sv1
As filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on January 7, 2008.
Registration
No. 333-
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form S-1
REGISTRATION
STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF
1933
athenahealth, Inc.
(Exact Name of Registrant as
Specified in its Charter)
|
|
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
7389
|
|
04-3387530
|
(State of
Incorporation)
|
|
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
|
311 Arsenal Street
Watertown, MA 02472
(617) 402-1000
(Address, including zip code,
and telephone number,
including area code, of
registrants principal executive offices)
Jonathan Bush
Chief Executive
Officer
athenahealth, Inc.
311 Arsenal Street
Watertown, MA 02472
(617) 402-1000
(Name, address, including zip
code, and telephone number,
including area code, of agent
for service)
Copies to:
|
|
|
|
|
Lawrence S. Wittenberg, Esq.
Michael H. Bison, Esq.
Goodwin Procter LLP
Exchange Place
53 State Street
Boston, MA 02109
(617) 570-1000
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin, Esq.
athenahealth, Inc.
311 Arsenal Street
Watertown, MA 02472
(617) 402-1000
|
|
Christopher J. Austin, Esq.
Michael D. Beauvais, Esq.
Ropes & Gray LLP
One International Place
Boston, MA 02110
(617) 951-7000
|
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the
public: As soon as practicable after the
effective date of this registration statement.
If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be
offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to
Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
check the following
box. o
If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act,
please 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
CALCULATION
OF REGISTRATION FEE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed Maximum
|
|
|
Proposed Maximum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount to be
|
|
|
Offering Price
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
Title of Each Class of Securities to be Registered
|
|
|
Registered(1)
|
|
|
Per Share(2)
|
|
|
Offering Price(2)
|
|
|
Amount of Registration Fee
|
Common stock, par value $0.01 per share
|
|
|
3,577,143
|
|
|
$35.38
|
|
|
$126,559,320
|
|
|
$4,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Includes 466,584 shares of
common stock that may be purchased by the underwriters to cover
over-allotments, if any.
|
|
(2)
|
|
Estimated solely for purposes of
calculating the registration fee pursuant to Rule 457(c)
under the Securities Act, based on the average of the high and
low sale prices of the registrants common stock on
January 2, 2008, as reported by the NASDAQ Global Market.
|
The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on
such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective
date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which
specifically states that this Registration Statement shall
thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a)
of the Securities Act of 1933 or until this 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. We may not sell these securities until the registration
statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is
effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these
securities and we are not soliciting offers to buy these
securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not
permitted.
|
Subject to Completion, dated
January 7, 2008
3,110,559 Shares
Common
Stock
athenahealth, Inc. is offering 335,000 shares of common
stock to be sold in the offering. The selling stockholders
identified in this prospectus are offering an additional
2,775,559 shares. athenahealth will not receive any of the
proceeds from the sale of the shares by the selling stockholders.
Our shares of common stock are listed on the NASDAQ Global
Market under the symbol ATHN. On January 2,
2008, the last sale price of the shares as reported on the
NASDAQ Global Market was $35.26 per share.
See Risk Factors on page 8 to read about
factors you should consider before buying shares of the common
stock.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any other
regulatory body has approved or disapproved of these securities
or passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of this prospectus. Any
representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Public offering price
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Underwriting discount
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Proceeds, before expenses, to athenahealth
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Proceeds, before expenses, to the selling stockholders
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
To the extent that the underwriters sell more than
3,110,559 shares of common stock, the underwriters have the
option to purchase up to an additional 466,584 shares from
athenahealth and the selling stockholders at the public offering
price less the underwriting discount.
The underwriters expect to deliver the shares against payment in
New York, New York
on ,
2008.
|
|
Goldman,
Sachs & Co. |
Merrill
Lynch & Co. |
|
|
Jefferies &
Company |
Piper
Jaffray |
Prospectus
dated ,
2008
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
You should rely only on the information contained in this
prospectus. We have not authorized anyone to provide you with
information different from that contained in this prospectus. We
are offering to sell, and are seeking offers to buy, shares of
common stock only in jurisdictions where offers and sales are
permitted. The information contained in this prospectus is
accurate only as of the date of this prospectus, regardless of
the time of delivery of this prospectus or of any sale of our
common stock.
This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in
this prospectus and does not contain all of the information you
should consider before buying shares of our common stock. Before
deciding to invest in shares of our common stock, you should
read the entire prospectus carefully, including our consolidated
financial statements and the accompanying notes and the
information set forth under the headings Risk
Factors and Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,
in each case included elsewhere in this prospectus.
athenahealth,
Inc.
Overview
athenahealth is a provider of
internet-based
business services for physician practices. Our service offerings
are based on three integrated components: our proprietary
internet-based
software, our continually updated database of payer
reimbursement process rules and our back-office service
operations that perform administrative aspects of billing and
clinical data management for physician practices. Our principal
offering, athenaCollector, automates and manages billing-related
functions for physician practices and includes a medical
practice management platform. We have also developed a service
offering, athenaClinicals, that automates and manages medical
record-related functions for physician practices and includes an
electronic medical record, or EMR, platform. We refer to
athenaCollector as our revenue cycle management service and
athenaClinicals as our clinical cycle management service. Our
services are designed to help our clients achieve faster
reimbursement from payers, reduce error rates, increase
collections, lower operating costs, improve operational workflow
controls and more efficiently manage clinical and billing
information.
Our services require relatively modest initial investment, are
highly adaptable to changing healthcare and technology trends
and are designed to generate significant financial benefit for
our physician clients. Our results are directly tied to the
financial performance of our clients, because the majority of
our revenue is based on a percentage of their collections. Our
fees are typically 2% to 8% of a practices total
collections depending upon the size, complexity and other
characteristics of the practice, with other fees for
implementation, patient billing statements and training
services. Our services have enabled our clients, on average, to
resolve 93% of their claims to payers on their first submission
attempt, compared to an industry average we estimate to be 70%.
Our internal studies show that we have reduced the days in
accounts receivable of our client base by more than 30%. We have
experienced a contract renewal rate of at least 97% in each of
the last five years, and this persistent client base drives a
predictable revenue stream. In 2006, we generated revenue of
$75.8 million from the sale of our services, compared to
$53.5 million in 2005. In the nine months ended
September 30, 2007, we generated revenue of
$72.6 million from the sales of our services, compared to
$55.0 million in the nine months ended September 30,
2006. As of September 30, 2007, there were more than 11,500
medical providers, including more than 8,900 physicians, using
our services across 33 states and 54 medical specialties.
We believe our innovative internet-based business services model
represents a significant departure from the traditional model of
physicians relying upon
on-site or
outsourced administrative staff, using stand-alone software that
is not internet-based, to run the back-office aspects of their
practices. By continuously improving all three components of our
services, we drive improvement in the business results of our
network of clients: we typically update our centralized
internet-based software every six to eight weeks; we add more
than 100 rules on average each month to our database of payer
rules; and we regularly improve our back-office service
operations with more efficient technology and processes.
Additionally, as our database of aggregated health information
grows, we are able to use this information to further the
strategic position of our company. For example, in June 2006 we
introduced our annual PayerView rankings of health plans
performance with respect to the speed and accuracy of
reimbursement processes at different insurance companies, an
initiative that we believe increases our profile in the provider
and payer communities.
Market
Opportunity
The market opportunity for our services is driven by physician
office collections in the United States. According to the
U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, since
2000, ambulatory care spending increased by an average of 7.7%
per year to $420 billion in 2005. As the ambulatory care
market has grown, we estimate that the market for revenue and
clinical cycle management solutions has grown to over
$27 billion. These expenditures are primarily comprised of
salary and benefits for
in-house
administrative staff and the cost of third-party practice
management and EMR software.
In addition, growth in managed care has increased the complexity
of physician practice reimbursement. Managed care plans
typically create complex reimbursement structures and plan
designs that place greater responsibility on physician practices
to capture data and provide appropriate claims to obtain
payments. As a result, physician practices must keep track of
multiple plan designs and processing requirements to ensure
appropriate payment for services rendered. We also believe that
new initiatives by government-sponsored and private health plans
will further increase the complexity of physician practice
reimbursement. For example, pay-for-performance programs require
submission of enhanced information to payers, and new health
plan designs, known as consumer driven health plans, include
provisions for increased direct payment by patients.
Physician practices are generally not well equipped to address
this increasing complexity. In addition to administering typical
small business functions, physician practices must invest
significant time and resources in activities that are required
to secure reimbursement from third-party payers or patients and
to process inbound and outbound communications related to
physician orders to laboratories and pharmacies. To accomplish
these tasks, physician offices often use locally installed
software, send and receive paper-based and fax-based
communications and conduct telephone-based discussions with
payers and intermediaries to resolve unpaid claims or to inquire
about the status of transactions. This work is typically
performed by
in-house
staff, although some practices hire
third-party
services that also use locally installed software to manage
transactions.
As the complexity and number of health benefit plan payer rules
have increased, the ability of physician practices or
third-party billing services to use locally installed software
solutions to keep up with these rules has diminished, leading to
poor financial performance and decreased clinical efficiency. In
addition to the time and cost of these activities, medical
offices typically stop seeking reimbursement and write off
associated receivables for approximately 10% of their medical
claims.
Our
Solution
The dynamic and increasingly complex healthcare market requires
an integrated solution to effectively manage the reimbursement
and clinical landscape. We believe we are the first company to
integrate internet-based software, a continually updated
database of payer reimbursement process rules and back-office
service operations into a single internet-based business service
for physician practices. We deliver these services at each
critical step in the revenue and clinical cycle workflow through
a combination of software, knowledge and work:
|
|
|
|
|
Software. athenaNet, our proprietary
internet-based practice management and EMR application, is a
workflow management tool used in every work step that is
required to properly handle billing, collections and medical
record management-related functions. All users across our
client-base simultaneously use the same version of our software
application, which connects them to our continually updated
database of payer rules and to our services team.
|
|
|
|
Knowledge. athenaRules, our proprietary
database of payer rules, enforces physician office workflow
requirements, and is continually updated with payer-specific
coding and documentation information. This knowledge continues
to grow as a result of our years of experience managing back
office service operations for hundreds of physician practices,
including processing medical claims with tens of thousands of
health benefit plans.
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
Work. The athenahealth service operations,
consisting of nearly 400 people in the United States, and
approximately 700 people at our off-shore service provider,
interact with clients at all key steps of the revenue and
clinical cycle workflow. These operations include setting up
medical providers for billing, checking the eligibility of
scheduled patients electronically, submitting electronic and
paper-based claims to payers directly or through intermediaries,
processing clinical orders, receiving and processing checks and
remittance information from payers, documenting the result of
payers responses and evaluating and resubmitting claims
denials.
|
Our
Strategy
Our mission is to be the most trusted and effective provider of
business services for physician practices. To achieve this, our
strategy includes:
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining intensely focused on our clients
success. Our business model aligns our goals with
our clients goals and provides an incentive for us to
continually improve the performance of our clients. We believe
that this approach enables us to maintain client loyalty, to
enhance our reputation and to improve the quality of our
solutions.
|
|
|
|
Maintaining and growing our payer rules
database. Our rules engine development work
increases the percentage of transactions that are successfully
executed on the first attempt and reduces the time to resolution
after claims or other transactions are submitted. An important
component of increasing value to our clients is that we continue
to develop our centralized payer reimbursement process rules
database, athenaRules, using our experience gained each day
across our network of clients. This continued development allows
all our clients to benefit from our more than 40 full-time
equivalent staff focused on finding, researching, documenting
and implementing new payer rules.
|
|
|
|
Attracting new clients. We expect to continue
with current and expanded sales and marketing efforts to address
our market opportunity by aggressively seeking new clients. We
believe that our internet-based business services provide
significant value for physician offices of any size. We estimate
that our athenaCollector client base represents less than two
percent of the U.S. addressable market for revenue cycle
management.
|
|
|
|
Increasing revenue per client by adding new service
offerings. We have only recently begun to offer
our athenaClinicals service, which we combine with
athenaCollector for sale to prospective clients. In the future,
we plan to offer athenaClinicals as a stand-alone option. We are
also developing additional services to address other
administrative tasks within the physician office, such as
patient communications for scheduling appointments, accessing
lab results and refilling prescriptions.
|
|
|
|
Expanding operating margins by reducing the costs of
providing our services. We believe we can
increase our operating margins as we increase the scalability of
our service operations. Our integrated operations enable us to
deploy efficient and effective resources at each step of the
revenue and clinical cycle workflow.
|
Risks
Associated with Our Business
Our business is subject to a number of risks which you should be
aware of before making an investment decision. Those risks are
discussed more fully in Risk Factors beginning on
page 8. For example:
|
|
|
|
|
we have incurred significant losses since inception, including
net losses of $9.2 million and $5.6 million for the
year ended December 31, 2006 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2007, respectively, resulting in an
accumulated deficit of $70.8 million at September 30, 2007;
|
|
|
|
we operate in a highly competitive industry, and if we are not
able to compete effectively, our business and operating results
will be harmed;
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
our proprietary internet-based software may not operate
properly, which could damage our reputation, give rise to claims
against us or divert application of our resources from other
purposes, any of which could cause harm to our business and
operating results; and
|
|
|
|
government regulation of healthcare creates risks and challenges
with respect to our compliance efforts and our business
strategies.
|
Our
Corporate Information
We were incorporated in Delaware on August 21, 1997 as
Athena Healthcare Incorporated. We changed our name to
athenahealth.com, Inc. on March 31, 2000 and to
athenahealth, Inc. on November 17, 2000. Our corporate
headquarters are located at 311 Arsenal Street, Watertown,
Massachusetts 02472, and our telephone number is
(617) 402-1000.
Our website address is www.athenahealth.com. The information on,
or that can be accessed through, our website is not part of this
prospectus. In this prospectus, the terms athena,
athenahealth, we, us and
our refer to athenahealth, Inc. and its subsidiary,
Athena Net India Pvt. Ltd., and any subsidiary that may be
acquired or formed in the future.
athenahealth, athenaNet and the athenahealth logo are registered
trademarks of athenahealth and athenaCollector, athenaClinicals,
athenaEnterprise and athenaRules are trademarks of athenahealth.
This prospectus also includes the registered and unregistered
trademarks of other persons.
4
THE
OFFERING
|
|
|
Common stock offered by us |
|
335,000 shares |
|
Common stock offered by the selling stockholders |
|
2,775,559 shares |
|
Common stock to be outstanding after this offering |
|
32,659,824 shares |
|
Option to purchase additional shares offered by us and the
selling stockholders |
|
To the extent that the underwriters sell more than
3,110,559 shares of common stock, the underwriters have the
option to purchase up to an additional 466,584 shares from
us and the selling stockholders, at the public offering price
less the underwriting discount. |
|
Use of proceeds |
|
We expect our net proceeds from the offering to be approximately
$ million,
assuming a public offering price of $35.26 per share, based on
the last reported sale price of our common stock on the NASDAQ
Global Market on January 2, 2008, after deducting estimated
underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated fees and
expenses payable by us. We will not receive any of the proceeds
from the sale of shares by the selling stockholders. We intend
to use the net proceeds to us from this offering for working
capital and other general corporate purposes. We may also use a
portion of the net proceeds to acquire complementary
technologies or businesses. See Use of Proceeds. |
|
NASDAQ Global Market symbol |
|
ATHN |
The number of shares of common stock to be outstanding after
this offering is based on 32,324,824 shares of common stock
outstanding as of December 31, 2007. The number of shares
of common stock to be outstanding after this offering does not
include:
|
|
|
|
|
2,888,058 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise
of stock options outstanding as of December 31, 2007 with a
weighted average exercise price of $4.00 per share;
|
|
|
|
74,936 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise of
warrants outstanding as of December 31, 2007 with a
weighted average exercise price of $3.34 per share; and
|
|
|
|
1,505,622 shares of common stock currently reserved for
future issuance under our equity incentive plans.
|
Unless otherwise indicated, all information in this prospectus
assumes that the underwriters do not exercise their option to
purchase 473,646 shares of our common stock in this
offering from us and the selling stockholders.
5
SUMMARY
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
The following tables present our summary consolidated financial
data for our fiscal years 2004 through 2006 and for the nine
months ended September 30, 2006 and 2007 and our summary
consolidated balance sheet data as of September 30, 2007.
The consolidated financial data for the fiscal years ended
December 31, 2004, 2005 and 2006 has been derived from our
audited consolidated financial statements and for the nine
months ended September 30, 2006 and 2007 and as of
September 30, 2007 has been derived from our unaudited
consolidated financial statements, which appear elsewhere in
this prospectus. The financial data as of and for the nine
months ended September 30, 2006 and 2007 are derived from
our unaudited consolidated financial statements, which in the
opinion of management contain all adjustments necessary for a
fair presentation of such consolidated financial data. Operating
results for these interim periods are not necessarily indicative
of the operating results for a full year. Historical results are
not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected in
future periods. You should read this information in conjunction
with our consolidated financial statements, the related notes to
these financial statements and Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations included elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
2004
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2006
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(in thousands except share and per share data)
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business services
|
|
$
|
35,033
|
|
|
$
|
48,958
|
|
|
$
|
70,652
|
|
|
$
|
51,167
|
|
|
$
|
67,648
|
|
Implementation and other
|
|
|
3,905
|
|
|
|
4,582
|
|
|
|
5,161
|
|
|
|
3,800
|
|
|
|
4,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue
|
|
|
38,938
|
|
|
|
53,540
|
|
|
|
75,813
|
|
|
|
54,967
|
|
|
|
72,608
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct operating
|
|
|
20,512
|
|
|
|
27,545
|
|
|
|
36,530
|
|
|
|
26,624
|
|
|
|
33,900
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
7,650
|
|
|
|
11,680
|
|
|
|
15,645
|
|
|
|
11,248
|
|
|
|
12,643
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
1,485
|
|
|
|
2,925
|
|
|
|
6,903
|
|
|
|
4,645
|
|
|
|
5,451
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
8,520
|
|
|
|
15,545
|
|
|
|
16,347
|
|
|
|
11,921
|
|
|
|
13,912
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
3,159
|
|
|
|
5,483
|
|
|
|
6,238
|
|
|
|
4,589
|
|
|
|
4,325
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
41,326
|
|
|
|
63,178
|
|
|
|
81,663
|
|
|
|
59,027
|
|
|
|
70,231
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(2,388
|
)
|
|
|
(9,638
|
)
|
|
|
(5,850
|
)
|
|
|
(4,060
|
)
|
|
|
2,377
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
106
|
|
|
|
372
|
|
|
|
251
|
|
|
|
356
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(1,362
|
)
|
|
|
(1,861
|
)
|
|
|
(2,671
|
)
|
|
|
(1,883
|
)
|
|
|
(2,399
|
)
|
Other expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(702
|
)
|
|
|
(444
|
)
|
|
|
(5,689
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other expense
|
|
|
(1,222
|
)
|
|
|
(1,755
|
)
|
|
|
(3,001
|
)
|
|
|
(2,076
|
)
|
|
|
(7,732
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes and cumulative effect of change in
accounting principle
|
|
|
(3,610
|
)
|
|
|
(11,393
|
)
|
|
|
(8,851
|
)
|
|
|
(6,136
|
)
|
|
|
(5,355
|
)
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(3,610
|
)
|
|
|
(11,393
|
)
|
|
|
(8,851
|
)
|
|
|
(6,136
|
)
|
|
|
(5,572
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(373
|
)
|
|
|
(373
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss)
|
|
$
|
(3,610
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11,393
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9,224
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6,509
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5,572
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per share basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.87
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.51
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.96
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.39
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.91
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
2004
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2006
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(in thousands except share and per share data)
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding basic and diluted
|
|
|
4,151,156
|
|
|
|
4,531,691
|
|
|
|
4,707,902
|
|
|
|
4,679,762
|
|
|
|
6,095,261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Amounts include stock-based compensation expense as
follows:
|
Direct operating
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
64
|
|
|
$
|
43
|
|
|
$
|
136
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
178
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
196
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
539
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
356
|
|
|
$
|
171
|
|
|
$
|
937
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The summary consolidated balance sheet data as of
September 30, 2007 is presented:
|
|
|
|
|
on an actual basis;
|
|
|
|
on a pro forma basis to reflect the repayment of long-term debt
totaling $22.2 million and additional interest and prepayment
penalties totaling $0.9 million during the fourth quarter of
2007; and
|
|
|
|
on a pro forma as adjusted basis to further reflect the receipt
by us of net proceeds of
$ million from
the sale of the 335,000 shares of common stock offered by
us in this offering at an assumed public offering price of
$35.26 per share, based on the last reported sale price of our
common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market on January 2,
2008, less estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and
estimated offering expenses payable by us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
89,809
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
82,157
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
121,839
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total indebtedness, including current portion
|
|
|
22,817
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
72,997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk.
You should consider carefully the risks and uncertainties
described below, together with all of the other information in
this prospectus, including the consolidated financial statements
and the related notes appearing at the end of this prospectus,
before deciding to invest in shares of our common stock. If any
of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial
condition, results of operations and future prospects could be
materially and adversely affected. In that event, the market
price of our common stock could decline and you could lose part
or all of your investment.
RISKS
RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS
We
have incurred significant operating losses in the past and may
not be profitable in the future.
We have incurred significant operating losses since our
inception. For the year ended December 31, 2006, we had a
net loss of $9.2 million and a loss from operations of
$5.9 million and for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007 we had a net loss of $5.6 million
and income from operations of $2.4 million. We have an
accumulated deficit of $70.8 million as of
September 30, 2007. It is not certain that we will become
profitable, or that, if we become profitable, our profitability
will increase. In addition, we expect our costs and operating
expenses to increase in the future as we expand our operations.
If our revenue does not grow to offset these expected increased
costs and operating expenses, we may not be profitable. You
should not consider recent quarterly revenue growth as
indicative of our future performance. In fact, in future
quarters we may not have any revenue growth and our revenue
could decline. Furthermore, if our costs and operating expenses
exceed our expectations, our financial performance will be
adversely affected.
Our
operating results have in the past and may continue to fluctuate
significantly and if we fail to meet the expectations of
analysts or investors, our stock price and the value of your
investment could decline substantially.
Our operating results are likely to fluctuate, and if we fail to
meet or exceed the expectations of securities analysts or
investors, the trading price of our common stock could decline.
Moreover, our stock price may be based on expectations of our
future performance that may be unrealistic or that may not be
met. Some of the important factors that could cause our revenues
and operating results to fluctuate from quarter to quarter
include:
|
|
|
|
|
the extent to which our services achieve or maintain market
acceptance;
|
|
|
|
our ability to introduce new services and enhancements to our
existing services on a timely basis;
|
|
|
|
new competitors and introduction of enhanced products and
services from new or existing competitors;
|
|
|
|
the length of our contracting and implementation cycles;
|
|
|
|
the financial condition of our current and potential clients;
|
|
|
|
changes in client budgets and procurement policies;
|
|
|
|
amount and timing of our investment in research and development
activities;
|
|
|
|
technical difficulties or interruptions in our services;
|
|
|
|
our ability to hire and retain qualified personnel, including
the rate of expansion of our sales force;
|
|
|
|
changes in the regulatory environment related to healthcare;
|
|
|
|
regulatory compliance costs;
|
|
|
|
the timing, size and integration success of potential future
acquisitions; and
|
|
|
|
unforeseen legal expenses, including litigation and settlement
costs.
|
8
Many of these factors are not within our control, and the
occurrence of one or more of them might cause our operating
results to vary widely. As such, we believe that
quarter-to-quarter comparisons of our revenues and operating
results may not be meaningful and should not be relied upon as
an indication of future performance.
A significant portion of our operating expense is relatively
fixed in nature and planned expenditures are based in part on
expectations regarding future revenue. Accordingly, unexpected
revenue shortfalls may decrease our gross margins and could
cause significant changes in our operating results from quarter
to quarter. In addition, our future quarterly operating results
may fluctuate and may not meet the expectations of securities
analysts or investors. If this occurs, the trading price of our
common stock could fall substantially either suddenly or over
time.
We
operate in a highly competitive industry, and if we are not able
to compete effectively, our business and operating results will
be harmed.
The provision by third parties of revenue cycle services to
physician practices has historically been dominated by small
service providers who offer highly individualized services and a
high degree of specialized knowledge applicable in many cases to
a limited medical specialty, a limited set of payers or a
limited geographical area. We anticipate that the software,
statistical and database tools that are available to such
service providers will continue to become more sophisticated and
effective and that demand for our services could be adversely
affected.
Revenue cycle software for physician practices has historically
been dominated by large, well-financed and
technologically-sophisticated entities that have focused on
software solutions. The size and financial strength of these
entities is increasing as a result of continued consolidation in
both the information technology and healthcare industries. We
expect large integrated technology companies to become more
active in our markets, both through acquisition and internal
investment. As costs fall and technology improves, increased
market saturation may change the competitive landscape in favor
of competitors with greater scale than we currently possess.
Some of our current large competitors, such as GE Healthcare,
Sage Software Healthcare, Inc., Misys Healthcare Systems,
Allscripts Healthcare Solutions, Inc., Quality Systems, Inc.,
Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. and McKesson Corp. have
greater name recognition, longer operating histories and
significantly greater resources than we do. As a result, our
competitors may be able to respond more quickly and effectively
than we can to new or changing opportunities, technologies,
standards or client requirements. In addition, current and
potential competitors have established, and may in the future
establish, cooperative relationships with vendors of
complementary products, technologies or services to increase the
availability of their products to the marketplace. Accordingly,
new competitors or alliances may emerge that have greater market
share, larger client bases, more widely adopted proprietary
technologies, greater marketing expertise, greater financial
resources and larger sales forces than we have, which could put
us at a competitive disadvantage. Further, in light of these
advantages, even if our services are more effective than the
product or service offerings of our competitors, current or
potential clients might accept competitive products and services
in lieu of purchasing our services. Increased competition is
likely to result in pricing pressures, which could negatively
impact our sales, profitability or market share. In addition to
new niche vendors, who offer stand-alone products and services,
we face competition from existing enterprise vendors, including
those currently focused on software solutions, which have
information systems in place at clients in our target market.
These existing enterprise vendors may now, or in the future,
offer or promise products or services with less functionality
than our services, but which offer ease of integration with
existing systems and which leverage existing vendor
relationships.
The
market for our services is immature and volatile, and if it does
not develop or if it develops more slowly than we expect, the
growth of our business will be harmed.
The market for
internet-based
business services is relatively new and unproven, and it is
uncertain whether these services will achieve and sustain high
levels of demand and market acceptance. Our success will depend
to a substantial extent on the willingness of enterprises, large
and small, to increase their use of on-demand business services
in general, and for their revenue and clinical cycles in
particular. Many
9
enterprises have invested substantial personnel and financial
resources to integrate established enterprise software into
their businesses, and therefore may be reluctant or unwilling to
switch to an on-demand application service. Furthermore, some
enterprises may be reluctant or unwilling to use on-demand
application services, because they have concerns regarding the
risks associated with security capabilities, among other things,
of the technology delivery model associated with these services.
If enterprises do not perceive the benefits of our services,
then the market for these services may not develop at all, or it
may develop more slowly than we expect, either of which would
significantly adversely affect our operating results. In
addition, as a new company in this unproven market, we have
limited insight into trends that may develop and affect our
business. We may make errors in predicting and reacting to
relevant business trends, which could harm our business. If any
of these risks occur, it could materially adversely affect our
business, financial condition or results of operations.
If we
do not continue to innovate and provide services that are useful
to users, we may not remain competitive, and our revenues and
operating results could suffer.
Our success depends on providing services that the medical
community uses to improve business performance and quality of
service to patients. Our competitors are constantly developing
products and services that may become more efficient or
appealing to our clients. As a result, we must continue to
invest significant resources in research and development in
order to enhance our existing services and introduce new
high-quality services that clients will want. If we are unable
to predict user preferences or industry changes, or if we are
unable to modify our services on a timely basis, we may lose
clients. Our operating results would also suffer if our
innovations are not responsive to the needs of our clients, are
not appropriately timed with market opportunity or are not
effectively brought to market. As technology continues to
develop, our competitors may be able to offer results that are,
or that are perceived to be, substantially similar to or better
than those generated by our services. This may force us to
compete on additional service attributes and to expend
significant resources in order to remain competitive.
As a
result of our variable sales and implementation cycles, we may
be unable to recognize revenue to offset expenditures, which
could result in fluctuations in our quarterly results of
operations or otherwise harm our future operating
results.
The sales cycle for our services can be variable, typically
ranging from three to five months from initial contact to
contract execution. During the sales cycle, we expend time and
resources, and we do not recognize any revenue to offset such
expenditures. Our implementation cycle is also variable,
typically ranging from three to five months from contract
execution to completion of implementation. Some of our
new-client
set-up
projects are complex and require a lengthy delay and significant
implementation work. Each clients situation is different,
and unanticipated difficulties and delays may arise as a result
of failure by us or by the client to meet our respective
implementation responsibilities. During the implementation
cycle, we expend substantial time, effort and financial
resources implementing our service, but accounting principles do
not allow us to recognize the resulting revenue until the
service has been implemented, at which time we begin recognition
of implementation revenue over the life of the contract. This
could harm our future operating results.
After a client contract is signed, we provide an implementation
process for the client during which appropriate connections and
registrations are established and checked, data is loaded into
our athenaNet system, data tables are set up and practice
personnel are given initial training. The length and details of
this implementation process vary widely from client to client.
Typically implementation of larger clients takes longer than
implementation for smaller clients. Implementation for a given
client may be cancelled. Our contracts typically provide that
they can be terminated for any reason or for no reason in
90 days. Despite the fact that we typically require a
deposit in advance of implementation, some clients have
cancelled before our service has been started. In addition,
implementation may be delayed or the target dates for completion
may be extended into the future for a variety of reasons,
including to meet the needs and requirements of the client,
because of delays with payer processing and because of the
volume and complexity of the implementations awaiting our work.
If implementation periods are extended, our provision of the
revenue cycle or clinical cycle services upon which we realize
most of our revenues will be delayed and our financial condition
may be
10
adversely affected. In addition, cancellation of any
implementation after it has begun may involve loss to us of
time, effort and expenses invested in the cancelled
implementation process and lost opportunity for implementing
paying clients in that same period of time.
These factors may contribute to substantial fluctuations in our
quarterly operating results, particularly in the near term and
during any period in which our sales volume is relatively low.
As a result, in future quarters our operating results could fall
below the expectations of securities analysts or investors, in
which event our stock price would likely decrease.
If the
revenue of our clients decreases, our revenue will
decrease.
Under most of our client contracts, we base our charges on a
percentage of the revenue that the client realizes while using
our services. Many factors may lead to decrease in client
revenue, including:
|
|
|
|
|
interruption of client access to our system for any reason;
|
|
|
|
our failure to provide services in a timely or high-quality
manner;
|
|
|
|
failure of our clients to adopt or maintain effective business
practices;
|
|
|
|
actions by third-party payers of medical claims to reduce
reimbursement;
|
|
|
|
government regulations reducing reimbursement; and
|
|
|
|
reduction of client revenue resulting from increased competition
or other changes in the marketplace for physician services.
|
If the clients revenue decreases for any reason, our
revenue will likely decrease.
If
participants in our channel marketing and sales lead programs do
not maintain appropriate relationships with potential clients,
our sales accomplished with their help or data may be unwound
and our payments to them may be deemed
improper.
We maintain a series of relationships with third parties that we
term channel relationships. These relationships take different
forms under different contractual language. Some relationships
help us identify sales leads. Other relationships permit third
parties to act as value-added resellers or as independent sales
representatives for our services. In some cases, for example in
the case of some membership organizations, these relationships
involve endorsement of our services as well as other marketing
activities. In each of these cases, we require contractually
that the third party disclose information to
and/or limit
their relationships with potential purchasers of our services
for regulatory compliance reasons. If these third parties do not
comply with these regulatory requirements, sales accomplished
with the data or help that they have provided may not be
enforceable and may be unwound. Third parties that, despite our
requirements and safeguards, exercise undue influence over
decisions by prospective clients, occupy positions with
obligations of fidelity or fiduciary obligations to prospective
clients, or who offer bribes or kickbacks to prospective clients
or their employees, may be committing wrongful or illegal acts
that could render any resulting contract between us and the
client unenforceable. Conduct by these third parties with
respect to prospective clients may result in allegations that we
have encouraged or participated in wrongful or illegal behavior
and that payments to such third parties under our channel
contracts are improper. This conduct could subject us to civil
or criminal claims and liabilities, could require us to change
or terminate some portions of our business, could require us to
refund portions of our services fees and could adversely effect
our revenue and operating margin. Even an unsuccessful challenge
of our activities could result in adverse publicity, require
costly response from us, impair our ability to attract and
maintain clients and lead analysts or potential investors to
reduce their expectations of our performance, resulting in
reduction to our market price.
11
Failure
to manage our rapid growth effectively could increase our
expenses, decrease our revenue and prevent us from implementing
our business strategy.
We have been experiencing a period of rapid growth. To manage
our anticipated future growth effectively, we must continue to
maintain and may need to enhance our information technology
infrastructure, financial and accounting systems and controls
and manage expanded operations in geographically-distributed
locations. We also must attract, train and retain a significant
number of qualified sales and marketing personnel, professional
services personnel, software engineers, technical personnel and
management personnel. Failure to manage our rapid growth
effectively could lead us to over-invest or under-invest in
technology and operations, could result in weaknesses in our
infrastructure, systems or controls, could give rise to
operational mistakes, losses, loss of productivity or business
opportunities, and could result in loss of employees and reduced
productivity of remaining employees. Our growth could require
significant capital expenditures and may divert financial
resources from other projects, such as the development of new
services. For example, in anticipation of our future growth, we
recently announced our intention to purchase a complex of
buildings, including approximately 133,000 square feet of
office space, on approximately 53 acres of land in Belfast,
Maine. If we are unable or, based on our due diligence, elect
not to complete this acquisition, we would expect to seek out
alternative facilities. Although we expect comparable facilities
would be available on commercially reasonable terms, we can not
assure you that this is the case, and in any event any such
delay could have an adverse impact on our company as we look to
effectively manage our future growth. If our management is
unable to effectively manage our growth, our expenses may
increase more than expected, our revenue could decline or may
grow more slowly than expected, and we may be unable to
implement our business strategy.
We
depend upon a third-party service provider for important
processing functions. If this third-party provider does not
fulfill its contractual obligations or chooses to discontinue
its services, our business and operations could be disrupted and
our operating results would be harmed.
We have entered into a service agreement with Vision
Healthsource, a subsidiary of Perot Systems Corporation, through
which approximately 700 people provide data entry and other
services from facilities located in India and the Philippines to
support our client service operations. Among other things, this
provider processes critical claims data and patient statements.
If these services fail or are of poor quality, our business,
reputation and operating results could be harmed. Failure of the
service provider to perform satisfactorily could result in
client dissatisfaction, disrupt our operations and adversely
affect operating results. With respect to this service provider,
we have significantly less control over the systems and
processes than if we maintained and operated them ourselves,
which increases our risk. In some cases, functions necessary to
our business are performed on proprietary systems and software
to which we have no access. If we need to find an alternative
source for performing these functions, we may have to expend
significant money, resources and time to develop the
alternative, and if this development is not accomplished in a
timely manner and without significant disruption to our
business, we may be unable to fulfill our responsibilities to
clients or the expectations of clients, with the attendant
potential for liability claims and a loss of business
reputation, loss of ability to attract or maintain clients and
reduction of our revenue or operating margin.
Various
risks could interrupt international operations, exposing us to
significant costs.
We have contracted with companies operating in Canada, India and
the Philippines for various services, including data entry,
outgoing calls to payers, data classification and software
development. In addition, in October 2005, we established a
subsidiary in Chennai, India to conduct research and development
activities. International operations expose us to potential
operational disruptions as a result of currency valuations,
political turmoil and labor issues. Any such disruptions may
have a negative effect on our profits, on client satisfaction
and on our ability to attract or maintain clients.
Because
competition for our target employees is intense, we may not be
able to attract and retain the highly-skilled employees we need
to support our planned growth.
To continue to execute on our growth plan, we must attract and
retain highly-qualified personnel. Competition for these
personnel is intense, especially for engineers with high levels
of experience in designing and developing software and
internet-related services and senior sales executives. We may
not be successful in
12
attracting and retaining qualified personnel. We have from time
to time in the past experienced, and we expect to continue to
experience in the future, difficulty in hiring and retaining
highly-skilled employees with appropriate qualifications. Many
of the companies with which we compete for experienced personnel
have greater resources than we have. In addition, in making
employment decisions, particularly in the Internet and
high-technology industries, job candidates often consider the
value of the stock options they are to receive in connection
with their employment. Volatility in the price of our stock may,
therefore, adversely affect our ability to attract or retain key
employees. Furthermore, the new requirement to expense stock
options may discourage us from granting the size or type of
stock option awards that job candidates require to join our
company. If we fail to attract new personnel or fail to retain
and motivate our current personnel, our business and future
growth prospects could be severely harmed.
If we
acquire companies or technologies in the future, they could
prove difficult to integrate, disrupt our business, dilute
stockholder value and adversely affect our operating results and
the value of our common stock.
As part of our business strategy, we may acquire, enter into
joint ventures with, or make investments in complementary
companies, services and technologies in the future. Acquisitions
and investments involve numerous risks, including:
|
|
|
|
|
difficulties in identifying and acquiring products, technologies
or businesses that will help our business;
|
|
|
|
difficulties in integrating operations, technologies, services
and personnel;
|
|
|
|
diversion of financial and managerial resources from existing
operations;
|
|
|
|
risk of entering new markets in which we have little to no
experience; and
|
|
|
|
delays in client purchases due to uncertainty and the inability
to maintain relationships with clients of the acquired
businesses.
|
As a result, if we fail to properly evaluate acquisitions or
investments, we may not achieve the anticipated benefits of any
such acquisitions, we may incur costs in excess of what we
anticipate, and management resources and attention may be
diverted from other necessary or valuable activities.
If we
are required to collect sales and use taxes on the services we
sell in additional jurisdictions, we may be subject to liability
for past sales and our future sales may decrease.
We may lose sales or incur significant expenses should states be
successful in imposing broader guidelines to state sales and use
taxes. A successful assertion by one or more states that we
should collect sales or other taxes on the sale of our services
could result in substantial tax liabilities for past sales,
decrease our ability to compete with traditional retailers and
otherwise harm our business. Each state has different rules and
regulations governing sales and use taxes and these rules and
regulations are subject to varying interpretations that may
change over time. We review these rules and regulations
periodically and, when we believe our services are subject to
sales and use taxes in a particular state, voluntarily engage
state tax authorities in order to determine how to comply with
their rules and regulations. For example, in April 2006 we
entered into a settlement agreement with the Ohio Department of
Taxation after it determined that we owed sales and use taxes
for sales made in the State of Ohio between July 2005 and
January 2006. In connection with this settlement we paid the
State of Ohio $0.2 million in taxes, interest and
penalties. Additionally, in November 2004, we began paying sales
and use taxes in the State of Texas. We cannot assure you that
we will not be subject to sales and use taxes or related
penalties for past sales in states where we believe no
compliance is necessary.
We may also become subject to tax audits or similar procedures
in states where we already pay sales and use taxes. For example,
in October 2007, we received an audit notification from the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Revenue requesting
materials relating to the amount of use tax the Company paid on
account of purchases by the Company for the audit periods
between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2006. The
audit is ongoing as of December 31, 2007. During the fourth
quarter of 2007, we accrued a liability of approximately $50,000
in connection with this ongoing audit. Although we do not think
the impact of this particular audit will be material to us,
there can be no assurance that this will be the case. The
assessment of
13
taxes, interest and penalties as a result of audits, litigation
or otherwise, could be materially adverse to our current and
future results of operations and financial condition.
Vendors of services, like us, are typically held responsible by
taxing authorities for the collection and payment of any
applicable sales and similar taxes. If one or more taxing
authorities determines that taxes should have, but have not,
been paid with respect to our services, we may be liable for
past taxes in addition to taxes going forward. Liability for
past taxes may also include very substantial interest and
penalty charges. Our client contracts provide that our clients
must pay all applicable sales and similar taxes. Nevertheless,
clients may be reluctant to pay back taxes and may refuse
responsibility for interest or penalties associated with those
taxes. If we are required to collect and pay back taxes and the
associated interest and penalties and if our clients fail or
refuse to reimburse us for all or a portion of these amounts, we
will have incurred unplanned expenses that may be substantial.
Moreover, imposition of such taxes on our services going forward
will effectively increase the cost of such services to our
clients and may adversely affect our ability to retain existing
clients or to gain new clients in the areas in which such taxes
are imposed.
We may
be unable to adequately protect, and we may incur significant
costs in enforcing, our intellectual property and other
proprietary rights.
Our success depends in part on our ability to enforce our
intellectual property and other proprietary rights. We rely upon
a combination of trademark, trade secret, copyright, patent and
unfair competition laws, as well as license and access
agreements and other contractual provisions, to protect our
intellectual property and other proprietary rights. In addition,
we attempt to protect our intellectual property and proprietary
information by requiring certain of our employees and
consultants to enter into confidentiality, noncompetition and
assignment of inventions agreements. Our attempts to protect our
intellectual property may be challenged by others or invalidated
through administrative process or litigation. While we have six
U.S. patent applications pending, we currently have no
issued patents and may be unable to obtain meaningful patent
protection for our technology. We have received a final office
action rejecting application on our oldest and broadest
application and have filed a request for continued examination,
along with a response and revised claims with respect to that
patent. In addition, if any patents are issued in the future,
they may not provide us with any competitive advantages, or may
be successfully challenged by third parties. Agreement terms
that address non-competition are difficult to enforce in many
jurisdictions and may not be enforceable in any particular case.
To the extent that our intellectual property and other
proprietary rights are not adequately protected, third parties
might gain access to our proprietary information, develop and
market products or services similar to ours, or use trademarks
similar to ours, each of which could materially harm our
business. Existing U.S. federal and state intellectual
property laws offer only limited protection. Moreover, the laws
of other countries in which we now or may in the future conduct
operations or contract for services may afford little or no
effective protection of our intellectual property. Further, our
platform incorporates open source software components that are
licensed to us under various public domain licenses. While we
believe we have complied with our obligations under the various
applicable licenses for open source software that we use, there
is little or no legal precedent governing the interpretation of
many of the terms of certain of these licenses and therefore the
potential impact of such terms on our business is somewhat
unknown. The failure to adequately protect our intellectual
property and other proprietary rights could materially harm our
business.
In addition, if we resort to legal proceedings to enforce our
intellectual property rights or to determine the validity and
scope of the intellectual property or other proprietary rights
of others, the proceedings could be burdensome and expensive,
even if we were to prevail. Any litigation that may be necessary
in the future could result in substantial costs and diversion of
resources and could have a material adverse effect on our
business, operating results or financial condition.
We may
be sued by third parties for alleged infringement of their
proprietary rights.
The software and Internet industries are characterized by the
existence of a large number of patents, trademarks and
copyrights and by frequent litigation based on allegations of
infringement or other violations of intellectual property
rights. Moreover, our business involves the systematic gathering
and analysis of data about the requirements and behaviors of
payers and other third parties, some or all of which may be
claimed to be
14
confidential or proprietary. We have received in the past, and
may receive in the future, communications from third parties
claiming that we have infringed on the intellectual property
rights of others. For example, in 2005, Billingnetwork Patent,
Inc. sued us in Florida federal court alleging infringement of
its patent issued in 2002 entitled Integrated Internet
Facilitated Billing, Data Processing and Communications
System. We have moved to dismiss that case and oral
argument on that motion was heard by the court in March 2006. We
are awaiting further action from the court at this time. Our
technologies may not be able to withstand any third-party claims
or rights against their use. Any intellectual property claims,
with or without merit, could be time-consuming and expensive to
resolve, could divert management attention from executing our
business plan and could require us to pay monetary damages or
enter into royalty or licensing agreements. In addition, many of
our contracts contain warranties with respect to intellectual
property rights, and some require us to indemnify our clients
for third-party intellectual property infringement claims, which
would increase the cost to us of an adverse ruling on such a
claim.
Moreover, any settlement or adverse judgment resulting from such
a claim could require us to pay substantial amounts of money or
obtain a license to continue to use the technology or
information that is the subject of the claim, or otherwise
restrict or prohibit our use of the technology or information.
There can be no assurance that we would be able to obtain a
license on commercially reasonable terms, if at all, from third
parties asserting an infringement claim; that we would be able
to develop alternative technology on a timely basis, if at all;
or that we would be able to obtain a license to use a suitable
alternative technology to permit us to continue offering, and
our clients to continue using, our affected services.
Accordingly, an adverse determination could prevent us from
offering our services to others. In addition, we may be required
to indemnify our clients for third-party intellectual property
infringement claims, which would increase the cost to us of an
adverse ruling for such a claim.
We are
bound by exclusivity provisions that restrict our ability to
enter into certain sales and marketing relationships in order to
market and sell our services.
Our marketing and sales agreement with Worldmed Shared Services,
Inc. (d/b/a PSS World Medical Shared Services, Inc.), or PSS,
restricts us during the term of the agreement from certain sales
and marketing relationships, including relationships with
certain competitors of PSS and certain distributors and
manufacturers of medical, surgical or pharmaceutical supplies.
This restriction may make it more difficult for us to realize
sales, distribution and income opportunities with certain
potential clients, in particular small physician practices,
which could adversely affect our operating results.
We may
require additional capital to support business growth, and this
capital might not be available.
We intend to continue to make investments to support our
business growth and may require additional funds to respond to
business challenges or opportunities, including the need to
develop new services or enhance our existing service, enhance
our operating infrastructure or acquire complementary businesses
and technologies. Accordingly, we may need to engage in equity
or debt financings to secure additional funds. If we raise
additional funds through further issuances of equity or
convertible debt securities, our existing stockholders could
suffer significant dilution, and any new equity securities we
issue could have rights, preferences and privileges superior to
those of holders of our common stock. Any debt financing secured
by us in the future could involve restrictive covenants relating
to our capital raising activities and other financial and
operational matters, which may make it more difficult for us to
obtain additional capital and to pursue business opportunities,
including potential acquisitions. In addition, we may not be
able to obtain additional financing on terms favorable to us, if
at all. If we are unable to obtain adequate financing or
financing on terms satisfactory to us when we require it, our
ability to continue to support our business growth and to
respond to business challenges could be significantly limited.
Our
loan agreements contain operating and financial covenants that
may restrict our business and
financing activities.
We have loan agreements that provide for up to
$40.1 million of total borrowings, of which
$22.8 million was outstanding at September 30, 2007.
Borrowings are secured by substantially all of our assets
including our intellectual property. Our loan agreements
restrict our ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
incur additional indebtedness;
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
create liens;
|
|
|
|
make investments;
|
|
|
|
sell assets;
|
|
|
|
pay dividends or make distributions on and, in certain cases,
repurchase our stock; or
|
|
|
|
consolidate or merge with other entities.
|
In addition, our credit facilities require us to meet specified
minimum financial measurements. The operating and financial
restrictions and covenants in these credit facilities, as well
as any future financing agreements that we may enter into, may
restrict our ability to finance our operations, engage in
business activities or expand or fully pursue our business
strategies. Our ability to comply with these covenants may be
affected by events beyond our control, and we may not be able to
meet those covenants. A breach of any of these covenants could
result in a default under the loan agreement, which could cause
all of the outstanding indebtedness under both credit facilities
to become immediately due and payable and terminate all
commitments to extend further credit.
We
will incur significant increased costs as a result of operating
as a public company, and our management will be required to
devote substantial time to new compliance
initiatives.
As a public company, we will incur significant legal, accounting
and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company.
In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as rules
subsequently implemented by the Securities and Exchange
Commission and the NASDAQ Global Market, have imposed various
new requirements on public companies, including requiring
changes in corporate governance practices. Our management and
other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time
to these new compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and
regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance
costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and
costly. For example, we expect these new rules and regulations
to make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain
director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required
to incur substantial costs to maintain the same or similar
coverage.
In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other
things, that we maintain effective internal control over
financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. In
particular, commencing in 2008, we must perform system and
process evaluation and testing of our internal control over
financial reporting to allow management and our independent
registered public accounting firm to report on the effectiveness
of our internal control over financial reporting, as required by
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Our testing, or the
subsequent testing by our independent registered public
accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal control
over financial reporting that are deemed to be material
weaknesses. Our compliance with Section 404 will require
that we incur substantial accounting expense and expend
significant management time on compliance-related issues.
Moreover, if we are not able to comply with the requirements of
Section 404 in a timely manner, or if we or our independent
registered public accounting firm identifies deficiencies in our
internal control over financial reporting that are deemed to be
material weaknesses, the market price of our stock could
decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations
by the NASDAQ Global Market, the Securities and Exchange
Commission or other regulatory authorities, which would require
additional financial and management resources.
Current
and future litigation against us could be costly and time
consuming to defend.
We are from time to time subject to legal proceedings and claims
that arise in the ordinary course of business, such as claims
brought by our clients in connection with commercial disputes
and employment claims made by our current or former employees.
Litigation may result in substantial costs and may divert
managements attention and resources, which may seriously
harm our business, overall financial condition and operating
results. In addition, legal claims that have not yet been
asserted against us may be asserted in the future. Insurance may
not cover such claims, may not be sufficient for one or more
such claims and may not continue to be available on terms
acceptable to us. A claim brought against us that is uninsured
or underinsured could result in unanticipated costs thereby
reducing our operating results and leading analysts or potential
investors to reduce their expectations of our performance
resulting in a reduction in the trading price of our stock.
16
RISKS
RELATED TO OUR SERVICE OFFERINGS
Our
proprietary athenaNet software may not operate properly, which
could damage our reputation, give rise to claims against us or
divert application of our resources from other purposes, any of
which could harm our business and operating
results.
Proprietary software development is time-consuming, expensive
and complex. Unforeseen difficulties can arise. We may encounter
technical obstacles, and it is possible that we discover
additional problems that prevent our proprietary athenaNet
application from operating properly. If athenaNet does not
function reliably or fails to achieve client expectations in
terms of performance, clients could assert liability claims
against us
and/or
attempt to cancel their contracts with us. This could damage our
reputation and impair our ability to attract or maintain clients.
Moreover, information services as complex as those we offer have
in the past contained, and may in the future develop or contain,
undetected defects or errors. We cannot assure you that material
performance problems or defects in our services will not arise
in the future. Errors may result from interface of our services
with legacy systems and data which we did not develop and the
function of which is outside of our control. Despite testing,
defects or errors may arise in our existing or new software or
service processes. Because changes in payer requirements and
practices are frequent and sometimes difficult to determine
except through trial and error, we are continuously discovering
defects and errors in our software and service processes
compared against these requirements and practices. These defects
and errors and any failure by us to identify and address them
could result in loss of revenue or market share, liability to
clients or others, failure to achieve market acceptance or
expansion, diversion of development resources, injury to our
reputation and increased service and maintenance costs. Defects
or errors in our software and service processes might discourage
existing or potential clients from purchasing services from us.
Correction of defects or errors could prove to be impossible or
impracticable. The costs incurred in correcting any defects or
errors or in responding to resulting claims or liability may be
substantial and could adversely affect our operating results.
In addition, clients relying on our services to collect, manage
and report clinical, business and administrative data may have a
greater sensitivity to service errors and security
vulnerabilities than clients of software products in general. We
market and sell services that, among other things, provide
information to assist care providers in tracking and treating
ill patients. Any operational delay in or failure of our
technology or service processes may result in the disruption of
patient care and could cause harm to our business and operating
results.
Our clients or their patients may assert claims against us in
the future alleging that they suffered damages due to a defect,
error or other failure of our software or service processes. A
product liability claim or errors or omissions claim could
subject us to significant legal defense costs and adverse
publicity regardless of the merits or eventual outcome of such a
claim.
If our
security measures are breached or fail and unauthorized access
is obtained to a clients data, our service may be
perceived as not being secure, clients may curtail or stop using
our service and we may incur significant
liabilities.
Our service involves the storage and transmission of
clients proprietary information and protected health
information of patients. Because of the sensitivity of this
information, security features of our software are very
important. If our security measures are breached or fail as a
result of third-party action, employee error, malfeasance or
otherwise, someone may be able to obtain unauthorized access to
client or patient data. As a result, our reputation could be
damaged, our business may suffer and we could face damages for
contract breach, penalties for violation of applicable laws or
regulations and significant costs for remediation and
remediation efforts to prevent future occurrences.
In addition, we rely upon our clients as users of our system for
key activities to promote security of the system and the data
within it, such as administration of client-side access
credentialing and control of client-side display of data. On
occasion, our clients have failed to perform these activities.
For example, our physician practice clients have, on occasion,
failed to terminate the athenaNet login/password of former
employees, or permitted current employees to share
login/passwords, each of which is a violation of our
17
contractual arrangement with these clients. When we become aware
of such breaches, we work with the client to terminate the
inappropriate access and provide additional instruction to our
clients in order to avoid the reoccurrence of such problems.
Although to date these breaches have not resulted in claims
against us or in material harm to our business, the failure of
our clients in future periods to perform these activities may
result in claims against us, which could expose us to
significant expense and harm to our reputation.
Because techniques used to obtain unauthorized access or to
sabotage systems change frequently and generally are not
recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to
anticipate these techniques or to implement adequate preventive
measures. If an actual or perceived breach of our security
occurs, the market perception of the effectiveness of our
security measures could be harmed and we could lose sales and
clients. In addition, our clients may authorize or enable third
parties to access their client data or the data of their
patients on our systems. Because we do not control such access,
we cannot ensure the complete integrity or security of such data
in our systems.
Failure
by our clients to obtain proper permissions and waivers may
result in claims against us or may limit or prevent our use of
data which could harm our business.
We require our clients to provide necessary notices and to
obtain necessary permissions and waivers for use and disclosure
of the information that we receive, and we require contractual
assurances from them that they have done so and will do so. If
they do not obtain necessary permissions and waivers, then our
use and disclosure of information that we receive from them or
on their behalf may be limited or prohibited by state or federal
privacy laws or other laws. This could impair our functions,
processes and databases that reflect, contain or are based upon
such data and may prevent use of such data. In addition, this
could interfere with or prevent creation or use of rules,
analyses or other data-driven activities that benefit us.
Moreover, we may be subject to claims or liability for use or
disclosure of information by reason of lack of valid notice,
permission or waiver. These claims or liabilities could subject
us to unexpected costs and adversely affect our operating
results.
Various
events could interrupt clients access to athenaNet,
exposing us to significant costs.
The ability to access athenaNet is critical to our clients
cash flow and business viability. Our operations and facilities
are vulnerable to interruption
and/or
damage from a number of sources, many of which are beyond our
control, including, without limitation: (i) power loss and
telecommunications failures; (ii) fire, flood, hurricane
and other natural disasters; (iii) software and hardware
errors, failures or crashes in our own systems or in other
systems; and (iv) computer viruses, hacking and similar
disruptive problems in our own systems and in other systems. We
attempt to mitigate these risks through various means including
redundant infrastructure, disaster recovery plans, separate test
systems and change control and system security measures, but our
precautions will not protect against all potential problems. If
clients access is interrupted because of problems in the
operation of our facilities, we could be exposed to significant
claims by clients or their patients, particularly if the access
interruption is associated with problems in the timely delivery
of funds due to clients or medical information relevant to
patient care. Our plans for disaster recovery and business
continuity rely upon third-party providers of related services,
and if those vendors fail us at a time that our systems are not
operating correctly, we could incur a loss of revenue and
liability for failure to fulfill our obligations. Any
significant instances of system downtime could negatively affect
our reputation and ability to retain clients and sell our
services which would adversely impact our revenues.
In addition, retention and availability of patient care and
physician reimbursement data are subject to federal and state
laws governing record retention, accuracy and access. Some laws
impose obligations on our clients and on us to produce
information to third parties and to amend or expunge data at
their direction. Our failure to meet these obligations may
result in liability which could increase our costs and reduce
our operating results.
Interruptions
or delays in service from our third-party data-hosting
facilities could impair the delivery of our service and harm our
business.
As of the date of this prospectus, we serve our clients from a
third-party data-hosting facility located in Waltham,
Massachusetts. As part of our current disaster recovery
arrangements, a subset of our production
18
environment and client data is currently replicated in a
separate standby facility located in Chicago, Illinois. We do
not control the operation of any of these facilities, and they
are vulnerable to damage or interruption from earthquakes,
floods, fires, power loss, telecommunications failures and
similar events. They are also subject to break-ins, sabotage,
intentional acts of vandalism and similar misconduct. Despite
precautions taken at these facilities, the occurrence of a
natural disaster or an act of terrorism, a decision to close the
facilities without adequate notice or other unanticipated
problems at both facilities could result in lengthy
interruptions in our service. Even with the disaster recovery
arrangements, our service could be interrupted.
We are planning to transition our primary hosting relationship
from Waltham, Massachusetts to another third-party hosting
facility located in Bedford, Massachusetts. In connection with
this transition, we will be moving, transferring or installing
equipment, data and software to and in that other facility.
Despite precautions taken during this process, any unsuccessful
transfers may impair the delivery of our service. Further, any
damage to, or failure of, our systems generally could result in
interruptions in our service. Interruptions in our service may
reduce our revenue, cause us to issue credits or pay penalties,
may cause clients to terminate services and may adversely affect
our renewal rates and our ability to attract new clients. Our
business may also be harmed if our clients and potential clients
believe our service is unreliable.
We
rely on Internet infrastructure, bandwidth providers, data
center providers, other third parties and our own systems for
providing services to our users, and any failure or interruption
in the services provided by these third parties or our own
systems could expose us to litigation and negatively impact our
relationships with users, adversely affecting our brand and our
business.
Our ability to deliver our internet-based services is dependent
on the development and maintenance of the infrastructure of the
Internet by third parties. This includes maintenance of a
reliable network backbone with the necessary speed, data
capacity and security for providing reliable Internet access and
services. Our services are designed to operate without
interruption in accordance with our service level commitments.
However, we have experienced and expect that we will in the
future experience interruptions and delays in services and
availability from time to time. We rely on internal systems as
well as third-party vendors, including data center providers and
bandwidth providers, to provide our services. We do not maintain
redundant systems or facilities for some of these services. In
the event of a catastrophic event with respect to one or more of
these systems or facilities, we may experience an extended
period of system unavailability, which could negatively impact
our relationship with users. To operate without interruption,
both we and our service providers must guard against:
|
|
|
|
|
damage from fire, power loss and other natural disasters;
|
|
|
|
communications failures;
|
|
|
|
software and hardware errors, failures and crashes;
|
|
|
|
security breaches, computer viruses and similar disruptive
problems; and
|
|
|
|
other potential interruptions.
|
Any disruption in the network access or co-location services
provided by these third-party providers or any failure of or by
these third-party providers or our own systems to handle current
or higher volume of use could significantly harm our business.
We exercise limited control over these third-party vendors,
which increases our vulnerability to problems with services they
provide.
Any errors, failures, interruptions or delays experienced in
connection with these third-party technologies and information
services or our own systems could negatively impact our
relationships with users and adversely affect our business and
could expose us to third-party liabilities. Although we maintain
insurance for our business, the coverage under our policies may
not be adequate to compensate us for all losses that may occur.
In addition, we cannot provide assurance that we will continue
to be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at an
acceptable cost.
The reliability and performance of the Internet may be harmed by
increased usage or by denial-of-service attacks. The Internet
has experienced a variety of outages and other delays as a
result of damages to portions of its infrastructure, and it
could face outages and delays in the future. These outages and
19
delays could reduce the level of Internet usage as well as the
availability of the Internet to us for delivery of our
internet-based services.
We
rely on third-party computer hardware and software that may be
difficult to replace or which could cause errors or failures of
our service which could damage our reputation, harm our ability
to attract and maintain clients and decrease our
revenue.
We rely on computer hardware purchased or leased and software
licensed from third parties in order to offer our service,
including database software from Oracle Corporation. These
licenses are generally commercially available on varying terms,
however it is possible that this hardware and software may not
continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at
all. Any loss of the right to use any of this hardware or
software could result in delays in the provisioning of our
service until equivalent technology is either developed by us,
or, if available, is identified, obtained and integrated, which
could harm our business. Any errors or defects in third-party
hardware or software could result in errors or a failure of our
service which could damage our reputation, harm our ability to
attract and maintain clients and decrease our revenue.
We are
subject to the effect of payer and provider conduct which we
cannot control and which could damage our reputation with
clients and result in liability claims that increase our
expenses.
We offer certain electronic claims submission services as part
of our service, and we rely on content from clients, payers and
others. While we have implemented certain features and
safeguards designed to maximize the accuracy and completeness of
claims content, these features and safeguards may not be
sufficient to prevent inaccurate claims data from being
submitted to payers. Should inaccurate claims data be submitted
to payers, we may experience poor operational results and may be
subject to liability claims which could damage our reputation
with clients and result in liability claims that increase our
expenses.
If our
services fail to provide accurate and timely information, or if
our content or any other element of our service is associated
with faulty clinical decisions or treatment, we could have
liability to clients, clinicians or patients which could
adversely affect our results of operations.
Our software, content and services are used to assist clinical
decision-making and provide information about patient medical
histories and treatment plans. If our software, content or
services fail to provide accurate and timely information or are
associated with faulty clinical decisions or treatment, then
clients, clinicians or their patients could assert claims
against us that could result in substantial costs to us, harm
our reputation in the industry and cause demand for our services
to decline.
Our proprietary athenaClinicals service is utilized in clinical
decision-making, provides access to patient medical histories
and assists in creating patient treatment plans including the
issuance of prescription drugs. If our athenaClinicals service
fails to provide accurate and timely information, or if our
content or any other element of our service is associated with
faulty clinical decisions or treatment, we could have liability
to clients, clinicians or patients.
The assertion of such claims and ensuing litigation, regardless
of its outcome could result in substantial cost to us, divert
managements attention from operations, damage our
reputation and decrease market acceptance of our services. We
attempt to limit by contract our liability for damages and to
require that our clients assume responsibility for medical care
and approve key system rules, protocols and data. Despite these
precautions, the allocations of responsibility and limitations
of liability set forth in our contracts may not be enforceable,
may not be binding upon patients or may not otherwise protect us
from liability for damages.
We maintain general liability and insurance coverage, but this
coverage may not continue to be available on acceptable terms or
may not be available in sufficient amounts to cover one or more
large claims against us. In addition, the insurer might disclaim
coverage as to any future claim. One or more large claims could
exceed our available insurance coverage.
Our proprietary software may contain errors or failures that are
not detected until after the software is introduced or updates
and new versions are released. It is challenging for us to test
our software for all
20
potential problems because it is difficult to simulate the wide
variety of computing environments or treatment methodologies
that our clients may deploy or rely upon. From time to time we
have discovered defects or errors in our software, and such
defects or errors can be expected to appear in the future.
Defects and errors that are not timely detected and remedied
could expose us to risk of liability to clients, clinicians and
patients and cause delays in introduction of new services,
result in increased costs and diversion of development
resources, require design modifications or decrease market
acceptance or client satisfaction with our services.
If any of these risks occur, they could materially adversely
affect our business, financial condition or results of
operations.
We may
be liable for use of incorrect or incomplete data we provide
which could harm our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
We store and display data for use by healthcare providers in
treating patients. Our clients or third parties provide us with
most of these data. If these data are incorrect or incomplete or
if we make mistakes in the capture or input of these data,
adverse consequences, including death, may occur and give rise
to product liability and other claims against us. In addition, a
court or government agency may take the position that our
storage and display of health information exposes us to personal
injury liability or other liability for wrongful delivery or
handling of healthcare services or erroneous health information.
While we maintain insurance coverage, we cannot assure that this
coverage will prove to be adequate or will continue to be
available on acceptable terms, if at all. Even unsuccessful
claims could result in substantial costs and diversion of
management resources. A claim brought against us that is
uninsured or under-insured could harm our business, financial
condition and results of operations.
RISKS
RELATED TO REGULATION
Government
regulation of healthcare creates risks and challenges with
respect to our compliance efforts and our business
strategies.
The healthcare industry is highly regulated and is subject to
changing political, legislative, regulatory and other
influences. Existing and new laws and regulations affecting the
healthcare industry could create unexpected liabilities for us,
could cause us to incur additional costs and could restrict our
operations. Many healthcare laws are complex, and their
application to specific services and relationships may not be
clear. In particular, many existing healthcare laws and
regulations, when enacted, did not anticipate the healthcare
information services that we provide, and these laws and
regulations may be applied to our services in ways that we do
not anticipate. Our failure to accurately anticipate the
application of these laws and regulations, or our other failure
to comply, could create liability for us, result in adverse
publicity and negatively affect our business. Some of the risks
we face from healthcare regulation are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
False or Fraudulent Claim Laws. There are
numerous federal and state laws that forbid submission of false
information or the failure to disclose information in connection
with submission and payment of physician claims for
reimbursement. In some cases, these laws also forbid abuse of
existing systems for such submission and payment. Any failure of
our services to comply with these laws and regulations could
result in substantial liability, including but not limited to
criminal liability, could adversely affect demand for our
services and could force us to expend significant capital,
research and development and other resources to address the
failure. Errors by us or our systems with respect to entry,
formatting, preparation or transmission of claim information may
be determined or alleged to be in violation of these laws and
regulations. Determination by a court or regulatory agency that
our services violate these laws could subject us to civil or
criminal penalties, could invalidate all or portions of some of
our client contracts, could require us to change or terminate
some portions of our business, could require us to refund
portions of our services fees, could cause us to be disqualified
from serving clients doing business with government payers and
could have an adverse effect on our business.
|
In most cases where we are permitted to do so, we calculate
charges for our services based on a percentage of the
collections that our clients receive as a result of our
services. To the extent that violations or liability for
violations of these laws and regulations require intent, it may
be alleged that
21
this percentage calculation provides us or our employees with
incentive to commit or overlook fraud or abuse in connection
with submission and payment of reimbursement claims. The
U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has stated
that it is concerned that percentage-based billing services may
encourage billing companies to commit or to overlook fraudulent
or abusive practices.
|
|
|
|
|
HIPAA and other Health Privacy
Regulations. There are numerous federal and state
laws related to patient privacy. In particular, the Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA,
includes privacy standards that protect individual privacy by
limiting the uses and disclosures of individually identifiable
health information and data security standards that require
covered entities to implement administrative, physical and
technological safeguards to ensure the confidentiality,
integrity, availability and security of individually
identifiable health information in electronic form. HIPAA also
specifies formats that must be used in certain electronic
transactions, such as claims, payment advice and eligibility
inquiries. Because we translate electronic transactions to and
from HIPAA-prescribed electronic formats and other forms, we are
a clearinghouse and as such are a covered entity. In addition,
our clients are also covered entities and are mandated by HIPAA
to enter into written agreements with us, known as business
associate agreements, that require us to safeguard individually
identifiable health information. Business associate agreements
typically include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
a description of our permitted uses of individually identifiable
health information;
|
|
|
|
a covenant not to disclose the information other than as
permitted under the agreement and to make our subcontractors, if
any, subject to the same restrictions;
|
|
|
|
assurances that appropriate administrative, physical and
technical safeguards are in place to prevent misuse of the
information;
|
|
|
|
an obligation to report to our client any use or disclosure of
the information not provided for in the agreement;
|
|
|
|
a prohibition against our use or disclosure of the information
if a similar use or disclosure by our client would violate the
HIPAA standards;
|
|
|
|
the ability for our clients to terminate the underlying support
agreement if we breach a material term of the business associate
agreement and are unable to cure the breach;
|
|
|
|
the requirement to return or destroy all individually
identifiable health information at the end of our support
agreement; and
|
|
|
|
access by the Department of Health and Human Services to our
internal practices, books and records to validate that we are
safeguarding individually identifiable health information.
|
We may not be able to adequately address the business risks
created by HIPAA implementation. Furthermore, we are unable to
predict what changes to HIPAA or other law or regulation might
be made in the future or how those changes could affect our
business or the costs of compliance. In addition, the federal
Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information
Technology, or ONCHIT, is coordinating the development of
national standards for creating an interoperable health
information technology infrastructure based on the widespread
adoption of electronic health records in the healthcare sector.
We are unable to predict what, if any, impact the creation of
such standards will have on our compliance costs or our services.
In addition some payers and clearinghouses with which we conduct
business interpret HIPAA transaction requirements differently
than we do. Where clearinghouses or payers require conformity
with their interpretations a condition of successful transaction
we seek to comply with their interpretations.
The HIPAA transaction standards include proper use of procedure
and diagnosis codes. Since these codes are selected or approved
by our clients, and since we do not verify their propriety, some
of our capability to comply with the transaction standards is
dependant on the proper conduct of our clients.
22
In addition to the HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules, most states
have enacted patient confidentiality laws that protect against
the disclosure of confidential medical information, and many
states have adopted or are considering further legislation in
this area, including privacy safeguards, security standards, and
data security breach notification requirements. Such state laws,
if more stringent than HIPAA requirements, are not preempted by
the federal requirements we are required to comply with them.
Failure by us to comply with any of the federal and state
standards regarding patient privacy may subject us to penalties,
including civil monetary penalties and in some circumstances,
criminal penalties. In addition, such failure may injure our
reputation and adversely affect our ability to retain clients
and attract new clients.
|
|
|
|
|
Anti-Kickback and Anti-Bribery Laws. There are
federal and state laws that govern patient referrals, physician
financial relationships and inducements to healthcare providers
and patients. For example, the federal healthcare programs
anti-kickback law prohibits any person or entity from offering,
paying, soliciting or receiving anything of value, directly or
indirectly, for the referral of patients covered by Medicare,
Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs or the leasing,
purchasing, ordering or arranging for or recommending the lease,
purchase or order of any item, good, facility or service covered
by these programs. Many states also have similar anti-kickback
laws that are not necessarily limited to items or services for
which payment is made by a federal healthcare program. Moreover,
both federal and state laws forbid bribery and similar behavior.
Any determination by a state or federal regulatory agency that
any of our activities or those of our clients or vendors violate
any of these laws could subject us to civil or criminal
penalties, could require us to change or terminate some portions
of our business, could require us to refund a portion of our
service fees, could disqualify us from providing services to
clients doing business with government programs and could have
an adverse effect on our business. Even an unsuccessful
challenge by regulatory authorities of our activities could
result in adverse publicity and could require costly response
from us.
|
|
|
|
Anti-Referral Laws. There are federal and
state laws that forbid payment for patient referrals, patient
brokering, remuneration of patients or billing based on
referrals between individuals
and/or
entities that have various financial, ownership or other
business relationships. In many cases, billing for care arising
from such actions is illegal. These vary widely from state to
state, and one of the federal law, termed the Stark Law, is very
complex in its application. Any determination by a state or
federal regulatory agency that any of our clients violate or
have violated any of these laws may result in allegations that
claims that we have processed or forwarded are improper. This
could subject us to civil or criminal penalties, could require
us to change or terminate some portions of our business, could
require us to refund portions of our services fees and could
have an adverse effect on our business. Even an unsuccessful
challenge by regulatory authorities of our activities could
result in adverse publicity and could require costly response
from us.
|
|
|
|
Corporate Practice of Medicine Laws and Fee-Splitting
Laws. In many states, there are state laws that
forbid physicians from practicing medicine in partnership with
non-physicians, such as business corporations. In some states,
including New York, these take the form of laws or regulations
forbidding splitting of physician fees with non-physicians or
others. In some cases, these laws have been interpreted to
prevent business service providers from charging their physician
clients on the basis of a percentage of collections or charges.
We have varied our charge structure in some states to comply
with these laws, which may make our services less desirable to
potential clients. Any determination by a state court or
regulatory agency that our service contracts with our clients
violate these laws could subject us to civil or criminal
penalties, could invalidate all or portions of some of our
client contracts, could require us to change or terminate some
portions of our business, could require us to refund portions of
our services fees and could have an adverse effect on our
business. Even an unsuccessful challenge by regulatory
authorities of our activities could result in adverse publicity
and could require costly response from us.
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
Anti-Assignment Laws. There are federal and
state laws that forbid or limit assignment of claims for
reimbursement from government-funded programs. In some cases,
these laws have been interpreted in regulations or policy
statements to limit the manner in which business service
companies may handle checks or other payments for such claims
and to limit or prevent such companies from charging their
physician clients on the basis of a percentage of collections or
charges. Any determination by a state court or regulatory agency
that our service contracts with our clients violate these laws
could subject us to civil or criminal penalties, could
invalidate all or portions of some of our client contracts,
could require us to change or terminate some portions of our
business, could require us to refund portions of our services
fees and could have an adverse effect on our business. Even an
unsuccessful challenge by regulatory authorities of our
activities could result in adverse publicity and could require
costly response from us.
|
|
|
|
Prescribing Laws. The use of our software by
physicians to perform a variety of functions, including
electronic prescribing, electronic routing of prescriptions to
pharmacies and dispensing of medication, is governed by state
and federal law, including fraud and abuse laws, drug control
regulations and state department of health regulations. States
have differing prescription format requirements. Many existing
laws and regulations, when enacted, did not anticipate methods
of
e-commerce
now being developed. For example, while federal law and the laws
of many states permit the electronic transmission of
prescription orders, the laws of several states neither
specifically permit nor specifically prohibit the practice.
Given the rapid growth of electronic transactions in healthcare,
and particularly the growth of the Internet, we expect the
remaining states to directly address these areas with regulation
in the near future. Regulatory authorities such as the
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Centers
for Medicare and Medicaid Services may impose functionality
standards with regard to electronic prescribing and EMR
technologies. Determination that we or our clients have violated
prescribing laws may expose us to liability, loss of reputation
and loss of business. These laws and requirements may also
increase the cost and time necessary to market new services and
could affect us in other respects not presently foreseeable.
|
|
|
|
Electronic Medical Records Laws. A number of
federal and state laws govern the use and content of electronic
health record systems, including fraud and abuse laws that may
affect the donation of such technology. As a company that
provides EMR functionality, our systems and services must be
designed in a manner that facilitates our clients
compliance with these laws. Because this is a topic of
increasing state and federal regulation, we expect additional
and continuing modification of the current legal and regulatory
environment. We cannot predict the content or effect of possible
future regulation on our business activities. The software
component of our athenaClinicals service complies with the
Certification Commission for Healthcare Information Technology,
or CCHIT, for ambulatory electronic health record criteria for
2006.
|
|
|
|
Claims Transmission Laws. Our services include
the manual and electronic transmission of our clients
claims for reimbursement from payers. Federal and various state
laws provide for civil and criminal penalties for any person who
submits, or causes to be submitted, a claim to any payer,
including, without limitation, Medicare, Medicaid and any
private health plans and managed care plans, that is false or
that that overbills or bills for items that have not been
provided to the patient.
|
|
|
|
Prompt Pay Laws. Laws in many states govern
prompt payment obligations for healthcare services. These laws
generally define claims payment processes and set specific time
frames for submission, payment and appeal steps. They frequently
also define and require clean claims. Failure to meet these
requirements and timeframes may result in rejection or delay of
claims. Failure of our services to comply may adversely affect
our business results and give rise to liability claims by
clients.
|
|
|
|
Medical Device Laws. The U.S. Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) has promulgated a draft policy for the
regulation of computer software products as medical devices
under the 1976 Medical Device Amendments to the Federal Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act. To the extent that computer software is a
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
medical device under the policy, we, as a provider of
application functionality, could be required, depending on the
functionality, to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
register and list our products with the FDA;
|
|
|
|
notify the FDA and demonstrate substantial equivalence to other
products on the market before marketing our functionality; or
|
|
|
|
obtain FDA approval by demonstrating safety and effectiveness
before marketing our functionality.
|
The FDA can impose extensive requirements governing pre- and
post-market conditions like service investigation, approval,
labeling and manufacturing. In addition, the FDA can impose
extensive requirements governing development controls and
quality assurance processes.
Potential
regulatory requirements placed on our software, services and
content could impose increased costs on us, could delay or
prevent our introduction of new services types and could impair
the function or value of our existing service
types.
Our services are and are likely to continue to be subject to
increasing regulatory requirements in a multitude of ways. As
these requirements proliferate, we must change or adapt our
services and our software to comply. Changing regulatory
requirements may render our services obsolete or may block us
from accomplishing our work or from developing new services.
This may in turn impose additional costs upon us to comply or to
further develop services or software. It may also make
introduction of new service types more costly or more time
consuming than we currently anticipate. It may even prevent such
introduction by us of new services or continuation of our
existing services unprofitably or impossible.
Potential
additional regulation of the disclosure of health information
outside the United States may adversely affect our operations
and may increase our costs.
Federal or state governmental authorities may impose additional
data security standards or additional privacy or other
restrictions on the collection, use, transmission and other
disclosures of health information. Legislation has been proposed
at various times at both the federal and the state level that
would limit, forbid or regulate the use or transmission of
medical information outside of the United States. Such
legislation, if adopted, may render our use of our off-shore
partners, such as our data-entry and customer service provider,
Vision Healthsource, for work related to such data impracticable
or substantially more expensive. Alternative processing of such
information within the United States may involve substantial
delay in implementation and increased cost.
Errors
or illegal activity on the part of our clients may result in
claims against us.
We rely on our clients, and we contractually obligate them, to
provide us with accurate and appropriate data and directives for
our actions. We rely upon our clients as users of our system for
key activities to produce proper claims for reimbursement.
Failure of clients to provide these data and directives or to
perform these activities may result in claims against us that
our reliance was misplaced.
Our
services present the potential for embezzlement, identity theft
or other similar illegal behavior by our employees or
subcontractors with respect to third parties.
Among other things, our services involve handling mail from
payers and from patients for many of our clients, and this mail
frequently includes original checks
and/or
credit card information, and occasionally, it includes currency.
Even in those cases in which we do not handle original documents
or mail, our services also involve the use and disclosure of
personal and business information that could be used to
impersonate third parties or otherwise gain access to their data
or funds. If any of our employees or subcontractors takes,
converts or misuses such funds, documents or data, we could be
liable for damages, and our business reputation could be damaged
or destroyed.
25
Potential
subsidy of services similar to ours may reduce client
demand.
Recently, entities such as the Massachusetts Healthcare
Consortium have offered to subsidize adoption by physicians of
electronic health record technology. In addition, federal
regulations have been changed to permit such subsidy from
additional sources subject to certain limitations. To the extent
that we do not qualify or participate in such subsidy programs,
demand for our services may be reduced which may decrease our
revenues.
RISKS
RELATED TO THIS OFFERING AND OWNERSHIP OF OUR COMMON
STOCK
An
active, liquid and orderly market for our common stock may not
develop.
Prior to our initial public in September 2007 offering there was
no market for shares of our common stock. An active trading
market for our common stock may never develop or be sustained,
which could depress the market price of our common stock and
could affect your ability to sell your shares. The trading price
of our common stock is likely to be highly volatile and could be
subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors,
some of which are beyond our control. In addition to the factors
discussed in this Risk Factors section and elsewhere
in this prospectus, these factors include:
|
|
|
|
|
our operating performance and the operating performance of
similar companies;
|
|
|
|
the overall performance of the equity markets;
|
|
|
|
announcements by us or our competitors of acquisitions, business
plans or commercial relationships;
|
|
|
|
threatened or actual litigation;
|
|
|
|
changes in laws or regulations relating to the sale of health
insurance;
|
|
|
|
any major change in our board of directors or management;
|
|
|
|
publication of research reports or news stories about us, our
competitors or our industry or positive or negative
recommendations or withdrawal of research coverage by securities
analysts;
|
|
|
|
large volumes of sales of our shares of common stock by existing
stockholders; and
|
|
|
|
general political and economic conditions.
|
In addition, the stock market in general, and the market for
internet-related companies in particular, has experienced
extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been
unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of
those companies. These fluctuations may be even more pronounced
in the trading market for our stock shortly following this
offering. Securities class action litigation has often been
instituted against companies following periods of volatility in
the overall market and in the market price of a companys
securities. This litigation, if instituted against us, could
result in very substantial costs, divert our managements
attention and resources and harm our business, operating results
and financial condition.
If a
substantial number of shares become available for sale and are
sold in a short period of time, the market price of our common
stock could decline.
If our existing stockholders sell a large number of shares of
our common stock or the public market perceives that these sales
may occur, the market price of our common stock could decline.
As of December 31, 2007, we had approximately
32,324,824 shares of common stock outstanding.
The shares sold in this public offering will be freely
tradable without restriction or further registration under the
federal securities laws, unless purchased by our affiliates.
Taking into consideration the effect of the lock-up agreements
(subject to customary extensions) that were entered into by
certain of our stockholders in connection with our initial
public offering which closed on September 25, 2007 and the
90-day
lock-up
agreements (subject to customary extensions) that have been
entered into by certain of our stockholders in connection with
this offering, we
26
estimate that the 32,659,824 shares of our common stock
that will be outstanding upon the closing of this offering will
be available for sale pursuant to Rule 144,
Rule 144(k) and Rule 701, as follows:
shares
are shares saleable under Rules 144 and 701 that are not
subject to a lock-up,
shares
are restricted securities held for one year or less,
shares
may be sold upon expiration of the initial public offering
lock-up agreements (subject in some cases to volume limitations)
and
shares
may be sold upon expiration of the
90-day
lock-up agreements entered into in connection with this offering
(subject in some cases to volume limitations).
We have also registered all common stock that we may issue under
our 1997 Stock Plan, 2000 Stock Plan, 2007 Stock Option and
Incentive Plan and 2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. As of
December 31, 2007, we had outstanding options to purchase
2,888,058 million shares of common stock that, if
exercised, will result
in additional
shares becoming available for sale upon expiration of the
initial public offering lock-up agreements
and
additional shares becoming available for sale upon expiration of
the 90-day lock-up agreements. These shares can be freely sold
in the public market upon issuance, subject to the lock-up
agreements referred to above. If a large number of these shares
are sold in the public market, the sales could reduce the
trading price of our common stock.
Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner
& Smith Incorporated, as representatives of the
underwriters, may at any time without notice, agree to release
all or any portion of the shares subject to the lock-up
agreements, which would result in more shares being available
for sale in the public market at earlier dates. Sales of common
stock by existing stockholders in the public market, the
availability of these shares for sale, our issuance of
securities or the perception that any of these events might
occur could materially and adversely affect the market price of
our common stock.
You
will experience immediate and substantial
dilution.
The public offering price will be substantially higher than the
net tangible book value of each outstanding share of common
stock immediately after this offering. If you purchase common
stock in this offering, you will suffer immediate and
substantial dilution. At an assumed public offering price of
$35.26 per share, based on the last reported sale price of our
common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market on January 2,
2008, with net proceeds of
$ million, after deducting
estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated
offering expenses, investors who purchase shares in this
offering will have contributed
approximately % of the total amount
of funding we have received to date, but will only hold
approximately % of the total voting
rights. The dilution will be $ per
share in the net tangible book value of the common stock from
the assumed public offering price. In addition, if outstanding
options to purchase shares of our common stock are exercised,
there could be further dilution. For more information refer to
Dilution.
We
have broad discretion in the use of the net proceeds from this
offering and may not use them effectively.
We cannot specify with certainty the particular uses of the net
proceeds we will receive from this offering. Our management will
have broad discretion in the application of the net proceeds,
including for any of the purposes described in Use of
Proceeds. Accordingly, you will have to rely upon the
judgment of our management with respect to the use of the
proceeds, with only limited information concerning
managements specific intentions. Our management may spend
a portion or all of the net proceeds from this offering in ways
that our stockholders may not desire or that may not yield a
favorable return. The failure by our management to apply these
funds effectively could harm our business. Pending their use, we
may invest the net proceeds from this offering in a manner that
does not produce income or that loses value.
27
A
limited number of stockholders will have the ability to
influence the outcome of director elections and other matters
requiring stockholder approval.
Upon completion of this offering, our directors, executive
officers and their affiliated entities will beneficially own
more than 38.9% of our outstanding common stock. These
stockholders, if they act together, could exert substantial
influence over matters requiring approval by our stockholders,
including the election of directors, the amendment of our
certificate of incorporation and by-laws and the approval of
mergers or other business combination transactions. This
concentration of ownership may discourage, delay or prevent a
change in control of our company, which could deprive our
stockholders of an opportunity to receive a premium for their
stock as part of a sale of our company and might reduce our
stock price. These actions may be taken even if they are opposed
by other stockholders, including those who purchase shares in
this offering.
Provisions
in our certificate of incorporation and by-laws or Delaware law
might discourage, delay or prevent a change of control of our
company or changes in our management and, therefore, depress the
trading price of our common stock.
Provisions of our certificate of incorporation and by-laws and
Delaware law may discourage, delay or prevent a merger,
acquisition or other change in control that stockholders may
consider favorable, including transactions in which you might
otherwise receive a premium for your shares of our common stock.
These provisions may also prevent or frustrate attempts by our
stockholders to replace or remove our management. These
provisions include:
|
|
|
|
|
limitations on the removal of directors;
|
|
|
|
advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals and
nominations;
|
|
|
|
the inability of stockholders to act by written consent or to
call special meetings; and
|
|
|
|
the ability of our board of directors to make, alter or repeal
our by-laws.
|
The affirmative vote of the holders of at least 75% of our
shares of capital stock entitled to vote is necessary to amend
or repeal the above provisions of our certificate of
incorporation. In addition, our board of directors has the
ability to designate the terms of and issue new series of
preferred stock without stockholder approval. Also, absent
approval of our board of directors, our by-laws may only be
amended or repealed by the affirmative vote of the holders of at
least 75% of our shares of capital stock entitled to vote.
In addition, Section 203 of the Delaware General
Corporation Law prohibits a publicly-held Delaware corporation
from engaging in a business combination with an interested
stockholder, generally a person which together with its
affiliates owns, or within the last three years has owned, 15%
of our voting stock, for a period of three years after the date
of the transaction in which the person became an interested
stockholder, unless the business combination is approved in a
prescribed manner.
The existence of the foregoing provisions and anti-takeover
measures could limit the price that investors might be willing
to pay in the future for shares of our common stock. They could
also deter potential acquirers of our company, thereby reducing
the likelihood that you could receive a premium for your common
stock in an acquisition.
We do
not currently intend to pay dividends on our common stock and,
consequently, your ability to achieve a return on your
investment will depend on appreciation in the price of our
common stock.
We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common
stock and do not currently intend to do so for the foreseeable
future. We currently intend to invest our future earnings, if
any, to fund our growth. Therefore, you are not likely to
receive any dividends on your common stock for the foreseeable
future and the success of an investment in shares of our common
stock will depend upon any future appreciation in its value.
There is no guarantee that shares of our common stock will
appreciate in value or even maintain the price at which our
stockholders have purchased their shares.
28
SPECIAL
NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This prospectus contains forward-looking statements. All
statements other than statements of historical fact contained in
this prospectus are forward-looking statements. In some cases,
you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such
as may, will, should,
expects, plans, anticipates,
believes, estimates,
predicts, potential or
continue or the negative of these terms or other
comparable terminology. These statements are only current
predictions and are subject to known and unknown risks,
uncertainties and other factors that may cause our or our
industrys actual results, levels of activity, performance,
or achievements to be materially different from those
anticipated by the forward-looking statements. These factors
include, among other things, those listed under Risk
Factors and elsewhere in this prospectus.
Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the
forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee
future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements.
Except as required by law, we are under no duty to update or
revise any of the forward-looking statements, whether as a
result of new information, future events or otherwise, after the
date of this prospectus.
This prospectus contains statistical data that we obtained from
industry publications and reports generated by third parties.
Although we believe that the publications and reports are
reliable, we have not independently verified this statistical
data.
Unless otherwise indicated, information contained in this
prospectus concerning our industry and the markets in which we
operate, including our general expectations and market position,
market opportunity and market share, is based on information
from independent industry analysts and third party sources
(including industry publications, surveys and forecasts and our
internal research), and management estimates. Management
estimates are derived from publicly available information
released by independent industry analysts and third-party
sources, as well as data from our internal research, and are
based on assumptions made by us based on such data and our
knowledge of such industry and markets, which we believe to be
reasonable. None of the sources cited in this prospectus has
consented to the inclusion of any data from its reports, nor
have we sought their consent. Our internal research has not been
verified by any independent source, and we have not
independently verified any third-party information. While we
believe the market position, market opportunity and market share
information included in this prospectus is generally reliable,
such information is inherently imprecise. In addition,
projections, assumptions and estimates of our future performance
and the future performance of the industries in which we operate
are necessarily subject to a high degree of uncertainty and risk
due to a variety of factors, including those described in
Risk Factors and elsewhere in this prospectus. These
and other factors could cause results to differ materially from
those expressed in the estimates made by the independent parties
and by us.
29
We estimate that the net proceeds to us from the sale of the
shares of common stock in this offering will be approximately
$ million, based
on an assumed public offering price of $35.26 per share, based
on the last reported sale price of our common stock on the
NASDAQ Global Market on January 2, 2008, and after
deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and
estimated offering expenses. If the underwriters exercise in
full the option to purchase additional shares our net proceeds
will be approximately
$ .
We will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of shares
by the selling stockholders.
The principal reasons for this offering are to obtain additional
capital and to further facilitate a public market for our common
stock, in particular in light of the fact that a large number of
our outstanding shares of common stock are currently subject to
lock-up agreements. We anticipate that we will use the net
proceeds we receive from this offering for working capital and
other general corporate purposes, including the funding of our
marketing activities and further investment in the development
of our service offerings. We have not allocated any specific
portion of the net proceeds to any particular purpose, and our
management will have the discretion to allocate the proceeds as
it determines. We may use a portion of the net proceeds for the
acquisition of businesses, products and technologies that we
believe are complementary to our own, although we have no
agreements or understandings with respect to any acquisition at
this time.
Pending our use of the net proceeds from this offering, we
intend to invest the net proceeds of this offering in
short-term, interest-bearing, investment-grade securities.
This expected use of the net proceeds of this offering
represents our current intentions based upon our present plans
and business condition. The amounts and timing of our actual
expenditures will depend upon numerous factors, including cash
flows from operations and the anticipated growth of our
business. We will retain broad discretion in the allocation and
use of our net proceeds. See Risk Factors
Risks Related to This Offering and Ownership of Our Common
Stock.
PRICE
RANGE OF COMMON STOCK
Our common stock has been listed on the NASDAQ Global Market
under the trading symbol ATHN since our initial
public offering on September 20, 2007. Prior to that time,
there was no public market for our common stock. The following
table sets forth the high and low closing sales prices of our
common stock, as reported by the NASDAQ Global Market, for each
of the periods listed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
Fiscal 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Third Quarter (commencing September 20, 2007)
|
|
$
|
35.50
|
|
|
$
|
33.91
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
46.99
|
|
|
|
32.10
|
|
Fiscal 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter (through January 3, 2008)
|
|
$
|
35.80
|
|
|
$
|
35.26
|
|
The last reported sale price of our common stock on the NASDAQ
Global Market on January 3, 2008 was $35.80 per share. As
of December 31, 2007, we had 348 holders of record of
our common stock.
We have never declared or paid any dividends on our capital
stock and our loan agreements restrict our ability to pay
dividends. We currently intend to retain any future earnings and
do not intend to declare or pay cash dividends on our common
stock in the foreseeable future. Any future determination to pay
dividends will be, subject to applicable law, at the discretion
of our board of directors and will depend upon, among other
factors, our results of operations, financial condition,
contractual restrictions and capital requirements.
30
The following table sets forth our capitalization as of
September 30, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
on an actual basis;
|
|
|
|
on a pro forma basis to reflect the repayment of long-term debt
totaling $22.2 million and additional interest and
prepayment penalties totaling $0.9 million during the
fourth quarter of 2007; and
|
|
|
|
on a pro forma as adjusted basis to further reflect the receipt
by us of net proceeds of
$ million from the sale of
the 335,000 shares of common stock offered by us in this
offering at an assumed public offering price of $35.26 per
share, based on the last reported sale price of our common stock
in the NASDAQ Global Market on January 2, 2008, less
estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated
offering expenses payable by us.
|
You should read this information together with
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations, our consolidated
financial statements and the notes to those statements appearing
elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
|
(in thousands, except share and
|
|
|
|
per share data)
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$
|
22,817
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Deferred rent
|
|
|
11,460
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock; $0.01 par value per share;
125,000,000 shares authorized, 33,513,893 shares
issued and 32,236,034 shares outstanding, actual;
125,000,000 shares
authorized, shares
issued
and shares
outstanding, pro forma; 125,000,000 shares authorized
and shares
issued
and shares
outstanding, pro forma as adjusted
|
|
|
335
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
144,554
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(70,752
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury stock, 1,277,859 shares
|
|
|
(1,200
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
72,997
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capitalization
|
|
$
|
107,274
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The number of shares shown as issued and outstanding in the
table above does not include:
|
|
|
|
|
2,896,117 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise
of stock options outstanding as of September 30, 2007 with
a weighted average exercise price of $3.90 per share; and
|
|
|
|
154,936 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise
of warrants outstanding as of September 30, 2007 with a
weighted average exercise price of $2.08 per share.
|
31
If you invest in our common stock in this offering, your
interest will be diluted to the extent of the difference between
the public offering price per share of our common stock and the
pro forma net tangible book value per share of our common stock.
The net tangible book value of our common stock as of
September 30, 2007 was a deficit of
$ million, or
$ per share. Net tangible book
value per share represents the amount of stockholders
deficit divided by shares of common stock outstanding at that
date.
Net tangible book value dilution per share to new investors
represents the difference between the amount per share paid by
purchasers of common stock in this offering and the pro forma
net tangible book value per share of common stock immediately
after completion of this offering. After giving effect to our
sale of 335,000 shares of common stock in this offering at
an assumed public offering price of $35.26 per share, based on
the last reported sale price of our common stock on the NASDAQ
Global Market on January 2, 2008, and after deducting
estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated
offering expenses, our pro forma net tangible book value as of
September 30, 2007 would have been
$ per share. This represents an
immediate increase in net tangible book value of
$ per share to existing
stockholders and an immediate dilution in net tangible book
value of $ per share to purchasers
of common stock in this offering, as illustrated in the
following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed public offering price per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Pro forma net tangible book value per share as of
September 30, 2007
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase per share attributable to new investors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net tangible book value per share at
September 30, 2007 after giving effect to the offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilution per share to new investors
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the underwriters exercise their over-allotment option in
full, the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per
share after this offering would be
$ per share, the increase per
share attributable to new investors would be
$ per share and the dilution
to new investors would be
$ per share.
The following table summarizes, on a pro forma basis, as of
September 30, 2007, the difference between the number of
shares of common stock purchased from us, the total
consideration paid to us and the average price per share paid by
existing stockholders and by new investors at an assumed public
offering price of $35.26 per share, based on the last reported
sale price of our common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market on
January 2, 2008, before deducting estimated underwriting
discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Avg
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased
|
|
|
Consideration
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
/ Share
|
|
|
Existing stockholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
New investors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
The discussion and the tables above assume no exercise of stock
options outstanding on September 30, 2007 and no issuance
of shares reserved for future issuance under our equity
compensation plans. In addition, the numbers set forth in the
table above assume the conversion as of September 30, 2007
of all outstanding shares of our preferred stock into shares of
our common stock. As of September 30, 2007, there were:
|
|
|
|
|
2,896,117 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise
of stock options outstanding with a weighted average exercise
price of $3.90 per share;
|
|
|
|
154,936 shares of common stock issuable upon the exercise
of warrants outstanding with a weighted average exercise price
of $2.08 per share; and
|
|
|
|
1,507,589 shares of common stock currently reserved for
future issuance under our equity incentive plans.
|
If the underwriters option to purchase additional shares
is exercised in full, the following will occur:
|
|
|
|
|
the percentage of shares of common stock held by existing
stockholders will decrease to
approximately % of the total number
of shares of our common stock outstanding after this
offering; and
|
|
|
|
the number of shares held by new investors will be increased
to , or
approximately %, of the total
number of shares of our common stock outstanding after this
offering.
|
33
SELECTED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
The following tables summarize our consolidated financial data
for the periods presented. You should read the following
financial information together with the information under
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and our consolidated
financial statements and the related notes to these consolidated
financial statements appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. The
selected consolidated statements of operations data for the
fiscal years ended December 31, 2004, 2005 and 2006, and
the selected consolidated balance sheet data as of
December 31, 2005 and 2006 are derived from our
consolidated financial statements, which are included elsewhere
in this prospectus, and have been audited by
Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered
public accounting firm, as indicated in their report. The
selected consolidated statements of operations data for the
years ended December 31, 2002 and 2003, and the
consolidated balance sheet data at December 31, 2002, 2003
and 2004 are derived from our audited consolidated financial
statements not included in this prospectus. The selected
consolidated balance sheet data as of September 30, 2007
and the selected consolidated statements of operations data for
nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2007 are derived
from our unaudited consolidated financial statements appearing
elsewhere in this prospectus. The unaudited consolidated
financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as our
audited financial statements and include, in the opinion of
management, all adjustments that management considers necessary
for a fair presentation of the financial information set forth
in those statements. Operating results for these periods are not
necessarily indicative of the operating results for a full year.
Historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results
to be expected in future periods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(in thousands except share and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business services
|
|
$
|
10,475
|
|
|
$
|
21,953
|
|
|
$
|
35,033
|
|
|
$
|
48,958
|
|
|
$
|
70,652
|
|
|
$
|
51,167
|
|
|
$
|
67,648
|
|
Implementation and other
|
|
|
1,509
|
|
|
|
2,713
|
|
|
|
3,905
|
|
|
|
4,582
|
|
|
|
5,161
|
|
|
|
3,800
|
|
|
|
4,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue
|
|
|
11,984
|
|
|
|
24,666
|
|
|
|
38,938
|
|
|
|
53,540
|
|
|
|
75,813
|
|
|
|
54,967
|
|
|
|
72,608
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct operating
|
|
|
10,107
|
|
|
|
15,396
|
|
|
|
20,512
|
|
|
|
27,545
|
|
|
|
36,530
|
|
|
|
26,624
|
|
|
|
33,900
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
3,952
|
|
|
|
4,994
|
|
|
|
7,650
|
|
|
|
11,680
|
|
|
|
15,645
|
|
|
|
11,248
|
|
|
|
12,643
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
488
|
|
|
|
1,051
|
|
|
|
1,485
|
|
|
|
2,925
|
|
|
|
6,903
|
|
|
|
4,645
|
|
|
|
5,451
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
4,448
|
|
|
|
5,222
|
|
|
|
8,520
|
|
|
|
15,545
|
|
|
|
16,347
|
|
|
|
11,921
|
|
|
|
13,912
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
2,493
|
|
|
|
2,894
|
|
|
|
3,159
|
|
|
|
5,483
|
|
|
|
6,238
|
|
|
|
4,589
|
|
|
|
4,325
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
21,488
|
|
|
|
29,557
|
|
|
|
41,326
|
|
|
|
63,178
|
|
|
|
81,663
|
|
|
|
59,027
|
|
|
|
70,231
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
(9,504
|
)
|
|
|
(4,891
|
)
|
|
|
(2,388
|
)
|
|
|
(9,638
|
)
|
|
|
(5,850
|
)
|
|
|
(4,060
|
)
|
|
|
2,377
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
326
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
106
|
|
|
|
372
|
|
|
|
251
|
|
|
|
356
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(380
|
)
|
|
|
(540
|
)
|
|
|
(1,362
|
)
|
|
|
(1,861
|
)
|
|
|
(2,671
|
)
|
|
|
(1,882
|
)
|
|
|
(2,399
|
)
|
Other expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(702
|
)
|
|
|
(445
|
)
|
|
|
(5,689
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other expense
|
|
|
(54
|
)
|
|
|
(475
|
)
|
|
|
(1,222
|
)
|
|
|
(1,755
|
)
|
|
|
(3,001
|
)
|
|
|
(2,076
|
)
|
|
|
(7,732
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(9,558
|
)
|
|
|
(5,366
|
)
|
|
|
(3,610
|
)
|
|
|
(11,393
|
)
|
|
|
(8,851
|
)
|
|
|
(6,136
|
)
|
|
|
(5,355
|
)
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(217
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(9,558
|
)
|
|
|
(5,366
|
)
|
|
|
(3,610
|
)
|
|
|
(11,393
|
)
|
|
|
(8,851
|
)
|
|
|
(6,136
|
)
|
|
|
(5,572
|
)
|
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(373
|
)
|
|
|
(373
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(in thousands except share and per share data)
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(9,558
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5,366
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3,610
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11,393
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9,224
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6,509
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5,572
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss per share basic and diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(1.96
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.39
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.91
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding basic and diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,707,902
|
|
|
|
4,679,762
|
|
|
|
6,095,261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Amounts include stock-based compensation expense as
follows:
|
Direct operating
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
64
|
|
|
$
|
43
|
|
|
$
|
136
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
84
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
37
|
|
|
|
178
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
196
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
539
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
356
|
|
|
$
|
171
|
|
|
$
|
937
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
(in thousands)
|
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments
|
|
$
|
7,634
|
|
|
$
|
8,432
|
|
|
$
|
8,763
|
|
|
$
|
9,309
|
|
|
$
|
9,736
|
|
|
$
|
89,809
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
10,017
|
|
|
|
12,791
|
|
|
|
14,981
|
|
|
|
17,722
|
|
|
|
21,355
|
|
|
|
105,318
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
16,520
|
|
|
|
18,830
|
|
|
|
26,022
|
|
|
|
38,345
|
|
|
|
39,973
|
|
|
|
121,839
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
7,317
|
|
|
|
8,474
|
|
|
|
14,196
|
|
|
|
16,947
|
|
|
|
23,646
|
|
|
|
23,161
|
|
Total non-current liabilities
|
|
|
1,514
|
|
|
|
7,442
|
|
|
|
5,335
|
|
|
|
25,640
|
|
|
|
30,504
|
|
|
|
25,681
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
8,831
|
|
|
|
15,916
|
|
|
|
19,531
|
|
|
|
42,587
|
|
|
|
54,150
|
|
|
|
48,842
|
|
Convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
43,678
|
|
|
|
43,678
|
|
|
|
50,094
|
|
|
|
50,094
|
|
|
|
50,094
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total indebtedness including current portion
|
|
|
4,775
|
|
|
|
9,852
|
|
|
|
11,467
|
|
|
|
20,137
|
|
|
|
27,293
|
|
|
|
22,817
|
|
Total stockholders (deficit) equity
|
|
|
(35,989
|
)
|
|
|
(40,764
|
)
|
|
|
(43,603
|
)
|
|
|
(54,336
|
)
|
|
|
(64,271
|
)
|
|
|
72,997
|
|
35
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion and analysis should be read in
conjunction with our consolidated financial statements, the
accompanying notes to these financial statements and the other
financial information that appear elsewhere in this prospectus.
This discussion contains predictions, estimates and other
forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and
uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially from those
discussed in these forward-looking statements due to a number of
factors, including those set forth in the section entitled
Risk Factors and elsewhere in this prospectus.
Overview
athenahealth is a provider of
internet-based
business services for physician practices. Our service offerings
are based on three integrated components: our proprietary
internet-based software, our continually updated database of
payer reimbursement process rules and our back-office service
operations that perform administrative aspects of billing and
clinical data management for physician practices. Our principal
offering, athenaCollector, automates and manages billing-related
functions for physician practices and includes a medical
practice management platform. We have also developed a service
offering, athenaClinicals, that automates and manages medical
record-related functions for physician practices and includes an
electronic medical record, or EMR, platform. We refer to
athenaCollector as our revenue cycle management service and
athenaClinicals as our clinical cycle management service. Our
services are designed to help our clients achieve faster
reimbursement from payers, reduce error rates, increase
collections, lower operating costs, improve operational workflow
controls and more efficiently manage clinical and billing
information.
Our services require relatively modest initial investment, are
highly adaptable to changing healthcare and technology trends
and are designed to generate significant financial benefit for
our physician clients. Our results are directly tied to the
financial performance of our clients because the majority of our
revenue is based on a percentage of their collections. Our
services have enabled our clients on average, to resolve 93% of
their claims to payers on their first submission attempt,
compared to an industry average we estimate to be 70%. Our
internal studies show that we have reduced the days in accounts
receivable of our client base by more than 30%. We have
experienced a contract renewal rate of at least 97% in each of
the last five years, and this persistent client base drives a
predictable revenue stream.
In 2006, we generated revenue of $75.8 million from the
sale of our services compared to $53.5 million in 2005. For
the nine months ended September 30, 2007 we generated
revenue of $72.6 million versus $55.0 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2006. Given the scope of
our market opportunity, we have increased our spending each year
on growth, innovation and infrastructure. Despite increased
spending in these areas, higher revenue and lower direct
operating expense as a percentage of revenue have led to smaller
net losses.
Our revenues are predominately derived from business services
that we provide on an ongoing basis. This revenue is generally
determined as a percentage of payments collected by our clients,
so the key drivers of our revenue include growth in the number
of physicians working within our client accounts and the
collections of these physicians. To provide these services we
incur expense in several categories, including direct operating,
selling and marketing, research and development, general and
administrative and depreciation and amortization expense. In
general, our direct operating expense increases as our volume of
work increases, whereas our selling and marketing expense
increases in proportion to our rate of adding new accounts to
our network of physician clients. Our other expense categories
are less directly related to growth of revenues and relate more
to our planning for the future, our overall business management
activities and our infrastructure. As our revenues have grown,
the difference between our revenue and our direct operating
expense also has grown, which has afforded us the ability to
spend more in other categories of expense and to experience an
increase in operating margin. Due to growth in the value of our
equity, we have incurred substantial expenses related to
warrants that will cease to accrue further upon the completion
of this offering. We manage our cash and our use of credit
facilities to ensure adequate liquidity, in adherence to related
financial covenants. As a result of
36
this offering, we expect to retire most of our current debt and
seek to establish sufficient liquidity to achieve our business
objectives.
Sources
of Revenue
We derive our revenue from two sources: from business services
associated with our revenue cycle and clinical cycle offerings
and from implementation and other services. Implementation and
other services consist primarily of professional services fees
related to assisting clients with the initial implementation of
our services and for ongoing training and related support
services. Business services accounted for approximately 93% of
our total revenues for the nine months ended September 30,
2007 and 90%, 91% and 93% for the twelve months ended
December 31, 2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively. Business
services fees are typically 2% to 8% of a practices total
collections depending upon the size, complexity and other
characteristics of the practice, plus a per statement charge for
billing statements that are generated for patients. Accordingly,
business services fees are largely driven by: the number of
physician practices we serve; the number of physicians working
in those physician practices; and the volume of activity and
related collections of those physicians, which is largely a
function of the number of patients seen or procedures performed
by the practice, the medical specialty in which the practice
operates and the geographic location of the practice. For
example, high volume, specialty practices in metropolitan areas
tend to collect more payments than slower, primary care
practices in rural areas. There is moderate seasonality in the
activity level of physician offices. Typically, discretionary
use of physician services declines in the late summer and during
the holiday season, which leads to a decline in collections by
our physician clients of about
30-50 days
later. None of our clients accounted for more than 5% of our
total revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2007
or the twelve months ended December 31, 2006. For the
twelve months ended December 31, 2004 and 2005, our largest
client accounted for approximately 7% of revenues in both years
and no other client exceeded 5% of our total revenues in those
years.
Operating
Expense
Direct Operating Expense. Direct operating
expense consists primarily of salaries, benefits, claim
processing costs, other direct costs and stock-based
compensation related to personnel who provide services to
clients, including staff who implement new clients. Although we
expect that direct operating expense will increase in absolute
terms for the foreseeable future, the direct operating expense
is expected to decline as a percentage of revenues as we further
increase the percentage of transactions that are resolved on the
first attempt. In addition, over the longer term, we expect to
increase our overall level of automation and to reduce our
direct operating expense as a percentage of revenues as we
become a larger operation, with higher volumes of work in
particular functions, geographies and medical specialties. In
2007, we include in direct operating expense the service costs
associated with our athenaClinicals offering, which includes
transaction handling related to lab requisitions, lab results
entry, fax classification and other services. We also expect
these costs to increase in absolute terms for the foreseeable
future but to decline as a percentage of revenue. This decrease
will be driven by increased levels of automation and by
economies of scale. Direct operating expense does not include
allocated amounts for rent, depreciation and amortization.
Selling and Marketing Expense. Selling and
marketing expense consists primarily of marketing programs
(including trade shows, brand messaging and on-line initiatives)
and personnel related expense for sales and marketing employees
(including salaries, benefits, commissions, stock-based
compensation, non-billable travel, lodging and other
out-of-pocket employee-related expense). Although we recognize
substantially all of our revenue when services have been
delivered, we recognize a large portion of our sales commission
expense at the time of contract signature and at the time our
services commence. Accordingly, we incur a portion of our sales
and marketing expense prior to the recognition of the
corresponding revenue. We plan to continue to invest in sales
and marketing by hiring additional direct sales personnel to add
new clients and increase sales to our existing clients. We also
plan to expand our marketing activities such as attending trade
shows, expanding user groups and creating new printed materials.
As a result, we expect that in the future, sales and marketing
expense will increase in absolute terms but decline over time as
a percentage of revenue.
Research and Development Expense. Research and
development expense consists primarily of personnel-related
expenses for research and development employees (including
salaries, benefits, stock-based compensation,
37
non-billable travel, lodging and other out-of-pocket
employee-related expense) and consulting fees for third-party
developers. We expect that in the future, research and
development expense will increase in absolute terms but not as a
percentage of revenue as new services and more mature products
require incrementally less new research and development
investment. For our revenue cycle related application
development, we expense nearly all of the development costs
because we believe the development is substantially complete.
For our clinical cycle related application development, we
capitalized nearly all of our research and development costs
during the year ended December 31, 2006 and the nine months
ended September 30, 2007, which capitalized costs
represented approximately 16% of our total research and
development expenditures in 2006 and approximately 15% in the
nine months ended September 30, 2007. We expect these
capitalized expenditures will begin to amortize next year when
we begin to implement our services to clients who are not part
of our beta-testing program. Our beta-testing program is the
implementation and utilization of a test version of our
athenaClinicals product with a client. It allows for testing, in
a live environment, of the features and functionality of the
product. The intent is to find errors in the application and
subsequently correct them.
General and Administrative Expense. General
and administrative expense consists primarily of
personnel-related expense for administrative employees
(including salaries, benefits, stock-based compensation,
non-billable travel, lodging and other out-of-pocket
employee-related expense), occupancy and other indirect costs
(including building maintenance and utilities) and insurance, as
well as software license fees and outside professional fees for
accountants, lawyers and consultants and temporary employees. We
expect that general and administrative expense will increase in
absolute terms for the foreseeable future as we invest in
infrastructure to support our growth and incur additional
expense related to being a publicly traded company. Though
expenses are expected to continue to rise in absolute terms, we
expect general and administrative expense to decline as a
percentage of overall revenues.
Depreciation and Amortization
Expense. Depreciation and amortization expense
consists primarily of depreciation of fixed assets and
amortization of capitalized software development costs, which we
amortize over a two-year period from the time of release of
related software code. Because our core revenue cycle
application is relatively mature, we expense those costs as
incurred, and as a result in 2006 approximately 86% of our
software development expenditures were expensed rather than
capitalized. In the nine months ended September 30, 2007,
approximately 85% were expensed rather than capitalized. As we
grow we will continue to make capital investments in the
infrastructure of the business and we will continue to develop
software that we capitalize. At the same time, because we are
spreading fixed costs over a larger client base, we expect
related depreciation and amortization expense to decline as a
percentage of revenues over time.
Other Income (Expense). Interest expense
consists primarily of interest costs related to our working
capital line of credit, our equipment-related term loans and our
subordinated term loan, offset by interest income on
investments. Interest income represents earnings from our cash,
cash equivalents and short-term investments. The unrealized loss
on warrant liability represents the change in the fair value of
our warrants to purchase shares of our preferred stock at the
end of each reporting period. This ongoing loss ceased upon the
completion of the initial public offering at which time the
associated liability converted to additional paid-in-capital.
Critical
Accounting Policies
We prepare our financial statements in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.
The preparation of these financial statements requires us to
make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts
of assets, liabilities, revenue, expense and related
disclosures. We base our estimates and assumptions on historical
experience and on various other factors that we believe to be
reasonable under the circumstances. We evaluate our estimates
and assumptions on an ongoing basis. Our actual results may
differ from these estimates under different assumptions or
conditions.
We believe the following critical accounting policies, among
others, affect our more significant judgments and estimates used
in the preparation of our financial statements.
38
Revenue
Recognition
We recognize revenue when all of the following conditions are
satisfied:
|
|
|
|
|
there is evidence of an arrangement;
|
|
|
|
the service has been provided to the client;
|
|
|
|
the collection of the fees is reasonably assured; and
|
|
|
|
the amount of fees to be paid by the client is fixed or
determinable.
|
Our arrangements do not contain general rights of return. All
revenue, other than implementation revenue, is recognized when
the service is performed. As the implementation service is not
separable from the ongoing business services, we record
implementation fees as deferred revenue until the implementation
service is complete, at which time we recognize revenue ratably
on a monthly basis over the expected performance period.
Our clients typically purchase one-year contracts that renew
automatically upon completion. In most cases, our clients may
terminate their agreements with 90 days notice without
cause. We typically retain the right to terminate client
agreements in a similar timeframe. Our clients are billed
monthly, in arrears, based either upon a percentage of
collections posted to athenaNet, minimum fees, flat fees or per
claim fees where applicable. Invoices are generated within the
first two weeks of the month and delivered to clients primarily
by email. For most of our clients, fees are then deducted from a
pre-determined bank account one week after invoice receipt via
an auto-debit transaction. Amounts that have been invoiced are
recorded as revenue or deferred revenue, as appropriate, and are
included in our accounts receivable balances. Deposits received
for future services (such as implementation fees) are recorded
as deferred revenue and amortized over the term of the service
agreement when ongoing services commence.
Capitalized
Software Costs
We account for internal software development costs under the
provisions of American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
Statement of Position (SOP)
98-1,
Accounting for the Costs of Computer Software Developed or
Obtained for Internal Use. Under
SOP 98-1,
costs related to the preliminary project stage of subsequent
versions of athenaNet
and/or other
technology are expensed as incurred. Costs incurred in the
application development stage are capitalized. Such costs are
amortized over the softwares estimated economic life of
two years. In 2006 approximately 86% of our software development
expenditures were expensed rather than capitalized based upon
the stage of development of the software. In the nine months
ended September 30, 2007, approximately 85% of our software
development expenditures were expensed rather than capitalized.
Stock-Based
Compensation
Prior to January 1, 2006, we accounted for stock-based
awards to employees using the intrinsic value method as
prescribed by Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion
No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,
and related interpretations. Under the intrinsic value
method, compensation expense is measured on the date of grant as
the difference between the deemed fair value of our common stock
and the option exercise price multiplied by the number of
options granted. Generally, we grant stock options with exercise
prices equal to or above the estimated fair value of our common
stock. The option exercise prices and fair value of our common
stock is determined by our management and board of directors.
Accordingly, no compensation expense was recorded for options
issued to employees prior to January 1, 2006 in fixed
amounts and with fixed exercise prices at least equal to the
fair value of our common stock at the date of grant.
On January 1, 2006, we adopted SFAS No. 123(R),
Share-Based Payment, which requires companies to expense
the fair value of employee stock options and other forms of
share-based awards. SFAS 123(R) addresses accounting for
share-based awards, including shares issued under employee stock
purchase plans, stock options and share-based awards, with
compensation expense measured using the fair value, for
financial reporting purposes, and recorded over the requisite
service period of the award. In accordance with
SFAS 123(R), we recognize compensation expense for awards
granted and awards modified, repurchased or
39
cancelled after the adoption date. Under SFAS 123(R), we
estimate the fair value of stock options and share-based awards
using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model.
We have recorded stock-based compensation under SFAS 123(R)
using the prospective transition method and accordingly, will
continue to account for awards granted prior to the adoption
date of SFAS 123(R) following the provisions of APB Opinion
No. 25. Prior periods have not been restated. For awards
granted after January 1, 2006, we have elected to recognize
compensation expense for awards with service conditions on a
straight line basis over the requisite service period. Prior to
the adoption of SFAS 123(R), we used the straight-line
method of recognition for all awards. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2007 and for the twelve months ended
December 31, 2006, we recorded $0.9 million and
$0.4 million in stock-based compensation expense,
respectively. As of December 31, 2006 the future expense of
non-vested options of approximately $2.5 million is to be
recognized through 2010. There was no impact on the presentation
in the consolidated statements of cash flows as no excess tax
benefits have been realized in 2006.
The fair value of our options issued during the nine months
ended September 30, 2007 and the twelve months ended
December 31, 2006 was determined using the Black-Scholes
model with the following assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
September 30, 2007
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
4.9%
|
|
|
|
4.7%
|
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
|
0.0%
|
|
|
|
0.0%
|
|
Expected option term (years)
|
|
|
6.25
|
|
|
|
6.25
|
|
Expected stock volatility
|
|
|
71.0%
|
|
|
|
71.0%
|
|
As there was no public market for our common stock prior to our
initial public offering in September 2007, we have determined
the volatility for options granted in 2006 and 2007 based on an
analysis of reported data for a peer group of companies that
issued options with substantially similar terms. These companies
include: HLTH Corporation (formerly known as Emdeon Corp.),
Quality Systems, Inc., Per Se Technologies, Inc. (acquired by
McKesson Corp.) and Allscripts HealthCare Solutions, Inc. The
expected volatility of options granted has been determined using
an average of the historical volatility measures of this peer
group of companies. The expected volatility for options granted
during 2006 and 2007 was 71%. We have continued to use this peer
group to measure volatility due to our limited history as a
publicly traded company. The expected life of options granted
during the year ended December 31, 2006 and the
nine months ended September 30, 2007 was determined to
be 6.25 years using the simplified method as
prescribed by SAB No. 107, Share-Based Payment. For
2006 and the nine months ended September 30, 2007, the
weighted-average risk free interest rate used was 4.9% and 4.7%,
respectively. The risk-free interest rate is based on a treasury
instrument whose term is consistent with the expected life of
the stock options. We have not paid and do not anticipate paying
cash dividends on our shares of common stock; therefore, the
expected dividend yield is assumed to be zero. In addition,
SFAS No. 123(R) requires companies to utilize an
estimated forfeiture rate when calculating the expense for the
period. Our estimated forfeiture rate of 17% in 2006 and 2007
used in determining the expense recorded in our consolidated
statement of operations is based on our actual forfeiture rate
since 1997.
We believe there is a high degree of subjectivity involved when
using option-pricing models to estimate share-based compensation
under SFAS 123(R). There is currently no market-based
mechanism or other practical application to verify the
reliability and accuracy of the estimates stemming from these
valuation models, nor is there a means to compare and adjust the
estimates to actual values. Although the fair value of employee
share-based awards is determined in accordance with
SFAS 123(R) using an option-pricing model, that value may
not be indicative of the fair value observed in a market
transaction between a willing buyer and willing seller. If
factors change and we employ different assumptions in the
application of SFAS 123(R) in future periods than those
currently applied under SFAS 123(R), the compensation
expense that we record in future under SFAS 123(R) may
differ significantly from what we have historically reported.
For example, if the volatility percentage used in calculating
our SFAS 123(R) stock compensation expense had fluctuated
by 10%, the total stock compensation expense to be recognized
over the stock options
40
four year vesting period would have increased or decreased by
approximately $0.3 million. If the volatility percentage
had fluctuated by the 10%, the effect on our stock compensation
expense for the year ended December 31, 2006 and for the
nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2007 would be an
increase or decrease of approximately $6,000, $9,000 and
$65,000, respectively. If the forfeiture rate used in
calculating our SFAS 123(R) stock compensation expense had
fluctuated by 10%, the total stock compensation expense to be
recognized over the stock options four year vesting period
would decrease or increase by approximately $0.5 million.
If the forfeiture rate had fluctuated by the 10%, the effect on
our stock compensation expense for the year ended
December 31, 2006 and for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 and 2007 would be a decrease or increase
of approximately $9,000, $15,000 and $130,000, respectively.
There would be no fluctuation in the expected life used in
calculating our SFAS 123(R) stock compensation expense as
the expected life was determined to be 6.25 years for all period
using the simplified method as prescribed by SAB
No. 107, Share-Based Payment. There would be no
fluctuation in the risk free interest rate used in calculating
our SFAS 123(R) stock compensation expense as the risk free
interest rate used in the calculation is dependant upon the
expected life used in the calculation which remains stagnant as
discussed above. There would also be no fluctuation in the
dividend rate used in calculating our SFAS 123(R) stock
compensation expense as we have never paid a dividend and
currently have no plans to pay a dividend in the future.
Prior to our initial public offering in September 2007, the fair
value for our common stock, for the purpose of determining the
exercise prices of our common stock options, was estimated by
our board of directors, with input from management. Our board of
directors exercised judgment in determining the estimated fair
value of our common stock on the date of grant based on several
factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the nature and history of our business;
|
|
|
|
our significant accomplishments and future prospects;
|
|
|
|
our revenue growth and expected future revenue rates;
|
|
|
|
our book value and financial condition;
|
|
|
|
the existence of goodwill or other intangible value within our
company;
|
|
|
|
our ability (or inability) to pay dividends;
|
|
|
|
external market conditions affecting the healthcare information
technology industry sector;
|
|
|
|
the illiquid nature of an investment in our common stock;
|
|
|
|
the prices at which we sold shares of our convertible preferred
stock;
|
|
|
|
the superior rights and preferences of securities senior to our
common stock at the time of each grant;
|
|
|
|
the likelihood of achieving a liquidity event such as an initial
public offering or sale; and
|
|
|
|
the market prices of publicly traded companies engaged in the
same or similar lines of business.
|
We believe this to have been a reasonable approach to estimating
the fair value of our common stock for those periods along with
our analyses of comparable companies in our industry and
arms-length transactions involving our common stock.
Determining the fair value of our stock requires making complex
and subjective judgments, however, and there is inherent
uncertainty in our estimate of fair value.
41
The following table presents the grant dates and related
exercise prices of stock options granted to employees in the
year ended December 31, 2006 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
Grants Made During Quarter Ended
|
|
Options Granted
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
March 31, 2006
|
|
|
174,978
|
|
|
$
|
5.26
|
|
June 30, 2006
|
|
|
107,702
|
|
|
|
5.72
|
|
September 30, 2006
|
|
|
66,652
|
|
|
|
6.16
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
353,200
|
|
|
|
6.58
|
|
March 31, 2007
|
|
|
468,350
|
|
|
|
7.36
|
|
June 30, 2007
|
|
|
52,900
|
|
|
|
9.30
|
|
September 30, 2007
|
|
|
89,500
|
|
|
|
15.27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total grants
|
|
|
1,313,282
|
|
|
$
|
7.29
|
|
The exercise price of all stock options described above was
equal to the estimated fair value of our common stock on the
date of grant, and therefore the intrinsic value of each option
grant was zero.
The exercise price of the stock options granted after
January 1, 2006 but prior to our initial public offering in
September 2007 was set by the board of directors based upon, in
addition to what is described above, an internal valuation
model. The internal valuation model used the weighted average of
the guideline public company method and the discounted future
cash flow method. The enterprise value from that analysis was
then utilized in the option pricing method as outlined in the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)
Technical Practice Aid, Valuation of Privately-Held-Company
Equity Securities Issued as Compensation (Practice Aid). The
exercise price for stock options granted subsequent to
January 1, 2006 but prior to our initial public offering in
September 2007, was based upon our contemporaneous valuation
completed on a quarterly basis.
We estimated our enterprise value under the guideline public
company method by comparing our company to publicly-traded
companies in our industry group. The companies used for
comparison under the guideline public company method were
selected based on a number of factors, including but not limited
to, the similarity of their industry, business model and similar
financial risk to those of ours. We used those companies that we
believed were closely comparable to ours, based on the above
factors. In determining our enterprise value under this method,
we utilized a risk-adjusted enterprise value multiple to sales
ratio, which ranged from 3.0 to 5.6 during the period from
January 1, 2006 through our initial public offering in
September 2007, based on the median of the guideline companies
and applied the ratio to the sales of our company.
We also estimated our enterprise value under the discounted
future cash flow method, which involves applying appropriate
discount rates to estimated cash flows that are based on
forecasts of revenue and costs. Our revenue forecasts were based
on expected market growth rates ranging from 12% to 38% during
the next five years, as well as related assumptions about our
future costs during this period. There is inherent uncertainty
in making these estimates. These assumptions underlying the
estimates are consistent with the plans and estimates that we
use to manage the business. The risks associated with achieving
our forecasts were assessed in selecting the appropriate
discount rates, which was approximately 15% to 17% for all
periods during the period from January 1, 2006 through our
initial public offering in September 2007. If different discount
rates had been used, the valuations would have been different.
The enterprise value was then allocated to preferred and common
shares using the option-pricing method. The option-pricing
method involves making estimates of the anticipated timing of a
potential liquidity event such as a sale of our company or an
initial public offering, and estimates of the volatility of our
equity securities. The anticipated timing is based on the plans
of our board and management. Estimating the volatility of the
share price of a privately held company is complex because there
is no readily available market for the shares. We estimated the
volatility of our stock based on available information on
volatility of stocks of publicly traded companies in the
industry. Had we used different estimates of volatility, the
allocations between preferred and common shares would have been
different.
42
The determination of the deemed fair value of our common stock
has involved significant judgments, assumptions, estimates and
complexities that impact the amount of deferred stock-based
compensation recorded and the resulting amortization in future
periods. If we had made different assumptions, the amount of our
deferred stock-based compensation, stock-based compensation
expense, operating loss, net loss attributable to common
stockholders and net loss per share attributable to common
stockholders amounts could have been significantly different. We
believe that we have used reasonable methodologies, approaches
and assumptions to determine the fair value of our common stock
and that stock-based deferred compensation and related
amortization have been recorded properly for accounting purposes.
As discussed more fully in Note 10 to our consolidated
financial statements which appear elsewhere in this prospectus,
we granted stock options with a weighted average exercise price
of $6.08 per share during the twelve months ended
December 31, 2006 and with a weighted average exercise
price of $8.69 per share during the nine months ended
September 30, 2007. The increase in weighted average
exercise price resulted from continued growth in our revenue and
a reduction in the net loss. Both of these factors resulted in
an increase in common stock value when factored into our
internal valuation model.
For each of the stock options described above, the exercise
price was equal to the estimated fair value of our common stock
on the date of grant, as determined by our board of directors.
In making these determinations our board of directors relied
upon the internal valuation model and other factors described
above. Specifically, our board of directors took into account
our operating results, market position and operating
achievements at the time of grant, among other factors. The
primary reasons for the difference between the fair value of our
common stock on each of these dates are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
On February 28, 2006, we granted options to purchase an
aggregate of 174,978 shares of our common stock with an
exercise price of $5.26 per share. Total revenues increased
approximately 41.6% from the year ended December 31, 2005
to the year ended December 31, 2006. Total revenue
increased approximately 12.7% for the quarter ended
September 30, 2005 to the quarter ended December 31,
2005 and the number of clients and the number of physicians live
on athenaNet also increased by 9 clients and 505 physicians,
respectively, during that same period.
|
|
|
|
On May 4, 2006, we granted options to purchase an aggregate
of 107,702 shares of our common stock with an exercise
price of $5.72 per share. Total revenue increased approximately
9.4% from the quarter ended December 31, 2005 to the
quarter ended March 31, 2006 and the number of clients and
the number of physicians live on athenaNet also increased by 58
clients and 166 physicians, respectively, during that same
period. Additionally, in April 2006, the first beta client went
live on our athenaClinicals service offering. A beta-client is a
client willing to implement a test version of our
athenaClinicals product. They agree to do so with the
understanding that the product is being used for testing
purposes in an attempt to identify and correct product errors.
|
|
|
|
On July 27, 2006, we granted options to purchase an
aggregate of 66,652 shares of our common stock with an
exercise price of $6.16 per share. Total revenue increased
approximately 10.6% from the quarter ended March 31, 2006
to the quarter ended June 30, 2006 and the number of
clients and the number of physicians live on athenaNet also
increased by 48 clients and 284 physicians, respectively, during
that same period. Additionally, during this period we announced
several strategic partner alliances, including our announcement
on June 30, 2006 of a channel marketing agreement with a
leading provider of advanced clinical, financial and management
software and service solutions.
|
|
|
|
On October 31, 2006 and November 3, 2006, we granted
options to purchase an aggregate of 1,000 and
352,200 shares, respectively, of our common stock with an
exercise price of $6.58 per share. Total revenue increased
approximately 5.8% from the quarter ended June 30, 2006 to
the quarter ended September 30, 2006 and the number of
clients and the number of physicians live on athenaNet also
increased by 59 clients and 587 physicians, respectively, during
that same period. Additionally, in September 2006, we hired a
chief operations officer.
|
|
|
|
On February 7, 2007 and March 15, 2007, we granted
options to purchase an aggregate of 77,100 and
391,250 shares of our common stock with exercise prices of
$7.20 and $7.39 per share, respectively.
|
43
Total revenue increased approximately 6.2% from the quarter
ended September 30, 2006 to the quarter ended
December 31, 2006 and the number of clients and the number
of physicians live on athenaNet also increased by 72 clients and
313 physicians, respectively, during that same period.
Additionally, during this period we announced several strategic
partner alliances and we first began to offer our
athenaClinicals service offering.
|
|
|
|
|
On May 3, 2007, we granted options to purchase an aggregate
of 52,900 shares of our common stock with an exercise price
of $9.30 per share. Total revenue increased approximately 5.3%
from the quarter ended December 31, 2006 to the quarter
ended March 31, 2007 and the number of clients and the
number of physicians live on athenaNet also increased by 31
clients and 265 physicians, respectively, during that same
period. In addition, new client implementations during this
period occurred at a rate above those experienced during any
previous period. Also, in April 2007 the Certification
Commission for Healthcare Information Technology, or CCHIT, an
independent, industry recognized accreditation organization
created to certify EMR applications, certified our
athenaClinicals service offering as meeting the CCHIT ambulatory
electronic health record (EHR) criteria for 2006.
|
|
|
|
On July 27, 2007, we granted options to purchase an
aggregate of 89,500 shares of our common stock with an
exercise price of $15.27 per share. In determining this
significant increase in fair value from May 3, 2007, our
board of directors took into account significant progress in our
business since the earlier date in terms of continuing revenue
growth and increasing client acceptance of our athenaClinicals
service offering. Specifically:
|
|
|
|
|
|
total revenue increased approximately 11.6% from the quarter
ended March 31, 2007 to the quarter ended June 30,
2007 and the number of clients and the number of physicians live
on athenaNet also increased by 68 clients and 504
physicians, respectively, during that same period;
|
|
|
|
in the month of June 2007, our income from operations surpassed
breakeven for the first time in our companys history with
revenues for the month surpassing $8.5 million for the
first time in our companys history;
|
|
|
|
on May 24, 2007 we signed a marketing and sales agreement
with PSS World Medical Shared Services, Inc., or PSS, for
the marketing and sales of athenaClinicals and athenaCollector,
and during this period we announced that one of the
nations leading academic health care organizations,
comprised of nearly 200 physicians, selected athenaCollector for
its physician organization, representing one of the largest
client additions in our companys history;
|
|
|
|
the number of physicians using our athenaClinicals service
offering exceeded 100, an important milestone for this new
service offering;
|
|
|
|
on June 29, 2007, certain of our existing stockholders sold
to PSS an aggregate of 1,470,589 shares of our previously
issued and outstanding convertible preferred stock for an
aggregate purchase price of $22.5 million, equating to a
per share price of $15.30 per share; and
|
|
|
|
in late June 2007, we filed a registration statement with the
Securities and Exchange Commission for our initial public
offering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
On October 1, 2007, November 1, 2007 and
December 3, 2007, we granted options to purchase an
aggregate 6,700, 1,300 and 1,025 shares of our common
stock, respectively. The exercise price was determined as the
closing value of our stock price on the grant date. The closing
value of our stock price on October 1, 2007,
November 1, 2007 and December 3, 2007, was $32.10,
$37.79 and $43.75, respectively.
|
Based on an assumed public offering price of $35.26, based on
the last reported sale price of our common stock on the NASDAQ
Global Market on January 2, 2008, the intrinsic value of
the options outstanding at September 30, 2007, was
$90.0 million, of which $35.4 million related to
vested options and $54.6 million related to unvested
options.
44
Income
Taxes
We are subject to federal and various state income taxes in the
United States, and we use estimates in determining our provision
and related deferred tax assets. At December 31, 2006, our
deferred tax assets consisted primarily of federal and state net
operating loss carry forwards, research and development credit
carry forwards, and temporary differences between the book and
tax bases of certain assets and liabilities.
We assess the likelihood that deferred tax assets will be
realized, and we recognize a valuation allowance if it is more
likely than not that some portion of the deferred tax assets
will not be realized. This assessment requires judgment as to
the likelihood and amounts of future taxable income by tax
jurisdiction. At December 31, 2006 and September 30,
2007, we had a full valuation allowance against our deferred tax
assets. Although we believe that our tax estimates are
reasonable, the ultimate tax determination involves significant
judgment that is subject to audit by tax authorities in the
ordinary course of business.
Consolidated
Results of Operations
The following table sets forth our consolidated results of
operations as a percentage of total revenue for the periods
shown:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
2004
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2006
|
|
2007
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business services
|
|
|
90.0
|
%
|
|
|
91.4
|
%
|
|
|
93.2
|
%
|
|
|
93.1
|
%
|
|
|
93.2
|
%
|
Implementation and other
|
|
|
10.0
|
|
|
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct operating
|
|
|
52.7
|
|
|
|
51.4
|
|
|
|
48.2
|
|
|
|
48.4
|
|
|
|
46.7
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
19.6
|
|
|
|
21.8
|
|
|
|
20.6
|
|
|
|
20.5
|
|
|
|
17.4
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
8.5
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
21.9
|
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
|
|
21.6
|
|
|
|
21.7
|
|
|
|
19.1
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
|
|
8.2
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expense
|
|
|
106.1
|
|
|
|
118.0
|
|
|
|
107.7
|
|
|
|
107.4
|
|
|
|
96.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
(6.1
|
)
|
|
|
(18.0
|
)
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)
|
|
|
(7.4
|
)
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(3.5
|
)
|
|
|
(3.5
|
)
|
|
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
|
(3.4
|
)
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
Other expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
(7.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other expense
|
|
|
(3.2
|
)
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
|
(3.8
|
)
|
|
|
(10.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(9.3
|
)%
|
|
|
(21.3
|
)%
|
|
|
(11.7
|
)%
|
|
|
(11.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(7.4
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
Loss before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(9.3
|
)
|
|
|
(21.3
|
)
|
|
|
(11.7
|
)
|
|
|
(11.2
|
)
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)
|
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(9.3
|
)%
|
|
|
(21.3
|
)%
|
|
|
(12.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(11.8
|
)%
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45
Results
of Operations
Comparison
of the Nine Months ended September 30, 2007 and
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Business services
|
|
$
|
67,648
|
|
|
$
|
51,167
|
|
|
$
|
16,481
|
|
|
|
32
|
%
|
Implementation and other
|
|
|
4,960
|
|
|
|
3,800
|
|
|
|
1,160
|
|
|
|
31
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
72,608
|
|
|
$
|
54,967
|
|
|
$
|
17,641
|
|
|
|
32
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue. Total revenue from business services
for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 was
$72.6 million, an increase of $17.6 million, or 32%,
over revenue of $55.0 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006. This increase was due almost entirely
to an increase in business services revenue.
Business Services Revenue. Revenue from
business services for the nine months ended September 30,
2007 was $67.6 million, an increase of $16.5 million,
or 32%, over revenue of $51.2 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2006. This increase was primarily due
to the growth in the number of physicians using our services.
The number of physicians using our services at
September 30, 2007 was 8,978, an increase of 1,944 or 28%,
from 7,034 physicians at September 30, 2006. Also
contributing to this increase was the growth in related
collections on behalf of these physicians. Total collections
generated by these providers which was posted for the nine
months ended September 30, 2007 was $2.0 billion an
increase of $0.6 billion, or 43%, over posted collections
of $1.4 billion for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006.
Implementation and Other Revenue. Revenue from
implementations and other sources was $5.0 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2007, an increase of
$1.2 million, or 31%, over revenue of $3.8 million for
the nine months ended September 30, 2006. This increase was
driven by new client implementations and increased professional
services for our larger client base. In the nine months ended
September 30, 2007, approximately 273 new accounts were
implemented, an increase of 108 accounts, or 65%, over 165 new
accounts implemented in the nine months ended September 30,
2006. The increase in implementation and other revenue is the
result of the increase in the volume of our business.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Direct operating costs
|
|
$
|
33,900
|
|
|
$
|
26,624
|
|
|
$
|
7,276
|
|
|
|
27
|
%
|
Direct operating costs. Direct operating costs
for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 was
$33.9 million, an increase of $7.3 million, or 27%,
over costs of $26.6 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006. This increase was primarily due to an
increase in the number of claims that we processed on behalf of
our clients and the related expense of providing services,
including transactions expense and salary and benefits expense.
Additionally, beginning in the nine months ended
September 30, 2007 we are now allocating costs to direct
operating expense related to our launch of athenaClinicals which
was previously included with research and development. The
athenaClinicals expense allocated to direct operating costs
totaled approximately $1.9 million in the nine months ended
September 30, 2007. The amount of collections processed for
the nine months ended September 30, 2007 was
$2.0 billion, which was 43% higher than the
$1.4 billion of collection processed for the nine months
ended September 30, 2006. The increase in collections
increased at a higher rate than the increase in the related
direct operating costs as we benefited from economies of scale.
46
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
$
|
12,643
|
|
|
$
|
11,248
|
|
|
$
|
1,395
|
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
Research and development
|
|
|
5,451
|
|
|
|
4,645
|
|
|
|
806
|
|
|
|
17
|
%
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
13,912
|
|
|
|
11,921
|
|
|
|
1,991
|
|
|
|
17
|
%
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
4,325
|
|
|
|
4,589
|
|
|
|
(264
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
36,331
|
|
|
$
|
32,403
|
|
|
$
|
3,928
|
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling and Marketing Expense. Selling and
marketing expense for the nine months ended September 30,
2007 was $12.6 million, an increase of $1.4 million,
or 12%, over costs of $11.2 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2006. This increase was primarily due
to increases in sales commissions of $1.1 million and an
increase in salaries and benefits of $0.7 million offset by
a decrease in marketing expenses of $0.4 million.
Research and Development Expense. Research and
development expense for the nine months ended September 30,
2007 was $5.5 million, an increase of $0.8 million, or
17%, over research and development expense of $4.7 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2006. This increase
was primarily due to $0.8 million increase in salaries and
benefits due to an increase in headcount.
General and Administrative Expense. General
and administrative expense for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007 was $13.9 million, an increase of
$2.0 million, or 17%, over general and administrative
expenses of $11.9 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006. This increase was primarily due to
$1.5 million increase in salaries and benefits due to an
increase in headcount and a $0.5 million increase in stock
compensation expense.
Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation
and amortization expense for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007 was $4.3 million, a decrease of
$0.3 million, or 6%, from depreciation and amortization of
$4.6 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2006. This decrease was primarily due to the lower amortization
amount relating to our capitalized software development costs,
which is the result of previously capitalized costs becoming
fully amortized during the first nine months of 2007.
Other income (expense). Interest expense, net
for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 was
$2.0 million, an increase of $0.4 million, or 25%,
over net interest expense of $1.6 million for the nine
months ended September 30, 2006. The increase is related to
an increase in bank debt, a working capital line of credit and
an equipment line of credit during 2007. The loss on warrant
liability for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 was
$5.0 million an increase of $4.6 million from
$0.4 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2006, as a result of the change in the fair value of the
warrants. This change in the fair value of the warrant is
attributable to the appreciation in the fair value of our common
and preferred stock during this period, as the common stock
increased from $6.16 per shares as of September 30, 2006 to
$18.00 per share at the time of our IPO on September 19,
2007. These warrants converted to warrants to purchase shares of
common stock upon the consummation of our IPO, at which time the
existing liability was reclassified to additional
paid-in-capital.
Also included in other expense for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007, was $0.1 million in loss on
disposal of assets and $0.6 million of financial advisor
fees paid by shareholders.
Income tax expense. We recorded a provision
for income taxes for the nine months ended September 30,
2007, of approximately $0.2 million which represents income
tax expense under the alternative minimum tax (AMT)
method. Because we expect to record income tax expense for the
year ended December 31, 2007, under the AMT method, we have
provided income tax expense for the three months ended
September 30, 2007, using the expected effective tax rate
for the entire year. We did not record a provision for income
taxes for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2006, as we were in a loss position during the period.
47
Comparison
of the Years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
Business services
|
|
$
|
48,958
|
|
|
|
91.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
70,652
|
|
|
|
93.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
21,694
|
|
|
|
44.3
|
%
|
Implementation and other
|
|
|
4,582
|
|
|
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
5,161
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
|
579
|
|
|
|
12.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
53,540
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
75,813
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
22,273
|
|
|
|
41.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue. Total revenue for 2006 was
$75.8 million, an increase of $22.3 million, or 42%,
over revenue of $53.5 million for 2005. This increase was
almost entirely due to an increase in business services revenue.
Business Services Revenue. Revenue from
business services for 2006 was $70.7 million, an increase
of $21.7 million, or 44%, over revenue of
$49.0 million for 2005. This increase was primarily due to
the growth in the number of physicians using our services. The
average number of active physicians using our services in 2006
was 6,588, an increase of 1,633, or 33%, over the 4,955
physicians in 2005. Also contributing to this increase was
growth in collections on behalf of these physicians. These
providers generated collections posted in 2006 of
$2.0 billion, which was a 45% increase over
$1.4 billion posted collections in 2005.
Implementation and Other Revenue. Revenue from
implementations and other sources was $5.2 million, an
increase of $0.6 million, or 13%, over revenue of
$4.6 million for 2005. This increase was primarily due to
the expansion of our client base, which required additional
implementation services.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Amount
|
|
Revenue
|
|
Amount
|
|
%
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
Direct operating expense
|
|
$
|
27,545
|
|
|
|
51.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
36,530
|
|
|
|
48.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
8,985
|
|
|
|
32.6
|
%
|
Direct operating expense. Direct operating
expense for 2006 was $36.5 million, an increase of
$9.0 million, or 33%, over direct operating expense of
$27.5 million for 2005. This increase was primarily due to
an increase in the number of claims that we processed on behalf
of our clients and the related expense of providing services,
including transactions expense and salary and benefits expense.
The amount of collections processed for our clients in 2006 was
$2.0 billion, which was 45% higher than in 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
%of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
$
|
11,680
|
|
|
|
21.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
15,645
|
|
|
|
20.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
3,965
|
|
|
|
33.9
|
%
|
Research and development
|
|
|
2,925
|
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
6,903
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
3,978
|
|
|
|
136.0
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
15,545
|
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
|
|
16,347
|
|
|
|
21.6
|
|
|
|
802
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
5,483
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
|
|
6,238
|
|
|
|
8.2
|
|
|
|
755
|
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
35,633
|
|
|
|
66.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
45,133
|
|
|
|
59.5
|
%
|
|
$
|
9,500
|
|
|
|
26.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling and Marketing Expense. Selling and
marketing expense for 2006 was $15.6 million, an increase
of $4.0 million, or 34%, over sales and marketing expense
of $11.7 million for 2005. This increase was primarily due
to a $1.7 million increase in salaries and benefits, a
$1.7 million increase in marketing programs and a
$0.5 million increase in travel and other expenses.
Research and Development Expense. Research and
development expense for 2006 was $6.9 million, an increase
of $4.0 million, or 136%, over research and development
expense of $2.9 million for 2005. This increase was
primarily due to a $2.8 million increase in salaries and
benefits related to the development of our
48
athenaClinicals product and other product and business
development initiatives, a $0.6 million increase in
consulting fees, a $0.4 million increase in expenses
related to the expansion of Athena Net India and a
$0.2 million increase in travel and other expenses of our
research team.
General and Administrative Expense. General
and administrative expense for 2006 was $16.3 million, an
increase of $0.8 million, or 5%, over general and
administrative expense of $15.5 million for 2005. This
increase was primarily due to an increase in salaries and
benefits.
Depreciation and Amortization
Expense. Depreciation and amortization expense
for 2006 was $6.2 million, an increase of
$0.8 million, or 14%, from depreciation and amortization
expense of $5.5 million for 2005. This increase was
primarily due to the larger base of depreciable assets in 2006.
Other Income (Expense). Interest expense, net,
for 2006 was $2.3 million, an increase of
$0.5 million, or 31%, over interest expense, net, of
$1.8 million for 2005. This increase was related to an
increase in bank debt, a working capital line of credit and an
equipment line of credit during 2006, offset by an increase in
interest income associated with an increase in cash, cash
equivalents and short-term investments. The unrealized loss on
warrant liability for 2006 was $0.7 million and represents
the remeasurement of the fair value of warrants.
Comparison
of the Years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%of
|
|
|
|
|
|
%of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
Business services
|
|
$
|
35,033
|
|
|
|
90.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
48,958
|
|
|
|
91.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
13,925
|
|
|
|
39.7
|
%
|
Implementation and other
|
|
|
3,905
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
|
|
|
4,582
|
|
|
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
677
|
|
|
|
17.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
38,938
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
53,540
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
14,602
|
|
|
|
37.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue. Total revenue for 2005 was
$53.5 million, an increase of $14.6 million, or 38%,
over revenue of $38.9 million for 2004. This increase was
due almost entirely to an increase in business services revenue.
Business Services Revenue. Revenue from
business services for 2005 was $49.0 million, an increase
of $13.9 million, or 40%, over revenue of
$35.0 million for 2004. This increase was primarily due to
the growth in the number of physicians using our services. The
average number of active physicians using our services in 2005
was 4,955, an increase of 1,402, or 39%, over 3,553 physicians
in 2004. Also contributing to this increase was growth in
collections on behalf of these physicians. These providers
generated posted collections of $1.4 billion in 2005, which
was a 39% increase over $972 million posted collections in
2004.
Implementation and Other Revenue. Revenue from
implementations and other sources was $4.6 million, an
increase of $0.7 million, or 17%, over revenue of
$3.9 million for 2004. This increase was primarily due to
the expansion of our client base and increased professional
services provided to that base.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
Direct operating expense
|
|
$
|
20,512
|
|
|
|
52.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
27,545
|
|
|
|
51.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
7,033
|
|
|
|
34.3
|
%
|
Direct Operating Expense. The direct operating
expense for 2005 was $27.5 million, an increase of
$7.0 million, or 34%, over direct operating expense of
$20.5 million for 2005. This increase was primarily due to
an increase in the number of claims that we processed on behalf
of our clients and the related expense of providing services,
including transactions expense and salary and benefits expense.
The amount of collections processed in 2005 was
$1.4 billion or 39% higher than 2004.
49
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
$
|
7,650
|
|
|
|
19.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
11,680
|
|
|
|
21.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,030
|
|
|
|
52.7
|
%
|
Research and development
|
|
|
1,485
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
2,925
|
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
1,440
|
|
|
|
97.0
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
8,520
|
|
|
|
21.9
|
|
|
|
15,545
|
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
|
|
7,025
|
|
|
|
82.5
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
3,159
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
5,483
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
|
|
2,324
|
|
|
|
73.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
20,814
|
|
|
|
53.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
35,633
|
|
|
|
66.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
14,819
|
|
|
|
71.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling and Marketing Expense. Selling and
marketing expense for 2005 was $11.7 million, an increase
of $4.0 million, or 53%, over selling and marketing expense
of $7.7 million for 2004. This increase was primarily due
to a $2.0 million increase in marketing programs, a
$1.6 million increase in salaries and benefits and a
$0.4 million increase in travel expense.
Research and Development Expense. Research and
development expense for 2005 was $2.9 million, an increase
of $1.4 million, or 97%, over research and development
expense of $1.5 million for 2004. This increase was
primarily due to a $0.9 million increase in salaries and
benefits and a $0.5 million increase in expense related to
the expansion of Athena Net India.
General and Administrative Expense. General
and administrative expense for 2005 was $15.5 million, an
increase of $7.0 million, or 83%, over general and
administrative expense of $8.5 million for 2004. This
increase was primarily due to a $3.2 million increase in
rent and related expense associated with our move into the
Watertown, Massachusetts facility, a $1.2 million increase
in salaries and benefits, a $0.6 million increase in
consulting fees and a $0.3 million increase in utility
expenses.
Depreciation and Amortization
Expense. Depreciation and amortization expense
for 2005 was $5.5 million, an increase of
$2.3 million, or 74%, from depreciation and amortization
expense of $3.2 million for 2004. The increase was
primarily due to the larger base of depreciable assets in 2005,
due to capital expenditures related to company infrastructure
and client servicing capacity.
Other Income (Expense). Interest expense, net,
for 2005 was $1.8 million, an increase of
$0.5 million, or 44%, over interest expense, net, of
$1.2 million for 2004. The increase is related to an
increase in bank debt, a working capital line of credit and an
equipment line of credit during 2005.
50
Quarterly
Results of Operations
The following table presents our unaudited consolidated
quarterly results of operations for the nine fiscal quarters
ended September 30, 2007. This information is derived from
our unaudited consolidated financial statements, and includes
all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring
adjustments, that we consider necessary for fair statement of
our financial position and operating results for the quarters
presented. Operating results for these periods are not
necessarily indicative of the operating results for a full year.
Historical results are not necessarily indicative of the results
to be expected in future periods. You should read this data
together with our consolidated financial statements and the
related notes to these financial statements included elsewhere
in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Quarter Ended,
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business services
|
|
$
|
12,465
|
|
|
$
|
13,822
|
|
|
$
|
15,490
|
|
|
$
|
17,332
|
|
|
$
|
18,345
|
|
|
$
|
19,485
|
|
|
$
|
20,490
|
|
|
$
|
22,778
|
|
|
|
24,380
|
|
Implementation and other
|
|
|
1,136
|
|
|
|
1,509
|
|
|
|
1,289
|
|
|
|
1,228
|
|
|
|
1,283
|
|
|
|
1,361
|
|
|
|
1,457
|
|
|
|
1,715
|
|
|
|
1,788
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue:
|
|
|
13,601
|
|
|
|
15,331
|
|
|
|
16,779
|
|
|
|
18,560
|
|
|
|
19,628
|
|
|
|
20,846
|
|
|
|
21,947
|
|
|
|
24,493
|
|
|
|
26,168
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expense(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct operating
|
|
|
7,019
|
|
|
|
7,814
|
|
|
|
8,256
|
|
|
|
9,202
|
|
|
|
9,166
|
|
|
|
9,906
|
|
|
|
10,807
|
|
|
|
11,361
|
|
|
|
11,732
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
3,322
|
|
|
|
3,324
|
|
|
|
3,743
|
|
|
|
3,692
|
|
|
|
3,813
|
|
|
|
4,397
|
|
|
|
4,330
|
|
|
|
3,984
|
|
|
|
4,329
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
773
|
|
|
|
906
|
|
|
|
1,110
|
|
|
|
1,399
|
|
|
|
2,137
|
|
|
|
2,257
|
|
|
|
1,819
|
|
|
|
1,780
|
|
|
|
1,852
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
3,627
|
|
|
|
3,746
|
|
|
|
4,099
|
|
|
|
3,672
|
|
|
|
4,150
|
|
|
|
4,426
|
|
|
|
4,583
|
|
|
|
4,988
|
|
|
|
4,341
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
1,332
|
|
|
|
1,377
|
|
|
|
1,440
|
|
|
|
1,512
|
|
|
|
1,636
|
|
|
|
1,650
|
|
|
|
1,564
|
|
|
|
1,484
|
|
|
|
1,277
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expense
|
|
|
16,073
|
|
|
|
17,167
|
|
|
|
18,648
|
|
|
|
19,477
|
|
|
|
20,902
|
|
|
|
22,636
|
|
|
|
23,103
|
|
|
|
23,597
|
|
|
|
23,531
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(2,472
|
)
|
|
|
(1,836
|
)
|
|
|
(1,869
|
)
|
|
|
(917
|
)
|
|
|
(1,274
|
)
|
|
|
(1,790
|
)
|
|
|
(1,156
|
)
|
|
|
896
|
|
|
|
2,637
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
142
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(346
|
)
|
|
|
(784
|
)
|
|
|
(568
|
)
|
|
|
(638
|
)
|
|
|
(677
|
)
|
|
|
(788
|
)
|
|
|
(771
|
)
|
|
|
(851
|
)
|
|
|
(777
|
)
|
Other expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(212
|
)
|
|
|
(130
|
)
|
|
|
(103
|
)
|
|
|
(257
|
)
|
|
|
(860
|
)
|
|
|
(3,556
|
)
|
|
|
(1,273
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other expense
|
|
|
(323
|
)
|
|
|
(766
|
)
|
|
|
(708
|
)
|
|
|
(688
|
)
|
|
|
(681
|
)
|
|
|
(924
|
)
|
|
|
(1,514
|
)
|
|
|
(4,310
|
)
|
|
|
(1,908
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes and cumulative effect of
change in accounting principle
|
|
|
(2,795
|
)
|
|
|
(2,602
|
)
|
|
|
(2,577
|
)
|
|
|
(1,605
|
)
|
|
|
(1,955
|
)
|
|
|
(2,714
|
)
|
|
|
(2,670
|
)
|
|
|
(3,414
|
)
|
|
|
729
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(217
|
)
|
Income (loss) before cumulative effect of change in accounting
principle
|
|
|
(2,795
|
)
|
|
|
(2,602
|
)
|
|
|
(2,577
|
)
|
|
|
(1,605
|
)
|
|
|
(1,955
|
)
|
|
|
(2,714
|
)
|
|
|
(2,670
|
)
|
|
|
(3,414
|
)
|
|
|
512
|
|
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(373
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(2,795
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,602
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,950
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,605
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,955
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,714
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,670
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3,414
|
)
|
|
|
512
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) Amounts include stock-based compensation expense
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct operating costs
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
8
|
|
|
$
|
19
|
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
$
|
21
|
|
|
$
|
43
|
|
|
$
|
50
|
|
|
$
|
43
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
79
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
136
|
|
|
|
164
|
|
|
|
167
|
|
|
|
208
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
|
$
|
64
|
|
|
$
|
75
|
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
|
$
|
278
|
|
|
$
|
326
|
|
|
$
|
333
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During these periods, total revenue increased each quarter,
primarily due to the expansion of our client base and growth in
revenue collections made on behalf of our existing clients. Our
direct operating expense and selling and marketing expense also
increased each quarter, primarily due to an increase in salary
and benefit expense as we expanded our operations to serve and
sell to our increasing client base. Research and development
expense increased in each quarter during this period, primarily
due to our development of athenaClinicals and other product and
business development initiatives as well as the expansion of
Athena Net India. General and administrative expense fluctuated
during this period, with an overall upward trend,
51
primarily as a result of our hiring additional personnel in
connection with our anticipated growth and incurred expenses in
preparation for becoming a public company.
We have experienced consistent revenue growth over the past
several years, which is primarily the result of a steady
increase in the number of physicians and other medical providers
served by us. This sequential revenue increase is driven by the
implementation of new accounts and the retention of existing
accounts. Because we earn ongoing fees, a large percentage of
each quarters revenue comes from accounts that also
contributed to the revenues of the preceding quarter. The vast
majority of our clients pay for services as a percentage of
collections posted, therefore our revenue is highly correlated
to the underlying collections of our clients. The provision of
medical services by our clients takes place throughout the year,
but there are seasonal factors that affect the total volume of
patients seen by our clients, which in turn impacts the
collections per physician and our related revenues per
physician. In particular, for patient visits that are
discretionary or elective, we typically see a reduction of
office visits during the late summer and during the end of year
holiday season, which leads to a decline in collections by our
physician clients of about 30 to 50 days later. Therefore,
the negative impact on client collections and related company
revenues per physician is generally experienced in the first and
third calendar quarters of the year. In our experience, client
collections and related company revenues per physician are
seasonally stronger in the second and fourth calendar quarters
of each year.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Since our inception, we have funded our growth primarily through
the private sale of equity securities, totaling approximately
$50.6 million as well as through long-term debt, working
capital, equipment-financing loans and the completion of our
initial public offering that provided net proceeds of
approximately $81.3 million. As of September 30, 2007,
our principal sources of liquidity were cash and cash
equivalents totaling $89.8 million. Our total indebtedness
was $22.8 million at September 30, 2007 and was
comprised mainly of term debt which is subordinated to our
senior debt. On October 1, 2007 we used a portion of the
proceeds from our initial public offering to repay approximately
$5.2 million of the principal outstanding on the equipment
line. In connection to this early payment of debt, we paid
approximately $0.2 million in an early payment penalty and
accrued interest which was recorded in the month of October
2007. On December 31, 2007, we repaid the balance of our
$17.0 million subordinated term debt. We recorded
additional charges to interest expense of $0.7 million to
fully amortize the debt discount, write off outstanding deferred
financing fees, to recognize accrued interest expense and to
recognize a penalty for early extinguishment of the debt. As of
December 31, 2007, we had total outstanding debt of
approximately $0.8 million.
Cash provided by operating activities during the nine months
ended September 30, 2007 was $3.1 million and
consisted of a net loss of $5.6 million and
$4.7 million utilized by working capital and other
activities. This is offset by positive non-cash adjustments of
$4.3 million related to depreciation and amortization
expense, $5.0 million of warrant expense, $0.9 million
in non-cash stock compensation expense, $2.0 million of
non-cash rent expense, and $0.6 million in a non-cash
expense relating to financial advisor fee paid by investor. Cash
used by working capital and other activities was primarily
attributable to a $2.1 million increase in accrued expense,
a $2.6 million decrease in deferred rent, a
$3.7 million increase in accounts receivable,
$0.6 million increase in prepaid expenses and other current
assets and a $0.6 million decrease in accounts payable,
offset in part by a $0.7 million increase in deferred
revenue.
Cash used in operating activities during the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 was $2.5 million and consisted of a
net loss of $6.5 million and $3.7 million utilized by
working capital and other activities, offset by positive
non-cash adjustments of $4.6 million related to
depreciation and amortization expense and $2.0 million of
non-cash rent expense. Cash used by working capital and other
activities was primarily attributable to a $2.4 million
decrease in deferred rent and a $2.7 million increase in
accounts receivable, offset in part by a $0.6 million
increase in accrued expense and a $0.4 million increase in
deferred revenue.
Net cash generated by investing activities was $3.4 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2007, which
consisted of purchases of investments of $1.9 million,
purchases of property and equipment of $2.1 million and
expenditures for internal development of the athenaClinicals
application of $0.8 million. This
52
outgoing investment cash flow was offset by positive investment
cash flow of $7.6 million, from proceeds of the sales and
maturities of investments and a decrease in restricted cash of
$0.6 million. Net cash used in investing activities was
$6.3 million during the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 primarily consisting of purchases of
property and equipment of $2.7 million, purchases of
investments of $3.2 million, and capitalized software
development costs of $0.8 million, offset in part by
decrease in restricted cash of $0.4 million.
Net cash provided by financing activities was $79.1 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2007. The majority
of the cash provided in the period resulted from the sale and
issuance of 5.0 million shares of common stock in our
initial public offering in September 2007 that provided net
proceeds of $81.3 million. This consisted of a net decrease
in the line of credit $7.2 million offset by
$2.6 million of net proceeds from long term debt and
$2.4 million in proceeds from the exercise of stock options
and warrants. Net cash provided by financing activities was
$6.6 million during nine months ended September 30,
2006, consisting primarily of $3.9 million of net
borrowings under a bank term loan, $2.6 million of net
borrowings under a line of credit and the remaining portion
relates to proceeds from the exercise of stock options during
the period.
We make investments in property and equipment and in software
development on an ongoing basis. Our property and equipment
investments consist primarily of technology infrastructure to
provide capacity for expansion of our client base, including
computers and related equipment in our data centers and
infrastructure in our service operations. Our software
development investments consist primarily of company-managed
design, development, testing and deployment of new application
functionality. Because the practice management component of
athenaNet is considered mature, we expense nearly all software
maintenance costs for this component of our platform as
incurred. For the electronic medical records (EMR)
component of athenaNet, which is the platform for our
athenaClinicals offering, we capitalize nearly all software
development. In the nine months ended September 30, 2006,
we capitalized $2.7 million in property and equipment and
$0.8 million in software development. In the nine months
ended September 30, 2007, we capitalized $2.1 million
of property and equipment and $0.8 million of software
development. We currently anticipate making aggregate capital
expenditures of approximately $12.5 million over the next
twelve months including approximately $6.1 million for the
purchase of a complex of buildings, including approximately
133,000 square feet of office space, on approximately
53 acres of land located in Belfast, Maine. The purchase is
expected to close in the first quarter of 2008, subject to
customary closing conditions, including the completion of our
due diligence. We intend to utilize this facility as a second
operational service site, and to lease a small portion of the
space to commercial tenants.
Given our current cash and cash equivalents, short-term
investments, accounts receivable and funds available under our
existing line of credit, we believe that we will have sufficient
liquidity to fund our business and meet our contractual
obligations for at least the next twelve months. We may increase
our capital expenditures consistent with our anticipated growth
in infrastructure and personnel, and as we expand our national
presence. In addition, we may pursue acquisitions or investments
in complementary businesses or technologies or experience
unexpected operating losses, in which case we may need to raise
additional funds sooner than expected. Accordingly, we may need
to engage in private or public equity or debt financings to
secure additional funds. If we raise additional funds through
further issuances of equity or convertible debt securities, our
existing stockholders could suffer significant dilution, and any
new equity securities we issue could have rights, preferences
and privileges superior to those of holders of our common stock.
Any debt financing obtained by us in the future could involve
restrictive covenants relating to our capital raising activities
and other financial and operational matters, which may make it
more difficult for us to obtain additional capital and to pursue
business opportunities, including potential acquisitions. In
addition, we may not be able to obtain additional financing on
terms favorable to us, if at all. If we are unable to obtain
required financing on terms satisfactory to us, our ability to
continue to support our business growth and to respond to
business challenges could be significantly limited. Beyond the
twelve month period, we intend to maintain sufficient liquidity
through continued improvements in the size and profitability of
our business and through prudent management of our cash
resources and our credit arrangements.
53
Credit
Facilities
Line
of Credit
We have a revolving loan and security agreement with a bank,
which has a maximum available borrowing amount of
$10.0 million at December 31, 2006 and matures in
August 2008. Borrowings under the agreement are limited by our
outstanding accounts receivable balance, and may be further
limited by accounts receivable concentrations. Under this
agreement, we may not borrow more than 80% of our accounts
receivable that are less than 90 days old and no
receivables in excess of 25% of our total accounts receivable
may be included in that borrowing limit. Use of this facility is
also permitted only when our adjusted quick ratio is at or
greater than 0.9. This ratio is defined as cash, cash
equivalents, investments and accounts receivable over current
liabilities excluding deferred revenue. As of September 30,
2007, we are in compliance with each of these provisions. The
agreement is collateralized by a first security interest in
receivables, deposit accounts and investments of athenahealth
that have not been pledged as collateral under previous
outstanding loan agreements and a second priority interest in
intellectual property. Principal amounts outstanding under the
agreement accrue interest at a per annum rate equal to the
banks prime rate. Beginning in January 2007, principal
amounts outstanding under the agreement will accrue interest at
a per annum rate equal to the banks prime rate, which was
8.0% at September 30, 2007. We had $0 million and
$7.2 million outstanding under this agreement at
September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006,
respectively. The available borrowing under the agreement at
September 30, 2007 was $9.0 million.
Equipment
Lines of Credit
As of September 30, 2007, there was a total of
$6.1 million in aggregate principal amount outstanding
under a series of promissory notes and security agreements with
various finance companies. These amounts are secured by specific
equipment. On October 1, 2007, approximately
$5.2 million of the equipment lines of credit were repaid
early with an early repayment penalty and accrued interest of
approximately $0.2 million
In September 2007, we entered into additional promissory notes
that aggregated $0.6 million in principal amount. These
amounts are also secured by specific equipment, they accrue
interest at a weighted average rate of 5.6% per annum and they
are payable on a monthly basis through October 2010.
Subordinated
Term Debt
As of September 30, 2007, there was a total of
$17.0 million in aggregate principal amount outstanding
under our subordinated term debt with a financial lender. On
December 31, 2007, we paid the balance of the
$17.0 million in principal amount. We recorded additional
charges to interest expense of $0.7 million to fully
amortize the debt discount, write off outstanding deferred
financing fees, recognize accrued interest expense and recognize
a penalty for early extinguishment of the debt.
Contractual
Obligations
We have contractual obligations under our bank debt, a working
capital line of credit and an equipment line of credit. We also
maintain operating leases for property and certain office
equipment. The following table summarizes our long-term
contractual obligations and commitments as of December 31,
2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due By Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 5
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1 year
|
|
|
1-3 Years
|
|
|
4-5 Years
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$
|
20,469
|
|
|
$
|
3,116
|
|
|
$
|
17,353
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Working capital line
|
|
|
7,204
|
|
|
|
7,204
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating lease obligations
|
|
|
35,928
|
|
|
|
3,655
|
|
|
|
11,801
|
|
|
|
9,102
|
|
|
|
11,370
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
63,602
|
|
|
$
|
13,975
|
|
|
$
|
29,154
|
|
|
$
|
9,102
|
|
|
$
|
11,370
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54
These amounts exclude interest payments of $2,684,110 and
$1,766,366 that were due in less than one year and one to three
years. We repaid this outstanding indebtedness with proceeds
from our initial public offering, as described below.
The working capital line and the portion of equipment lines of
credit included in long-term debt are described above under
Credit Facilities. Also included in
long-term debt is a term loan with a finance company which had
an outstanding balance of $14.0 million at
December 31, 2006 and which increased to $17.0 million
at June 30, 2007. Under the terms of the agreement, the
term loan would have to be repaid in thirty monthly installments
starting February 1, 2008.
During the fourth quarter of 2007, we repaid approximately
$22.2 million of our long-term debt with proceeds from our
initial public offering in September 2007, leaving a long-term
debt balance of $0.8 million as of December 31, 2007.
The commitments under our operating leases shown above consist
primarily of lease payments for our Watertown, Massachusetts
corporate headquarters and our Chennai, India subsidiary
location.
On November 28, 2007, we entered into a purchase and sale
agreement with a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America
Corporation for the purchase of a complex of buildings,
including approximately 133,000 square feet of office
space, on approximately 53 acres of land located in
Belfast, Maine, for a total purchase price of $6.1 million.
The purchase is expected to close in the first quarter of 2008,
subject to customary closing conditions, including the
completion of our due diligence. We intend to utilize this
facility as a second operational service site, and to lease a
small portion of the space to commercial tenants.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
As of September 30, 2007 and 2006 and December 31,
2006, 2005 and 2004, we did not have any relationships with
unconsolidated entities or financial partnerships, such as
entities often referred to as structured finance or special
purpose entities, which would have been established for the
purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet arrangements or other
contractually narrow or limited purposes. Other than our
operating leases for office space and computer equipment, we do
not engage in off-balance sheet financing arrangements.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements (SFAS 157), which
establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands
disclosures about the use of fair value measurements and
liabilities in interim and annual reporting periods subsequent
to initial recognition. Prior to the issuance of SFAS 157,
which emphasizes that fair value is a market-based measurement
and not an entity-specific measurement, there were different
definitions of fair value and limited definitions for applying
those definitions under generally accepted accounting
principles. SFAS 157 is effective for us on a prospective
basis for the reporting period beginning January 1, 2008.
We are evaluating the impact of SFAS 157 on our financial
position, results of operations and cash flows.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The
Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
(SFAS 159). SFAS 159 expands opportunities to use
fair value measurements in financial reporting and permits
entities to choose to measure many financial instruments and
certain other items at fair value. SFAS 159 is effective
for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. We are
evaluating the impact of SFAS 159 on our financial
position, result of operations and cash flows.
In December 2007 the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R),
Business Combinations, (SFAS 141(R))
which replaces SFAS 141. SFAS 141(R) establishes
principles and requirements for how an acquirer recognizes and
measures in its financial statements the identifiable assets
acquired, the liabilities assumed, any noncontrolling interest
in the acquiree and the goodwill acquired. The Statement also
establishes disclosure requirements which will enable users of
the financial statements to evaluate the nature and financial
effects of the business combination. SFAS 141(R) is
effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
2008. The Company has
55
not determined the effect that the application of
SFAS 141(R) will have on its consolidated financial
statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interest in Consolidated Financial
Statements an amendment of Accounting Research
Bulletin No. 51 (SFAS 160), which
establishes accounting and reporting standards for ownership
interests in subsidiaries held by parties other than the parent,
the amount of consolidated net income attributable to the parent
and to the noncontrolling interest, changes to a parents
ownership interest and the valuation of retained noncontrolling
equity investments when a subsidiary is deconsolidated. The
Statement also establishes reporting requirements that provide
sufficient disclosures that clearly identify and distinguish
between the interests of the parent and the interests of the
noncontrolling owners. SFAS 160 is effective for fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2008. The Company has
not determined the effect that the application of SFAS 160
will have on its consolidated financial statements.
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Foreign Currency Exchange Risk. Our results of
operations and cash flows are subject to fluctuations due to
changes in the Indian rupee. None of our consolidated revenues
are generated outside the United States. None of our vendor
relationships, including our contract with our offshore service
provider Vision Healthsource for work performed in India, is
denominated in any currency other than the U.S. dollar. In
2006 and for the nine months ended September 30, 2007, 0.7%
and 0.9%, respectively, of our expenses occurred in our direct
subsidiary in Chennai, India and were incurred in Indian rupees.
We therefore believe that the risk of a significant impact on
our operating income from foreign currency fluctuations is not
substantial.
Interest Rate Sensitivity. We had unrestricted
cash and cash equivalents totaling $89.8 million at
September 30, 2007. These amounts are held for working
capital purposes and were invested primarily in deposits, money
market funds and short-term, interest-bearing, investment-grade
securities. In addition, some of the net proceeds of this
offering may be invested in short-term, interest-bearing,
investment-grade securities pending their application. Due to
the short-term nature of these investments, we believe that we
do not have any material exposure to changes in the fair value
of our investment portfolio as a result of changes in interest
rates. The value of these securities, however, will be subject
to interest rate risk and could fall in value if interest rates
rise.
We have bank debt and a line of credit which bears interest
based upon the prime rate. At September 30, 2007, there was
an aggregate of $22.8 million outstanding under these
borrowing arrangements. If the prime rate fluctuated by 10% as
of September 30, 2007, interest expense would have
fluctuated by approximately $0.3 million.
56
Overview
athenahealth is a provider of
internet-based
business services for physician practices. Our service offerings
are based on three integrated components: our proprietary
internet-based software, our continually updated database of
payer reimbursement process rules and our back-office service
operations that perform administrative aspects of billing and
clinical data management for physician practices. Our principal
offering, athenaCollector, automates and manages billing-related
functions for physician practices and includes a medical
practice management platform. We have also developed a service
offering, athenaClinicals, that automates and manages medical
record-related functions for physician practices and includes an
electronic medical record, or EMR, platform. We refer to
athenaCollector as our revenue cycle management service and
athenaClinicals as our clinical cycle management service. Our
services are designed to help our clients achieve faster
reimbursement from payers, reduce error rates, increase
collections, lower operating costs, improve operational workflow
controls and more efficiently manage clinical and billing
information.
Our services require relatively modest initial investment, are
highly adaptable to changing healthcare and technology trends
and are designed to generate significant financial benefit for
our physician clients. Our results are directly tied to the
financial performance of our clients, because the majority of
our revenue is based on a percentage of their collections. Our
services have enabled our clients, on average, to resolve 93% of
their claims to payers on their first submission attempt,
compared to an industry average we estimate to be 70%. Our
internal studies show that we have reduced the days in accounts
receivable of our client base by more than 30%. We have
experienced a contract renewal rate of at least 97% in each of
the last five years, and this persistent client base drives a
predictable revenue stream. In 2006, we generated revenue of
$75.8 million from the sale of our services, compared to
$53.5 million in 2005. As of September 30, 2007, there
were more than 11,500 medical providers, including more than
8,900 physicians, using our services across 33 states and
54 medical specialties.
We believe our innovative internet-based business services model
represents a significant departure from the traditional model of
physicians relying upon
on-site or
outsourced administrative staff, using stand-alone software that
is not internet-based, to run the back-office aspects of their
practices. By continuously improving all three components of our
services, we drive improvement in the business results of our
network of clients: we typically update our centralized
internet-based software every six to eight weeks; we add more
than 100 rules on average each month to our database of payer
rules; and we regularly improve our integrated back-office
service operations with more efficient technology and processes.
Additionally, as our database of aggregated health information
grows, we are able to use this information to further the
strategic position of our company. For example, in June 2006 we
introduced our annual PayerView rankings of health plans
performance with respect to the speed and accuracy of
reimbursement processes at different insurance companies, an
initiative that we believe increases our profile in the provider
and payer communities.
In the last five years, we have focused on developing our
proprietary internet-based software application and integrated
service operations to expand our client base. During this period
we undertook no acquisitions. In 2006, we formed a subsidiary in
India to complement our U.S.-based software development
activities and to work closely with our business partners in
India.
Industry
Overview
We believe that the market we address is defined by the total
annual physician office expenditures in the United States for
revenue and clinical cycle management solutions and by the total
annual physician office collections for services rendered. We
estimate that total annual physician office expenditures in the
United States for revenue and clinical cycle management
solutions exceed $18 billion and $9 billion,
respectively. These expenditures are primarily comprised of
salary, wages and benefits for in-house administrative staff and
third-party practice management and EMR software. In 2005,
physicians collected approximately $420 billion for
services rendered, representing 21% of total health care
industry expenditures of $2.0 trillion according to
57
the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. From
2000 to 2005, payments to physicians increased by an average of
7.7% per year.
In addition, growth in managed care has increased the complexity
of physician practice reimbursement. Managed care plans
typically create reimbursement structures with greater
complexity than previous methods, placing greater responsibility
on the physician practice to capture and provide appropriate
data to obtain payments. Also, despite substantial consolidation
in the number of managed care organizations over the last
decade, most of the legacy information technology platforms used
to manage the plans operated by these companies have remained in
place. As a result of this increasing complexity, physician
practices must keep track of multiple plan designs and
processing requirements to ensure appropriate payment for
services rendered.
Physician office-based billing activities that are required to
ensure appropriate payment for services rendered have increased
in number and complexity for the following reasons:
|
|
|
|
|
Diversity of health benefit plan
design. Health insurers have introduced a wide
range of benefit structures, many of which are customized to
unique goals of particular employer groups. This has resulted in
an increase in rules regarding who is eligible for healthcare
services, what healthcare services are eligible for
reimbursement and who is responsible for payment of healthcare
services delivered.
|
|
|
|
Dynamic nature of health benefit plan
design. Health insurers continuously update their
reimbursement rules based on ongoing monitoring of consumption
patterns, in response to new medical products and procedures,
and to address changing employer demands. As these changes are
made frequently throughout the year and are typically specific
to each individual health plan, physician practices need to be
continually aware of this dynamic element of the reimbursement
cycle as it could impact overall reimbursement and specific
workflow.
|
|
|
|
Proliferation of new payment models. New
health benefit plans and reimbursement structures have
considerably modified the ways in which physician practices are
paid. For example, there is an increasing trend toward consumer
driven health plans, or CDHPs, that require a far greater
portion of fees to be paid by the consumer, typically until a
pre-specified threshold is achieved. Care-based initiatives,
including pay-for-performance, or P4P programs, which provide
reimbursement incentives centered around capture and submission
of specified clinical information have dramatically increased
the administrative and clinical documentation burden of the
physician practice.
|
|
|
|
Changes in the regulatory environment. The
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA,
required changes in the way private health information is
handled, mandated new data formats for the health insurance
industry and created new security standards. As part of HIPAA,
adoption of National Provider Identifiers affects physician
office billing and collection workflow requirements.
|
In addition to administering typical small business functions,
smaller physician practices must invest significant time and
resources in activities that are required to secure
reimbursement from third party payers or patients and process
inbound and outbound communications related to physician orders
to laboratories and pharmacies. In order to process these
communications, physician offices often manipulate locally
installed software, execute paper-based and fax-based
communications to and from payers and conduct telephone-based
discussions with payers and intermediaries to resolve unpaid
claims or to inquire about the status of transactions.
The
Established Model
Currently, the majority of physician practices bill for their
services in one of two ways, either purchasing, installing and
operating locally installed practice management software or
hiring a third-party billing service to collect billing-related
information and input the information into a locally installed
software system. In almost all instances, the solutions are
installed and operated at the clinic by the administrative
personnel on staff. As the complexity and number of health
benefit plan payer rules has increased, the ability of locally
installed software solutions to keep up with new and revised
payer rules has lagged this trend, leading to higher levels
58
of unpaid claims, prolonged billing cycles and increased
clinical inefficiencies. While locally installed software has
been shown to provide improvement in physician practice
efficiency and collections relative to paper-based systems, we
believe such software alone is not suited for todays
dynamic and increasingly complex healthcare system.
At present, we estimate that 70% of all medical claims submitted
to payers are resolved on the first submission attempt, which we
refer to as a practices first pass resolution rate.
Medical practices typically will attempt to fix a denied claim
and then resubmit it for payment, frequently leading to multiple
cycles of submission and rejection. In addition to the time and
cost of these activities, medical offices typically stop seeking
reimbursement (and write off associated receivables) for
approximately ten percent of their medical claims. Beyond the
high rate of claim rejection that typically occurs, it also is
common for physicians to be paid at levels below contracted
amounts due to administrative error, contract complexity or
other factors.
Despite advances in practice management software to address the
administrative needs of the physician office, the billing,
collections and medical record management functions remain
expensive, inefficient and challenging for many physician
practice groups. We believe that established locally installed
physician practice management software has generally suffered
from the following challenges:
|
|
|
|
|
Software is static. Payer rules change
continuously and the systems used to seek reimbursement require
constant updating to remain accurate. By not being linked to a
centrally-hosted, continuously updated knowledge base of payer
rules, software typically cannot reflect real-time changes based
upon health benefit plan specific requirements. Additionally,
since most software vendors are not in the business of
processing claims, they are often unaware of the creation of new
payer rules and changes to existing payer rules. As a result,
physician practices typically have the responsibility to
navigate this complex and dynamic reimbursement system in order
to submit accurate and complete claims. We believe their
inability to keep current on these rules changes is the single
largest factor leading to claims denials and diverting time and
resources away from revenue and clinical cycle workflow.
|
|
|
|
Software requires reliance on physician office
personnel. Physician offices have difficulty
managing the increased complexity of billing, collections and
medical record management because they lack the necessary
infrastructure and suffer from a high staff turnover rate.
Despite attempts to automate workflow, many software solutions
still require that a number of payer interactions be executed
manually via paper or phone. These manual interactions include
insurance product monitoring, insurance eligibility, claims
submission, claims tracking, remittance posting, denials
management, payment processing, formatting of lab requisitions,
submitting of lab requisitions, monitoring and classification of
all inbound faxes. These tasks are prone to human error, are
inefficient and require the accumulation of rules and claims
processing knowledge. Given that employee clinic turnover in
physician offices averages
10-25%
annually, critical reimbursement knowledge can be lost.
|
|
|
|
Software vendors are not paid on results. Most
established software companies operate under a business model
that does not directly incentivize them to improve their
clients financial results. The established software
business model involves a substantial upfront license payment in
addition to ongoing maintenance fees. While the goal of practice
management software is to improve reimbursement and clinical
efficiency, realizing these efficiencies still largely rests on
the physician offices administrative staff.
|
Traditional outsourced back office service providers do not
compensate significantly for these deficiencies of the locally
installed software model. These service providers generally rely
on third-party software that suffers from the same deficiencies
that physicians experience when they perform their own back
office processing operations. The software often is not
connected to payer rules that can be enforced in real-time by
office staff throughout the patient workflow. In addition, these
service providers typically operate discrete databases and
separate processes for each client they serve, which affords
limited advantages of scale, thereby conferring limited cost
advantages to physician practices. Without control over the
software application and without an integrated rules database,
outsourced service providers cannot offer physicians the
benefits of our internet-based business service model.
59
The payer universe is dynamic and continuously growing in
complexity as rules are changed and new rules are added, making
it extremely difficult for physician practices, and even payers,
to effectively manage the reimbursement rules landscape. While
locally installed software has struggled to meet these
challenges, the Internet has developed in the broader economy
into a reliable and efficient medium that opens the door to
entirely new ways of performing business functions. The Internet
is ideally suited to centralization of the large-scale research
needed to stay current with payer rules and to the instantaneous
dissemination of this information. The Internet also allows
real-time consolidation and centralized execution of
administrative work across many medical practice locations. As a
result, the health care industry is an ideal industry to benefit
from the efficiency and effectiveness of the Internet as a
delivery platform.
Our
Solution
The dynamic and increasingly complex healthcare market requires
an integrated solution to effectively manage the reimbursement
and clinical landscape. We believe we are the first company to
integrate web-based software, a continually updated database of
payer rules and back-office service operations into a single
internet-based business service for physician practices. We
deliver these services at each critical step in the revenue and
clinical cycle workflow through a combination of software,
knowledge and work:
|
|
|
|
|
Software. athenaNet, our proprietary web-based
practice management and EMR application, is a workflow
management tool used in every work step that is required to
properly handle billing, collections and medical record
management-related functions. All users across our client-base
simultaneously use the same version of our software application,
which connects them to our continually updated database of payer
rules and to our services team.
|
|
|
|
Knowledge. athenaRules, our proprietary
database of payer rules, enforces physician office workflow
requirements, and is continually updated with payer-specific
coding and documentation information. This knowledge continues
to grow as a result of our years of experience managing back
office service operations for hundreds of physician practices,
including processing medical claims with tens of thousands of
health benefit plans.
|
|
|
|
Work. The athenahealth service operations,
consisting of nearly 400 people in the United States, and
approximately 700 people at our off-shore service provider,
interact with clients at all key steps of the revenue and
clinical cycle workflow. These operations include setting up
medical providers for billing, checking the eligibility of
scheduled patients electronically, submitting electronic and
paper-based claims to payers directly or through intermediaries,
processing clinical orders, receiving and processing checks and
remittance information from payers, documenting the result of
payers responses and evaluating and resubmitting claims
denials.
|
We are economically aligned with our physician practice clients
because payment for our services in most cases is dependent on
the results our services achieve for our clients. As a result of
this approach, the effectiveness of our revenue cycle management
services are borne out by measurable improvements in the
financial performance for physician practices within a short
period of time after they start using our services. These
results include:
|
|
|
|
|
a successful resolution rate of over 93% on average on the first
submission attempt of claims to payers compared to the national
average which we estimate to be 70%;
|
|
|
|
an average reduction in
days-in-accounts
receivable of more than 30% within 90 days of
implementation; and
|
|
|
|
an average increase in total collections of 10%.
|
The positive results of our approach are seen in the significant
growth in clients serviced, collections under management and
overall revenue in each of the preceding seven years.
60
Key advantages of our solution include:
|
|
|
|
|
Lower total cost of the athenahealth
solutions. The cost of our services includes a
modest up-front expenditure, with subsequent costs based on the
amounts collected. This approach eliminates the large and risky
upfront investments in software, hardware, implementation
service and support and additional IT staff often associated
with the established software model. We update our web-based
software every six to eight weeks and we add over 100 new rules
on average each month to our shared payer knowledge base, which
enables our clients to use these new features with minimal
disruption and no incremental cost. Once implemented, only an
Internet connection and a web browser are required to run our
internet-based
practice management system and EMR. By removing cost barriers to
initial adoption, we believe our services-based model provides a
lower total cost to our clients based on the elimination of
future upgrade, training and extra
follow-up
costs associated with the established model.
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive payer rules engine that is continuously
expanded and updated. We believe we have the
largest and most comprehensive continually updated database of
payer reimbursement process rules in the United States. We
collect health benefit plan specific processing information so
that the medical office workflow and the work at our service
operations can be tailored to the requirements of each health
benefit plan. Real-time error alerts automatically triggered by
our rules engine enable our clients to catch billing-related
errors immediately at the beginning of the reimbursement cycle,
fix these errors quickly and easily and generate medical claims
that achieve substantially higher first-pass success rates than
the industry norm. Payer rules are frequently unavailable from
the payers and therefore must be learned from experience. We
have more than 40 full-time equivalent staff focused on finding,
researching, documenting and implementing new rules, enabling
our solution to consistently deliver quantifiably superior
financial results for our clients. Additionally, we discover and
implement even more new rules as new clients connect to our
rules engine. Our other clients benefit from the addition of
these new rules, and this continuous updating increases our
value proposition benefiting both current and future clients.
|
|
|
|
Real-time workflow and process optimization resulting in
improved financial outcomes. Our solution
incorporates a large number of efficient, real-time
communications between the physician practices staff and
our rules engine and service operations staff throughout the
patient encounter and billing processes. These process steps
begin prior to the claims submission process, making our
efficient online interaction vital for delivering the financial
performance our clients enjoy. This enables us to stay close to
client needs and constantly upgrade our offerings in order to
continuously improve the effectiveness of our overall service.
These elements ensure we can identify and influence critical
practice workflow steps to maximize billing performance and
deliver improved financial outcomes for our physician clients.
|
|
|
|
Critical mass and access to superior scale and
capabilities. We believe that our service site in
Watertown, Massachusetts is the largest single-site operation in
the United States for physician back-office operations. Our
platform was designed and constructed to enable us to assume
full responsibility for the completion of automated and manual
tasks in the revenue and clinical workflow cycles, while
providing critical tools and knowledge to effectively assist
clients in completing those tasks that must be done
on-site in
the physician practice. By taking on the administrative effort
associated with revenue and clinical workflow, we free our
clients from the burden of performing these laborious tasks in a
time-consuming and expensive manner with insufficient scale to
operate effectively. As a result of our substantial
infrastructure, we can apply a broad array of resources (from
athenahealth, our clients and our off-shore partners) to
cost-effectively address the myriad of discrete tasks within the
revenue and clinical workflow cycles. This approach allows us to
deliver resources, expertise and performance superior to what
any individual physician practice could achieve on its own.
|
61
Our
Strategy
Our mission is to be the most trusted and effective provider of
business services for physician practices. Key elements of our
strategy include:
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining intensely focused on our clients
success. Our business model aligns our goals with
our clients goals and provides an incentive for us to
continually improve the performance of our clients. We believe
that this approach enables us to maintain client loyalty, to
enhance our reputation and to improve the quality of our
solutions. For instance, we collaborate closely with our clients
to identify the resources required to efficiently manage each
critical step in the revenue and clinical cycle workflow so that
they fully realize the intended benefits of our solutions. We
also provide benchmarking against physician practices as
measured by size, geography and specialty which enables clients
to measure their results against and learn from their peers.
|
|
|
|
Maintaining and growing our payer rules
database. An important component of increasing
value to our clients is that we continue to develop our
centralized payer rules database, athenaRules, based on
experience gained each day across our network of clients. This
allows all of our clients to benefit from our more than 40
full-time equivalent staff focused on finding, researching,
documenting and implementing new payer rules. Our rules engine
development work increases the percentage of transactions that
are successfully executed on the first attempt and reduces the
time to resolution after claims or other transactions are
submitted. Over 100 new rules on average are added to our rules
engine each month and approximately 50% of the rules triggered
each month were added within the previous six months. We intend
to maintain a work environment that fosters creativity and
innovation so that we can continue to attract and retain the
type of employees needed to find, research, document and
implement new payer rules. Additionally, we will discover and
implement even more rules as new clients connect to our rules
engine.
|
|
|
|
Attracting new clients. We estimate that our
current athenaCollector client base represents less than 2% of
the U.S. addressable market for revenue cycle management.
We expect to continue with current and expanded sales and
marketing efforts to address our market opportunity by
aggressively seeking new clients. We believe that our
internet-based business services provide significant value for
physician offices of any size, from small practices (one to
three physicians) to larger practices (greater than 26
physicians). We have steadily increased and plan to continue to
increase the number of direct sales professionals we employ, and
we intend to develop additional distribution channels for our
services. For example, we have developed a remote sales and
implementation model (web and phone only), which creates a
distinct advantage in the small practice segment, which we
define as offices with fewer than four physicians.
|
|
|
|
Increasing revenue per client by adding new service
offerings. We have only recently begun to offer
our athenaClinicals service, which we combined with
athenaCollector for sale to prospective clients. Given the
recent advances in the overall EMR market and recent regulatory
changes, we expect that many of our current and future clients
will be making purchasing decisions based in part on EMR
functionality. Our recent certification by the Certification
Commission for Healthcare Information Technology, or CCHIT, an
independent, industry-recognized accreditation organization
created to certify EMR applications, for the software component
of athenaClinicals provides further opportunity for it to be
combined with athenaCollector for sale to prospective new
clients. In the future, we plan to offer athenaClinicals as a
stand-alone option. We are developing additional services to
address other administrative tasks within the physician office
that create opportunities to leverage our healthcare domain
knowledge and create increased revenue opportunity from our
existing clients. These additional services will focus on
managing patient communications with the physician office such
as scheduling appointments, accessing lab results and refilling
prescriptions. Consistent with our other offerings, we intend to
deliver these services on an ongoing basis for a percentage of
collections. Like our other services, this new service would be
delivered through use of the athenaNet platform, through use of
the athenaRules database of payer rules and through our
integrated service operations.
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
Expanding operating margins by reducing the costs of
providing our services. We believe we can
increase our operating margins as we increase the scalability of
our service operations. Our integrated operations enable us to
deploy the most efficient resources to lower the cost of
providing specific discrete tasks at each step of the revenue
and clinical cycles workflow. To do this, we will make targeted
investments that are likely to include additional and
geographically diverse datacenter capacity, an additional
service center location in the United States, enhanced use of
off-shore capacity for processing work and increased capability
in our off-shore software development center. As we add new
service offerings, these offerings will also utilize our current
capabilities, ultimately further reducing the cost of providing
our services to our clients.
|
Our
Services
athenahealth is a provider of internet-based business services
for physician practices. Our service offerings are based on our
proprietary web-based software, a continually updated database
of payer rules and integrated back-office service operations.
Our services are designed to help our clients achieve faster
reimbursement from payers, reduce error rates, increase
collections, lower operating costs, improve operational workflow
controls and more efficiently manage clinical and billing
information.
athenaCollector
Our principal offering, athenaCollector, is our revenue cycle
management service that automates and manages billing-related
functions for physician practices, and includes a practice
management platform. athenaCollector assists our physician
clients with the proper handling of claims and billing processes
to help submit claims quickly and efficiently.
Software
(athenaNet)
Through athenaNet, athenaCollector utilizes the Internet to
connect physician practices to our rules engine and service
operations team. In its 2007 year-end Best in KLAS
survey, KLAS Enterprises, LLC, a healthcare information
technology industry research firm, rated athenaNet No. 5 in
the Ambulatory and Billing Scheduling category for practice
groups with one to five physicians, No. 2 in the Ambulatory
and Billing Scheduling category for practice groups with six to
25 physicians and No. 1 in the Ambulatory and Billing
63
Scheduling category for practice groups with 25 to 100
physicians. athenaNet has been ranked the top five in each of
these categories in each annual Best in KLAS ranking since 2004,
and has received No. 1 rankings in certain categories in
some of those years. It includes a workflow dashboard used by
our clients and our services team to track in real-time claims
requiring edits before they are sent to the payer, claims
requiring work that have come back from the payer unpaid and
claims that are being held up due to administrative steps
required by the individual client. This internet-native
functionality provides our clients with the benefits of our
database of payer rules as it is updated and enables them to
interact with our services team to efficiently monitor
workflows. The internet-based architecture of athenaNet allows
each transaction to be available to our centralized rules engine
so that mistakes can be corrected quickly across all of our
clients.
Knowledge
(athenaRules)
Physician practices route all of their electronic and paper
payer communications to us, which we then process using
athenaRules and our significant understanding of payer rules to
achieve faster reimbursement rates and improve practice revenue.
Our proprietary database of payer knowledge has been constructed
based on over seven years of experience in dealing with
physician workflow in hundreds of physician practices with
medical claims from tens of thousands of health benefit plans.
The core focus of the database is on the payer rules which are
the key drivers of claim payment and denials. Understanding
denials allows us to construct rules to avoid future denials
across our entire client base resulting in increased automation
of our workflow processes. Over 100 new rules on average are
added to our rules engine each month and approximately 50% of
the rules triggered each month were added within the previous
six months. athenaRules has been designed to interact seamlessly
with athenaNet in the medical office workflow and in our service
operations. As of the end of 2007, we dedicated more than 40
full-time equivalents cross functionally to the process of
analyzing denials and developing and adding new rules to the
database.
Work
(athenahealth Service Operations)
Our athenahealth service operations provides the service teams
that collaborate with client staff to achieve successful
outcomes or payment transactions. Our services operations
consists of both the highly healthcare knowledgeable staff and
technological infrastructure required to execute the key steps
associated with proper handling of physician claims and clinical
data management. It is comprised of nearly 400 people on
our service teams in the United States and approximately
700 people at our off-shore partners who interact with
physicians at all of the key steps in the revenue cycle
including:
|
|
|
|
|
coordinating with payers to ensure that client providers are
properly
set-up for
billing;
|
|
|
|
checking the eligibility of scheduled patients electronically;
|
|
|
|
submitting claims to payers directly or through intermediaries,
whether electronic or via printed claim forms;
|
|
|
|
obtaining confirmation of claim receipt from the payer either
electronically or through phone calls;
|
|
|
|
receiving and processing checks and remittance information from
payers and documenting the result of payers responses;
|
|
|
|
evaluating denied claims and determining the best approach to
appealing
and/or
resubmitting claims to obtain payment;
|
|
|
|
billing patients for balances that are due;
|
|
|
|
compiling and delivering management reporting about the
performance of clients at both the account level and the
provider level;
|
|
|
|
transmitting key clinical data in the revenue cycle workflow to
eliminate the need for code re-entry and providing all key data
elements required to achieve maximum appropriate
reimbursement; and
|
|
|
|
providing proactive and responsive client support to manage
issues, address questions, identify training needs and
communicate trends.
|
64
athenaClinicals
Our most recent offering, athenaClinicals, is our clinical cycle
management service which automates and manages medical record
management-related functions for physician practices, and
includes an EMR platform. It assists medical groups with the
proper handling of physician orders and related inbound and
outbound communications to ensure that orders are carried out
quickly and accurately and to provide an up-to-date and accurate
online patient clinical record. athenaClinicals is designed to
improve clinical administrative workflow, the software component
of that recently received CCHIT certification.
Software
(athenaNet)
Through athenaNet, athenaClinicals displays key clinical
measures by office location related to the drivers of high
quality and efficient care delivery on a workflow dashboard,
including lab results requiring review, patient referral
requests, prescription requests and family history of previous
exams. Similar to its functionality within athenaCollector,
athenaNet provides comprehensive reporting on a range of
clinical results, including distribution of different procedure
codes (leveling), incidence of different diagnoses, timeliness
of turnaround by lab companies and other intermediaries and
other key performance indicators.
Knowledge
(athenaRules)
Clinical data must be captured according to the requirements and
incentives of different payers and plans. Clinical
intermediaries such as laboratories and pharmacy networks
require specific formats and data elements as well. athenaRules
can access medication formularies, identify potential medication
errors such as drug-to-drug interactions or allergy reactions
and identify the specific clinical activities that are required
to adhere to pay-for-performance programs, which can add
incremental revenue to the physician practice.
Work
(athenahealth Service Operations)
athenaClinicals provides the additional functionality that
medical groups expect from an EMR to help them complete the key
processes that affect the clinical care record related to
patient care including:
|
|
|
|
|
identifying available P4P programs, incentives and enrollment
requirements;
|
|
|
|
entering data about patient encounters as they happen for
general exams (well visits) as well as problem-focused visits
(sick exams);
|
|
|
|
delivering outbound physician orders such as prescriptions and
lab requisitions; and
|
|
|
|
capturing, classifying and presenting inbound documentation
electronically or via fax such as lab results.
|
Sales and
Marketing
We have developed a sales and marketing capability aimed at
expanding our network of physician clients, and expect to expand
these efforts in the future. We have a significant direct sales
effort which we augment through our indirect channel
relationships.
Direct
Sales
As of September 30, 2007, we employed a direct sales and
sales support force of 55 employees. Of these employees, 46
were sales professionals. Because of our ongoing service
relationship with clients we conduct a consultative sales
process. This process includes understanding the needs of
perspective clients, developing service proposals and
negotiating contracts to enable the commencement of services. Of
this sales force, 31 members of our sales force are dedicated to
physician practices with four or more physicians and 15 members
of our sales force are dedicated to physician practices with one
to three physicians. Our sales force is supported by
nine personnel in our sales and marketing organizations
that provide specialized support for promotional and selling
efforts.
65
Channel
Partners
In addition to our employed sales force, we maintain business
relationships with individuals and organizations that promote or
support our sales or services within specific industries of
geographic regions, which we refer to as channels. We refer to
these individuals and organizations as our channel partners.
These relationships usually involve agreements that compensate
channel partners for providing us sales lead information that
result in sales. These channel partners usually do not make
sales but instead provide us with leads that we use to develop
new business through our direct sales force. In 2006,
channel-based leads were associated with approximately half of
our new business. Other channel relationships permit third
parties to act as value-added resellers or as independent sales
representatives for our services. Our channel relationships
include state medical societies, Healthcare Information
Technology product companies, healthcare product distribution
companies and consulting firms. Examples of these types of
channel relationships include:
|
|
|
|
|
the Ohio State Medical Society;
|
|
|
|
Eclipsys Corporation; and
|
|
|
|
WorldMed Shared Services, Inc. (d/b/a PSS World Medical Shares
Services, Inc.), or PSS.
|
In May 2007, we entered into a marketing and sales agreement
with PSS for the marketing and sale of athenaClinicals and
athenaCollector. The agreement has an initial term of three
years and may be terminated by either party for cause or
convenience. Under the terms of the agreement, we will pay PSS
sales commissions based upon the estimated contract value of
orders placed with PSS, which will be adjusted 15 months
after the date the service begins for a client to reflect actual
revenue received by us from clients. Subsequent commissions will
be based upon a specified percentage of actual revenue generated
from orders placed with PSS. We will be responsible for funding
$300,000 toward the establishment of an incentive plan for the
PSS sales representatives during the first twelve months of the
agreement, as well as co-sponsoring training sessions for PSS
sales representatives and conducting on-line education for PSS
sales representatives.
Under the terms of the agreement, no later than June 2009,
revenue cycle services or software from athenahealth will be the
exclusive revenue cycle solution distributed by PSS, and from
and after the date that clinical cycle services and software
from athenahealth has been CCHIT certified and is generally
commercially released as a stand-alone service, such services
and software will be the exclusive clinical cycle solution
marketed and sold by PSS. Additionally, the terms of the
agreement prohibit us from entering into a similar agreement
with any business that has, as its primary source of revenue,
revenue from the business of distributing medical and surgical
supplies to the physician ambulatory care market in the United
States. None of our existing channel relationships are affected
by our exclusive arrangement with PSS, and while our agreement
with PSS precludes us from entering into similar arrangements
with other distributors of medical and surgical supplies to the
physician ambulatory care market in the United States, we
believe PSS is of sufficient size so as to offer us a compelling
opportunity to market our services to prospective clients that
would otherwise be difficult for us to reach. According to PSS,
they have the largest medical and surgical supplies sales force
in the United States, consisting of more than 700 sales
consultants who distribute medical supplies and equipment to
more than 100,000 offices in all 50 states.
Marketing
Initiatives
Since our service model is new to most physicians, our marketing
and sales objectives are designed to increase awareness of our
company, establish the benefits of our service model and build
credibility with prospective clients, so that they will view our
company as a trustworthy long-term service provider. To effect
this strategy, we have designed and implemented specific
activities and programs aimed at converting leads to new clients.
In June 2006, we introduced our annual PayerView rankings in
order to provide an industry-unique framework to systematically
address what we believe is unnecessary administrative complexity
existing between payers and providers. PayerView is designed to
look at payers performance based on a number of
categories, which combine to provide an overall ranking aimed at
quantifying the ease of doing business with the
payer. All data used for the rankings come from actual
claims performance data of our clients and depict
66
our experience in dealing with individual payers across the
nation. The rankings include national payers with at least
120,000 charge lines of data and regional payers with a minimum
of 20,000 charge lines.
Our marketing initiatives are generally targeted towards
specific segments of physician practices. These marketing
programs primarily consist of:
|
|
|
|
|
sponsoring
pay-per-click
search advertising and other internet-focused awareness building
efforts (such as online videos and webinars);
|
|
|
|
engaging in public relations activities aimed at generating
media coverage;
|
|
|
|
participating in industry-focused trade shows;
|
|
|
|
disseminating targeted mail and phone calls to physician
practices; and
|
|
|
|
conducting informational meetings (such as town-hall style
meetings or strategic retreats with targeted potential clients
at an event called the athenahealth Institute).
|
Technology,
Development and Operations
We currently operate data centers in Waltham, Massachusetts and
in Bedford, Massachusetts. We operate an application in a
separate data center located in Chicago, Illinois, which we call
athenaNet EmergencyEdition, which provides our clients access to
their critical data and functionality in the event of a failure
at our primary data centers. Our data centers are maintained and
supported by third-parties at their dedicated locations. In
addition, in 2007 we signed a disaster recovery contract with a
major provider of these services, so that in the event of a
total disaster at our primary data centers, we could become
operational in an acceptable timeframe at a
back-up
location. The services provided by our data center and disaster
recovery service providers are generally commercially available
at comparable rates from other service providers. Our corporate
technology support is augmented by a third-party service
provider in New Brunswick, Canada.
On November 28, 2007, we entered into a purchase and sale
agreement with a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America
Corporation for the purchase of a complex of buildings,
including approximately 133,000 square feet of office
space, on approximately 53 acres of land located in
Belfast, Maine, for a total purchase price of $6.1 million.
The purchase is expected to close in the first quarter of 2008,
subject to customary closing conditions, including the
completion of our due diligence. We intend to utilize this
facility as a second operational service site, and to lease a
small portion of the space to commercial tenants.
Our mission-critical business application is hosted by us and
accessed by clients using high-speed Internet connections or
private network connections. We have devoted significant
resources to producing software and related application and data
center services that meet the functionality and performance
expectations of clients. We use commercially available hardware
and a combination of proprietary and commercially available
software to provide our service. These software licenses are
generally available on commercially reasonable terms. The design
of our application and database servers is modular and scaleable
in that as new clients are added we add additional capacity as
necessary. We refer to this as a horizontal scaling
architecture, which means that hardware to support new
clients is added alongside existing clients hardware and
does not directly affect those clients.
We devote significant resources to innovation. We execute six to
eight releases of new software functionality to our clients each
year. We deploy a rigorous application development methodology
so that each software release is properly designed, built,
tested and rolled out. Our clients all operate on the same
version of our software. Our software development activities
involve more than 51 technologists employed by us in the United
States as of September 30, 2007. We complement this
teams work with software development services from a
third-party technology development provider in Pune, India and
with our own direct employees at our development center operated
through our wholly-owned subsidiary located in Chennai, India.
As of September 30, 2007, we employed 21 people in our direct
subsidiary, and in the first nine months of 2007 this entity
represented approximately 0.9% of our total operating expense.
In addition to our core software development activities, we
dedicate more than 40 full-time equivalent staff across the
company to our ongoing development and maintenance of the
athenaRules database. Over 100 new rules on average are added to
our
67
rules engine each month and approximately 50% of the rules
triggered each month were added within the previous six months.
We also employ process innovation specialists and product
management personnel, who work continually on improvements to
our service operations processes and our service design,
respectively.
Once our clients are live on our service, we collaborate with
them to generate strong business results. We employed nearly
400 people in our service operations dedicated to providing
these services to our clients as of September 30, 2007.
These employees assist our clients at each critical step in the
revenue cycle and clinical cycle workflow process including,
insurance benefits packaging, insurance eligibility, claims
submission, claims tracking, remittance posting, denials
management, payment processing, formatting of lab requisitions,
submission of lab requisitions, monitoring and classification of
all inbound faxes. Additionally we use third-parties for data
entry, data matching, data characterization and outbound
telephone services. Currently, we have contracted for these
services with Vision Healthsource, a subsidiary of Perot Systems
Corporation, through which approximately 700 people provide data
entry and other services from facilities located in India and
the Philippines to support our client service operations. These
services are generally commercially available at comparable
rates from other service providers.
During eleven months ended November 30, 2007, athenahealth:
|
|
|
|
|
posted over $2.5 billion in physician payments;
|
|
|
|
processed over 20 million medical claims;
|
|
|
|
handled over 41 million charge postings; and
|
|
|
|
sorted approximately 15 million pages of paper which
amounted to approximately 150,000 pounds of mail.
|
We depend on satisfied clients to succeed. Our client contracts
require minimum commitments by us on a range of tasks, including
claims submission, payment posting, claims tracking and claims
denial management. We also commit to our clients that athenaNet
is accessible 99.7% of the time, excluding scheduled maintenance
windows. Each quarter, our management conducts a survey of
clients to identify client concerns and track progress against
client satisfaction objectives. In our most recent survey, 87%
of the respondents reported that they would recommend our
services to a trusted friend or colleague.
In addition to the services described above, we also provide
client support services. There are several client service
support activities that take place on a regular basis, including
the following:
|
|
|
|
|
client support by the client services center designed to address
client questions and concerns rapidly, whether registered via a
phone call or via an online support case through our customized
use of customer relationship management technology;
|
|
|
|
account performance and issue resolution activities by the
account management organization, designed to address open issues
and focus clients on the financial results of the co-sourcing
relationship; these efforts also are intended to result in
client retention, appropriate adjustments to service pricing at
renewal dates and provision of incremental services when
appropriate; and
|
|
|
|
relationship management by regional leaders of the client
services organization to ensure that decision-makers at clients
are satisfied and that regional performance is managed
proactively with regard to client satisfaction, client margins,
client retention, renewal pricing and added services.
|
Competition
We have experienced, and expect to continue to experience
intense competition from a number of companies. Our primary
competition is the use of locally installed software to manage
revenue and clinical cycle workflow within the physicians
office. Software companies that sell practice management and EMR
software and medical billing and collection organizations
include GE Healthcare, Sage Software Healthcare, Inc., Misys
Healthcare Systems, Allscripts Healthcare Solutions, Inc.,
Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. and Quality Systems, Inc. As
a service company that provides revenue cycle services, we also
compete against
68
large billing companies such as McKesson Corp., Medical
Management Professions, a division of CBIZ, Inc., and regional
billing companies.
The principal competitive factors in our industry include:
|
|
|
|
|
ability to quickly adapt to increasing complexity of the
healthcare reimbursement system;
|
|
|
|
size and scope of payer rules knowledge;
|
|
|
|
ease of use and rates of user adoption;
|
|
|
|
product functionality;
|
|
|
|
performance, security, scalability and reliability of service;
|
|
|
|
sale and marketing capabilities of vendor; and
|
|
|
|
financial stability of the vendor.
|
We believe that we compete favorably with our competitors on the
basis of these factors. However, many of our competitors and
potential competitors have significantly greater financial,
technological and other resources and name recognition than we
do and more established distribution networks and relationships
with healthcare providers. As a result, many of these companies
may respond more quickly to new or emerging technologies and
standards and changes in customer requirements. These companies
may be able to invest more resources in research and
development, strategic acquisitions, sales and marketing, patent
prosecution and litigation and finance capital equipment
acquisitions for their customers.
Government
Regulation
Although we generally do not contract with U.S. government
entities, the services that we provide are subject to a complex
array of federal and state laws and regulations, including
regulation by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or
CMS, of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, as
well as additional regulation.
Government
Regulation of Health Information
Privacy and Security Regulations. The Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as
amended, and the regulations that have been issued under it
(collectively HIPAA) contain substantial
restrictions and requirements with respect to the use and
disclosure of individuals protected health information.
These are embodied in the Privacy Rule and Security Rule
portions of HIPAA. The HIPAA Privacy Rule prohibits a covered
entity from using or disclosing an individuals protected
health information unless the use or disclosure is authorized by
the individual or is specifically required or permitted under
the Privacy Rule. The Privacy Rule imposes a complex system of
requirements on covered entities for complying with this basic
standard. Under the HIPAA Security Rule, covered entities must
establish administrative, physical and technical safeguards to
protect the confidentiality, integrity and availability of
electronic protected health information maintained or
transmitted by them or by others on their behalf.
The HIPAA Privacy and Security Rules apply directly to covered
entities, such as healthcare providers who engage in
HIPAA-defined standard electronic transactions, health plans and
healthcare clearinghouses. Because we translate electronic
transactions to and from the HIPAA-prescribed electronic forms
and other forms, we are a clearinghouse and as such are a
covered entity. In addition, our clients are also covered
entities. In order to provide clients with services that involve
the use or disclosure of protected health information, the HIPAA
Privacy and Security Rules require us to enter into business
associate agreements with our clients. Such agreements must,
among other things, provide adequate written assurances:
|
|
|
|
|
as to how we will use and disclose the protected health
information;
|
|
|
|
that we will implement reasonable administrative, physical and
technical safeguards to protect such information from misuse;
|
69
|
|
|
|
|
that we will enter into similar agreements with our agents and
subcontractors that have access to the information;
|
|
|
|
that we will report security incidents and other inappropriate
uses or disclosures of the information; and
|
|
|
|
that we will assist the covered entity with certain of its
duties under the Privacy Rule.
|
State Laws. In addition to the HIPAA Privacy
and Security Rules, most states have enacted patient
confidentiality laws that protect against the disclosure of
confidential medical information, and many states have adopted
or are considering further legislation in this area, including
privacy safeguards, security standards and data security breach
notification requirements. Such state laws, if more stringent
than HIPAA requirements, are not preempted by the federal
requirements, and we must comply with them.
Transaction Requirements. In addition to the
Privacy and Security Rules, HIPAA also requires that certain
electronic transactions related to health care billing be
conducted using prescribed electronic formats. For example,
claims for reimbursement that are transmitted electronically to
payers must comply with specific formatting standards, and these
standards apply whether the payer is a government or a private
entity. As a covered entity subject to HIPAA, we must meet these
requirements, and moreover, we must structure and provide our
services in a way that supports our clients HIPAA
compliance obligations.
Government
Regulation of Reimbursement
Our clients are subject to regulation by a number of
governmental agencies, including those that administer the
Medicare and Medicaid programs. Accordingly, our clients are
sensitive to legislative and regulatory changes in, and
limitations on, the government healthcare programs and changes
in reimbursement policies, processes and payment rates. During
recent years, there have been numerous federal legislative and
administrative actions that have affected government programs,
including adjustments that have reduced or increased payments to
physicians and other healthcare providers and adjustments that
have affected the complexity of our work. For example, Medicare
reimbursement was, for a period of time in 2006, reduced with
respect to portions of the physician payment fee schedule. The
federal government subsequently rescinded reduction and decided
to pay physicians the amount of the reduction that had been
applied to claims already processed under the reduced payment
fee schedule. To collect these payments for our clients, we
re-submitted claims that had previously been processed. This
process required substantial unanticipated processing work by
us, and the additional payments for re-submitted claims were
sometimes very small. It is possible that the federal or state
governments will implement future reductions, increases or
changes in reimbursement under government programs that
adversely affect our client base or our cost of providing our
services. Any such changes could adversely affect our own
financial condition by reducing the reimbursement rates of our
clients.
Fraud
and Abuse
A number of federal and state laws, loosely referred to as fraud
and abuse laws, are used to prosecute healthcare providers,
physicians and others that make, offer, seek or receive
referrals or payments for products or services that may be paid
for through any federal or state healthcare program and in some
instances any private program. Given the breadth of these laws
and regulations, they are potentially applicable to our
business, to the transactions which we undertake on behalf of
our clients and to the financial arrangements through which we
market, sell and distribute our products. These laws and
regulations include:
Anti-kickback Laws. There are numerous federal
and state laws that govern patient referrals, physician
financial relationships, and inducements to healthcare providers
and patients. The federal healthcare programs
anti-kickback law prohibits any person or entity from offering,
paying, soliciting, or receiving anything of value, directly or
indirectly, for the referral of patients covered by Medicare,
Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs or the leasing,
purchasing, ordering or arranging for or recommending the lease,
purchase or order of any item, good, facility or service covered
by these programs. Courts have construed this anti-kickback law
to mean that a financial arrangement may violate this law if any
one of the purposes of one of the arrangements is to encourage
patient referrals or other federal healthcare program business,
regardless of whether there are other legitimate purposes for
the arrangement. There are several limited exclusions known as
70
safe harbors that may protect some arrangements from enforcement
penalties. These safe harbors have very limited application.
Penalties for federal anti-kickback violations are severe, and
include imprisonment, criminal fines, civil money penalties with
triple damages and exclusion from participation in federal
healthcare programs. Many states have similar anti-kickback
laws, some of which are not limited to items or services for
which payment is made by government healthcare programs.
False or Fraudulent Claim Laws. There are
numerous federal and state laws that forbid submission of false
information or the failure to disclose information in connection
with the submission and payment of physician claims for
reimbursement. In some cases, these laws also forbid abuse of
existing systems for such submission and payment, for example,
by systematic over treatment or duplicate billing of the same
services to collect increased or duplicate payments. These laws
and regulations may change rapidly, and it is frequently unclear
how they apply to our business. For example, one federal false
claim law forbids knowing submission to government programs of
false claims for reimbursement for medical items or services.
Under this law, knowledge may consist of willful ignorance or
reckless disregard of falsity. How these concepts apply to a
services such as ours that rely substantially on automated
processes, has not been well defined in the regulations or
relevant case law. As a result, our errors with respect to the
formatting, preparation or transmission of such claims and any
mishandling by us of claims information that is supplied by our
clients or other third parties may be determined to or may be
alleged to involve willful ignorance or reckless disregard of
any falsity that is later determined to exist.
In most cases where we are permitted to do so, we charge our
clients a percentage of the collections that they receive as a
result of our services. To the extent that liability under fraud
and abuse laws and regulations requires intent, it may be
alleged that this percentage calculation provides us or our
employees with incentive to commit or overlook fraud or abuse in
connection with submission and payment of reimbursement claims.
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has stated that
it is concerned that percentage-based billing services may
encourage billing companies to commit or to overlook fraudulent
or abusive practices.
Stark Law and similar state laws. The Ethics
in Patient Referrals Act, known as the Stark Law, prohibits
certain types of referral arrangements between physicians and
healthcare entities. Physicians are prohibited from referring
patients for certain designated health services reimbursed under
federally-funded programs to entities with which they or their
immediate family members have a financial relationship or an
ownership interest, unless such referrals fall within a specific
exception. Violations of the statute can result in civil
monetary penalties
and/or
exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Furthermore,
reimbursement claims for care rendered under forbidden referrals
may be deemed false or fraudulent, resulting in liability under
other fraud and abuse laws.
Laws in many states similarly forbid billing based on referrals
between individuals
and/or
entities that have various financial, ownership or other
business relationships. These laws vary widely from state to
state.
Corporate
Practice of Medicine Laws, Fee-Splitting Laws and
Anti-Assignment Laws
In many states, there are laws that forbid non-licensed
practitioners from practicing medicine, that prevent
corporations from being licensed as practitioners and that
forbid licensed medical practitioners from practicing medicine
in partnership with non-physicians, such as business
corporations. In some states, these prohibitions take the form
of laws or regulations forbidding the splitting of physician
fees with non-physicians or others. In some cases, these laws
have been interpreted to prevent business service providers from
charging their physician clients on the basis of a percentage of
collections or charges.
There are also federal and state laws that forbid or limit
assignment of claims for reimbursement from government funded
programs. Some of these laws limit the manner in which business
service companies may handle payments for such claims and
prevent such companies from charging their physician clients on
the basis of a percentage of collections or charges. In
particular, the Medicare program specifically requires that
billing agents who receive Medicare payments on behalf of
medical care providers must meet the following requirements:
|
|
|
|
|
the agent must receive the payment under an agreement between
the provider and the agent;
|
|
|
|
the agents compensation may not be related in any way to
the dollar amount billed or collected;
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
the agents compensation may not depend upon the actual
collection of payment;
|
|
|
|
the agent must act under payment disposition instructions, which
the provider may modify or revoke at any time; and
|
|
|
|
in receiving the payment, the agent must act only on behalf of
the provider, except insofar as the agent uses part of that
payment to compensate the agent for the agents billing and
collection services.
|
Medicaid regulations similarly provide that payments may be
received by billing agents in the name of their clients without
violating anti-assignment requirements if payment to the agent
is related to the cost of the billing service, not related on a
percentage basis to the amount billed or collected and not
dependant on collection of payment.
Electronic
Prescribing Laws
States have differing prescription format and signature
requirements. Many existing laws and regulations, when enacted,
did not anticipate the methods of
e-commerce
now being developed. While federal law and the laws of many
states permit the electronic transmission of prescription
orders, the laws of several states neither specifically permit
nor specifically prohibit the practice. Given the rapid growth
of electronic transactions in healthcare and the growth of the
Internet, we expect the remaining states to directly address the
electronic transmission of prescription orders with regulation
in the near future. In addition, on November 7, 2005, the
Department of Health and Human Services published its final
E-Prescribing
and the Prescription Drug Program regulations
(E-Prescribing
Regulations). These regulations are required by the Medicare
Prescription Drug Improvement and Modernization Act of 2003
(MMA) and became effective beginning on January 1, 2006.
The
E-Prescribing
Regulations consist of detailed standards and requirements, in
addition to the HIPAA standards discussed previously, for
prescription and other information transmitted electronically in
connection with a drug benefit covered by the MMAs
Prescription Drug Benefit. These standards cover not only
transactions between prescribers and dispensers for
prescriptions but also electronic eligibility and benefits
inquiries and drug formulary and benefit coverage information.
The standards apply to prescription drug plans participating in
the MMAs Prescription Drug Benefit. Aspects of our
services are affected by such regulation, as our clients need to
comply with these requirements.
Electronic
Health Records Certification Requirements
The federal Office of the National Coordinator for Health
Information Technology, or ONCHIT, is responsible for promoting
the use of interoperable electronic health records, or EHRs, and
systems. ONCHIT has introduced a strategic framework and has
awarded contracts to advance a national health information
network and interoperable EHRs. One project within this
framework is a voluntary private sector based
certification commission, CCHIT, to certify electronic health
record systems as meeting minimum functional and
interoperability requirements. The certification commission has
begun and our clinical application functionality is certified by
CCHIT under its 2006 criteria. It is possible that such
certification may become a requirement for selling clinical
systems in the future, and CCHITs certification
requirement may change substantially. While we believe our
system is well designed in terms of function and
interoperability, we cannot be certain that it will meet future
requirements.
United
States Food and Drug Administration
The FDA has promulgated a draft policy for the regulation of
computer software products as medical devices under the 1976
Medical Device Amendments to the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic
Act, or FDCA. If our computer software functionality is a
medical device under the policy, we could be subject to the FDA
requirements discussed below. Although it is not possible to
anticipate the final form of the FDAs policy with regard
to computer software, we expect that the FDA is likely to become
increasingly active in regulating computer software intended for
use in healthcare settings regardless of whether the draft is
finalized or changed.
Medical devices are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA
under the FDCA. Under the FDCA, medical devices include any
instrument, apparatus, machine, contrivance or other similar or
related articles that is
72
intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other
conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention
of disease. FDA regulations govern among other things, product
development, testing, manufacture, packaging, labeling, storage,
clearance or approval, advertising and promotion, sales and
distribution and import and export. FDA requirements with
respect to devices that are determined to pose lesser risk to
the public include:
|
|
|
|
|
establishment registration and device listing with FDA;
|
|
|
|
the Quality System Regulation, or QSR, which requires
manufacturers, including third-party or contract manufacturers,
to follow stringent design, testing, control, documentation and
other quality assurance procedures during all aspects of
manufacturing;
|
|
|
|
labeling regulations and FDA prohibitions against the
advertising and promotion of products for uncleared, unapproved
off-label uses and other requirements related to advertising and
promotional activities;
|
|
|
|
medical device reporting regulations, which require that
manufacturers report to the FDA if their device may have caused
or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in
a way that would likely cause or contribute to a death or
serious injury if the malfunction were to recur;
|
|
|
|
corrections and removal reporting regulations, which require
that manufacturers report to the FDA field corrections and
product recalls or removals if undertaken to reduce a risk to
health posed by the device or to remedy a violation of the FDCA
that may present a risk to health; and
|
|
|
|
post-market surveillance regulations, which apply when necessary
to protect the public health or to provide additional safety and
effectiveness data for the device.
|
Non-compliance with applicable FDA requirements can result in,
among other things, public warning letters, fines, injunctions,
civil penalties, recall or seizure of products, total or partial
suspension of production, failure of the FDA to grant marketing
approvals, withdrawal of marketing approvals, a recommendation
by the FDA to disallow us from entering into government
contracts and criminal prosecutions. The FDA also has the
authority to request repair, replacement or refund of the cost
of any device.
Foreign
Regulations
Our subsidiary in Chennai, India is subject to additional
regulations by the Government of India, as well as its
subdivisions. These include Indian federal and local corporation
requirements, restrictions on exchange of funds,
employment-related laws and qualification for tax status.
Intellectual
Property
We rely on a combination of patent, trademark, copyright and
trade secret laws in the United States as well as
confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions to protect
our proprietary technology, databases and our brand. Despite
these reliances, we believe the following factors are more
essential to establishing and maintaining a competitive
advantage:
|
|
|
|
|
the statistical and technological skills of our service
operations team;
|
|
|
|
the healthcare domain expertise and payer rules knowledge of our
service operations team;
|
|
|
|
real-time connectivity of our solutions;
|
|
|
|
continued expansion of our proprietary rules engine; and
|
|
|
|
continued focus on the improved financial results of our clients.
|
We have filed six patent applications related to the technology
and workflow processes underlying our core service offerings
such as our athenaNet Rules Engine. Our first patent
application describes and documents our unique patient workflow
process, including the athenaNet Rules Engine which applies
proprietary rules to practice and payer inputs on a live,
ongoing basis to produce cleaner health care claims which can be
adjudicated more quickly and efficiently. This patent
application was filed in August 2001. We
73
have received a final office action from the U.S. Patent
and Trademark Office, or USPTO, rejecting this application. In
response, we have filed a request for continued examination and
have submitted a response and revised claims. Five subsequent
patent applications which describe and document other unique
aspects of our functionality and workflow processes were filed
during calendar year 2006 and are currently pending before the
USPTO. None of them have received any office actions from the
USPTO.
We also rely on a combination of registered and unregistered
trademarks to protect our brands. athenahealth, athenaNet and
the athenahealth logo are our registered trademarks of
athenahealth and athenaCollector, athenaClinicals,
athenaEnterprise and athenaRules are trademarks of athenahealth.
We have a policy of requiring key employees and consultants to
execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of an
employment or consulting relationship with us. Our employee
agreements also require relevant employees to assign to us all
rights to any inventions made or conceived during their
employment with us. In addition, we have a policy of requiring
individuals and entities with which we discuss potential
business relationships to sign non-disclosure agreements. Our
agreements with clients include confidentiality and
non-disclosure provisions.
Employees
As of September 30, 2007, we had 578 U.S. employees,
including 376 in service operations, 69 in sales and marketing,
58 in research and development and 75 in general and
administrative functions. In addition, as of that date, we had
21 employees, located in Chennai, India, who were employed
by our 100% directly owned subsidiary, Athena Net India Pvt.,
including two in service operations, five in research and
development and three in client general and administrative
functions. We believe that we have good relationships with our
employees. None of our employees is subject to collective
bargaining agreements or is represented by a union.
Legal
Proceedings
We have been sued by Billingnetwork Patent, Inc. in a patent
infringement case (Billingnetwork Patent, Inc. v.
athenahealth, Inc., Civil Action
No. 8:05-CV-205-T-17TGW
United States District Court for the Middle District of
Florida). The complaint alleges that we have infringed on a
patent issued in 2002 entitled Integrated Internet
Facilitated Billing, Data Processing and Communications
System and it seeks an injunction enjoining infringement,
treble damages and attorneys fees. We have moved to
dismiss that case, and arguments on that motion were heard by
the court in March 2006. There have been no material proceedings
in the matter since that time, and we are currently awaiting
further action from the court on the pending motion. We do not
believe that this case will have a material adverse effect on
our business, financial condition, or operating results.
From time to time, in the ordinary course of business, we have
been threatened with litigation by employees, former employees,
clients or former clients.
Facilities
We do not own any real property. We lease our existing
facilities. Our primary location is 311 Arsenal Street in
Watertown, Massachusetts, where we lease 133,616 square
feet, which is under lease until July 1, 2015. We also
lease 11,146 square feet in Chennai, India through our
direct subsidiary, Athena Net India Pvt. Ltd., which is leased
through November 5, 2014. Our servers are housed at our
headquarters and also in data centers in Bedford, Massachusetts,
in Waltham, Massachusetts, and in Chicago, Illinois.
On November 28, 2007, we entered into a purchase and sale
agreement with a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America
Corporation for the purchase of a complex of buildings,
including approximately 133,000 square feet of office
space, on approximately 53 acres of land located in
Belfast, Maine, for a total purchase price of $6.1 million.
The purchase is expected to close in the first quarter of 2008,
subject to customary closing conditions, including the
completion of our due diligence. We intend to utilize this
facility as a second operational service site, and to lease a
small portion of the space to commercial tenants.
74
DIRECTORS,
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND KEY EMPLOYEES
Our executive officers, key employees and directors and their
respective ages and positions as of January 1, 2008 are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
Jonathan Bush(1)
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman
|
James M. MacDonald(1)
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
|
Carl B. Byers(1)
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
|
Christopher E. Nolin(1)
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
|
Robert L. Cosinuke
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
Senior Vice President, Chief Marketing Officer
|
Robert M. Hueber(1)
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
Senior Vice President of Sales
|
Nancy G. Brown(1)
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
Senior Vice President of Business Development and Government
Affairs
|
Leslie Locke
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
Senior Vice President of People and Process
|
Todd Y. Park
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
Chief Athenista and Director
|
Ruben J. King-Shaw, Jr.(2)
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
Lead Director
|
Richard N. Foster(3),(4)
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
Director
|
Brandon H. Hull(2)
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
Director
|
John A. Kane(2)
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Director
|
Ann H. Lamont(3),(4)
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Director
|
James L. Mann(3),(4)
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
Director
|
Bryan E. Roberts(2)
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
Director
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Executive Officer |
(2) |
|
Member of audit committee |
(3) |
|
Member of compensation committee |
(4) |
|
Member of nominating and corporate governance committee |
Jonathan Bush is our Chief Executive Officer, President
and Chairman. Mr. Bush co-founded athenahealth in 1997.
Prior to joining athenahealth, Mr. Bush served as an EMT
for the City of New Orleans, was trained as a medic in the
U.S. Army, and worked as a management consultant with Booz
Allen & Hamilton. Mr. Bush obtained a Bachelor of
Arts in the College of Social Studies from Wesleyan University
and an M.B.A. from Harvard Business School.
James M. MacDonald is our Executive Vice President and
Chief Operating Officer. Mr. MacDonald joined athenahealth
in September of 2006. From 2000 to 2006, Mr. MacDonald was
employed by Fidelity Investments, most recently as President of
Fidelity Human Resources Services Company; he also served as
Chief Information Officer of Fidelity Employer Services Company
and as Chief Information Officer of Fidelity
Management & Research Company. Prior to his work at
Fidelity, Mr. MacDonald was a partner at Computer Sciences
Corporation and served as Chief Information Officer for State
Street Corporation. Mr. MacDonald obtained a Bachelor of
Science in Business Management from the University of
Massachusetts Boston (formerly Boston State College).
Carl B. Byers is our Senior Vice President, Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer. Mr. Byers joined
athenahealth at its founding in 1997. Prior to joining
athenahealth, Mr. Byers served as a management consultant
with Booz Allen & Hamilton. Mr. Byers obtained a
Bachelor of Arts in the College of Social Studies from Wesleyan
University and was a Business Fellow at the University of
Chicagos Graduate School of Business.
Robert L. Cosinuke is our Chief Marketing Officer.
Mr. Cosinuke joined athenahealth in January of 2008.
Mr. Cosinuke was a co-founder of the Boston Office of
Digitas, LLC in 1991. Digitas is a leading interactive
75
and database marketing advertising agency and was acquired by
Publicis Group SA in February 2007. From 1991-2006, Mr. Cosinuke
was employed by Digitas, most recently as President of Digitas,
Boston. He also served as President of Global Capabilities,
Digitas. Mr. Cosinuke has a Bachelor of Arts degree from
Haverford College, and an M.B.A. from the Harvard Business
School.
Christopher E. Nolin is our Senior Vice President,
General Counsel and Secretary. Mr. Nolin joined
athenahealth in 2001. From 1999 to 2001, Mr. Nolin was a
partner at Holland & Knight LLP. Prior to that,
Mr. Nolin was a partner at Warner & Stackpole
LLP, which he joined in 1979. Mr. Nolin obtained a Bachelor
of Arts in Anthropology and a Juris Doctor from Boston
University. He is admitted to practice in Massachusetts and is a
member of the American Health Lawyers Association and the
American Bar Association.
Robert M. Hueber is our Senior Vice President of Sales.
Mr. Hueber joined athenahealth in 2002. From 1984 to 2002,
Mr. Hueber served IDX Systems Corporation as Vice President
and National Director of Sales and most recently as Vice
President of Sales for the Enterprise Solutions Division. Prior
to joining IDX, Mr. Hueber served as Senior Marketing
Representative at Raytheon Data Systems and as a Sales Executive
for Exxon Enterprises. Mr. Hueber obtained a Bachelor of
Science in Marketing from Northeastern University.
Nancy G. Brown is our Senior Vice President of Business
Development and Government Affairs. Ms. Brown joined
athenahealth in 2004. From 1999 to 2004, Ms. Brown served
McKesson Corporation as Senior Vice President. Before McKesson,
Ms. Brown was co-founder of Abaton.com, which was acquired
by McKesson Corp. Prior to that, Ms. Brown worked for
Harvard Community Health Plan in various senior management roles
over a five year period. Ms. Brown obtained a Bachelor of
Science from the University of New Hampshire and an M.B.A. from
Northeastern University.
Leslie Locke is our SVP, People and Process.
Ms. Locke has served in several capacities since joining
athenahealth in 1998, including operational and product roles.
Prior to joining athenahealth, Ms. Locke held various roles
in integrated delivery systems operations at Lovelace Health
Systems, a provider of health care services. Ms. Locke
obtained a Bachelors of Arts from Colorado College and a Masters
in Heath Administration from Washington University.
Todd Y. Park is our Chief Athenista and a Director.
Mr. Park co-founded athenahealth in 1997. As Chief
Athenista, Mr. Park will focus on the long term corporate
strategy of the Company. Mr. Park has served in various
capacities prior to becoming Chief Athenista, most recently
serving as our Executive Vice President and Chief Development
Officer since February 2004. Prior to joining athenahealth,
Mr. Park served as a management consultant with Booz
Allen & Hamilton. Mr. Park obtained a Bachelor of
Arts in Economics from Harvard University.
Ruben J. King-Shaw, Jr. has served as a member of
our Board of Directors since 2005 and was named Lead Director in
2007. Mr. King-Shaw is the Chairman and CEO of Mansa Equity
Partners, Inc., which he founded in 2005. From January 2003 to
August 2003, Mr. King-Shaw served as Senior Advisor to the
Secretary of the Department of the Treasury. From July 2001 to
April 2003, Mr. King-Shaw served as Deputy Administrator
and Chief Operating Officer of the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services Centers for Medicare and
Medicaid Services (CMS). From January 1999 to July 2001,
Mr. King-Shaw served as Secretary of the Florida Agency for
Health Care Administration. Before that, Mr. King-Shaw was
the Chief Operating Officer of Neighborhood Health Partnership,
Inc. and the Executive Director of the JMH Health Plan.
Mr. King-Shaw serves on numerous boards of directors,
including the Scripps Florida Corporation and WellCare Health
Plans, Inc., a leading provider of government sponsored
healthcare programs. He is also a Trustee of the University of
Massachusetts. Mr. King-Shaw obtained a Bachelor of Science
in Industrial and Labor Relations from Cornell University, a
Master in Health Services Administration from Florida
International University and a Master of International Business
from the Chapman Graduate School of Business and the Center for
International Studies in Madrid, Spain.
Richard N. Foster has served as a member of our
Board of Directors since 2005. Mr. Foster is the Managing
Partner of Millbrook Management Group. Prior to joining
Millbrook Management Group in 2004, Mr. Foster served as
Director of McKinsey & Company, Inc. During his
31 year tenure with McKinsey & Company which began in
1973, Mr. Foster was elected principal (1977) and later
Senior Partner and Director (1982), a position he maintained for
22 years. Before retiring from McKinsey & Company,
Mr. Foster served
76
as founder and Managing Director of McKinseys private
equity practice. He also founded and led McKinseys
technology and healthcare sectors. Mr. Foster is the author
of Innovation: The Attackers Advantage (1986) and
Creative Destruction (2001). He is a Member of the Board
of Directors of Trust Company of the West, Cardax
Pharmaceuticals, Memorial Sloan Kettering Institute, the
Deans Advisory Committee of the Yale School of Medicine,
the Council for Aid to Education, and the Council on Foreign
Relations. Mr. Foster received his B.S., M.S. and Ph.D. in
Engineering and Applied Science from Yale University.
Brandon H. Hull has served as a member of our Board of
Directors since 1999. Since October 1997, Mr. Hull has
served as General Partner of Cardinal Partners, a venture
capital firm that he co-founded that specializes in healthcare
and life-sciences investments. From 1991 to 1997, Mr. Hull
served as principal of the Edison Venture Fund, another venture
capital firm, where he directed Edisons healthcare
investing activities and served on the boards of its healthcare
portfolio companies. Mr. Hull serves on the boards of
directors of Cardio Optics, Replication Medical, CodeRyte and
FluidNet. Mr. Hull obtained his Bachelor of Arts from
Wheaton College and his M.B.A. from The Wharton School at the
University of Pennsylvania.
John A. Kane has served as a member of our Board of
Directors since July 2007. Mr. Kane served as Senior Vice
President, Finance and Administration, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer of IDX Systems Corporation from May 2001 until it
was acquired by GE Healthcare in 2006, and as the Vice
President, Finance and Administration, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer of IDX from October 1984, when he joined IDX.
While at IDX, Mr. Kane guided the company through more than
a dozen acquisitions and at various times, he managed the
finance, facilities, legal, human resources and information
systems functions for the company. Previous to his employment
with IDX, Mr. Kane worked as an audit manager at
Ernst & Young LLP, in Boston. Mr. Kane serves as
a director of Merchants Bank, Spheris Inc. and several private
organizations. Since his retirement from IDX in 2006,
Mr. Kane has not been employed on a
full-time
basis and his principal occupations have consisted of the
directorships mentioned in the preceding sentence. He is a
certified public accountant and earned a B.S. and Master of
Accountancy from Brigham Young University.
Ann H. Lamont has served as a member of our Board of
Directors since January 2001. Ms. Lamont has been with Oak
Investment Partners since 1982. She became a Managing Partner in
2006 and prior to that served as General Partner from 1986. Ms.
Lamont leads the healthcare and financial services information
technology teams at Oak Investment Partners. Ms. Lamont
previously served as a research associate with
Hambrecht & Quist. Ms. Lamont serves on the
boards of numerous private companies including CareMedic
Systems, Inc., Health Dialog Services Corporation, NetSpend
Corporation, Next Page, Inc., Franklin & Seidelmann, LLC,
Pay Flex Systems USA, Inc., United BioSource Holding LLC and
iHealth Technologies, Inc. Ms. Lamont obtained a Bachelor
of Arts in Political Science from Stanford University.
James L. Mann has served as a member of our Board of
Directors since 2006. Mr. Mann has served as Chairman of
the Board of Directors of SunGard Data Systems Inc. from 1987 to
2005 and as Director from 1983 to 2005 and currently from 2006.
Mr. Mann served as SunGards Chief Executive Officer
from 1986 to 2002, President from 1986 to 2000 and Chief
Operating Officer from 1983 to 1985. Since 2002, Mr. Mann
has been employed by SunGard in an advisory capacity.
Mr. Mann previously served as President and COO of Bradford
National Corp. Mr. Mann obtained a Bachelor of Science in
Business Administration from Wichita State University.
Bryan E. Roberts has served as a member of our Board of
Directors since 1999. Dr. Roberts joined Venrock
Associates, a venture capital investment firm, in 1997, served
as a General Partner from 2001 to 2006, and is now a Managing
General Partner. From 1989 to 1992, Dr. Roberts worked in
the Corporate Finance Department of Kidder, Peabody &
Co., a brokerage company. Dr. Roberts serves on the Board
of Directors of several private companies. He received a
Bachelor of Arts from Dartmouth University and a Ph.D. in
chemistry and chemical biology from Harvard University.
Board
Composition
Our board of directors currently consists of nine members. Our
directors hold office until their successors have been elected
and qualified or until the earlier of their resignation or
removal.
77
Our by-laws permit our board of directors to establish by
resolution the authorized number of directors, and our amended
and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the
authorized number of directors may be changed only by resolution
of the board of directors.
Our directors are divided into three classes serving staggered
three-year terms. At each annual meeting of our stockholders,
directors will be elected to succeed the class of directors
whose terms have expired. For our current directors,
Class I directors terms will expire at our 2008
annual stockholders meeting, Class II directors
terms will expire at our 2009 annual stockholders meeting
and Class III directors terms will expire at our 2010
annual stockholders meeting. Messrs. Bush, Hull and
Roberts are our current Class I directors; Ms. Lamont
and Messrs. Mann and Foster are our current Class II
directors; and Messrs. Park, Kane and King-Shaw, Jr. are
our current Class III directors. Our classified board could
have the effect of increasing the length of time necessary to
change the composition of a majority of our board of directors.
Generally, at least two annual meetings of stockholders will be
necessary for stockholders to effect a change in the majority of
the members of our board of directors.
Board
Committees
Our board of directors has established an audit committee, a
compensation committee and a nominating and governance
committee, each of which operates pursuant to a separate charter
adopted by our board of directors. The composition and
functioning of all of our committees will comply with all
applicable requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
NASDAQ Global Market and Securities and Exchange Commission
rules and regulations.
Audit Committee. Messrs. Kane,
King-Shaw, Jr., Hull and Roberts currently serve on the
audit committee. Mr. Kane is the chairman of our audit
committee and qualifies as an audit committee financial
expert for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. The audit
committees responsibilities include:
|
|
|
|
|
overseeing our regulatory compliance programs and procedures;
|
|
|
|
appointing, approving the compensation of and assessing the
independence of our independent registered public accounting
firm;
|
|
|
|
pre-approving auditing and permissible non-audit services, and
the terms of such services, to be provided by our independent
registered public accounting firm;
|
|
|
|
reviewing and discussing with management and the independent
registered public accounting firm our annual and quarterly
financial statements and related disclosures;
|
|
|
|
coordinating the oversight and reviewing the adequacy of our
internal control over financial reporting;
|
|
|
|
establishing policies and procedures for the receipt and
retention of accounting related complaints and concerns; and
|
|
|
|
preparing the audit committee report required by Securities and
Exchange Commission rules to be included in our annual proxy
statement.
|
Under the Exchange Act and the rules of the NASDAQ Global
Market, the members of our audit committee must be independent,
as defined thereunder. Messrs. Roberts and Hull may be deemed to
fall outside the non-exclusive safe harbor provision provided by
these rules, under which persons that beneficially own 10% or
fewer shares of our common stock are presumptively deemed to be
independent. Our board of directors has determined that each of
Messrs. Roberts and Hull are independent under these rules,
notwithstanding this non-exclusive safe harbor.
Compensation Committee. Messrs. Mann and
Foster and Ms. Lamont currently serve on the compensation
committee. Mr. Mann is the chairman of our compensation
committee. The compensation committees responsibilities
include:
|
|
|
|
|
annually reviewing and approving corporate goals and objectives
relevant to compensation of our chief executive officer;
|
|
|
|
evaluating the performance of our chief executive officer in
light of such corporate goals and objectives and determining the
compensation of our chief executive officer;
|
78
|
|
|
|
|
reviewing and approving the compensation of all our other
officers;
|
|
|
|
overseeing and administering our employment agreements,
severance arrangements, compensation, welfare, benefit and
pension plans and similar plans; and
|
|
|
|
reviewing and making recommendations to the board with respect
to director compensation.
|
Nominating and Governance
Committee. Messrs. Foster and Mann and
Ms. Lamont currently serve on the nominating and governance
committee. Mr. Foster is the chairman of our nominating and
governance committee. The nominating and governance
committees responsibilities include:
|
|
|
|
|
developing and recommending to the board criteria for selecting
board and committee membership;
|
|
|
|
establishing procedures for identifying and evaluating director
candidates including nominees recommended by stockholders;
|
|
|
|
identifying individuals qualified to become board members;
|
|
|
|
recommending to the board the persons to be nominated for
election as directors and to each of the boards committees;
|
|
|
|
developing and recommending to the board a code of business
conduct and ethics and a set of corporate governance guidelines;
|
|
|
|
conducting appropriate review of all related party
transactions; and
|
|
|
|
overseeing the evaluation of the board, its committees and
management.
|
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
None of our executive officers serves as a member of the board
of directors or compensation committee, or other committee
serving an equivalent function, of any other entity that has one
or more of its executive officers serving as a member of our
board of directors or compensation committee.
Corporate
Governance
We have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics that
applies to all of our employees, officers and directors,
including those officers responsible for financial reporting.
The code of business conduct and ethics will be available on our
Internet site at www.athenahealth.com. We expect that any
amendments to the code, or any waivers of its requirements, will
be disclosed on our website.
Executive
Officers
Each of our executive officers has been elected by our board of
directors and serves until his or her successor is duly elected
and qualified.
79
Named
Executive Officers
Our named executive officers, or NEOs, include the individuals
who served as our chief executive officer and chief financial
officer, as well as our three most highly compensated executive
officers (other than our chief executive officer and chief
financial officer) who served in such capacities during 2007.
For 2007, our NEOs were:
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Bush, Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman;
|
|
|
|
Carl B. Byers, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer;
|
|
|
|
Todd Y. Park, Executive Vice President and Chief Development
Officer;
|
|
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin, Senior Vice President, General Counsel and
Secretary; and
|
|
|
|
James M. MacDonald, Senior Vice President and Chief Operating
Officer.
|
Effective January 1, 2008, Mr. Park transitioned to
the role of Chief Athenista. In connection with his new role,
Mr. Park will focus on long-term strategy and will no longer
have responsibility for day-to-day management affairs. As such,
he is no longer an executive officer.
Compensation
Discussion and Analysis
Evolution
of Our Compensation Approach
Our compensation approach is necessarily tied to our stage of
development as a company. Historically, compensation decisions
for our executive officers were approved by our board of
directors upon the recommendation of our compensation committee,
which in turn relied upon the recommendation of our Chief
Executive Officer. As discussed below, in some cases, the
recommendation of our Chief Executive Officer was largely
discretionary, based on his subjective assessment of the
particular executive. As we gain experience as a public company,
we expect that the specific direction, emphasis and components
of our executive compensation program will continue to evolve.
For example, over time, we expect to reduce our reliance upon
subjective determinations made by our Chief Executive Officer in
favor of a more empirically based approach that involves
benchmarking the compensation paid to our executive officers
against peer companies that we identify and the use of clearly
defined, objective targets to determine incentive compensation
awards. We may also reduce our executive compensation
programs emphasis on stock options as a long-term
incentive component in favor of other forms of equity
compensation such as restricted stock awards. Anticipating these
changes, beginning in 2007 we engaged a compensation consultant
to more proactively assist our compensation committee in
continuing to develop our executive compensation program, and in
the future we may look to programs implemented by comparable
public companies in refining our compensation approach.
Our
Executive Compensation Philosophy and Objectives
We have designed our executive compensation program to attract,
retain and motivate highly qualified executives and to align
their interests with the interests of our stockholders. Our
business model is based on our ability to establish long-term
relationships with clients and to maintain our strong mission,
client focus, entrepreneurial spirit and team orientation. We
have sought to create an executive compensation package that
balances short-term versus long-term components, cash versus
equity elements and fixed versus contingent payments, in ways we
believe are most appropriate to motivate senior management and
reward them for achieving the following goals:
|
|
|
|
|
develop a culture that embodies a passion for our business,
creative contribution and a drive to achieve established goals
and objectives;
|
|
|
|
provide leadership to the organization in such a way as to
maximize the results of our business operations;
|
|
|
|
lead us by demonstrating forward thinking in the operation,
development and expansion of our business;
|
80
|
|
|
|
|
effectively manage organizational resources to derive the
greatest value possible from each dollar invested; and
|
|
|
|
take strategic advantage of the market opportunity to expand and
grow our business.
|
We believe that having a compensation program designed to align
executive officers to achieve business results and to reinforce
accountability is the cornerstone to successfully implement and
achieve our strategic plan. In determining the compensation of
our executive officers, we are guided by the following key
principles:
|
|
|
|
|
Competition. Compensation should reflect the
competitive marketplace, so we can retain, attract and motivate
talented executives.
|
|
|
|
Accountability for Business
Performance. Compensation should be tied to
financial performance, so that executives are held accountable
through their compensation for contributions to the performance
of the company as a whole through the performance of the
businesses for which they are responsible.
|
|
|
|
Accountability for Individual
Performance. Compensation should be tied to the
individuals performance to encourage and reflect
individual contributions to our performance. We consider
individual performance as well as performance of the businesses
and responsibility areas that an individual oversees, and weigh
these factors as appropriate in assessing a particular
individuals performance.
|
|
|
|
Alignment with Stockholder
Interests. Compensation should be tied to our
financial performance through equity awards to align
executives interests with those of our stockholders.
|
Our executive compensation structure not only aims to be
competitive in our industry, but also to be fair relative to
compensation paid to other professionals within our
organization, relative to our short-term and long-term
performance and relative to the value we deliver to our
stockholders. We seek to maintain a performance-oriented culture
and a compensation approach that rewards our executive officers
when we achieve our goals and objectives, while putting at risk
an appropriate portion of their compensation against the
possibility that our goals and objectives may not be achieved.
Determination
of Executive Compensation Awards
Historically, compensation decisions for our executive officers
were approved by our board of directors upon the recommendation
of our compensation committee, which in turn relied upon the
recommendation of our Chief Executive Officer. We have
traditionally placed significant emphasis on the recommendation
of our Chief Executive Officer with respect to the determination
of executive compensation (other than his own), in particular
with respect to the determination of base salary, cash incentive
and equity incentive awards, and typically followed such
recommendations as presented by our Chief Executive Officer.
Currently, our compensation committee is responsible for
administering our executive compensation program, although we
continue to rely, in part, upon the advice and recommendations
of our Chief Executive Officer, particularly with respect to
those executive officers that report directly to him. The
compensation committees composition and oversight of our
executive compensation program is described in more detail below
and in the section above entitled Board
Composition Board Committees
Compensation Committee.
For purposes of determining our executive officer compensation
in 2007, we considered the following factors: our understanding
of the amount of compensation generally paid by professional
service firms or similarly situated companies to their
executives with similar roles and responsibilities; the roles
and responsibilities of our executives; the individual
experience and skills of, and expected contributions from, our
executives; the amounts of compensation being paid to our other
executives; our executives historical compensation at our
company; an assessment of the professional effectiveness and
capabilities of the executive officer; the performance of the
executive officer against the corporate and other scorecards
used to determine incentive compensation; and the performance of
our company departments and the company as a whole against the
departmental and company-wide scorecards. While we have not used
any formula to determine compensation based on these factors, we
have placed the most emphasis in determining compensation on our
understanding of the amount of compensation generally paid by
professional service firms or similarly situated companies to
their
81
executives with similar roles and responsibilities and the
subjective assessment of the professional effectiveness and
capabilities of the executive officer. Our understanding of the
amount of compensation generally paid by professional service
firms or by similarly situated companies has been based on our
compensation committees and CEOs own business
judgment and collective experience in such matters.
Beginning in January 2007, our management retained Axiom
Consulting Partners, a compensation consultant, to conduct an
assessment of our current executive compensation practices for
our NEOs. This market survey compared the compensation paid to
our Chief Executive Officer and our other NEOs to executives at
similar management levels and functions at over fifty software,
information technology services or other technology oriented
companies, located in metropolitan areas, that had annual
revenue of between approximately $100 million and
$200 million.
Also in early 2007, the compensation committee established a
general goal to pay our NEOs, in subsequent years, at the
60th percentile of the market survey results for base
salary compensation, at the 60th percentile for total cash
compensation (i.e., base salary plus cash incentives awards) for
achievement of pre-defined performance objectives (as set forth
below) and at the 75th percentile for total cash
compensation for superior achievement in excess of these
pre-defined objectives (as set forth below). For NEOs other than
our Chief Executive Officer, the pre-defined performance
objectives were established in the form of corporate and similar
scorecards, as described below. In the case of our Chief
Executive Officer, the pre-defined performance objectives were
established in the form of specified financial targets, as
described below. The percentile rankings are made with reference
to compensation paid to executives at similar management levels
and functions. Although the compensation committee established
this executive compensation objective in 2007, as described
below, it did not adjust 2007 base salary and total cash
compensation for all of our NEOs to the 60th percentile or 75th
percentile, as applicable. The compensation committee intends to
reach this objective over time as our annual revenue reaches the
level of annual revenue of the companies in the Axiom market
survey, but the compensation committee has not set a specific
date as a deadline for achieving this objective.
Components
of our Executive Compensation Program
Our executive compensation program currently consists of three
components:
|
|
|
|
|
base salary;
|
|
|
|
cash incentives paid in quarterly installments linked to
corporate (or in some cases individual) performance; and
|
|
|
|
periodic grants of long-term stock-based compensation, such as
stock options.
|
Our compensation philosophies with respect to each of these
elements, including the basis for the compensation awarded to
each of our executive officers, are discussed below. In
addition, although each element of compensation described below
is considered separately, the compensation committee takes into
account the aggregate compensation package for each individual
in its determination of each individual component of that
package. The committees philosophy is to put significant
weight on those aspects of compensation tied to performance,
such as annual cash incentives based on measurable performance
objectives and long-term incentives in the form of stock options.
Base
Salary
The base salary of our NEOs is reviewed on an annual basis. In
2007, adjustments were made to reflect performance-based
factors, as well as competitive and market conditions. With
respect to the performance-based component, such determinations
were based upon a subjective assessment of professional
effectiveness and capabilities. In the case of our NEOs other
than Mr. Bush, this assessment was made by Mr. Bush
and was informed by his personal annual performance evaluation
of the executive, since each of these executives report directly
to him. In the case of Mr. Bush, this assessment was made
by our compensation committee. Historically we have not applied
specific formulas to set base salary or to determine salary
increases, nor have
82
we sought to formally benchmark base salary against similarly
situated companies. Generally, executive officer salaries are
adjusted effective the first quarter of each year.
With respect to each NEO other than Mr. MacDonald, 2007
base salary was largely determined with the goal of paying the
executive an amount that our CEO believed was necessary to be
competitive with base salaries at a similarly situated company
or professional services firm, based on his own business
judgement and experience in such matters and not based on
quantitative data or benchmarking, and to a lesser degree
informed by his subjective assessment of the executive as
described above. While mindful of competitive factors in
determining base salary for our executive officers, our
compensation philosophy places significant weight on those
aspects of compensation tied to performance, such as annual cash
incentives and long-term incentives in the form of stock
options, as further described below. We hired Mr. MacDonald
as our Chief Operating Officer in September 2006 and established
his base salary at $300,000 per year, on an annualized basis.
His base salary was negotiated based on his prior experience,
his prior levels of compensation, and competitive market
factors. Mr. MacDonalds salary did not increase in
2007 because the compensation committee had set his 2006 salary
late in the calendar year.
Although base salary for 2007 for each of Messrs. Bush and
Byers was still below the median of the companies surveyed, the
salaries set forth below reflect the effort of the compensation
committee to move their base salaries towards the
60th percentile over time. 2007 base salaries for each of
Messrs. Park and Nolin are above the median but less than
the 60th percentile of these companies. The compensation
committee intends to reach the 60th percentile objective for
Messrs. Bush, Byers and Nolin over time as our annual revenue
reaches the level of annual revenue of the companies in the
Axiom market survey, but the compensation committee has not set
a specific date as a deadline for achieving this objective. 2007
base salary for Mr. MacDonald was above the 60th percentile
but less than the 75th percentile.
The following table sets forth base salaries of our NEOs for
2007 and 2008 and the percentage increase for each NEO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% Increase
|
|
Executive
|
|
2007 Salary(1)
|
|
|
2008 Salary(2)
|
|
|
(2007-2008)
|
|
|
Jonathan Bush
|
|
$
|
350,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
240,000
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Todd Y. Park(3)
|
|
|
270,000
|
|
|
|
270,000
|
|
|
|
0.0
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin
|
|
|
225,000
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
11.1
|
|
James M. MacDonald
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
|
|
315,000
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Represents base salary during 2007 on an annualized basis. For
amounts actually paid during 2007, see Summary
Compensation Table below.
|
|
(2)
|
Annual review of base salary for Mr. Bush for 2008 is expected
to be determined on or about January 31, 2008. Any
resulting adjustment may be implemented retroactively to
January 1, 2008.
|
|
(3)
|
Mr. Parks 2008 base salary was determined in connection
with his promotion to Chief Athenista, effective January 1,
2008, at which time he will no longer have responsibility for
the day-to-day management of our affairs. Mr. Park will be paid
a base salary at an annualized rate of $270,000 for the first
six months. After this time his base salary will be re-evaluated.
|
Cash
Incentives Awards
2007
Awards
For 2007, cash incentive awards for Messrs. Byers, Park,
Nolin and MacDonald were tied to the achievement of our company
goals and objectives, which are set forth in the corporate and
growth scorecards described below. For 2007, cash incentive
awards for Mr. Bush were tied to our EBITDA scorecard
described below. Cash incentive awards were paid to
Messrs. Byers, Park, Nolin and MacDonald on a quarterly
basis. The compensation committee set a bonus target amount for
each of these executive officers that was equal to a
83
certain percentage of their base salary, as set forth below. The
target percentage was adjustable up or down based on our
performance as measured against the corporate and growth
scorecards. In 2007, the bonus percentage earned was adjusted
(upward or downward, as applicable) by 2% for every 1% of
variance from the applicable scorecard target. The annual
performance bonus for the first three quarters is based on a
year-to-date corporate or growth scorecard value, as applicable,
and the annual performance bonus for the fourth quarter will be
based on the annual scorecard values, as applicable, when those
values are calculated. Our fourth quarter bonuses for our NEOs,
other than Mr. Bush, are expected to be determined on or
about March 31, 2008. Our compensation committee approved
the corporate and growth scorecards as summarized below:
Corporate scorecard. 2007 cash incentive
compensation for Messrs. Byers and Nolin is based on our
corporate scorecard. 2007 cash incentive compensation for
Mr. MacDonald is based on our corporate scorecard minus the
growth metric. For 2007 our corporate scorecard is comprised of
ten specific financial, growth, client performance,
stability and client-satisfaction-based metrics, as set forth
below, and each metric is assigned a different percentage value
of the overall scorecard value. These categories of performance
metrics are designed to capture all of the important operational
and financial aspects of the organization:
|
|
|
|
|
The financial metrics comprise 24% of the overall scorecard
value and are comprised of gross margin targets, revenue
targets, and EBITDA targets.
|
|
|
|
The growth metric comprises 20% of the overall scorecard value
and is comprised of the estimated value of new contracts, which
we refer to as bookings.
|
|
|
|
The client performance metrics comprise 21% of the overall
scorecard value and are comprised of client
days-in-accounts
receivable, or DAR, the amount of client claims that are written
off and not collected and the ratio of items that we classify
into work queues for our clients attention to the number
of items posted for our clients, which we refer to as the client
work rate.
|
|
|
|
The stability metrics comprise 20% of the overall scorecard
value and are comprised of the first and second pass resolve
rate and the voluntary turnover rate.
|
|
|
|
The client satisfaction metric comprises 15% of the overall
scorecard value and is comprised of the client satisfaction rate.
|
Since the components of the corporate scorecard, other than the
financial metrics which are discussed below, contain highly
sensitive data such as service operation results, we do not
disclose all of our specific performance measures and targets
because we believe that such disclosure would result in serious
competitive harm. We believe the targets within each of the
scorecards were designed to be challenging but attainable if we
had what we considered to be a successful year. The elements
included in the corporate scorecard have changed over time as we
gain experience using them, and are likely to be adjusted in the
future as well.
Our corporate scorecard contains three financial metrics:
revenue, gross margin and EBITDA. Our 2007 revenue, gross margin
and EBITDA targets are summarized below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metric
|
|
Q1 Target
|
|
Q1 Score
|
|
Q2 Target
|
|
Q2 Score
|
|
Q3 Target
|
|
Q3 Score
|
|
Annual Target(1)
|
|
Annual Score(1)
|
|
Total revenue
|
|
$22.5 million
|
|
97.7%
|
|
$24.8 million
|
|
98.8%
|
|
$26.7 million
|
|
98.1%
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
48.4%
|
|
104.7%
|
|
52.0%
|
|
103.0%
|
|
53.6%
|
|
102.9%
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA
|
|
$0.7 million
|
|
109.8%
|
|
$2.5 million
|
|
97.2%
|
|
$3.2 million
|
|
131.6%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Our annual score has not yet been determined and is expected to
be determined on or about January 31, 2008. |
The above-referenced performance targets and scorecard results
were determined using our unaudited financial results and thus
may differ from the actual audited results when our 2007 audited
consolidated
84
statements are completed. The above-referenced performance
targets should not be interpreted as a prediction of how we will
perform in future periods. As described above, the purpose of
these targets was to establish a method for determining the
payment of cash based incentive compensation. You are cautioned
not to rely on these performance goals as a prediction of our
future performance.
Since the targeted bookings growth metric in the corporate
scorecard and growth scorecard is highly sensitive data, we do
not disclose the specific performance measure and target for
this metric because we believe that such disclosure would result
in serious competitive harm. We set the targets for the bookings
metric at a high level because we are a growth oriented company
and rely on bookings to help drive our growth. Additionally, the
value associated at the time of booking is an estimate of the
revenue we expect to receive from new clients which, in turn, is
based on an estimate of what the clients total collections
will be using our services. The number is an estimate based on
an estimate which means it is inherently volatile and can not be
used predict actual revenue.
Growth scorecard. 2007 cash incentive
compensation for Mr. Park is based on our growth scorecard.
For 2007, our growth scorecard is comprised of nine specific
financial, client satisfaction, operations and employee based
metrics as set forth below, and each metric is assigned a
different percentage value of the overall scorecard value in
similar fashion to the corporate scorecard discussed above.
These categories of performance metrics are designed to capture
important growth aspects of the organization:
|
|
|
|
|
The financial metrics comprise 55% of the overall scorecard
value and are comprised of revenue targets and bookings.
|
|
|
|
The client satisfaction metric comprises 10% of the overall
scorecard value and is comprised of the client satisfaction rate.
|
|
|
|
The operations metrics comprise 30% of the overall scorecard
value and are comprised of quarterly sales forecast accuracy and
the number of sales meetings with small practices, sales
meetings with group practices, sales proposals delivered to
small practices and sales proposals delivered to group practices.
|
|
|
|
The employee-based metric comprises 5% of the overall scorecard
value and is comprised of the voluntary turnover rate in sales,
marketing and service development areas.
|
Since the components of the growth scorecard, other than the
revenue metric which is discussed above, contain highly
sensitive data such as sales results, we do not disclose all of
our specific performance measures and targets because we believe
that such disclosure would result in serious competitive harm.
We believe the targets within each of the scorecards were
designed to be challenging but attainable if we had what we
considered to be a successful year. The elements included in the
growth scorecard have changed over time as we gain experience
using them, and are likely to be adjusted in the future as well.
As described above, in 2007, the bonus percentage earned was
adjusted by 2% for every 1% of variance from the applicable
scorecard target. For the 2007 corporate scorecard, as of the
end of the third quarter, the financial metrics were 107.2% of
target, the client metrics were 88.7% of target, the service
metrics were 97.5% of target and the employee based metrics were
95.2% of target. Overall, the 2007 corporate scorecard was 96.8%
of target, as of the end of the third quarter. Since that number
was 3.2% off of target, the target bonus percentage for each of
Messrs. Byers, Nolin and MacDonald was reduced by 6.4%. For
the 2007 growth scorecard, as of the end of the third quarter,
the financial metrics were 93.5% of target, the client
satisfaction metric was 84.9% of target, the operations metrics
were 95.8% of target and the employee based metrics were 77.9%
of target. Overall, the 2007 growth scorecard was 92.6% of
target, as of the end of the third quarter. Since that number
was 7.4% off of target, the target bonus percentage for
Mr. Park was reduced by 14.8%.
85
The following table contains the original and adjusted 2007
bonus target percentages for each of the following NEOs based on
the amounts attributable to the corporate scorecard, corporate
scorecard excluding bookings and growth scorecard, as applicable:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bonus % As
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bonus % As
|
|
|
Bonus % at
|
|
|
Adjusted for
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bonus % As
|
|
|
|
Bonus % at
|
|
|
Adjusted for
|
|
|
100%
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
Bonus % at
|
|
|
Adjusted for
|
|
|
|
100%
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
Achievement of
|
|
|
Scorecard
|
|
|
100%
|
|
|
Growth
|
|
|
|
Achievement of
|
|
|
Scorecard
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
Results Excluding
|
|
|
Achievement of
|
|
|
Scorecard
|
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
Results
|
|
|
Scorecard Goals
|
|
|
Bookings
|
|
|
Growth
|
|
|
Results
|
|
Executive
|
|
Scorecard Goals
|
|
|
(through Q3)
|
|
|
Excluding Bookings
|
|
|
(through Q3)
|
|
|
Scorecard Goals
|
|
|
(through Q3)
|
|
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
40
|
%
|
|
|
33.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Todd Y. Park
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
45.2
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
43.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James M. MacDonald
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
53.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA scorecard. Our chief executive
officers 2007 bonus is expected to be based only on our
annual earnings before interest taxes depreciation and
amortization, or EBITDA. This goal was based on the Compensation
Committees interest in linking Mr. Bushs annual
cash incentive compensation directly to our profitability. Based
on EBITDA achievement, Mr. Bushs bonus is expected to
range in 2007 from $0 to $0.3 million and, subject to
compensation committee approval, he will be granted options
ranging from 0 to 90,000 shares on the same basis. At
budgeted EBITDA, this bonus would be $0.2 million and
options to purchase 45,000 shares of our common stock at
fair value at the time of grant. The bonus is adjustable up or
down based on actual EBITDA as measured against budgeted EBITDA.
For every $1 that our EBITDA achievement exceeds the high end of
the range, Mr. Bush will receive an additional cash amount
equal to the difference between actual EBITDA and the high end
of the range multiplied by 7.5% and additional options in an
amount equal to the difference between actual EBITDA and the
high end of the range multiplied by 3.5%. Mr. Bushs annual
bonus is expected to be determined by our compensation committee
on or about January 31. 2008.
Although the compensation committee has discretion to award
annual cash incentives when targets are not met, historically no
discretion has been exercised by the compensation committee in
determining whether the targets described above have been
achieved as the targets are objective.
2008
Target Awards
In 2008, Mssrs. MacDonald, Nolin and Byers will receive cash
incentive awards based on the 2008 corporate scorecard, with the
exception that Mr. MacDonalds calculation will not
include the booking portion of that scorecard. Since
Mr. Park is no longer an executive officer, he will not
receive any cash incentive compensation. Mr. Bushs
2008 cash incentive compensation program has not yet been
evaluated by the compensation committee.
In 2008, the corporate scorecard is comprised of the following
measures: revenue weighted at 10%, operating income weighted at
15%, bookings weighted at 25%, client satisfaction weighted at
15%, days-in-accounts receivable weighted at 10%, lost patient
care revenue weighted at 5%, the client work rate weighted at
10%, and the voluntary turnover rate weighted at 10%.
86
The 2008 targets are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bonus% at
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bonus% at
|
|
|
100%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100%
|
|
|
Achievement of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Achievement of
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
Scorecard
|
|
|
Bonus Amount
|
|
|
|
Scorecard
|
|
|
Excluding
|
|
|
at Target
|
|
Executive
|
|
Goals
|
|
|
Bookings Goal
|
|
|
Achievement
|
|
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
60
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
150,000
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
James M. MacDonald
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
220,000
|
|
Since the components of the corporate scorecard contain highly
sensitive data such as targeted revenue growth and service
operation results, we do not disclose specific performance
measures and targets because we believe that such disclosure
would result in serious competitive harm. The compensation
committee designed these targets within these scorecards to be
challenging but attainable if we have what we consider to be a
successful year. Although the compensation committee has
discretion to award annual cash incentives when targets are not
met, historically no discretion has been exercised by the
compensation committee in determining whether the targets have
been achieved as the targets are objective.
Long-term
Stock-Based Compensation
Our long-term compensation program has historically consisted
solely of stock options. Option grants made to executive
officers are designed to provide them with incentive to execute
their responsibilities in such a way as to generate long-term
benefit to us and our stockholders. Through possession of stock
options, our executives participate in the long-term results of
their efforts, whether by appreciation of our companys
value or the impact of business setbacks, either
company-specific or industry-based. Additionally, stock options
provide a means of ensuring the retention of our executive
officers, in that they are in almost all cases subject to
vesting over an extended period of time.
Stock options provide executives with a significant and
long-term interest in our success. By only rewarding the
creation of shareholder value, we believe stock options provide
our NEOs with an effective risk and reward profile. Although it
is our current practice to use stock options as our sole form of
long-term incentive compensation, the compensation committee
reviews this practice on an annual basis in light of our overall
business strategy, existing market-competitive best practices
and other factors.
Stock options are granted periodically and are subject to
vesting based on the executives continued employment.
Historically we have granted our executive officers a
combination of incentive stock options that vest over a period
of time and non-qualified stock options that are immediately
exercisable but the shares issued upon exercise are subject to
vesting. Incentive stock options were the primary type of stock
options granted to our executive officers early in the
companys development. Starting in 2000, we granted
non-qualified stock options that were immediately exercisable
because this approach enabled exercise prior to vesting which
provided certain advantages with regard to achieving stock
ownership sooner and at a time when the fair value of stock was
lower. Most options vest evenly over four years, beginning on
the date of the grant.
Prior to our initial public offering in September 2007, the
exercise price of options was determined by our board of
directors, with input from management, after taking into account
a variety of factors, including the nature and history of our
business and our significant accomplishments and future
prospects. For additional discussion of these factors please see
Managements Discussion & Analysis
Stock-Based Compensation.
Stock options are granted to our NEOs in amounts determined by
the compensation committee in its discretion. Grants have not
been formula-based, but instead have historically been granted
taking into account a mixture of the following qualitative
factors: the executives level of responsibility; the
competitive market for the executives position; the
executives potential contribution to our growth; and the
subjective assessment
87
of the professional effectiveness and capabilities of these
executives as determined by our Chief Executive Officer for our
NEOs other than our Chief Executive Officer and by our
compensation committee for our Chief Executive Officer. Although
no specific number of options granted can be attributable to any
specific factor, we have placed the most emphasis in determining
the amount of the stock options grants on the competitive market
for the executives position and the executives
potential contribution to our success. Additionally, larger
awards have typically been made to the NEOs that have areas of
responsibility and function that are more likely to build
long-term shareholder value as determined by how directly linked
their areas of responsibility and function are to the growth of
the Company. Relative to other NEOs, larger awards are typically
made to each of Messrs. Bush and Park in light of their areas of
responsibility and function which are more directly linked to
the growth of the Company than other NEOs.
In 2007, our compensation committee awarded the following
non-qualified stock options to our NEOs. The awards made in
March 2007 to Messrs. Byers, Park and Nolin were made by
the compensation committee taking into account the
recommendation of our Chief Executive Officer. The
recommendation for Mr. Park was based on the following factors:
that in the business judgment and experience of our Chief
Executive Officer an award of 35,000 options was necessary to
remain competitive with the market for his services; that Mr.
Park, as the Chief Development Officer, had an area of
responsibility and function that was directly linked to the
growth of the Company; and to a lesser degree on our Chief
Executive Officers subjective assessment of the
professional effectiveness and capabilities of Mr. Park. The
recommendation for Messrs. Byers and Nolin was based on the
following factors: that in the business judgment and experience
of our Chief Executive Officer an award of 10,000 options in the
case of Mr. Byers and 18,000 in the case of Mr. Nolin, was
necessary to remain competitive with the market for their
continued services; that Messrs. Byers and Nolin, as the Chief
Financial Officer and General Counsel, respectively, have areas
of responsibility and function that are not directly linked to
the growth of the Company; the subjective assessment by our
Chief Executive Officer regarding the effect of their respective
current stockholdings in providing incentive for future
performance and to a lesser degree on our Chief Executive
Officers subjective assessment of the professional
effectiveness and capabilities of Messrs. Byers and Nolin. The
award made in March 2007 to Mr. Bush by our compensation
committee was based on the following factors: that in the
business judgment and experience of our compensation committee
an award of 25,000 options was necessary to remain competitive
with the market for his services; that Mr. Bush, as the Chief
Executive Officer, has an area of responsibility and function
that is directly linked to the growth of the Company. In
addition, the award to Mr. Bush was based to a lesser
degree on our compensation committees subjective
assessment of the professional effectiveness and capabilities of
Mr. Bush. The award made in March 2007 to
Mr. MacDonald by our compensation committee was based on
the recommendation by our Chief Executive Officer. Since
Mr. MacDonald had received a grant in November 2006 of
300,000 options, in the business judgment and experience of our
Chief Executive Officer an award of 11,500 shares was
necessary to remain competitive with the market for his services.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive
|
|
Number of Options
|
|
|
Exercise Price($/Sh)
|
|
|
Jonathan Bush
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
$
|
7.39
|
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
Todd Y. Park
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin
|
|
|
18,000
|
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
James M. MacDonald
|
|
|
11,500
|
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
On December 13, 2007, our compensation committee approved
the following non-qualified stock option awards to be effective
on February 1, 2008 with an exercise price per share equal
to the closing market price per share of our common stock on the
NASDAQ Global Market on February 1, 2008. The awards were
made by the compensation committee taking into account the
recommendations of our Chief Executive Officer based, with
respect to Messrs. MacDonald, Nolin and Byers, upon his
subjective assessment of the professional effectiveness and
capabilities of these executives, the nature and scope of their
areas of responsibility, and the number of unvested options
remaining to each individual. With respect to Mr. Park, the
subjective assessment of the Chief Executive Officer also
included that unvested options left to Mr. Park, together with a
portion of
88
the new options recommended would result in unvested options to
Mr. Park approximating option grants that we have
historically given to non-venture capital representative new
directors.
|
|
|
|
|
Executive
|
|
Number of Options
|
|
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
Todd Y. Park
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
James M. MacDonald
|
|
|
40,000
|
|
Additionally, under the terms of their employment agreements,
Messrs. Bush, Park, Nolin and Byers are due to receive new
option bonuses upon the completion of a company milestone, as
defined in their employment agreements, if and when the company
achieves a positive net income for three consecutive months with
$10.0 million or more of cash, cash equivalents and
short-term investments on hand. Such options would be awarded by
our board of directors following achievement of these
milestones, and priced at fair value at the time of such grant.
This incentive would result in cash bonuses and option grants
with an exercise price at the fair value at the time of grant
subsequent to achievement of this milestone and in the following
amounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
Executive
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Bonus($)
|
|
|
Jonathan Bush
|
|
|
120,000
|
|
|
$
|
25,000
|
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
30,000
|
|
|
|
12,500
|
|
Todd Y. Park
|
|
|
70,000
|
|
|
|
12,500
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
12,500
|
|
Because these potential option awards have not yet been granted
they are not included in the statements of beneficial ownership
elsewhere in this document. See Employment
Agreements and Change of Control Arrangements for
additional discussion.
We have granted stock options as incentive stock options under
Section 422 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended, subject to the volume limitations contained in the
Internal Revenue Code, and we may, in the future, grant
non-qualified stock options. Generally, for stock options that
do not qualify as incentive stock options, we are entitled to a
tax deduction in the year in which the stock options are
exercised equal to the spread between the exercise price and the
fair value of the stock for which the stock option was
exercised. The holders of the non-qualified stock options are
generally taxed on this same amount in the year of exercise. For
stock options that qualify as incentive stock options, we do not
receive a tax deduction, and the holder of the stock option may
receive more favorable tax treatment than he or she would
receive for a non-qualified stock option. We may choose to grant
incentive stock options in order to provide these potential tax
benefits to our executives and because of the limited expected
benefits to our company of the potential tax deductions as a
result of our historical net losses.
Our equity award grant policy formalizes our process for
granting equity-based awards to officers and employees after
this offering. Under our equity award grant policy all grants
must be approved by our board of directors or compensation
committee. All stock options will be awarded at fair value and
calculated based on our closing market price on the grant date.
Under our equity award grant policy, equity awards will
typically be made on a regularly scheduled basis, as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
grants made in conjunction with the hiring of a new employee or
the promotion of an existing employee will be made on the first
trading day of the month following the later of (i) the hire
date or the promotion date or (ii) the date on which such grant
is approved; and
|
|
|
|
grants made to existing employees other than in connection with
a promotion will be made, if at all, on an annual basis.
|
89
Benefits
We provide the following benefits to our executive officers on
the same basis as the benefits provided to all employees:
|
|
|
|
|
health and dental insurance;
|
|
|
|
life insurance;
|
|
|
|
short-and long-term disability; and
|
|
|
|
401(k) plan.
|
These benefits are consistent with those offered by other
companies and specifically with those companies with which we
compete for employees.
As of July 1, 2007, we provide a qualified matching
contribution to each employee, including our executive officers,
who participate in our 401(k) plan. This matching policy
provides a match of one-third of contributions up to 6% of
eligible compensation.
Employment
Agreements and Change of Control Arrangements
Jonathan Bush. We are party to an employment agreement
with Jonathan Bush for the position of Chief Executive Officer.
The agreement provides for at-will employment, and a base annual
salary subject to annual review. Mr. Bush currently
receives a base salary of $350,000. Mr. Bush is eligible to
participate in our employee benefit plans, to the extent he is
eligible for those plans, on the same terms as other
similarly-situated executive officers of athenahealth. He is
also eligible for a bonus as described above. In addition, under
the terms of the agreement, if and when athenahealth achieves
positive net income for three consecutive months with
$10.0 million or more of cash, cash equivalents and
short-term investments on hand, Mr. Bush is due to receive
a one-time option bonus of 120,000 options and a one-time cash
bonus of $25,000. The option grant will be fully vested upon the
date of grant.
Carl B. Byers. We are party to an employment agreement
with Carl B. Byers for the position of Chief Financial Officer.
The agreement provides for at-will employment and for a base
annual salary subject to annual review. Mr. Byers currently
receives a base salary of $250,000. Mr. Byers is eligible
to participate in our employee benefit plans, to the extent he
is eligible for those plans, on the same terms as other
similarly-situated executive officers of athenahealth and is
eligible for a bonus as described above. In addition, if and
when athenahealth achieves positive net income for three
consecutive months with $10.0 million or more of cash, cash
equivalents and short-term investments on hand, Mr. Byers
is due to receive a one-time option bonus of 30,000 options and
a one-time cash bonus of $12,500. The option grant will be fully
vested upon the date of grant.
Todd Y. Park. We are party to an employment agreement
with Todd Y. Park for the position of Chief Development Officer.
The agreement provides for at-will employment at a base annual
salary subject to annual review. Mr. Park currently
receives a base salary of $270,000 payable on a six-month basis,
which will be re-evaluated after June 30, 2008.
Mr. Park is eligible to participate in our employee benefit
plans, to the extent he is eligible for those plans, on the same
terms as other similarly-situated executive officers of
athenahealth and is eligible for a bonus as described above. In
addition, if and when athenahealth achieves positive net income
for three consecutive months with $10.0 million or more of
cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments on hand,
Mr. Park is due to receive a one-time option bonus of
70,000 options and a one-time cash bonus of $12,500. The option
grant will be fully vested upon the date of grant.
Christopher E. Nolin. We are party to an employment
agreement with Christopher E. Nolin for the position of General
Counsel. The agreement provided for at-will employment at a base
annual salary subject to annual review. Mr. Nolin currently
receives a base salary of $250,000. Mr. Nolin is eligible
to participate in our employee benefit plans, to the extent he
is eligible for those plans, on the same terms as other
similarly-
90
situated executive officers of athenahealth and is eligible for
a bonus as described above. In addition, if and when
athenahealth achieves positive net income for three consecutive
months with $10.0 million or more of cash, cash equivalents
and short-term investments on hand, Mr. Nolin is due to
receive a one-time option bonus of 10,000 options and a one-time
cash bonus of $12,500. The option grant will be fully vested
upon the date of grant.
James M. MacDonald. We are party to an employment
agreement with James M. MacDonald for the position of Chief
Operating Officer. The agreement provided for at-will
employment. The agreement provided for a base salary subject to
annual review and a one time option grant of 330,000 options.
Mr. MacDonald currently receives a base salary of $315,000.
Mr. MacDonald is eligible to participate in our employee
benefit plans, to the extent he is eligible for those plans, on
the same terms as other similarly-situated executive officers of
athenahealth and is eligible to receive a bonus as described
above.
Equity
Benefit Plans
2007
Stock Option and Incentive Plan
Our 2007 Option and Incentive Plan, or 2007 Stock Option Plan,
was adopted by our board of directors and approved by our
stockholders in 2007. The 2007 Option Plan permits us to make
grants of incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options,
stock appreciation rights, deferred stock awards, restricted
stock awards, unrestricted stock awards and dividend equivalent
rights. We have initially reserved 1,000,000 shares of our
common stock for the issuance of awards under the 2007 Option
Plan. The 2007 Stock Option Plan provides that the number of
shares reserved and available for issuance under the plan will
automatically increase each January 1, beginning in 2008, by an
additional number of shares which is equal to the lower of (i)
that number of shares as is necessary such that the total number
of shares reserved and available for issuance under the plan
(excluding shares reserved for issuance pursuant to awards
outstanding on such date) shall equal five percent of the
outstanding number of shares of stock on the immediately
preceding December 31 and (ii) such lower number of shares
as may be determined by our board of directors. Notwithstanding
the foregoing, in no event will more than 20,000,000 shares be
issued under the 2007 Stock Option Plan.
The number of shares reserved for issuance under the 2007 Stock
Option Plan is subject to adjustment in the event of a stock
split, stock dividend or other change in our capitalization.
Generally, shares that are forfeited or canceled from awards
under the 2007 Option Plan also will be available for future
awards. No awards had been granted under the 2007 Option Plan.
The 2007 Option Plan may be administered by either a committee
of at least two non-employee directors or by our full board of
directors, or the administrator. The administrator has full
power and authority to select the participants to whom awards
will be granted, to make any combination of awards to
participants, to accelerate the exercisability or vesting of any
award and to determine the specific terms and conditions of each
award, subject to the provisions of the 2007 Option Plan.
All full-time and part-time officers, employees, non-employee
directors and other key persons (including consultants and
prospective employees) are eligible to participate in the 2007
Option Plan, subject to the discretion of the administrator.
There are certain limits on the number of awards that may be
granted under the 2007 Option Plan. For example, no more than
2,000,000 shares of common stock may be granted in the form
of stock options or stock appreciation rights to any one
individual during any one-calendar-year period.
The exercise price of stock options awarded under the 2007
Option Plan may not be less than the fair value of our common
stock on the date of the option grant and the term of each
option may not exceed ten years from the date of grant. The
administrator will determine at what time or times each option
may be exercised and, subject to the provisions of the 2007
Option Plan, the period of time, if any, after retirement,
death, disability or other termination of employment during
which options may be exercised.
91
To qualify as incentive options, stock options must meet
additional federal tax requirements, including a $100,000 limit
on the value of shares subject to incentive options which first
become exercisable in any one calendar year, and a shorter term
and higher minimum exercise price in the case of certain large
stockholders.
Stock appreciation rights may be granted under our 2007 Option
Plan. Stock appreciation rights allow the recipient to receive
the appreciation in the fair value of our common stock between
the exercise date and the date of grant. The administrator
determines the terms of stock appreciation rights, including
when such rights become exercisable and whether to pay the
increased appreciation in cash or with shares of our common
stock, or a combination thereof.
Restricted stock may be granted under our 2007 Option Plan.
Restricted stock awards are shares of our common stock that vest
in accordance with terms and conditions established by the
administrator. The administrator will determine the number of
shares of restricted stock granted to any employee. The
administrator may impose whatever conditions to vesting it
determines to be appropriate. For example, the administrator may
set restrictions based on the achievement of specific
performance goals. Shares of restricted stock that do not vest
are subject to our right of repurchase or forfeiture.
Deferred and unrestricted stock awards may be granted under our
2007 Option Plan. Deferred stock awards are units entitling the
recipient to receive shares of stock paid out on a deferred
basis, and are subject to such restrictions and conditions as
the administrator shall determine. Our 2007 Option Plan also
gives the administrator discretion to grant stock awards free of
any restrictions.
Dividend equivalent rights may be granted under our 2007 Option
Plan. Dividend equivalent rights are awards entitling the
grantee to current or deferred payments equal to dividends on a
specified number of shares of stock. Dividend equivalent rights
may be settled in cash or shares and are subject to other
conditions as the administrator shall determine.
Cash-based awards may be granted under our 2007 Option Plan.
Each cash-based award shall specify a cash-denominated payment
amount, formula or payment ranges as determined by the
administrator. Payment, if any, with respect to a cash-based
award may be made in cash or in shares of stock, as the
administrator determines.
Unless the administrator provides otherwise, our 2007 Option
Plan does not allow for the transfer of awards and only the
recipient of an award may exercise an award during his or her
lifetime.
In the event of a merger, sale or dissolution, or a similar
sale event, unless assumed or substituted, all stock
options and stock appreciation rights granted under the 2007
Option Plan will automatically become fully exercisable, all
other awards granted under the 2007 Option Plan will become
fully vested and non-forfeitable and awards with conditions and
restrictions relating to the attainment of performance goals may
become vested and non-forfeitable in connection with a sale
event in the administrators discretion. In addition, upon
the effective time of any such sale event, the 2007 Option Plan
and all awards will terminate unless the parties to the
transaction, in their discretion, provide for appropriate
substitutions or assumptions of outstanding awards. Any award so
assumed or continued or substituted shall be deemed vested and
exercisable in full upon the date on which the grantees
employment or service relationship with us terminates if such
termination occurs (i) within 18 months after such
sale event and (ii) such termination is by us or a
successor entity without cause or by the grantee for good reason.
No awards may be granted under the 2007 Option Plan after August
2017. In addition, our board of directors may amend or
discontinue the 2007 Option Plan at any time and the
administrator may amend or cancel any outstanding award for the
purpose of satisfying changes in law or for any other lawful
purpose. No such amendment may adversely affect the rights under
any outstanding award without the holders consent. Other
than in the event of a necessary adjustment in connection with a
change in our stock or a merger or similar transaction, the
administrator may not reprice or otherwise reduce
the exercise price of outstanding stock options or stock
appreciation rights. Further, amendments to the 2007 Option Plan
will be subject to approval by our stockholders if the amendment
(i) increases the number of shares available for issuance
under the 2007 Option Plan, (ii) expands the types of
awards available under, the eligibility to participate in, or
the duration of, the plan, (iii) materially changes the
method of determining fair value for purposes of the 2007
92
Option Plan, (iv) is required by the Nasdaq Global Market
rules, or (v) is required by the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended, or the Code, to ensure that incentive options
are tax-qualified.
2007
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
Our 2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, or 2007 ESPP, was adopted
by our board of directors and approved by our stockholders in
2007. We have reserved a total of 500,000 shares of our
common stock for issuance to participating employees under the
2007 ESPP.
All of our employees, including our directors who are employees
and all employees of any of our participating subsidiaries, who
have been employed by us for at least six months prior to
enrolling in the 2007 ESPP, who are employees on the first day
of the offering period, and whose customary employment is for
more than twenty hours a week, will be eligible to participate
in the 2007 ESPP. Employees who would, immediately after being
granted an option to purchase shares under the 2007 ESPP, own 5%
or more of the total combined voting power or value of our
common stock will not be eligible to participate in the 2007
ESPP.
We will make one or more offerings to our employees to purchase
stock under the 2007 ESPP. The first offering will begin on
February 1, 2008 and end on July 31, 2008. Subsequent
offerings will begin on each February 1 and August 1,
or the first business day thereafter and end on the last
business day occurring on or before the following July 31
and January 31, respectively. During each offering period,
payroll deductions will be made and held for the purchase of the
common stock at the end of the offering period.
On the first day of a designated payroll deduction period, or
offering period, we will grant to each eligible employee who has
elected to participate in the 2007 ESPP an option to purchase
shares of our common stock. The employee may authorize
deductions from 1% to 10% of his compensation for each payroll
period during the offering period. On the last day of the
offering period, the employee will be deemed to have exercised
the option, at the option exercise price, to the extent of
accumulated payroll deductions. Under the terms of the 2007
ESPP, the option exercise price shall be equal to 85% of the
closing price of the common stock on the exercise date. An
employee may not sell, exchange, assign, encumber, alienate,
transfer, pledge or otherwise dispose of any shares of our
common stock until the one-year anniversary of the option
exercise for such shares.
An employee who is not a participant on the last day of the
offering period will not be entitled to exercise any option, and
the employees accumulated payroll deductions will be
refunded. An employees rights under the 2007 ESPP will
terminate upon voluntary withdrawal from the 2007 ESPP at any
time, or when the employee ceases employment for any reason,
except that upon termination of employment because of death, the
balance in the employees account will be paid to the
employees beneficiary.
1997
Stock Plan and 2000 Stock Plan
Our 1997 Option Plan was adopted by our board of directors and
approved by our stockholders in October 1997. We reserved
600,000 shares of our common stock for the issuance of
awards under the 1997 Option Plan.
Our 1997 Option Plan is administered by our compensation
committee, or in the absence of any such committee, by the full
board of directors. Our compensation committee has the full
power and authority to select the individuals to whom awards
will be granted, to make any combination of awards to
participants, to accelerate the exercisability or vesting of any
award, to provide substitute awards and to determine the
specific terms and conditions of each award, subject to the
provisions of the 1997 Option Plan.
The 1997 Option Plan permits us to make grants of incentive
stock options, non-qualified stock options, restricted stock
awards and unrestricted stock awards to employees. Stock options
granted under the 1997 Option Plan have a maximum term of ten
years from the date of grant and incentive stock options have an
exercise price of no less than the fair value of our common
stock on the date of grant.
93
Upon a sale event in which all awards are not assumed or
substituted by the successor entity, we may take such action
with respect to such awards as the compensation committee or the
board of directors may deem to be equitable and in the best
interests of athenahealth and its stockholders under the
circumstances. Under the 1997 Option Plan, a sale event is
defined as (i) the consolidation of athenahealth with
another entity, (ii) the acquisition of athenahealth by
another entity in a merger, or (iii) the sale of all or
substantially all of athenahealth assets.
Our 2000 Option Plan was adopted by our board of directors in
January 2000 and approved by our stockholders in March 2000. We
reserved 5,834,181 shares of our common stock for the
issuance of awards under the 2000 Option Plan.
Our 2000 Option Plan is administered by our board of directors.
Our board of directors has the authority to delegate full power
and authority to a committee of the board to select the
individuals to whom awards will be granted, to make any
combination of awards to participants, to accelerate the
exercisability or vesting of any award, to provide substitute
awards and to determine the specific terms and conditions of
each award, subject to the provisions of the 2000 Option Plan.
The 2000 Option Plan permits us to make grants of incentive
stock options, non-qualified stock options, restricted stock
awards and any other stock-based award to officers, employees,
directors, consultants and advisors. Stock options granted under
the 2000 Option Plan have a maximum term of ten years from the
date of grant and incentive stock options have an exercise price
of no less than the fair value of our common stock on the date
of grant.
Upon a sale event in which all awards are not assumed or
substituted by the successor entity, all outstanding awards,
unless otherwise provided in those awards, shall remain our
obligation and there shall be automatically substituted for the
shares of common stock then subject to such awards either
(A) the consideration payable with respect to the
outstanding shares of common stock in connection with the sale
event, (B) shares of stock of the surviving or acquiring
corporation or (C) such other securities as the board of
directors deems appropriate (the fair value of which (as
determined by the board of directors in its sole discretion)
shall not materially differ from the fair value of the shares of
common stock subject to such awards immediately preceding the
sale event), and the vesting provisions of all the unvested
awards shall become accelerated by a period of one year. Under
the 2000 Option Plan, a sale event is defined as (i) the
sale of athenahealth by merger in which our shareholders in
their capacity as such no longer own a majority of the
outstanding equity securities of athenahealth (or its
successor); or (ii) any sale of all or substantially all of
the assets or capital stock of athenahealth (other than in a
spin-off or similar transaction) or (iii) any other
acquisition of the business of athenahealth, as determined by
the board of directors.
Our board of directors does not intend to grant any further
awards under the 2000 Option Plan.
94
Summary
Compensation.
The following table sets forth summary information concerning
the compensation paid or earned for services rendered to the
Company in all capacities during the fiscal years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006, to the Companys Chief
Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and each of the other
three most highly compensated persons serving as executive
officers of the Company during fiscal years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006.
Summary
Compensation Table(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incentive Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salary
|
|
|
Bonus
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Name and Principal Position
|
|
Year
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
Jonathan Bush
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
$
|
348,077
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
55,703(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
403,780
|
|
Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of the
Board
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
298,077
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,521(4
|
)
|
|
|
59,400(5
|
)
|
|
|
379,998
|
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
238,462
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,378(2
|
)
|
|
|
87,840(3
|
)
|
|
|
338,680
|
|
Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
199,039
|
|
|
|
30,000(6
|
)
|
|
|
4,361(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
233,400
|
|
Todd Y. Park
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
268,923
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,325(2
|
)
|
|
|
89,087(3
|
)
|
|
|
401,335
|
|
Executive Vice President, Chief Development Officer
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
241,154
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,164(4
|
)
|
|
|
30,134(5
|
)
|
|
|
297,452
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
224,827
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,281(2
|
)
|
|
|
138,100(3
|
)
|
|
|
385,208
|
|
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
220,096
|
|
|
|
67,000(6
|
)
|
|
|
4,361(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
291,457
|
|
James M. MacDonald
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,235(2
|
)
|
|
|
191,913(3
|
)
|
|
|
506,148
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
|
53,308(7
|
)
|
|
|
98,098(4
|
)
|
|
|
14,850(5
|
)
|
|
|
241,256
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Columns disclosing compensation under the headings Stock
Awards, Change In Pension Value And Nonqualified
Deferred Compensation Earnings and All Other
Compensation are not included because no compensation in
these categories were awarded to, earned by or paid to our named
executive officers in 2007 or 2006. The compensation in this
table also does not include certain perquisites and other
personal benefits received by the named executive officers that
did not exceed $10,000 in the aggregate during 2007 or 2006. |
(2) |
|
These amounts represent stock-based compensation expense for
stock option grants recognized in 2007 for financial statement
reporting purposes. Stock-based compensation expense for these
awards was calculated in accordance with
SFAS No. 123(R) and is being amortized over the
vesting period of the related awards. As of December 31,
2007, this unamortized amount was $167,722 for Mr. Bush,
$37,272 for Mr. Byers, $130,450 for Mr. Park, $67,089
for Mr. Nolin and $42,862 for Mr. MacDonald. The
amounts reflected in this table exclude the estimate of
forfeitures applied by us under SFAS No. 123(R) when
recognizing stock-based compensation expense for financial
statement reporting purposes in fiscal 2007. For a discussion of
valuation assumptions the section entitled
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Critical
Accounting Policies Stock-Based Compensation.
All stock option awards granted to each of the above named
officers prior to 2006 were accounted for in accordance with APB
Opinion No. 25 and were granted at exercise prices equal to
fair value on the date of grant. Accordingly, there was no
stock-based compensation expense associated with the awards
prior to 2006. |
|
(3) |
|
Represents quarterly cash incentive awards earned during the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 and paid in 2007 during
the first three quarters of 2007. 2007 annual cash incentive
awards for Mr. Bush and fourth quarter 2007 cash incentive
awards for each of Messrs. Byers, Park, Nolin and MacDonald
are not calculable at this time. The compensation committee is
expected to determine such awards for Mr. Bush |
95
|
|
|
|
|
on or about January 31, 2008 and for each of
Messrs. Byers, Park, Nolin and MacDonald on or about
March 31, 2008, and we will file a Current Report on
Form 8-K
with this information when those amounts are determined. |
|
(4) |
|
These amounts represent stock-based compensation expense for
stock option grants recognized in 2006 for financial statement
reporting purposes. Stock-based compensation expense for these
awards was calculated in accordance with
SFAS No. 123(R) and is being amortized over the
vesting period of the related awards. As of December 31,
2006, this unamortized amount was $186,914 for Mr. Bush,
$13,523 for Mr. Byers, $81,137 for Mr. Park, $13,523
for Mr. Nolin and $1,378,422 for Mr. MacDonald. The
amounts reflected in this table exclude the estimate of
forfeitures applied by us under SFAS No. 123(R) when
recognizing stock-based compensation expense for financial
statement reporting purposes in fiscal 2006. For a discussion of
valuation assumptions the section entitled
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Critical
Accounting Policies Stock-Based Compensation.
All stock option awards granted to each of the above named
officers prior to 2006 were accounted for in accordance with APB
Opinion No. 25 and were granted at exercise prices equal to
fair value on the date of grant. Accordingly, there was no
stock-based compensation expense associated with the awards
prior to 2006. |
|
(5) |
|
Represents annual and quarterly cash incentive awards earned
during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 and paid in
part in 2006 and in part in 2007. |
|
(6) |
|
Represents annual cash incentive awards earned during the fiscal
year ended December 31, 2006 and paid in 2007. |
|
(7) |
|
Represents bonus paid to compensate Mr. MacDonald in part
for the cost to him associated with the timing of his transition
to athenahealth from his prior employer. |
96
Grants of Plan-Based Awards. The following
table sets forth information concerning the non-equity incentive
plan awards and stock option grants made to each of the NEOs
during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 pursuant to
the Companys 1997 and 2000 Stock Option and Incentive
Plans. The Company has never granted any stock appreciation
rights.
Grants of
Plan-Based Awards(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards:
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Possible Payouts Under
|
|
|
Estimated Possible Payouts
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
or Base
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
|
Under Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
Price of
|
|
|
of Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards(2)(3)
|
|
|
Awards
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
and Option
|
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
Threshold
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
Threshold
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Awards
|
|
|
Awards(4)
|
|
Name
|
|
Date
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
(#)
|
|
|
(#)
|
|
|
(#)
|
|
|
(#)(3)
|
|
|
($/Sh)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
Jonathan Bush
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,000
|
(5)
|
|
$
|
7.39
|
|
|
$
|
223,435
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
200,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
3/15/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
(6)
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
|
|
49,650
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,280
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,360
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Todd Y. Park
|
|
|
3/15/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
(7)
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
|
|
173,775
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,275
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,575
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,365
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin
|
|
|
3/15/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,000
|
(8)
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
|
|
89,370
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,625
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,825
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,650
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James M. MacDonald
|
|
|
3/15/07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,500
|
(9)
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
|
|
57,098
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,592
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,658
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,505
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Columns disclosing grants of plan-based awards under the
headings Estimated Possible Payouts Under Equity Incentive
Plan Awards, All other Option Awards: Number of
Securities Underlying Options and Exercise or Base Price
of Options Awards are not included in this table because
no plan-based grants in these categories were granted to our
named executive officers in 2007. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes quarterly cash incentive awards earned for 2007 and
paid through the first three quarters of 2007 in the cases of
Messrs. Byers, Park, Nolin and MacDonald. The awards are
described in more detail above in the section entitled
Cash Bonus. |
|
(3) |
|
Represents quarterly equity incentive awards earned for 2007 and
granted in 2007. The awards are described in more detail above
in the section entitled Long Term Incentive
Compensation. |
|
(4) |
|
The amounts reported in this column reflect the grant date fair
value of those awards computed in accordance with SFAS
No. 123(R). |
|
(5) |
|
Represents an option award to purchase 45,000 shares of our
common stock at an exercise price of $7.39 per share, granted to
Mr. Bush on March 15, 2007. The option award is
subject to vesting at the rate of 25% on the first anniversary
of the vesting start date and 25% on the next three
anniversaries thereafter. |
|
(6) |
|
Represents an option award to purchase 10,000 shares of our
common stock at an exercise price of $7.39 per share, granted to
Mr. Byers on March 15, 2007. The option award is
subject to vesting at the rate of 25% on the first anniversary
of the vesting start date and 25% on the next three
anniversaries thereafter. |
97
|
|
|
(7) |
|
Represents an option award to purchase 35,000 shares of our
common stock at an exercise price of $7.39 per share, granted to
Mr. Park on March 15, 2007. The option award is
subject to vesting at the rate of 25% on the first anniversary
of the vesting start date and 25% on the next three
anniversaries thereafter. |
|
(8) |
|
Represents an option award to purchase 18,000 shares of our
common stock at an exercise price of $7.39 per share, granted to
Mr. Nolin on March 15, 2007. The option award is
subject to vesting at the rate of 25% on the first anniversary
of the vesting start date and 25% on the next three
anniversaries thereafter. |
|
(9) |
|
Represents an option award to purchase 11,500 shares of our
common stock at an exercise price of $7.39 per share, granted to
Mr. MacDonald on March 15, 2007. The option award is
subject to vesting at the rate of 25% on the first anniversary
of the vesting start date and 25% on the next three
anniversaries thereafter. |
|
(10) |
|
Our fourth quarter bonuses for our NEOs other than Mr. Bush
are expected to be determined on or about March 31, 2008.
We will file a Current Report on
Form 8-K
with this information when this amount is determined. |
Option Exercises and Unexercised Option
Holdings. The following table sets forth certain
information regarding the number and value of exercisable
options by each of the NEOs as of December 31, 2007 and the
number and value of unexercised options held by each of the NEOs
as of December 31, 2007.
Outstanding
Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
Underlying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
|
Unexercised
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
|
(#)
|
|
|
(#)
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Expiration
|
|
Name
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Jonathan Bush
|
|
|
65,000
|
(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
3/18/2011
|
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
8/1/2013
|
|
|
|
|
130,849
|
(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
8/1/2013
|
|
|
|
|
100,000
|
(5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
2/6/2014
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
(6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.50
|
|
|
|
4/27/2015
|
|
|
|
|
285,537
|
(7)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.50
|
|
|
|
4/27/2015
|
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
(8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.16
|
|
|
|
7/27/2016
|
|
|
|
|
45,000
|
(9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
|
|
3/15/2017
|
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
5,000
|
(10)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.50
|
|
|
|
4/27/2015
|
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
(11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.26
|
|
|
|
2/28/2016
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
(12)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
|
|
3/15/2017
|
|
Todd Y. Park
|
|
|
55,000
|
(13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
3/18/2011
|
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
(14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
8/1/2013
|
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
(15)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
2/6/2014
|
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
(16)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.50
|
|
|
|
4/27/2015
|
|
|
|
|
30,000
|
(17)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.26
|
|
|
|
2/28/2016
|
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
(18)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
|
|
3/15/2017
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin
|
|
|
20,000
|
(19)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
2/6/2014
|
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
(20)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.50
|
|
|
|
4/27/2015
|
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
(21)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.26
|
|
|
|
2/28/2016
|
|
|
|
|
18,000
|
(22)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
|
|
3/15/2017
|
|
James M. MacDonald
|
|
|
330,000
|
(23)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.58
|
|
|
|
9/25/2016
|
|
|
|
|
11,500
|
(24)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
|
|
3/15/2017
|
|
98
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Columns disclosing outstanding equity awards at fiscal year end
under the headings Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of
Securities Underlying Unexercised Unearned Options,
Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not
Vested, Market Value of Shares of Stock That Have
Not Vested, Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of
Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not
Vested and Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or
Payout of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not
Vested are not included in this table because no equity
awards were outstanding in these categories for the fiscal year
ending 2006. |
|
(2) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
March 18, 2001 and 100% of the options in this grant were
vested as of February 1, 2005. |
|
(3) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
August 1, 2003 and 100% of the options in this grant were
vested as of January 1, 2007. |
|
(4) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
August 1, 2003 and 60% of the options in this grant vest
monthly until the third anniversary of the vesting start date
and the remaining vest monthly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(5) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
February 6, 2004 and 60% of the options in this grant were
vested as of the third anniversary of the vesting start date and
the remaining vest monthly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(6) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
April 27, 2005 and 25% of the options in this grant were
vested as of the first anniversary of the vesting start date and
the remaining vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(7) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
April 27, 2005 and 25% of the options in this grant were
vested as of the first anniversary of the vesting start date and
the remaining vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(8) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
July 27, 2006 and 25% of the options in this grant were
vested as of the first anniversary of the vesting start date and
the remaining vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(9) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on March 15,
2007 and 25% of the options in this grant were vested as of the
first anniversary of the vesting start date and the remaining
vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth anniversary of the
vesting start date. |
|
(10) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
April 27, 2005 and 25% of the options in this grant were
vested as of the first anniversary of the vesting start date and
the remaining vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(11) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
February 28, 2006 and 25% of the options in this grant were
vested as of the first anniversary of the vesting start date and
the remaining vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(12) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on March 15,
2007 and 25% of the options in this grant were vested as of the
first anniversary of the vesting start date and the remaining
vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth anniversary of the
vesting start date. |
|
(13) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
March 18, 2001 and 100% of the options in this grant were
vested as of February 1, 2005. |
|
(14) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
August 1, 2003 and 100% of the options in this grant were
vested as of January 1, 2007. |
|
(15) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
February 6, 2004 and 60% of the options in this grant vest
monthly until the third anniversary of the vesting start date
and the remaining vest monthly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(16) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
April 27, 2005 and 25% of the options in this grant were
vested as of the first anniversary of the vesting start date and
the remaining vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
99
|
|
|
(17) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
February 28, 2006 and 25% of the options in this grant were
vested as of the first anniversary of the vesting start date and
the remaining vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(18) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on March 15,
2007 and 25% of the options in this grant were vested as of the
first anniversary of the vesting start date and the remaining
vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth anniversary of the
vesting start date. |
|
(19) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
February 6, 2004 and 60% of the options in this grant vest
monthly until the third anniversary of the vesting start date
and the remaining vest monthly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(20) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
April 27, 2005 and 25% of the options in this grant were
vested as of the first anniversary of the vesting start date and
the remaining vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(21) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
February 28, 2006 and 25% of the options in this grant were
vested as of the first anniversary of the vesting start date and
the remaining vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(22) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on March 15,
2007 and 25% of the options in this grant were vested as of the
first anniversary of the vesting start date and the remaining
vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth anniversary of the
vesting start date. |
|
(23) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on
November 3, 2006 and 25% of the options in this grant vest
as of the first anniversary of the vesting start date and the
remaining vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth
anniversary of the vesting start date. |
|
(24) |
|
100% of the options in this grant were exercisable on March 15,
2007 and 25% of the options in this grant were vested as of the
first anniversary of the vesting start date and the remaining
vest yearly until fully vested on the fourth anniversary of the
vesting start date. |
Option
Exercises and Stock Vested
None of our NEOs exercised options during 2007 or hold shares of
stock that vested during 2007.
Pension
Benefits
None of our NEOs participate in or have account balances in
qualified or non-qualified defined benefit plans sponsored by us
at December 31, 2007 and, as a result, there is not a
pension benefits table included in this registration statement.
Non-qualified
Deferred Compensation
None of our NEOs participate in or have account balances in
non-qualified defined contribution plans maintained by us at
December 31, 2007 and, as a result, there is not a
non-qualified deferred compensation table included in this
registration statement.
Potential
Payments Upon Termination or
Change-in-Control
Pursuant to stock option agreements between us and each of our
named executive officers, unvested stock options awarded under
our 1997 Option Plan and 2000 Option Plan shall become
accelerated by a period of one year upon the consummation of an
acquisition of athenahealth. For purposes of these agreements,
an acquisition is defined as: (i) the sale of athenahealth
by merger in which its shareholders in their capacity as such no
longer own a majority of the outstanding equity securities of
athenahealth; (ii) any sale of all or substantially all of
the assets or capital stock of athenahealth; or (iii) any
other acquisition of the business of athenahealth, as determined
by our board of directors.
100
The tables below reflect the acceleration of options outstanding
as of December 31, 2007, for each of our named executive
officers, upon the consummation of any such acquisition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value upon
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Consummation of
|
|
Name
|
|
Securities(1)
|
|
|
Acquisition(2)
|
|
|
Jonathan Bush
|
|
|
104,328
|
|
|
$
|
3,841,357
|
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
5,694
|
|
|
|
209,653
|
|
Todd Y. Park
|
|
|
22,102
|
|
|
|
813,796
|
|
Christopher E. Nolin
|
|
|
8,352
|
|
|
|
307,521
|
|
James M. MacDonald
|
|
|
85,375
|
|
|
|
3,143,508
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Reflects one year acceleration of vesting as of
December 31, 2007, assuming consummation of an acquisition
on such date.
|
|
(2)
|
We have estimated the market value of the unvested option shares
based on an assumed public offering price of $36.82 per share,
based on the last reported sale price of our common stock on the
NASDAQ Global Market on December 31, 2007.
|
Limitation
of Liability and Indemnification Agreements
As permitted by the Delaware General Corporation Law, we have
adopted provisions in our certificate of incorporation and
by-laws to be in effect at the closing of this offering that
limit or eliminate the personal liability of our directors.
Consequently, a director will not be personally liable to us or
our stockholders for monetary damages or breach of fiduciary
duty as a director, except for liability for:
|
|
|
|
|
any breach of the directors duty of loyalty to us or our
stockholders;
|
|
|
|
any act or omission not in good faith or that involves
intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law;
|
|
|
|
any unlawful payments related to dividends or unlawful stock
purchases, redemptions or other distributions; or
|
|
|
|
any transaction from which the director derived an improper
personal benefit.
|
These limitations of liability do not alter director liability
under the federal securities laws and do not affect the
availability of equitable remedies such as an injunction or
rescission.
In addition, our by-laws provide that:
|
|
|
|
|
we will indemnify our directors, officers and, in the discretion
of our board of directors, certain employees to the fullest
extent permitted by the Delaware General Corporation
Law; and
|
|
|
|
we will advance expenses, including attorneys fees, to our
directors and, in the discretion of our board of directors, to
our officers and certain employees, in connection with legal
proceedings, subject to limited exceptions.
|
We have entered into indemnification agreements with each of our
directors and our executive officers. These agreements provide
that we will indemnify each of our directors and executive
officers to the fullest extent permitted by law and advance
expenses, including attorneys fees, to each indemnified
director or executive officer in connection with any proceeding
in which indemnification is available.
We also maintain general liability insurance which covers
certain liabilities of our directors and officers arising out of
claims based on acts or omissions in their capacities as
directors or officers, including liabilities under the
Securities Act.
Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the
Securities Act may be permitted to directors, officers or
persons controlling the registrant under the foregoing
provisions, we have been informed that in the opinion of the SEC
such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in
the Securities Act and is therefore unenforceable.
101
These provisions may discourage stockholders from bringing a
lawsuit against our directors for breach of their fiduciary
duty. These provisions may also have the effect of reducing the
likelihood of derivative litigation against directors and
officers, even though such an action, if successful, might
otherwise benefit us and our stockholders. Furthermore, a
stockholders investment may be adversely affected to the
extent we pay the costs of settlement and damage awards against
directors and officers under these indemnification provisions.
We believe that these provisions, the indemnification agreements
and the insurance are necessary to attract and retain talented
and experienced directors and officers.
At present, there is no pending litigation or proceeding
involving any of our directors or officers where indemnification
will be required or permitted. We are not aware of any
threatened litigation or proceeding that might result in a claim
for such indemnification.
Director
Compensation
Director
Compensation Policy
We reimburse each member of our board of directors who is not an
employee for reasonable travel and other expenses in connection
with attending meetings of the board of directors or committees
thereof. Mr. Foster, Mr. King-Shaw and Mr. Mann
each received an option grant of 60,000 shares upon their
election to the board of directors. Mr. Kane received an option
grant of 80,000 shares upon his election to the board of
directors.
In October 2007, our board of directors approved a director
compensation policy. Our current eligible directors are
Messrs. King-Shaw, Jr., Foster, Kane, and Mann.
Eligible directors will be paid the annual cash retainers set
forth in the table below, payable quarterly in arrears and
pro-rated for any partial period. Since we expect a significant
amount of the boards work to occur in committees and for
that workload to vary by committee, we have set separate amounts
of cash compensation for each of the boards committee
chairs.
|
|
|
Position
|
|
Annual Retainer
|
|
Director
|
|
$30,000 per year(1)
|
Lead Director
|
|
$10,000 per year additional
|
Chairman of Audit Committee
|
|
$20,000 per year additional
|
Chairman of Other Standing Committee
|
|
$10,000 per year additional
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amount reduced $2,500 for each in-person meeting missed and
$1,500 for each in-person meeting attended by phone. |
The following table sets forth a summary of the compensation
earned by our directors and/or paid to our directors under
certain agreements, in each case, in 2007, other than Mr. Bush.
Mr. Bush receives no additional compensation for his services to
us as a director. Mr. Kane joined our board in July 2007.
Director
Compensation Table(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fees Earned
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
or Paid in
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Incentive Plan
|
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
|
Awards
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Name
|
|
($)(2)
|
|
|
($)(3)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
($)
|
|
|
Richard N. Foster
|
|
$
|
15,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
15,000
|
|
Ruben J. King-Shaw, Jr.
|
|
|
17,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,500
|
|
James L. Mann
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
John A. Kane
|
|
|
25,000
|
|
|
|
99,836
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
124,836
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Columns disclosing compensation under the heading Stock
Awards, Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards,
All other Compensation and Change In Pension
Value And Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings are
not included because no compensation in this category was
awarded to, earned by or paid to our directors in 2006. |
102
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Represents fees earned in 2007 pursuant to our Non-Employee
Director Compensation Policy discussed above. |
|
(3) |
|
Represents stock-based compensation expense for fiscal 2007 for
stock option awards granted in 2007 to Mr. Kane.
Stock-based compensation expense for these awards was calculated
in accordance with SFAS No. 123(R) and is being
amortized over the vesting period of the related awards. The
amounts reflected in this table exclude the estimate of
forfeitures applied by us under SFAS No. 123(R) when
recognizing stock-based compensation expense for financial
statement reporting purposes in fiscal 2007. For a discussion of
valuation assumptions the section entitled
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Critical
Accounting Policies Stock-Based Compensation.
On July 26, 2007, we awarded Mr. Kane a one-time stock
option award to purchase 80,000 shares of our common stock
at an exercise price of $15.27 per share, which vests quarterly
over a four year period. At December 31, 2006, there was
approximately $726,932 of unamortized stock-based compensation
expense related to these awards excluding our estimate of
forfeitures, which will be amortized over the remaining vesting
period of the awards. |
103
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Since January 1, 2005, we have engaged in the following
transactions with our directors, executive officers, holders of
more than five percent of our voting securities, or any member
of the immediate family of the foregoing persons.
Investors
Rights Agreement
We have granted registration rights to holders of our preferred
stock pursuant to an investors rights agreement. See
Description of Capital Stock Registration
Rights.
Voting
Agreement
Pursuant to a voting agreement by and among us and certain of
our stockholders, each of Bryan Roberts, Brandon Hull and Ann
Lamont were each elected to serve as members of our board of
directors. Mr. Roberts was selected as a representative of
our Series C preferred stock as designated by Venrock
Associates, Mr. Hull was selected as a representative of our
Series C preferred stock as designed by Cardinal Partners and
Ms. Lamont was selected as a representative of our
Series D preferred stock, as designated by Oak Investment
Partners. The voting agreement and all rights thereunder
terminated upon completion of our initial public offering.
Board
Compensation
We pay non-employee directors for board meeting attendance, and
certain of our directors have received options to purchase
shares of our common stock. For more information regarding these
arrangements, see Executive Compensation
Director Compensation.
Employment
Agreements
We have entered into offer letters or employment related
agreements with each of Messrs. Bush, Byers, Park, Nolin
and MacDonald. For more information regarding these
arrangements, see Executive Compensation
Employment Agreements and Change of Control Arrangements.
Indemnification
Agreements
We have entered into indemnification agreements with each of our
directors and executive officers. These agreements, among other
things, require us to indemnify each director and executive
officer to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law,
including indemnification of expenses such as attorneys
fees, judgments, fines and settlement amounts incurred by the
director or executive officer in any action or proceeding,
including any action or proceeding by or in right of us, arising
out of the persons services as a director or executive
officer.
Stock
Option Grants
We have granted options to purchase shares of our common stock
to our directors and executive officers. See Executive
Compensation Director Compensation and
Executive Compensation Outstanding Equity
Awards at Fiscal Year-End.
Marketing
and Sales Agreement with PSS
We are party to a marketing and sales agreement with WorldMed
Shared Services, Inc. (d/b/a PSS World Medical Shares Services,
Inc.), or PSS, for the sales and marketing of athenaClinicals
and athenaCollector. See Business Sales and
Marketing Channel Relationships.
In June 2007, certain of our existing stockholders sold to PSS
an aggregate of 1,470,589 shares of our previously issued and
outstanding convertible preferred stock for an aggregate
purchase price of $22.5 million. In connection with the
transaction, PSS agreed to a standstill provision pursuant to
which it agreed not to purchase (together with its affiliates)
more than 14.99% of our capital stock prior to the earlier of
January 1, 2011, the first public announcement by an
unaffiliated third party of its intention to purchase a majority
of the outstanding capital stock of athenahealth or the purchase
by an unaffiliated third party of more than 14.99% of the
outstanding capital stock of athenahealth. Also in connection
with the transaction, PSS was made party to the investors
rights agreement described above thereby acquiring certain
registration rights with respect to its
104
shares of capital stock. See Description of Capital
Stock Registration Rights. In connection with
this stock purchase, PSS agreed to pay on demand up to a maximum
of $562,000 in advisory fees, as well as to reimburse up to a
maximum of $30,000 in costs and expenses incurred in connection
with the transaction.
Policies
for Approval of Related Person Transactions
Our board of directors reviews and approves transactions with
directors, officers and holders of five percent or more of our
voting securities and their affiliates, or each, a related
party. Prior to our initial public offering, prior to our board
of directors consideration of a transaction with a related
party, the material facts as to the related partys
relationship or interest in the transaction are disclosed to our
board of directors, and the transaction is not considered
approved by our board of directors unless a majority of the
directors who are not interested in the transaction approve the
transaction. Following our initial public offering, such
transactions must be approved by our audit committee or another
independent body of our board of directors. Further, when
stockholders are entitled to vote on a transaction with a
related party, the material facts of the related partys
relationship or interest in the transaction are disclosed to the
stockholders, who must approve the transaction in good faith.
105
PRINCIPAL
AND SELLING STOCKHOLDERS
The following table sets forth certain information known to us
regarding beneficial ownership of our common stock as of
December 31, 2007, as adjusted to reflect the sale of
shares of common stock offered by us and the selling
stockholders in this offering, for:
|
|
|
|
|
each person known by us to be the beneficial owner of more than
five percent of our common stock;
|
|
|
|
our named executive officers;
|
|
|
|
each of our directors;
|
|
|
|
all executive officers and directors as a group; and
|
|
|
|
the selling stockholders
|
To the extent that the underwriters sell more than
3,110,559 shares of common stock in this offering, the
underwriters have the option to purchase up to an additional
466,584 shares from us and the selling stockholders at the
public offering price less the underwriting discount. To our
knowledge, each selling stockholder purchased the shares of our
stock in the ordinary course of business and, at the time of
acquiring the securities to be resold, the selling stockholder
had no agreements or understandings, directly or indirectly,
with any person to distribute the securities. Except as set
forth in the footnotes below, no selling stockholder has had a
material relationship with us in the past three years or is a
broker-dealer or an affiliate of a broker-dealer.
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules
of the Securities and Exchange Commission and generally includes
voting or investment power with respect to securities. Except as
noted by footnote, and subject to community property laws where
applicable, we believe based on the information provided to us
that the persons and entities named in the table below have sole
voting and investment power with respect to all shares of common
stock shown as beneficially owned by them.
The table lists applicable percentage ownership based on
32,324,824 shares of common stock outstanding as of
December 31, 2007, and also lists applicable percentage
ownership based on 32,659,824 shares of common stock
assumed to be outstanding after the closing of the offering.
Options to purchase shares of our common stock that are
exercisable within 60 days of December 31, 2007, are
deemed to be beneficially owned by the persons holding these
options for the purpose of computing percentage ownership of
that person, but are not treated as outstanding for the purpose
of computing any other persons ownership percentage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Beneficially
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Beneficially
|
|
|
|
Owned Prior to the
|
|
|
|
|
|
Owned After the
|
|
|
|
Offering
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Offering
|
|
Name and Address of Beneficial Owner(1)
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Offered(38)
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
5% Stockholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entities Affiliated with Oak Investment Partners(2)
|
|
|
4,151,212
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
%
|
|
|
1,191,217
|
|
|
|
2,959,995
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
%
|
One Gorham Island
Westport, CT 06880
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entities Affiliated with Draper Fisher Jurvetson(3)
|
|
|
3,961,613
|
|
|
|
12.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,692,897
|
|
|
|
12.1
|
%
|
2882 Sand Hill Road
Suite 150
Menlo Park, CA 94205
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entities Affiliated with Venrock Associates(4)
|
|
|
3,945,024
|
|
|
|
12.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,945,024
|
|
|
|
12.1
|
%
|
2424 Sand Hill Road
Suite 300
Menlo Park, CA 94205
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entities Affiliated with Cardinal Partners(5)
|
|
|
2,693,190
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
%
|
|
|
473,913
|
|
|
|
2,219,277
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
%
|
600 Alexander Park, Suite 204 Princeton, NJ 08540
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Executive Officers and Directors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Bush(6)
|
|
|
1,355,036
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
%
|
|
|
30,436
|
|
|
|
1,324,600
|
|
|
|
4.0
|
%
|
Todd Y. Park(7)
|
|
|
1,473,650
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
%
|
|
|
108,696
|
|
|
|
1,364,954
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
%
|
James M. MacDonald(8)
|
|
|
341,500
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
341,500
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
Carl B. Byers(9)
|
|
|
340,200
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
%
|
|
|
43,478
|
|
|
|
296,722
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Christopher E. Nolin(10)
|
|
|
214,700
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
21,717
|
|
|
|
192,983
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Ruben J. King-Shaw, Jr.(11)
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
7,826
|
|
|
|
82,174
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Richard N. Foster(12)
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Brandon H. Hull(5)
|
|
|
2,693,190
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
%
|
|
|
473,913
|
|
|
|
2,219,277
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
%
|
John A. Kane(13)
|
|
|
80,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Ann H. Lamont(2)
|
|
|
4,151,212
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
%
|
|
|
1,191,217
|
|
|
|
2,959,995
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
%
|
James L. Mann(14)
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
106
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Beneficially
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Beneficially
|
|
|
|
Owned Prior to the
|
|
|
|
|
|
Owned After the
|
|
|
|
Offering
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Offering
|
|
Name and Address of Beneficial Owner(1)
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Offered(38)
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Bryan E. Roberts(4)
|
|
|
3,945,024
|
|
|
|
12.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,945,024
|
|
|
|
12.1
|
%
|
All executive officers and directors as a group
(15 persons)(15)
|
|
|
15,411,712
|
|
|
|
44.9
|
%
|
|
|
1,930,930
|
|
|
|
13,480,782
|
|
|
|
38.9
|
%
|
Other selling stockholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert M. Hueber(16)
|
|
|
409,700
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
%
|
|
|
53,648
|
|
|
|
356,052
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
%
|
Lawrence Sosnow(17)
|
|
|
326,022
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
%
|
|
|
95,468
|
|
|
|
230,554
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Draper Richards L.P.(18)
|
|
|
318,183
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
69,170
|
|
|
|
249,013
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
The Bush 2004 Family Gift Trust(19)
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
21,739
|
|
|
|
228,261
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Lambda IV, LLC(20)
|
|
|
218,037
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
189,597
|
|
|
|
28,440
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Anders J. Engen(21)
|
|
|
191,587
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
12,157
|
|
|
|
179,430
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
The Nolin Investment Trust(22)
|
|
|
166,700
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
21,717
|
|
|
|
144,983
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Jonathan Bush(23)
|
|
|
156,574
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
31,803
|
|
|
|
124,771
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Diane Kaye(24)
|
|
|
155,409
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
8,696
|
|
|
|
146,713
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Macomber Associates LLC(25)
|
|
|
137,037
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
119,163
|
|
|
|
17,874
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
John Eads(26)
|
|
|
127,300
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
14,426
|
|
|
|
112,874
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Roy M. Korins
|
|
|
123,396
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
86,957
|
|
|
|
36,439
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Glenn Scott Andrews(27)
|
|
|
105,199
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
6,654
|
|
|
|
98,545
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Edward I. Burns
|
|
|
87,037
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
30,435
|
|
|
|
56,602
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
George and Barbara Bush Community Property Trust(28)
|
|
|
87,037
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
37,826
|
|
|
|
49,211
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Anshul Amar(29)
|
|
|
78,807
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
4,130
|
|
|
|
74,677
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Pamela Equities Corp.(30)
|
|
|
57,037
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
23,478
|
|
|
|
33,559
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Stanley S. Trotman, Jr.
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
34,783
|
|
|
|
15,217
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Meg Sosnow(31)
|
|
|
45,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
39,130
|
|
|
|
5,870
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Deirdre A. Fenick(32)
|
|
|
36,050
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
2,174
|
|
|
|
33,876
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Argus Capital LLC(33)
|
|
|
35,715
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
13,043
|
|
|
|
22,672
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Kevin Tolin-Scheper(34)
|
|
|
31,921
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
1,743
|
|
|
|
30,178
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
John G. Murray
|
|
|
28,572
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
6,211
|
|
|
|
22,361
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Scott M. Cohen(35)
|
|
|
24,915
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
1,239
|
|
|
|
23,676
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Chip Ach(36)
|
|
|
24,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
1,304
|
|
|
|
22,696
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
John D. Macomber(37)
|
|
|
17,297
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
15,041
|
|
|
|
2,256
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Represents beneficial ownership of less than one percent of our
outstanding common stock. |
|
(1) |
|
Unless otherwise indicated, the address for each beneficial
owner is
c/o athenahealth,
Inc., 311 Arsenal Street, Watertown, Massachusetts 02472. |
|
(2) |
|
Consists of 4,012,147 shares held by Oak Investment
Partners IX, L.P., 42,761 shares held by Oak IX Affiliates
Fund, L.P. and 96,304 shares held by Oak IX Affiliates
Fund-A, L.P. Ms. Lamont is a managing director of Oak Investment
Partners. As such, Ms. Lamont may be deemed to share voting
and investment power with respect to all shares held by such
entity. Ms. Lamont disclaims beneficial ownership of such
shares except to the extent of her pecuniary interest, if any. |
|
(3) |
|
Draper Fisher Jurvetson Fund VI, L.P. is a California
Limited Partnership (the Fund). Its general partner,
Draper Fisher Jurvetson Management Company VI, LLC, a California
Limited Liability Company (the General Partner),
controls the investing and voting power of the shares held by
the Fund. The General Partner is controlled by a majority vote
of its three managing members: Timothy C. Draper, John H.N.
Fisher and Steven T. Jurvetson. Draper Fisher Jurvetson Partners
VI, LLC, is a California Limited Liability Company. The
investing and voting power of the shares held by Partners VI is
controlled by a majority vote of its three Managing Members:
Timothy C. Draper, John H.N. Fisher and Steven T. Jurvetson.
Draper Associates, L.P. is a California Limited Partnership and
a Small Business Investment Company, regulated by the Small
Business Administration. The investing and voting power of the
shares held by Draper Associates, L.P. is controlled by its
general partner, Draper Associates, Inc., a California
Corporation. Draper Associates, Inc. is controlled by its
President and majority shareholder, Timothy C. Draper. |
|
(4) |
|
Consists of 1,547,889 shares held by Venrock Associates,
2,227,377 shares held by Venrock Associates, II, L.P.
and 169,758 shares held by Venrock Entrepreneurs Fund, L.P.
Mr. Roberts is a managing general partner of Venrock Associates.
As such, Mr. Roberts may be deemed to share voting and
investment power with respect to all shares held by such entity.
Mr. Roberts disclaims beneficial ownership of such shares
except to the extent of his pecuniary interest, if any. |
|
(5) |
|
Consists of 1,067,944 shares held by CHP II, L.P. and
1,625,246 shares held by Cardinal Health Partners, L.P. CHP
II Management, LLC is the General Partner of CHP II, L.P.
Cardinal Health Partners Management, LLC is the General Partner
of Cardinal Health Partners, L.P. John K. Clarke, Brandon H.
Hull, Lisa Skeete Tatum and John J. Park are the managing
members of CHP II Management, LLC and Cardinal Health Partners |
107
|
|
|
|
|
Management, LLC. As such, Mr. Hull may be deemed to share
voting and investment power with respect to all shares held by
CHP II, L.P. and Cardinal Health Partners, L.P. Mr. Hull
disclaims beneficial ownership of such shares except to the
extent of his pecuniary interest, if any. |
|
(6) |
|
Includes 736,386 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Bush upon exercise of stock options. Includes
582,400 shares of common stock owned by Mr. Bush and
pledged to Merrill Lynch as security for a personal loan.
Excludes 15,000 shares held by the Jonathan J. Bush, Jr.
2007 Grantor Retained Annuity Trust, the beneficiaries of which
are Mr. Bush and certain of his children. Todd Park serves
as trustee of this trust and has sole voting and dispositive
power over such shares. Excludes 250,000 shares held by a trust
for the benefit of certain of Mr. Bushs children of which
Todd Park and Mr. Parks wife serve as co-trustees, who
together acting by unanimous consent have sole voting and
dispositive power over such shares. |
|
(7) |
|
Includes 265,000 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Park upon exercise of stock options. Includes
15,000 shares held by the Jonathan J. Bush, Jr. 2007
Grantor Retained Annuity Trust, the beneficiaries of which are
Mr. Bush and certain of his children. Todd Park serves as
trustee of this trust and has sole voting and dispositive power
over such shares. Includes 250,000 shares held by a trust for
the benefit of certain of Mr. Bushs children of which Todd
Park and Mr. Parks wife serve as co-trustees, who together
acting by unanimous consent have sole voting and dispositive
power over such shares. |
|
(8) |
|
Includes 316,500 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. MacDonald upon exercise of stock options. |
|
(9) |
|
Includes 20,000 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Byers upon exercise of stock options. |
|
(10) |
|
Includes 48,000 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Nolin upon exercise of stock options. Also, includes
166,700 shares held by the Nolin Investment Trust. Each of
Mr. Nolin and his wife are beneficiaries and trustees of
such trust, each with independent power as trustee to vote and
dispose of all of such shares. |
|
(11) |
|
Includes 60,000 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. King-Shaw upon exercise of stock options. Includes
30,000 shares held by Mansa Equity Partners, Inc.
Mr. King-Shaw, as chief executive officer of Mansa Equity
Partners, Inc., holds voting and dispositive power for these
shares. |
|
(12) |
|
Includes 60,000 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Foster upon exercise of stock options. |
|
(13) |
|
Includes 80,000 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Kane upon exercise of stock options. |
|
(14) |
|
Includes 60,000 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Mann upon exercise of stock options. |
|
(15) |
|
Includes an aggregate of 2,248,386 shares of common stock
issuable upon exercise of stock options held by 12 of our
executive officers and directors. |
|
(16) |
|
Includes 312,500 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Hueber upon exercise of stock options. Mr. Hueber
is our senior vice president, sales. |
|
(17) |
|
Mr. Sosnow formerly served on our board of directors.
Mr. Sosnow resigned from our board of directors in 2005. |
|
(18) |
|
The general partner of Draper Richards, L.P. is Draper Richards
Management Company. All officers of Draper Richards Management
Company hold voting and dispositive power of these shares. |
|
(19) |
|
Todd Park and Mr. Parks wife serve as co-trustees of
The Bush 2004 Family Gift Trust, who together acting by
unanimous written consent have sole voting and dispositive power
for these shares. |
|
(20) |
|
Anthony M. Lamport, manager of Lambda IV, LLC, holds voting and
dispositive power for these shares. |
|
(21) |
|
Includes 98,387 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Engen upon exercise of stock options. Mr. Engen is
a vice president, client operations. |
|
(22) |
|
Each of Mr. Nolin and his wife are the beneficiaries and
trustees of the Nolin Investment Trust, each with independent
power as trustee to vote and dispose of all shares. |
|
(23) |
|
Mr. Bush is the father of our chief executive officer. |
|
(24) |
|
Includes 77,629 shares of common stock issuable to
Ms. Kaye upon exercise of stock options. Ms. Kaye is
one of our employees. |
|
(25) |
|
John D. Macomber, chairman of Macomber Associates LLC,
holds voting and dispositive power for these shares. |
108
|
|
|
(26) |
|
Includes 92,700 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Eads upon exercise of stock options. Mr. Eads is
one of our regional vice presidents. |
|
(27) |
|
Includes 54,287 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Andrews upon exercise of stock options.
Mr. Andrews is one of our employees. |
|
(28) |
|
Bessemer Trust Company, N.A., as corporate trustee of The George
and Barbara Bush Community Property Trust, holds voting and
dispositve power for these shares. The trusts
beneficiaries, George H.W. Bush and Barbara Bush, are the
uncle and aunt of our chief executive officer. |
|
(29) |
|
Includes 47,000 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Amar upon exercise of stock options. Mr. Amar is
one of our employees. |
|
(30) |
|
John Manocherian, vice president of Pamela Equities Corp., holds
voting and dispositive power for these shares. |
|
(31) |
|
Ms. Sosnow is the daugher of Lawrence Sosnow, who formerly
served on our board of directors. |
|
(32) |
|
Includes 19,450 shares of common stock issuable to
Ms. Fenick upon exercise of stock options. Ms. Fenick
is one of our employees. |
|
(33) |
|
Charles R. Ewald, manager of Argus Capital LLC, holds voting and
dispositive power for these shares. |
|
(34) |
|
Includes 17,691 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Tolin-Scheper upon exercise of stock options.
Mr. Tolin-Scheper is one of our employees. |
|
(35) |
|
Includes 14,590 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Cohen upon exercise of stock options. Mr. Cohen is
one of our employees. |
|
(36) |
|
Includes 13,250 shares of common stock issuable to
Mr. Ach upon exercise of stock options. Mr. Ach is one
of our employees. |
|
(37) |
|
Excludes 137,037 shares held by Macomber Associates LLC.
Mr. Macomber is chairman of Macomber Associates LLC and
holds voting and dispositive power over these shares. |
|
(38) |
|
If the underwriters option to purchase additional shares
is exercised in full, the additional shares to be sold by
selling stockholders would be allocated among the selling
stockholders as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Beneficially
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
|
Subject to the
|
|
|
After the Option
|
|
|
|
Option to Purchase
|
|
|
to Purchase Additional
|
|
|
|
Additional Shares
|
|
|
Shares is Exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Entities affiliated with Oak Investment Partners
|
|
|
178,683
|
|
|
|
2,781,312
|
|
|
|
8.5
|
%
|
Entities affiliated with Cardinal Partners
|
|
|
71,087
|
|
|
|
2,148,190
|
|
|
|
6.6
|
%
|
Todd Y. Park
|
|
|
16,304
|
|
|
|
1,348,650
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
%
|
Jonathan Bush
|
|
|
4,564
|
|
|
|
1,320,036
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
%
|
Robert M. Hueber
|
|
|
8,047
|
|
|
|
348,005
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Carl B. Byers
|
|
|
6,522
|
|
|
|
290,200
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Ruben J. King-Shaw, Jr.
|
|
|
1,174
|
|
|
|
81,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Lawrence Sosnow
|
|
|
14,320
|
|
|
|
216,234
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Draper Richards L.P.
|
|
|
10,375
|
|
|
|
238,638
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
The Bush 2004 Family Gift Trust
|
|
|
3,261
|
|
|
|
225,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Lambda IV, LLC
|
|
|
28,440
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Anders J. Engen
|
|
|
1,823
|
|
|
|
177,607
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
The Nolin Investment Trust
|
|
|
3,258
|
|
|
|
141,725
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Jonathan Bush
|
|
|
4,771
|
|
|
|
120,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Diane Kaye
|
|
|
1,304
|
|
|
|
145,409
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Macomber Associates LLC
|
|
|
17,874
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
John Eads
|
|
|
2,164
|
|
|
|
110,710
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Roy M. Korins
|
|
|
13,043
|
|
|
|
23,396
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Glenn Scott Andrews
|
|
|
998
|
|
|
|
97,547
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Edward I. Burns
|
|
|
4,565
|
|
|
|
52,037
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
George and Barbara Bush Community Property Trust
|
|
|
5,674
|
|
|
|
43,537
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Anshul Amar
|
|
|
620
|
|
|
|
74,057
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Pamela Equities Corp.
|
|
|
3,522
|
|
|
|
30,037
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Stanley S. Trotman, Jr.
|
|
|
5,217
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Meg Sosnow
|
|
|
5,870
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Beneficially
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
|
Subject to the
|
|
|
After the Option
|
|
|
|
Option to Purchase
|
|
|
to Purchase Additional
|
|
|
|
Additional Shares
|
|
|
Shares is Exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Deirdre A. Fenick
|
|
|
326
|
|
|
|
33,550
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Argus Capital LLC
|
|
|
1,957
|
|
|
|
20,715
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Kevin Tolin-Scheper
|
|
|
262
|
|
|
|
29,916
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
John G. Murray
|
|
|
932
|
|
|
|
21,429
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Scott M. Cohen
|
|
|
186
|
|
|
|
23,490
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Chip Ach
|
|
|
196
|
|
|
|
22,500
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
John D. Macomber
|
|
|
2,256
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
If the underwriters option to purchase additional shares
is exercised in part, the additional shares sold by selling
stockholders would be allocated pro rata based upon the share
amounts set forth in the preceding table.
110
DESCRIPTION
OF CAPITAL STOCK
General
For more detailed information, please see our certificate of
incorporation, by-laws and Investors Rights Agreement,
filed as exhibits to the registration statement of which this
prospectus forms a part.
Our authorized capital stock consists of
130,000,000 shares, par value of $0.01 per share, of which
125,000,000 shares are designated as common stock and
5,000,000 shares are designated as preferred stock.
At December 31, 2007, we had outstanding
32,324,824 shares of common stock held of record by
348 stockholders. Upon completion of this offering, there
will be 32,659,824 shares of our common stock outstanding.
Common
Stock
On all matters submitted to our stockholders for vote, our
common stockholders are entitled to one vote per share, voting
together as a single class and do not have cumulative voting
rights. Accordingly, the holders of a majority of the shares of
common stock entitled to vote in any election of directors can
elect all of the directors standing for election, if they so
choose. Subject to preferences that may apply to any shares of
preferred stock outstanding, the holders of common stock are
entitled to share equally in any dividends that our board of
directors may determine to issue from time to time. Upon our
liquidation, dissolution or
winding-up,
the holders of common stock shall be entitled to share equally
all assets remaining after the payment of any liabilities and
the liquidation preferences on any outstanding preferred stock.
Holders of common stock have no preemptive or conversion rights
or other subscription rights and there are no redemption or
sinking funds provisions applicable to the common stock.
Preferred
Stock
The board of directors will have the authority, without any
action by the stockholders, to issue from time to time the
preferred stock in one or more series and to fix the number of
shares, designations, preferences, powers and rights and the
qualification, limitations or restrictions thereof. The
preferences, powers, rights and restrictions of different series
of preferred stock may differ with respect to dividend rates,
amounts payable on liquidation, voting rights, conversion
rights, redemption provisions, sinking fund provisions and other
matters. The issuance of preferred stock could decrease the
amount of earnings and assets available for distribution to
holders of common stock or adversely affect the rights and
powers, including voting rights, of the holders of common stock
and may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a
change in control of our company. The existence of authorized
but unissued preferred stock may enable the board of directors
to render more difficult or to discourage an attempt to obtain
control of us by means of a merger, tender offer, proxy contest
or otherwise. For example, if in the due exercise of its
fiduciary obligations, the board of directors were to determine
that a takeover proposal was not in the best interests of our
stockholders, the board of directors could cause shares of
preferred stock to be issued without stockholder approval in one
or more private offerings or other transactions that might
dilute the voting or other rights of the proposed acquirer,
stockholder or stockholder group.
Registration
Rights
Registration
Rights Agreement
We are party to an agreement with SVB Financial Group providing
for rights to register under the Securities Act the shares of
our common stock held by them. Under this agreement, holders of
shares having registration rights can request that their shares
be covered by a registration statement that we are otherwise
filing.
Piggyback Registration Rights. If we determine
to register any of our securities under the Securities Act,
either for our own account or for the account of a security
holder or holders, the holders of registration
111
rights are entitled to written notice of the registration and
are entitled to include their shares of our common stock.
Expenses of Registration. We will pay all
registration expenses, other than underwriting discounts and
commissions, related to any piggyback registration.
Indemnification. The registration rights
agreement contains customary cross-indemnification provisions,
pursuant to which we are obligated to indemnify the selling
stockholder in the event of material untrue statements or
omissions in the registration statement attributable to us, and
they are obligated to indemnify us for material untrue
statements or omissions attributable to them.
All of these registration rights are subject to conditions and
limitations, including the right of the underwriters of an
offering to limit the number of shares included in such
registration.
Investor
Rights Agreement
We are party to an agreement with the founders, holders of
common stock issued upon conversion of our convertible preferred
stock upon the completion of our initial public offering in
September 2007 and holders of warrants to purchase common stock
providing for rights to register under the Securities Act the
shares of our common stock held or issuable under warrants held
by them. Under this agreement, holders of shares having
registration rights can request that their shares be covered by
a registration statement that we are otherwise filing.
Piggyback Registration Rights. If we determine
to register any of our securities under the Securities Act,
either for our own account or for the account of a security
holder or holders, the holders of registration rights are
entitled to written notice of the registration and are entitled
to include their shares of our common stock.
Demand Registration Rights. In addition, one
or more holders of 30% in interest or more may demand us to use
our best efforts to effect the expeditious registration of their
shares of our common stock on up to two occasions.
S-3
Registration. If we qualify for registration on
Form S-3,
certain holders of registration rights may also request a
registration on
Form S-3
and we are required (no more than one time in any twelve-month
period) to use our best efforts to effect the expeditious
registration of their shares of our common stock.
Expenses of Registration. We are required to
pay all registration expenses except any underwriting discounts
and applicable selling commissions and any expenses related to
registrations on
Forms S-1
and S-3.
Anti-Takeover
Effects of Delaware Law, Our Certificate of Incorporation and
Our By-laws
Our certificate of incorporation and by-laws include a number of
provisions that may have the effect of encouraging persons
considering unsolicited tender offers or other unilateral
takeover proposals to negotiate with our board of directors
rather than pursue non-negotiated takeover attempts. These
provisions include the items described below.
Board Composition and Filling Vacancies. Our
certificate of incorporation provides that directors may be
removed only for cause and then only by the affirmative vote of
the holders of 75% or more of the shares then entitled to vote
at an election of directors. Furthermore, any vacancy on our
board of directors, however occurring, including a vacancy
resulting from an increase in the size of our board, may only be
filled by the affirmative vote of a majority of our directors
then in office even if less than a quorum.
No Written Consent of Stockholders. Our
certificate of incorporation provides that all stockholder
actions are required to be taken by a vote of the stockholders
at an annual or special meeting, and that stockholders may not
take any action by written consent in lieu of a meeting.
Meetings of Stockholders. Our by-laws provide
that only a majority of the members of our board of directors
then in office may call special meetings of stockholders and
only those matters set forth in the notice of the special
meeting may be considered or acted upon at a special meeting of
stockholders. Our by-laws
112
limit the business that may be conducted at an annual meeting of
stockholders to those matters properly brought before the
meeting.
Advance Notice Requirements. Our by-laws
establish advance notice procedures with regard to stockholder
proposals relating to the nomination of candidates for election
as directors or new business to be brought before meetings of
our stockholders. These procedures provide that notice of
stockholder proposals must be timely given in writing to our
corporate secretary prior to the meeting at which the action is
to be taken. Generally, to be timely, notice must be received at
our principal executive offices not less than 90 days or
more than 120 days prior to the first anniversary date of
the annual meeting for the preceding year. The notice must
contain certain information specified in the by-laws.
Amendment to By-Laws and Certificate of
Incorporation. As required by the Delaware
General Corporation Law, any amendment of our certificate of
incorporation must first be approved by a majority of our board
of directors and, if required by law or our certificate of
incorporation, thereafter be approved by a majority of the
outstanding shares entitled to vote on the amendment, and a
majority of the outstanding shares of each class entitled to
vote thereon as a class, except that the amendment of the
provisions relating to stockholder action, directors, limitation
of liability and the amendment of our by-laws and certificate of
incorporation must be approved by not less than 75% of the
outstanding shares entitled to vote on the amendment, and not
less than 75% of the outstanding shares of each class entitled
to vote thereon as a class. Our by-laws may be amended by the
affirmative vote of a majority vote of the directors then in
office, subject to any limitations set forth in the by-laws; and
may also be amended by the affirmative vote of at least 75% of
the outstanding shares entitled to vote on the amendment, or, if
the board of directors recommends that the stockholders approve
the amendment, by the affirmative vote of the majority of the
outstanding shares entitled to vote on the amendment, in each
case voting together as a single class.
Blank Check Preferred Stock. Our certificate
of incorporation provides for 5,000,000 authorized shares of
preferred stock. The existence of authorized but unissued shares
of preferred stock may enable our board of directors to render
more difficult or to discourage an attempt to obtain control of
us by means of a merger, tender offer, proxy contest or
otherwise. For example, if in the due exercise of its fiduciary
obligations, our board of directors were to determine that a
takeover proposal is not in the best interests of us or our
stockholders, our board of directors could cause shares of
preferred stock to be issued without stockholder approval in one
or more private offerings or other transactions that might
dilute the voting or other rights of the proposed acquirer or
insurgent stockholder or stockholder group. In this regard, our
certificate of incorporation grants our board of directors broad
power to establish the rights and preferences of authorized and
unissued shares of preferred stock. The issuance of shares of
preferred stock could decrease the amount of earnings and assets
available for distribution to holders of shares of common stock.
The issuance may also adversely affect the rights and powers,
including voting rights, of these holders and may have the
effect of delaying, deterring or preventing a change in control
of us.
Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporate
Law. We are subject to the provisions of
Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. In
general, Section 203 prohibits a publicly held Delaware
corporation from engaging in a business combination
with an interested stockholder for a three-year
period following the time that this stockholder becomes an
interested stockholder, unless the business combination is
approved in a prescribed manner. A business
combination includes, among other things, a merger, asset
or stock sale or other transaction resulting in a financial
benefit to the interested stockholder. An interested
stockholder is a person who, together with affiliates and
associates, owns, or did own within three years prior to the
determination of interested stockholder status, 15% or more of
the corporations voting stock.
Under Section 203, a business combination between a
corporation and an interested stockholder is prohibited unless
it satisfies one of the following conditions:
|
|
|
|
|
before the stockholder became interested, the board of directors
approved either the business combination or the transaction
which resulted in the stockholder becoming an interested
stockholder;
|
|
|
|
upon consummation of the transaction which resulted in the
stockholder becoming an interested stockholder, the interested
stockholder owned at least 85% of the voting stock of the
corporation
|
113
outstanding at the time the transaction commenced, excluding for
purposes of determining the voting stock outstanding, shares
owned by persons who are directors and also officers, and
employee stock plans, in some instances; or
|
|
|
|
|
at or after the time the stockholder became interested, the
business combination was approved by the board of directors of
the corporation and authorized at an annual or special meeting
of the stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least
two-thirds of the outstanding voting stock which is not owned by
the interested stockholder.
|
NASDAQ
Global Market Listing
Our common stock is listed on the NASDAQ Global Market under the
symbol ATHN.
Transfer
Agent and Registrar
The transfer agent and registrar for our common stock is
American Stock Transfer & Trust Company.
114
SHARES
ELIGIBLE FOR FUTURE SALE
Prior to our initial public offering in September 2007, there
was no public market for our common stock. Future sales of our
common stock in the public market, or the availability of such
shares for sale in the public market, could adversely affect
market prices prevailing from time to time. As described below,
some of our outstanding shares will not be available for sale
after this offering due to contractual and legal restrictions on
resale. Sales of our common stock in the public market after
such restrictions lapse, or the perception that those sales may
occur, could adversely affect the prevailing market price at
such time and our ability to raise equity capital in the future.
Upon the closing of this offering, we will have outstanding an
aggregate of approximately 32,659,824 shares of common
stock assuming no exercise of the underwriters option to
purchase additional shares from us and the selling stockholders
and no exercise of outstanding options or warrants after
December 31, 2007. The 3,110,559 shares of common
stock to be sold by us and the selling stockholders in this
offering will be freely tradable without restriction or further
registration under the Securities Act, except for any shares
purchased by any of our affiliates as such term is
defined in Rule 144 of the Securities
Act. shares
of common stock held by existing stockholders will be
Restricted Securities as that term is defined in
Rule 144 under the Securities Act. Restricted Securities
may be sold in the public market only if registered or if they
qualify for exemption under Rules 144 or 701 under the
Securities Act, which rules are summarized below, on another
exemption.
As a result of the
lock-up
agreements described below and the provisions of Rule 144
and Rule 701 under the Securities Act, the shares of our
common stock (excluding the shares sold in this offering) that
will be available for sale in the public market are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate
|
|
|
|
|
Date of Availability of Sale
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
Comment
|
|
|
As of the date of this prospectus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
days after the date of this
prospectus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90 days after the date of this prospectus
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lock-up
Agreements
All of our directors, executive officers and the stockholders
selling shares of common stock in this offering have signed a
lock-up
agreement which prevents them from selling any shares of our
common stock or any securities convertible into or exercisable
or exchangeable for shares of our common stock for a period of
not less than 90 days from the date of this prospectus
without the prior written consent of the representatives. This
90-day
period may be extended if (i) during the last 17 days
of the
90-day
period we issue an earnings release or announce material news or
a material event relating to us occurs; or (ii) prior to
the expiration of the
90-day
period, we announce that we will release earnings results during
the 15-day
period following the last day of the
90-day
period. The period of such extension will be 18 days,
beginning on the issuance of the earnings release or the
announcement of the material news or material event.
Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Merrill Lynch, Pierce,
Fenner & Smith Incorporated may in their sole
discretion and at any time without notice release some or all of
the shares subject to
lock-up
agreements prior to the expiration of the
90-day
period. When determining whether or not to release shares from
the lock-up
agreements, Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Merrill Lynch,
Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated will consider,
among other factors, the stockholders reasons for
requesting the release, the number of shares for which the
release is being requested and market conditions at the time.
115
Substantially all of the others holders of our capital stock
signed a
lock-up
agreement in connection with our initial public offering which
closed on September 25, 2007. The IPO
lock-up
agreements prevent them from selling any shares of our common
stock or any securities convertible into or exercisable or
exchangeable for shares of our common stock for a period of not
less than 180 days following September 19, 2007
without the prior written consent of the representatives. This
180-day
period may be extended if (i) during the last 17 days
of the
180-day
period we issue an earnings release or announce material news or
a material event relating to us occurs; or (ii) prior to
the expiration of the
180-day
period, we announce that we will release earnings results during
the 15-day
period following the last day of the
180-day
period. The period of such extension will be 18 days,
beginning on the issuance of the earnings release or the
announcement of the material news or material event.
Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Merrill Lynch, Pierce,
Fenner & Smith Incorporated may in their sole
discretion and at any time without notice release some or all of
the shares subject to the IPO
lock-up
agreements prior to the expiration of the
180-day
period described above. However, subject to certain limited
exceptions, a number of our stockholders who own more than one
percent of our outstanding shares and who have signed
lock-up
agreements have a right either to consent to such a release from
the lock-up
or to have a pro rata portion of their shares released from
their respective
lock-ups.
When determining whether or not to release shares from the
lock-up
agreements, Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Merrill Lynch,
Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated will consider,
among other factors, the stockholders reasons for
requesting the release, the number of shares for which the
release is being requested and market conditions at the time.
Rule 144
In general, under Rule 144 of the Securities Act, beginning
90 days after the date of this prospectus a person deemed
to be our affiliate, or a person holding restricted
shares who beneficially owns shares that were not acquired from
us or any of our affiliates within the previous
year, is entitled to sell within any three-month period a number
of shares that does not exceed the greater of either 1% of the
then outstanding shares of our common stock, which will equal
approximately shares
immediately after this offering, assuming no exercise of the
underwriters option to purchase additional shares and no
exercise of outstanding options, or the average weekly trading
volume of our common stock on the NASDAQ Global Market during
the four calendar weeks preceding the filing with the Securities
and Exchange Commission of a notice on Form 144 with
respect to such sale. Sales under Rule 144 of the
Securities Act are also subject to prescribed requirements
relating to the manner of sale, notice and availability of
current public information about us.
Rule 701
Rule 701, as currently in effect, permits resales of shares
in reliance upon Rule 144 but without compliance with some
of the restrictions of Rule 144, including the holding
period requirement. Most of our employees, officers, directors
or consultants who purchased shares under a written compensatory
plan or contract (such as our current stock option plans) may be
entitled to rely on the resale provisions of Rule 701, but
all holders of Rule 701 shares are required to wait
until 90 days after the date of this prospectus before
selling their shares.
116
athenahealth, the selling stockholders and the underwriters
named below have entered into an underwriting agreement with
respect to the shares being offered. Subject to certain
conditions, each underwriter has severally agreed to purchase
the number of shares indicated in the following table. Goldman,
Sachs & Co., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner &
Smith Incorporated, Jefferies & Company, Inc. and
Piper Jaffray & Co. are the representatives of the
underwriters.
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriters
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
Goldman, Sachs & Co.
|
|
|
|
|
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated
|
|
|
|
|
Jefferies & Company, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
Piper Jaffray & Co.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
3,110,559
|
|
The underwriters are committed to take and pay for all of the
shares being offered, if any are taken, other than the shares
covered by the option described below unless and until this
option is exercised.
If the underwriters sell more shares than the total number set
forth in the table above, each of Goldman, Sachs & Co.
and Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated
severally have an option to buy up to an additional
466,584 shares in the aggregate from us and the selling
stockholders to cover such sales. They may exercise that option
for 30 days. If any shares are purchased pursuant to this
option, these underwriters will severally purchase shares in
approximately the same proportion as set forth in the table
above.
The following tables show the per share and total underwriting
discounts and commissions to be paid to the underwriters by the
company and the selling stockholders. Such amounts are shown
assuming both no exercise and full exercise of the
underwriters option to purchase additional shares.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid by the Company
|
|
No Exercise
|
|
|
Full Exercise
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid by the Selling Stockholders
|
|
No Exercise
|
|
|
Full Exercise
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Shares sold by the underwriters to the public will initially be
offered at the public offering price set forth on the cover of
this prospectus. Any shares sold by the underwriters to
securities dealers may be sold at a discount of up to
$ per share from the public
offering price. If all the shares are not sold at the public
offering price, the representatives may change the offering
price and the other selling terms.
The common stock is listed on the NASDAQ Global Market under the
symbol ATHN.
athenahealth and its executive officers, directors and the
selling stockholders have agreed with the underwriters, subject
to certain exceptions, not to dispose of or hedge any of their
common stock or securities convertible into or exchangeable for
shares of common stock during the period from the date of this
prospectus continuing through the date 90 days after the
date of this prospectus, except with the prior written consent
of Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Merrill Lynch, Pierce,
Fenner & Smith Incorporated. See Shares Eligible
for Future Sale for a discussion of certain transfer
restrictions.
The 90-day
restricted period described in the preceding paragraph will be
automatically extended if: (1) during the last 17 days
of the
90-day
restricted period athenahealth issues an earnings release or
announce material news or a material event; or (2) prior to
the expiration of the
90-day
restricted period, athenahealth announces that it will release
earnings results during the
15-day
period following the last day of the
90-day
period, in which case the restrictions described in the
preceding paragraph will continue to apply until the
117
expiration of the
18-day
period beginning on the issuance of the earnings release or the
announcement of the material news or material event.
In connection with the offering, the underwriters may purchase
and sell shares of common stock in the open market. These
transactions may include short sales, stabilizing transactions
and purchases to cover positions created by short sales. Short
sales involve the sale by the underwriters of a greater number
of shares than they are required to purchase in the offering.
Covered short sales are sales made in an amount not
greater than the underwriters option to purchase
additional shares from us and the selling stockholders in the
offering. The underwriters may close out any covered short
position by either exercising their option to purchase
additional shares or purchasing shares in the open market. In
determining the source of shares to close out the covered short
position, the underwriters will consider, among other things,
the price of shares available for purchase in the open market as
compared to the price at which they may purchase additional
shares pursuant to the option granted to them. Naked
short sales are any sales in excess of such option. The
underwriters must close out any naked short position by
purchasing shares in the open market. A naked short position is
more likely to be created if the underwriters are concerned that
there may be downward pressure on the price of the common stock
in the open market after pricing that could adversely affect
investors who purchase in the offering. Stabilizing transactions
consist of various bids for or purchases of common stock made by
the underwriters in the open market prior to the completion of
the offering.
The underwriters may also impose a penalty bid. This occurs when
a particular underwriter repays to the underwriters a portion of
the underwriting discount received by it because the
representatives have repurchased shares sold by or for the
account of such underwriter in stabilizing or short covering
transactions.
Purchases to cover a short position and stabilizing
transactions, as well as other purchases by the underwriters for
their own accounts, may have the effect of preventing or
retarding a decline in the market price of the common stock, and
together with the imposition of the penalty bid, may stabilize,
maintain or otherwise affect the market price of the common
stock. As a result, the price of the common stock may be higher
than the price that otherwise might exist in the open market. If
these activities are commenced, they may be discontinued at any
time. These transactions may be effected on NASDAQ Global
Market, in the over-the-counter market or otherwise.
Each of the underwriters has represented and agreed that:
(a) it has only communicated or caused to be communicated
and will only communicate or cause to be communicated an
invitation or inducement to engage in investment activity
(within the meaning of section 21 of FSMA) to persons who
have professional experience in matters relating to investments
falling within Article 19(5) of the Financial Services and
Markets Act 2000 (Financial Promotion) Order 2005 or in
circumstances in which section 21 of FSMA does not apply to
athenahealth; and
(b) it has complied with, and will comply with all
applicable provisions of FSMA with respect to anything done by
it in relation to the shares in, from or otherwise involving the
United Kingdom.
In relation to each Member State of the European Economic Area
which has implemented the Prospectus Directive (each, a Relevant
Member State), each Underwriter has represented and agreed that
with effect from and including the date on which the Prospectus
Directive is implemented in that Relevant Member State (the
Relevant Implementation Date) it has not made and will not make
an offer of shares to the public in that Relevant Member State
prior to the publication of a prospectus in relation to the
shares which has been approved by the competent authority in
that Relevant Member State or, where appropriate, approved in
another Relevant Member State and notified to the competent
authority in that Relevant Member State, all in accordance with
the Prospectus Directive, except that it may, with effect from
and including the Relevant Implementation Date, make an offer of
shares to the public in that Relevant Member State at any time:
(a) to legal entities which are authorized or regulated to
operate in the financial markets or, if not so authorized or
regulated, whose corporate purpose is solely to invest in
securities;
118
(b) to any legal entity which has two or more of
(1) an average of at least 250 employees during the
last financial year; (2) a total balance sheet of more than
43,000,000 and (3) an annual net turnover of more
than 50,000,000, as shown in its last annual or
consolidated accounts;
(c) to fewer than 100 natural or legal persons (other than
qualified investors as defined in the Prospectus Directive)
subject to obtaining the prior consent of the representatives
for any such offer; or
(d) in any other circumstances which do not require the
publication by the Issuer of a prospectus pursuant to
Article 3 of the Prospectus Directive.
For the purposes of this provision, the expression an
offer of shares to the public in relation to any
shares in any Relevant Member State means the communication in
any form and by any means of sufficient information on the terms
of the offer and the shares to be offered so as to enable an
investor to decide to purchase or subscribe the shares, as the
same may be varied in that Relevant Member State by any measure
implementing the Prospectus Directive in that Relevant Member
State and the expression Prospectus Directive means Directive
2003/71/EC and includes any relevant implementing measure in
each Relevant Member State.
The shares may not be offered or sold by means of any document
other than (i) in circumstances which do not constitute an
offer to the public within the meaning of the Companies
Ordinance (Cap. 32, Laws of Hong Kong), or (ii) to
professional investors within the meaning of the
Securities and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571, Laws of Hong Kong)
and any rules made thereunder, or (iii) in other
circumstances which do not result in the document being a
prospectus within the meaning of the Companies
Ordinance (Cap. 32, Laws of Hong Kong), and no advertisement,
invitation or document relating to the shares may be issued or
may be in the possession of any person for the purpose of issue
(in each case whether in Hong Kong or elsewhere), which is
directed at, or the contents of which are likely to be accessed
or read by, the public in Hong Kong (except if permitted to do
so under the laws of Hong Kong) other than with respect to
shares which are or are intended to be disposed of only to
persons outside Hong Kong or only to professional
investors within the meaning of the Securities and Futures
Ordinance (Cap. 571, Laws of Hong Kong) and any rules made
thereunder.
This prospectus has not been registered as a prospectus with the
Monetary Authority of Singapore. Accordingly, this prospectus,
and any other document or material in connection with the offer
or sale, or invitation for subscription or purchase, of the
shares may not be circulated or distributed, nor may the shares
be offered or sold, or be made the subject of an invitation for
subscription or purchase, whether directly or indirectly, to
persons in Singapore other than (i) to an institutional
investor under Section 274 of the Securities and Futures
Act, Chapter 289 of Singapore (the SFA),
(ii) to a relevant person, or any person pursuant to
Section 275(1A), and in accordance with the conditions,
specified in Section 275 of the SFA or (iii) otherwise
pursuant to, and in accordance with the conditions of, any other
applicable provision of the SFA.
Where the shares are subscribed or purchased under
Section 275 by a relevant person which is: (a) a
corporation (which is not an accredited investor) the sole
business of which is to hold investments and the entire share
capital of which is owned by one or more individuals, each of
whom is an accredited investor; or (b) a trust (where the
trustee is not an accredited investor) whose sole purpose is to
hold investments and each beneficiary is an accredited investor,
shares, debentures and units of shares and debentures of that
corporation or the beneficiaries rights and interest in
that trust shall not be transferable for six months after that
corporation or that trust has acquired the shares under
Section 275 except: (1) to an institutional investor
under Section 274 of the SFA or to a relevant person, or
any person pursuant to Section 275(1A), and in accordance
with the conditions, specified in Section 275 of the SFA;
(2) where no consideration is given for the transfer; or
(3) by operation of law.
The securities have not been and will not be registered under
the Securities and Exchange Law of Japan (the Securities and
Exchange Law) and each underwriter has agreed that it will not
offer or sell any securities, directly or indirectly, in Japan
or to, or for the benefit of, any resident of Japan (which term
as used herein means any person resident in Japan, including any
corporation or other entity organized under the laws of Japan),
or to others for re-offering or resale, directly or indirectly,
in Japan or to a resident of Japan, except pursuant to an
exemption from the registration requirements of, and otherwise
in compliance with, the Securities and Exchange Law and any
other applicable laws, regulations and ministerial guidelines of
Japan.
119
A prospectus in electronic format may be made available on the
websites maintained by one or more of the representatives, and
may also be made available on websites maintained by the
underwriters. The representatives may agree to allocate a number
of shares to the underwriters and selling group members for sale
to their online brokerage account holders. Internet
distributions will be allocated by the representatives to
underwriters that may make Internet distributions on the same
basis as other allocations. The information on, or that can be
accessed through, these websites is not part of this prospectus.
athenahealth estimates that its share of the total expenses of
the offering, excluding underwriting discounts and commissions,
will be approximately
$ million.
athenahealth and the selling stockholders have agreed to
indemnify the several underwriters against certain liabilities,
including liabilities under the Securities Act of 1933.
Certain of the underwriters and their respective affiliates
have, from time to time, performed, and may in the future
perform, various financial advisory and investment banking
services for the company, for which they received or will
receive customary fees and expenses.
120
Goodwin Procter
llp, Boston,
Massachusetts, will pass upon the validity of the common stock
offered by this prospectus. Ropes & Gray LLP, Boston,
Massachusetts, will pass upon legal matters relating to this
offering for the underwriters.
The financial statements as of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
and for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2006, included in this prospectus have been
audited by Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent
registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report
appearing herein (which report expresses an unqualified opinion
on the financial statements and includes an explanatory
paragraph referring to the Companys adoption of Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (Revised),
Share-Based Payment and Financial Accounting Standards
Board (FASB) Staff Position
No. 150-5,
Issuers Accounting under FASB Statement No. 150
for Freestanding Warrants and Other Similar Instruments on
Shares that are Redeemable) and has been so included in
reliance upon the reports of such firm given upon their
authority as experts in accounting and auditing.
WHERE
YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
We have filed with the SEC a registration statement on
Form S-1
under the Securities Act with respect to the shares of common
stock we and the selling stockholders are offering by this
prospectus. This prospectus does not contain all of the
information included in the registration statement. For further
information pertaining to us and our common stock, you should
refer to the registration statement and to its exhibits.
Whenever we make reference in this prospectus to any of our
contracts, agreements or other documents, the references are not
necessarily complete, and you should refer to the exhibits
attached to the registration statement for copies of the actual
contract, agreement or other document.
We are subject to the informational requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and will file annual, quarterly
and current reports, proxy statements and other information with
the SEC. You can read our SEC filings, including the
registration statement, over the Internet at the SECs
website at www.sec.gov. You may also read and copy any document
we file with the SEC at its public reference facility at
100 F Street, N.E., Room 1580,
Washington, D.C. 20549.
You may also obtain copies of the documents at prescribed rates
by writing to the Public Reference Section of the SEC at
100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549.
Please call the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330
for further information on the operation of the public reference
facilities.
121
INDEX TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
F-1
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of
athenahealth, Inc.
Watertown, Massachusetts
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
athenahealth, Inc. and subsidiary (the Company) as
of December 31, 2005 and 2006, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders deficit, and cash
flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2006. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Companys management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these 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. The Company is not required to
have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal
control over financial reporting. Our audits included
consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a
basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the
circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion
on the effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An
audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements, 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, such consolidated financial statements present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of
athenahealth, Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31, 2005
and 2006, and the results of their operations and their cash
flows for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2006, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America.
As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial
statements, on January 1, 2006, the Company changed its
method of accounting for share-based awards upon the adoption of
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS)
No. 123 (Revised), Share-Based Payment, and changed
its method of accounting for warrants issued for redeemable
securities upon the adoption of Financial Accounting Standards
Board (FASB) Staff Position
No. 150-5,
Issuers Accounting under FASB Statement No. 150
for Freestanding Warrants and Other Similar Instruments on
Shares that are Redeemable.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
June 22, 2007
F-2
athenahealth,
Inc.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
September 30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
CURRENT ASSETS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
9,309,183
|
|
|
$
|
4,191,480
|
|
|
$
|
89,809,109
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,544,828
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net of allowances of $402,000, $565,000 and
$625,000 at December 31, 2005 and 2006 and
September 30, 2007, respectively
|
|
|
6,921,599
|
|
|
|
10,009,247
|
|
|
|
13,331,034
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
1,491,291
|
|
|
|
1,609,304
|
|
|
|
2,177,865
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
17,722,073
|
|
|
|
21,354,859
|
|
|
|
105,318,008
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT Net
|
|
|
14,816,331
|
|
|
|
13,481,283
|
|
|
|
11,953,489
|
|
|
|
|
|
RESTRICTED CASH
|
|
|
3,524,854
|
|
|
|
3,169,436
|
|
|
|
2,569,436
|
|
|
|
|
|
CAPITALIZED SOFTWARE COSTS Net
|
|
|
2,104,592
|
|
|
|
1,719,829
|
|
|
|
1,743,005
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER ASSETS
|
|
|
177,585
|
|
|
|
247,363
|
|
|
|
255,370
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL ASSETS
|
|
$
|
38,345,435
|
|
|
$
|
39,972,770
|
|
|
$
|
121,839,308
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES, CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK AND
STOCKHOLDERS (DEFICIT) EQUITY
|
CURRENT LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Line of credit
|
|
$
|
4,399,776
|
|
|
$
|
7,204,034
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
1,843,504
|
|
|
|
3,116,297
|
|
|
|
7,596,407
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
1,028,474
|
|
|
|
1,130,352
|
|
|
|
659,859
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
5,795,600
|
|
|
|
7,633,161
|
|
|
|
9,615,873
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
2,916,879
|
|
|
|
3,614,052
|
|
|
|
4,290,084
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of deferred rent
|
|
|
962,692
|
|
|
|
948,020
|
|
|
|
999,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
16,946,925
|
|
|
|
23,645,916
|
|
|
|
23,161,973
|
|
|
|
|
|
WARRANT LIABILITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,423,129
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LONG-TERM DEFERRED RENT Net of current portion
|
|
|
11,746,460
|
|
|
|
11,108,200
|
|
|
|
10,459,843
|
|
|
|
|
|
LONG-TERM DEBT Net of current portion
|
|
|
13,893,672
|
|
|
|
16,972,719
|
|
|
|
15,220,508
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
42,587,057
|
|
|
|
54,149,964
|
|
|
|
48,842,324
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CONTINGENCIES (Note 13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible preferred stock, $0.01 par value
authorized 26,389,684 shares; issued,
22,331,991 shares and outstanding, 21,531,457 shares
at December 31, 2005 and 2006; at redemption value
(liquidation value $50,094,006); no shares authorized, issued or
outstanding at September 30, 2007
|
|
|
50,094,006
|
|
|
|
50,094,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS DEFICIT:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value per share; no shares
authorized, issued and outstanding at December 31, 2005 and
2006; authorized, 5,000,000 shares, and no shares issued and
outstanding at September 30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.01 par value authorized,
50,000,000 shares; issued, 5,097,554 shares and
outstanding, 4,620,229 shares at December 31, 2005;
issued 5,281,291 shares and outstanding,
4,803,966 shares at December 31, 2006; 125,000,000
shares authorized, 33,513,893 shares issued, 32,236,034 shares
outstanding at September 30, 2007
|
|
|
50,976
|
|
|
|
52,813
|
|
|
|
335,139
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
2,770,243
|
|
|
|
2,090,153
|
|
|
|
144,553,985
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury stock, at cost, 1,277,859 shares
|
|
|
(1,200,194
|
)
|
|
|
(1,200,194
|
)
|
|
|
(1,200,194
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income
|
|
|
(400
|
)
|
|
|
(34,211
|
)
|
|
|
59,642
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(55,956,253
|
)
|
|
|
(65,179,761
|
)
|
|
|
(70,751,588
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders (deficit) equity
|
|
|
(54,335,628
|
)
|
|
|
(64,271,200
|
)
|
|
|
72,996,984
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES, CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK AND
STOCKHOLDERS (DEFICIT) EQUITY
|
|
$
|
38,345,435
|
|
|
$
|
39,972,770
|
|
|
$
|
121,839,308
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-3
athenahealth,
Inc.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
REVENUE:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business services
|
|
$
|
35,032,838
|
|
|
$
|
48,957,775
|
|
|
$
|
70,652,305
|
|
|
$
|
51,167,219
|
|
|
$
|
67,648,537
|
|
Implementation and other
|
|
|
3,905,040
|
|
|
|
4,582,352
|
|
|
|
5,160,528
|
|
|
|
3,799,908
|
|
|
|
4,959,538
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue
|
|
|
38,937,878
|
|
|
|
53,540,127
|
|
|
|
75,812,833
|
|
|
|
54,967,127
|
|
|
|
72,608,075
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPERATING EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct operating
|
|
|
20,512,203
|
|
|
|
27,544,335
|
|
|
|
36,530,062
|
|
|
|
26,624,118
|
|
|
|
33,900,361
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
7,650,017
|
|
|
|
11,680,272
|
|
|
|
15,644,648
|
|
|
|
11,247,572
|
|
|
|
12,643,302
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
1,484,566
|
|
|
|
2,925,382
|
|
|
|
6,903,029
|
|
|
|
4,645,504
|
|
|
|
5,450,667
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
8,519,870
|
|
|
|
15,545,013
|
|
|
|
16,346,562
|
|
|
|
11,921,040
|
|
|
|
13,912,101
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
3,159,425
|
|
|
|
5,482,769
|
|
|
|
6,238,570
|
|
|
|
4,588,539
|
|
|
|
4,325,265
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
41,326,081
|
|
|
|
63,177,771
|
|
|
|
81,662,871
|
|
|
|
59,026,773
|
|
|
|
70,231,696
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPERATING LOSS
|
|
|
(2,388,203
|
)
|
|
|
(9,637,644
|
)
|
|
|
(5,850,038
|
)
|
|
|
(4,059,646
|
)
|
|
|
2,376,379
|
|
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
139,835
|
|
|
|
105,530
|
|
|
|
371,684
|
|
|
|
250,610
|
|
|
|
356,137
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(1,361,509
|
)
|
|
|
(1,861,068
|
)
|
|
|
(2,670,383
|
)
|
|
|
(1,882,322
|
)
|
|
|
(2,398,839
|
)
|
Other expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(701,996
|
)
|
|
|
(445,149
|
)
|
|
|
(5,689,063
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other expense
|
|
|
(1,221,674
|
)
|
|
|
(1,755,538
|
)
|
|
|
(3,000,695
|
)
|
|
|
(2,076,861
|
)
|
|
|
(7,731,765
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOSS BEFORE INCOME TAXES AND CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGE IN
ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE
|
|
|
(3,609,877
|
)
|
|
|
(11,393,182
|
)
|
|
|
(8,850,733
|
)
|
|
|
(6,136,507
|
)
|
|
|
(5,355,386
|
)
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
216,441
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOSS BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE
|
|
|
(3,609,877
|
)
|
|
|
(11,393,182
|
)
|
|
|
(8,850,733
|
)
|
|
|
(6,136,507
|
)
|
|
|
(5,571,827
|
)
|
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(372,775
|
)
|
|
|
(372,775
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET LOSS
|
|
$
|
(3,609,877
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11,393,182
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9,223,508
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6,509,282
|
)
|
|
|
(5,571,827
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET LOSS PER SHARE BASIC AND DILUTED
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BEFORE CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE
|
|
$
|
(0.87
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.51
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.88
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.31
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.91
|
)
|
CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.08
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.08
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET LOSS PER SHARE BASIC AND DILUTED
|
|
$
|
(0.87
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.51
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.96
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.39
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.91
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING BASIC AND DILUTED
|
|
|
4,151,156
|
|
|
|
4,531,691
|
|
|
|
4,707,902
|
|
|
|
4,679,762
|
|
|
|
6,095,261
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-4
athenahealth,
Inc.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS (DEFICIT)
EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Receivable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
From
|
|
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Shareholder
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
(Loss) Income
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
(Deficit) Equity
|
|
|
Loss
|
|
|
BALANCE January 1, 2004
|
|
$
|
3,662,179
|
|
|
$
|
36,622
|
|
|
$
|
1,316,155
|
|
|
$
|
(49,336
|
)
|
|
|
(951,004
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,113,925
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(40,953,194
|
)
|
|
$
|
(40,763,678
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options exercised
|
|
|
1,291,003
|
|
|
|
12,910
|
|
|
|
667,394
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
680,304
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase of unvested restricted common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(326,855
|
)
|
|
|
(86,269
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(86,269
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants exercised
|
|
|
417
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
254
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
258
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remeasurement of preferred stock warrant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
126,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
126,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment of shareholder note receivable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,336
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,336
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,609,877
|
)
|
|
|
(3,609,877
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3,609,877
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(3,609,877
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE December 31, 2004
|
|
|
4,953,599
|
|
|
|
49,536
|
|
|
|
2,110,538
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,277,859
|
)
|
|
|
(1,200,194
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44,563,071
|
)
|
|
|
(43,603,191
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options exercised
|
|
|
142,287
|
|
|
|
1,423
|
|
|
|
143,762
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
145,185
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of preferred stock warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
514,925
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
514,925
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants exercised
|
|
|
1,668
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
1,018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,035
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,393,182
|
)
|
|
|
(11,393,182
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11,393,182
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(400
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(400
|
)
|
|
|
(400
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(11,393,582
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE December 31, 2005
|
|
|
5,097,554
|
|
|
|
50,976
|
|
|
|
2,770,243
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,277,859
|
)
|
|
|
(1,200,194
|
)
|
|
|
(400
|
)
|
|
|
(55,956,253
|
)
|
|
|
(54,335,628
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification of warrants upon adoption of FSP
150-5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,229,051
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,229,051
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Stock compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
356,329
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
356,329
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options exercised
|
|
|
183,737
|
|
|
|
1,837
|
|
|
|
192,632
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
194,469
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,223,508
|
)
|
|
|
(9,223,508
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9,223,508
|
)
|
Unrealized loss on available-for-sale investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34,046
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34,046
|
)
|
|
|
(34,046
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
235
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
235
|
|
|
|
235
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(9,257,319
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE December 31, 2006
|
|
|
5,281,291
|
|
|
|
52,813
|
|
|
|
2,090,153
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,277,859
|
)
|
|
|
(1,200,194
|
)
|
|
|
(34,211
|
)
|
|
|
(65,179,761
|
)
|
|
|
(64,271,200
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
937,267
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
937,267
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options exercised
|
|
|
422,115
|
|
|
|
4,221
|
|
|
|
670,449
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
674,670
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants exercised
|
|
|
478,496
|
|
|
|
4,785
|
|
|
|
1,705,842
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,710,627
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholder contribution of capital
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
591,936
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
591,936
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares issued in initial public offering, net of expenses
|
|
|
5,000,000
|
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
81,237,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,287,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conversion of convertible preferred stock to common stock
|
|
|
22,331,991
|
|
|
|
223,320
|
|
|
|
49,870,686
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,094,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification of warrant liability to additional
paid-in-capital
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,450,589
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,450,589
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,571,827
|
)
|
|
|
(5,571,827
|
)
|
|
|
(5,571,827
|
)
|
Unrealized gain on available-for-sale investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,119
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,119
|
|
|
|
34,119
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,734
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,734
|
|
|
|
59,734
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(5,477,974
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE September 30, 2007 (unaudited)
|
|
|
33,513,893
|
|
|
$
|
335,139
|
|
|
$
|
144,553,985
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,277,859
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,200,194
|
)
|
|
$
|
59,642
|
|
|
$
|
(70,751,588
|
)
|
|
$
|
72,996,984
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-5
athenahealth,
Inc.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(3,609,877
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11,393,182
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9,223,508
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6,509,282
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5,571,827
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used
in) operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
3,159,425
|
|
|
|
5,482,769
|
|
|
|
6,238,570
|
|
|
|
4,588,539
|
|
|
|
4,325,265
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accretion of debt discount
|
|
|
194,297
|
|
|
|
403,155
|
|
|
|
137,942
|
|
|
|
105,302
|
|
|
|
136,443
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of premium (discounts) on investments
|
|
|
159,340
|
|
|
|
69,284
|
|
|
|
(58,502
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(73,784
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash rent expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,202,647
|
|
|
|
2,627,801
|
|
|
|
1,970,851
|
|
|
|
1,971,090
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial advisor fee paid by investor
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
591,936
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for uncollectable accounts
|
|
|
(37,868
|
)
|
|
|
294,782
|
|
|
|
(17,328
|
)
|
|
|
72,871
|
|
|
|
379,239
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remeasurement of preferred stock warrants
|
|
|
126,735
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,336
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation of preferred stock warrants
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32,860
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
372,775
|
|
|
|
372,775
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncash warrant expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
701,996
|
|
|
|
445,149
|
|
|
|
5,027,460
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
356,329
|
|
|
|
171,232
|
|
|
|
937,267
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on disposal of property and equipment
|
|
|
42,851
|
|
|
|
22,129
|
|
|
|
258,579
|
|
|
|
6,588
|
|
|
|
98,223
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
(1,689,975
|
)
|
|
|
(1,847,242
|
)
|
|
|
(3,064,777
|
)
|
|
|
(2,685,080
|
)
|
|
|
(3,701,026
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
(202,965
|
)
|
|
|
(697,969
|
)
|
|
|
(128,295
|
)
|
|
|
13,566
|
|
|
|
(568,561
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
602,704
|
|
|
|
(1,280,251
|
)
|
|
|
512,468
|
|
|
|
586,312
|
|
|
|
(586,166
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
|
1,282,538
|
|
|
|
1,953,280
|
|
|
|
1,837,561
|
|
|
|
454,071
|
|
|
|
2,053,829
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
114,378
|
|
|
|
542,572
|
|
|
|
697,173
|
|
|
|
397,371
|
|
|
|
676,032
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred rent
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,372,889
|
|
|
|
(3,280,733
|
)
|
|
|
(2,440,189
|
)
|
|
|
(2,567,478
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other long-term assets
|
|
|
32,393
|
|
|
|
(114,062
|
)
|
|
|
(69,778
|
)
|
|
|
(49,195
|
)
|
|
|
(8,007
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
|
173,976
|
|
|
|
6,010,801
|
|
|
|
(2,089,391
|
)
|
|
|
(2,499,119
|
)
|
|
|
3,087,075
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized software development costs
|
|
|
(1,808,445
|
)
|
|
|
(1,640,725
|
)
|
|
|
(1,137,267
|
)
|
|
|
(830,114
|
)
|
|
|
(800,842
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of property and equipment
|
|
|
(3,035,581
|
)
|
|
|
(13,348,125
|
)
|
|
|
(4,067,609
|
)
|
|
|
(2,673,552
|
)
|
|
|
(2,050,159
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
8,402
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,950
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales and maturities of investments
|
|
|
5,201,000
|
|
|
|
4,000,000
|
|
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,603,469
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of investments
|
|
|
(7,158,706
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,520,372
|
)
|
|
|
(3,180,281
|
)
|
|
|
(1,949,257
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from note receivable
|
|
|
132,581
|
|
|
|
55,069
|
|
|
|
4,739
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Increase) decrease in restricted cash
|
|
|
(3,460,979
|
)
|
|
|
612,448
|
|
|
|
355,418
|
|
|
|
355,418
|
|
|
|
600,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities
|
|
|
(10,121,728
|
)
|
|
|
(10,321,333
|
)
|
|
|
(10,350,141
|
)
|
|
|
(6,328,529
|
)
|
|
|
3,403,211
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net proceeds from issuance of convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
6,416,253
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from exercise of stock options and warrants
|
|
|
680,404
|
|
|
|
146,378
|
|
|
|
194,469
|
|
|
|
172,872
|
|
|
|
2,385,297
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of shareholder note receivable
|
|
|
49,336
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of treasury stock
|
|
|
(86,269
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments on long-term debt
|
|
|
(1,514,080
|
)
|
|
|
(7,398,496
|
)
|
|
|
(2,432,065
|
)
|
|
|
(1,592,380
|
)
|
|
|
(2,492,601
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds of initial public offering, net of issuance cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,287,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from long-term debt
|
|
|
1,409,103
|
|
|
|
15,279,726
|
|
|
|
6,752,934
|
|
|
|
5,479,440
|
|
|
|
5,116,917
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from line of credit
|
|
|
1,600,420
|
|
|
|
5,112,125
|
|
|
|
11,043,668
|
|
|
|
8,070,245
|
|
|
|
5,914,415
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments on line of credit
|
|
|
(74,088
|
)
|
|
|
(4,212,349
|
)
|
|
|
(8,239,410
|
)
|
|
|
(5,489,410
|
)
|
|
|
(13,118,449
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities
|
|
|
8,481,079
|
|
|
|
8,927,384
|
|
|
|
7,319,596
|
|
|
|
6,640,767
|
|
|
|
79,092,642
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EFFECTS OF EXCHANGE RATE CHANGES ON CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,537
|
)
|
|
|
2,233
|
|
|
|
(2,829
|
)
|
|
|
34,701
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET (DECREASE) INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
|
|
(1,466,673
|
)
|
|
|
4,615,315
|
|
|
|
(5,117,703
|
)
|
|
|
(2,189,710
|
)
|
|
|
85,617,629
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS Beginning of period
|
|
|
6,160,541
|
|
|
|
4,693,868
|
|
|
|
9,309,183
|
|
|
|
9,309,183
|
|
|
|
4,191,480
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS End of period
|
|
$
|
4,693,868
|
|
|
$
|
9,309,183
|
|
|
$
|
4,191,480
|
|
|
$
|
7,119,473
|
|
|
$
|
89,809,109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES OF NONCASH ITEMS Property
and equipment recorded in accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
$
|
22,625
|
|
|
$
|
595,038
|
|
|
$
|
184,449
|
|
|
$
|
200,066
|
|
|
$
|
300,124
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION
Cash paid for interest
|
|
$
|
1,218,184
|
|
|
$
|
1,252,382
|
|
|
$
|
1,944,866
|
|
|
$
|
1,862,465
|
|
|
$
|
2,388,146
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-6
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
|
|
1.
|
BUSINESS
AND ORGANIZATION
|
General athenahealth, Inc. (the
Company) is a business services company that
provides ongoing billing, collecting, and related services to
its customers. The Company provides these services with the use
of athenaNet, a proprietary internet-based practice management
application. The Companys customers consist of medical
group practices ranging in size throughout the United States of
America.
In October 2005, the Company established a subsidiary in
Chennai, India, Athena Net India Pvt. Ltd., to conduct research
and development activities.
Initial Public Offering (Unaudited) On
September 25, 2007, the Company raised $90.0 million
in gross proceeds from the sale of 5.0 million shares of
its common stock in an Initial Public Offering (IPO)
at $18.00 per share. The net offering proceeds after
deducting approximately $8.7 million in offering related
expenses and underwriters discount were approximately
$81.3 million. All outstanding shares of the Companys
convertible preferred stock were converted into 21,531,457
shares of common stock upon completion of the IPO.
Risks and Uncertainties The Company is
subject to risks common to companies in similar industries and
stages of development, including, but not limited to,
competition from larger companies, a volatile market for its
services, new technological innovations, dependence on key
personnel, third-party service providers and vendors, protection
of proprietary technology, fluctuations in operating results,
dependence on market acceptance of its products and compliance
with government regulations.
|
|
2.
|
SUMMARY
OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
|
Principles of Consolidation The accompanying
consolidated financial statements include the results of
operations of the Company and its wholly owned subsidiary. All
intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in
consolidation.
Unaudited Interim Financial Statements The
accompanying interim consolidated balance sheet and statement of
stockholders (deficit) equity as of September 30,
2007 and the consolidated statements of operations and cash
flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2007
are unaudited and have been prepared in accordance with the
rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and
footnotes required by accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America for complete financial
statements. The unaudited interim consolidated financial
statements have been prepared on the same basis as the audited
consolidated financial statements and, in the opinion of
management, reflect all adjustments consisting of normal
recurring accruals considered necessary to present fairly the
Companys financial position as of September 30, 2007
and results of its operations and its cash flows for the nine
months ended September 30, 2006 and 2007. The results of
operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 are
not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected
for the year ending December 31, 2007.
Net Loss per Share Basic and diluted net loss
per common share is calculated by dividing net loss by the
weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the
period. Diluted net loss per common share is the same as basic
net loss per common share, since the effects of potentially
dilutive securities are antidilutive for all periods presented.
F-7
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following potentially dilutive securities were excluded from
the calculation of diluted net loss per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
21,531,457
|
|
|
|
21,531,457
|
|
|
|
21,531,457
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants to purchase convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
360,412
|
|
|
|
521,357
|
|
|
|
554,787
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options to purchase common stock
|
|
|
2,088,702
|
|
|
|
2,437,794
|
|
|
|
2,825,686
|
|
|
|
2,896,117
|
|
Warrants to purchase common stock
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
|
154,936
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
24,055,571
|
|
|
|
24,565,608
|
|
|
|
24,986,930
|
|
|
|
3,051,053
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive Loss The Company has applied
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 130, Reporting Comprehensive
Income, which requires that all components of comprehensive
income (loss) be reported in the consolidated financial
statements in the period in which they are recognized.
Comprehensive loss includes net loss, foreign currency
translation adjustments and unrealized gains (losses) on
available-for-sale securities.
Use of Estimates The preparation of financial
statements 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 the disclosure of contingent
assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements,
as well as the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during
the reporting period. Actual results could significantly differ
from those estimates.
Revenue Recognition The Company generally
recognizes revenue when there is evidence of an arrangement, the
service has been provided to the customer, the collection of the
fees is reasonably assured, and the amount of fees to be paid by
the customer are fixed or determinable.
The Company derives its revenue from business services fees,
implementation fees and other services. Business services fees
include amounts charged for ongoing billing, collecting and
related services and are generally billed to the customer as a
percentage of total collections. The Company does not recognize
revenue for business services fees until these collections are
made as the services fees are not fixed and determinable until
such time. Business services fees also include amounts charged
to customers for generating and mailing patient statements and
are recognized as the related services are performed.
Implementation revenue consists primarily of professional
services fees related to assisting customers with the
implementation of the Companys services and are generally
billed upfront and recorded as deferred revenue until the
implementation is complete and then recognized ratably over the
expected performance period. Other services consist primarily of
training and interface fees and are recognized as the services
are performed.
Direct Operating Expenses Direct operating
expenses consist primarily of salaries, benefits and stock-based
compensation related to personnel who provide services to
clients, claims processing costs and other direct costs related
to collection and business services. The reported amounts of
direct operating expenses do not include allocated amounts for
rent, depreciation, amortization or other overhead costs.
Research and Development Expenses Research
and development expenses consist primarily of personnel-related
costs and consulting fees for third party developers. All such
costs are expensed as incurred.
Cash and Cash Equivalents Cash and cash
equivalents consist of deposits, money market funds, commercial
paper, and other liquid securities with remaining maturities of
three months or less at the date of purchase.
F-8
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Investments Management determines the
appropriate classification of investments at the time of
purchase based upon managements intent with regard to such
investments. All investments are classified as
available-for-sale and are recorded at fair value with
unrealized gains and losses included in accumulated other
comprehensive loss (income).
Accounts Receivable Accounts receivable
represents amounts due from customers for subscription and
implementation services. Accounts receivable are stated net of
an allowance for contractual adjustments and uncollectible
accounts, which are determined by establishing reserves for
specific accounts and consideration of historical and estimated
probable losses.
Activity in the allowance is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Beginning balance
|
|
$
|
145,000
|
|
|
$
|
107,132
|
|
|
$
|
402,196
|
|
|
$
|
564,347
|
|
Provision
|
|
|
274,399
|
|
|
|
1,393,540
|
|
|
|
1,287,303
|
|
|
|
1,320,717
|
|
Write-offs and adjustments
|
|
|
(312,267
|
)
|
|
|
(1,098,476
|
)
|
|
|
(1,125,152
|
)
|
|
|
(1,260,352
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance
|
|
$
|
107,132
|
|
|
$
|
402,196
|
|
|
$
|
564,347
|
|
|
$
|
624,712
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Instruments The carrying amount of
the Companys financial instruments approximates their fair
value primarily because of their short-term nature and include
cash equivalents, investments, accounts receivable, accounts
payable, and accrued expenses. The carrying amounts of the
Companys debt obligations approximate fair value based
upon our best estimate of interest rates that would be available
for similar debt obligations.
Property and Equipment Property and equipment
are stated at cost. Equipment, furniture and fixtures and
purchased software are depreciated using the straight-line
method over their estimated useful lives, generally ranging from
three to five years. Leasehold improvements are depreciated
using the straight-line method over the lesser of the useful
life of the improvements or lease terms, excluding renewal
periods. Costs associated with maintenance and repairs are
expensed as incurred.
Long-Lived Assets Long-lived assets to be
held and used are reviewed for impairment whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of
such assets may not be recoverable. Determination of
recoverability of long-lived assets is based on an estimate of
undiscounted future cash flows resulting from the use of the
asset and its eventual disposition as compared with the asset
carrying value. Measurement of an impairment loss for long-lived
assets that management expects to hold and use is based on the
fair value of the asset. Long-lived assets to be disposed of are
reported at the lower of carrying amount or fair value less
costs to sell. No impairment losses have been recognized in the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2005 or 2006 or the
nine-months ended September 30, 2007 (unaudited).
Restricted Cash Restricted cash consists
primarily of funds held under a letter of credit as a condition
of the Companys operating lease for its corporate
headquarters (see Note 5). The letter of credit may be
reduced during 2007 and 2008 to $1,712,957 and $856,478,
respectively, provided there is no breach of the lease
agreement. The letter of credit will remain in effect during the
term of the lease agreement.
Capitalized Software Costs The Company
accounts for internal software development costs under the
provisions of American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
Statement of Position (SOP)
98-1,
Accounting for the Costs of Computer Software Developed or
Obtained for Internal Use. Under
SOP 98-1,
costs related to the preliminary project stage of subsequent
versions of athenaNet
and/or other
technologies are expensed as incurred. Costs incurred in the
application development stage are capitalized and such costs are
amortized over the softwares estimated economic life. In
2005, the estimated useful life of the software was changed to
two years from the initially estimated three year life, which
increased amortization expense in
F-9
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
2005 by $732,486. Amortization expense was $1,171,285,
$2,179,872 and $1,522,030 for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively. Amortization expense was
$1,156,878 and $777,666 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 and September 30, 2007 (unaudited).
Future amortization expense for all software development costs
capitalized as of December 31, 2006, is estimated to be
$958,336, $529,295 and $232,198, for the years ending
December 31, 2007, 2008, and 2009, respectively.
Accrued expenses Accrued expenses consist of
the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
Accrued expenses
|
|
$
|
2,403,013
|
|
|
$
|
2,608,463
|
|
|
$
|
3,930,991
|
|
Accrued bonus
|
|
|
1,612,904
|
|
|
|
2,931,201
|
|
|
|
2,253,122
|
|
Accrued vacation
|
|
|
674,737
|
|
|
|
767,522
|
|
|
|
983,232
|
|
Accrued payroll
|
|
|
504,748
|
|
|
|
689,738
|
|
|
|
1,557,200
|
|
Accrued commissions
|
|
|
600,198
|
|
|
|
636,237
|
|
|
|
891,328
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,795,600
|
|
|
$
|
7,633,161
|
|
|
$
|
9,615,873
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrant Liability Effective January 1,
2006, freestanding warrants and other similar instruments
related to shares that are redeemable are accounted for in
accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) Staff Position
No. 150-5,
Issuers Accounting under FASB Statement No. 150
for Freestanding Warrants and Other Similar Instruments on
Shares that are Redeemable
(FSP 150-5),
an interpretation of FASB Statement No. 150, Accounting for
Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of Both
Liabilities and Equity. Under
FSP 150-5,
freestanding warrants exercisable for shares of the
Companys redeemable convertible preferred stock are
classified as a warrant liability on the Companys balance
sheet. The warrants issued for the purchase of the
Companys Series D and Series E Preferred Stock
are subject to the provisions of
FSP 150-5.
The Company accounted for the adoption of
FSP 150-5
as a cumulative effect of change in accounting principle of
$372,775 recorded on January 1, 2006, the date of the
Companys adoption of
FSP 150-5.
The cumulative effect adjustment was calculated as the
difference in the fair value of the warrants from the historical
carrying value as of January 1, 2006. The original carrying
value of the warrants, $1,229,051, was reclassified to
liabilities from additional paid-in capital at the date of
adoption. At December 31, 2006, and September 30,
2006, the Company remeasured the warrant liability and recorded
charges of $701,996 and $445,149 (unaudited) during the
respective periods, for the increase in value of the warrants.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2007, the
Company revalued the warrant liability relating to the preferred
stock warrants and recorded other expense of $4,994,598
(unaudited). Upon completion of the IPO and the conversion of
outstanding preferred stock to common stock, the preferred stock
warrants became automatically exercisable into shares of common
stock. Accordingly, the warrant liability of $7,450,589
(unaudited) was reclassified to additional paid-in capital.
During the year ended December 31, 2005, the fair value of
the Companys warrants to purchase Series D and
Series E Preferred Stock increased by approximately
$397,000 related to the fair value assigned to warrants issued
in December 2005 (see note 9) and by $373,000 due to a
change in warrant fair value.
Deferred Rent Deferred rent consists of step
rent and tenant improvement allowances and other incentives
received from landlords related to the Companys operating
leases for its facilities. Step rent represents the difference
between actual operating lease payments due and straight-line
rent expense, which is recorded by the Company over the term of
the lease, including any construction period. The excess is
recorded as a deferred credit in the early periods of the lease,
when cash payments are generally lower than straight-line rent
expense, and is reduced in the later periods of the lease when
payments begin to exceed the straight-line expense. Tenant
allowances from landlords for tenant improvements are generally
comprised of cash received from the landlord as part of the
negotiated terms of the lease or reimbursements of moving costs.
These cash
F-10
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
payments are recorded as deferred rent from landlords and are
amortized as a reduction of periodic rent expense, over the term
of the applicable lease.
Concentrations of Credit Risk Financial
instruments that potentially subject the Company to
concentrations of credit risk are cash equivalents, investments,
and accounts receivable. The Company attempts to limit its
credit risk associated with cash equivalents and investments by
investing in highly-rated corporate and financial institutions.
With respect to customer accounts receivable, the Company
manages its credit risk by performing ongoing credit evaluations
of its customers and, when deemed necessary, requiring letters
of credit, guarantees, or collateral. No customer accounted for
more than 10% of revenues or accounts receivable as of or for
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2005 or 2006, or as of
or for the nine-months ended September 30, 2006 or 2007.
Other Expense other expense consists of the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Unrealized loss on warrants
|
|
|
701,996
|
|
|
$
|
445,149
|
|
|
$
|
4,994,598
|
|
Financial advisor fees paid by shareholder (Note 14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
591,936
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102,529
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
701,996
|
|
|
$
|
445,149
|
|
|
$
|
5,689,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Taxes Deferred tax assets and
liabilities relate to temporary differences between the
financial reporting and income tax bases of assets and
liabilities and are measured using enacted tax rates and laws
expected to be in effect at the time of their reversal. A
valuation allowance is established to reduce net deferred tax
assets if, based on the available evidence, it is more likely
than not that some or all of the deferred tax assets will not be
realized.
The provision for income taxes represents the Companys
federal and state income tax obligations as well as foreign tax
provisions. The Companys provision for income taxes was
$216,441 (unaudited) for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007. The Company did not record a provision
for income taxes for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2006, as the Company was in a loss position
and no benefit was recorded.
In June 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an interpretation
of FASB Statement 109 (FIN 48). This
statement clarifies the criteria that an individual tax position
must satisfy for some or all of the benefits of that position to
be recognized in a companys financial statements.
FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold of
more-likely-than-not, and a measurement attribute for all tax
positions taken or expected to be taken on a tax return, in
order for those tax positions to be recognized in the financial
statements.
On January 1, 2007, the Company adopted FIN 48 and
recognized a reduction in recognized deferred tax asset for
unrecognized tax benefits totaling $744,000. Because of the
Companys net loss position and full valuation allowance on
net deferred tax assets, the adoption of FIN 48 had no
impact on the Companys balance sheet or accumulated
deficit upon implementation.
The Companys policy is to record interest and penalties
related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense. As
of September 30, 2007 the Company has no accrued interest
or penalties related to uncertain tax positions. Tax returns for
all years are open for audit by the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) until the Company begins utilizing its net
operating losses as the IRS has the ability to adjust the amount
of a net operating loss utilized on an income tax return. The
Companys primary state jurisdiction is the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts.
F-11
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Segment Reporting Operating segments are
identified as components of an enterprise about which separate
discrete financial information is available for evaluation by
the chief decision-maker, or decision-making group, in making
decisions regarding resource allocation and assessing
performance. The Company, which uses consolidated financial
information in determining how to allocate resources and assess
performance, has determined that it operates in one segment.
Treasury Stock Shares of the Companys
stock that are repurchased are recorded as treasury stock at
cost and included as a component of stockholders deficit.
Stock-Based Compensation On January 1,
2006, the Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 123(R), Share-Based
Payment, (SFAS 123(R)) to account for
stock-based awards. SFAS 123(R) addresses accounting for
share-based awards, including shares issued under employee stock
purchase plans, stock options, and share-based awards with
compensation cost measured using the fair value of the awards
issued. The Company adopted SFAS 123(R) using the
prospective transition method, which requires the Company to
recognize compensation cost for awards granted and awards
modified, repurchased or cancelled on or after January 1,
2006. These costs are recognized on a straight-line basis over
the requisite service period for all time vested awards.
Prior to January 1, 2006, the Company accounted for
stock-based awards to employees using the intrinsic value method
as prescribed by Accounting Principles Board (APB)
Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees, and related interpretations. No compensation
expense was recorded for options issued to employees in fixed
amounts and with fixed exercise prices at least equal to the
fair value of the Companys common stock at the date of
grant.
The Company makes a number of estimates and assumptions related
to SFAS 123(R). The estimation of share-based awards that
will ultimately vest requires judgment, and to the extent actual
results differ from the Companys estimates, such amounts
will be recorded as an adjustment in the period estimates are
revised. Actual results may differ substantially from these
estimates. The Company also uses significant judgment in
determining the expected volatility of its common stock and the
expected term of the awards.
In determining the exercise prices for stock-based awards, the
Companys Board of Directors considers the estimated fair
value of the common stock as of each grant date. The
determination of the deemed fair value of the Companys
common stock involves significant assumptions, estimates and
complexities that impact the amount of stock-based compensation.
The estimated fair value of the Companys common stock has
been determined by the Board of Directors after considering a
broad range of factors including, but not limited to, the
illiquid nature of an investment in common stock, the
Companys historical financial performance and financial
position, the Companys significant accomplishments and
future prospects, opportunity for liquidity events and, recent
sale and offer prices of the common and convertible preferred
stock in private transactions negotiated at arms length.
Foreign Currency Translation The financial
position and results of operations of the Companys foreign
subsidiary are measured using local currency as the functional
currency. Assets and liabilities are translated at the rate of
exchange in effect at the end of each reporting period. Revenues
and expenses are translated at the average exchange rate for the
period. Foreign currency translation gains and losses are
recorded within accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements In September
2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value
Measurements (SFAS 157), which establishes
a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures
about the use of fair value measurements subsequent to initial
recognition. Prior to the issuance of SFAS 157, which
emphasizes that fair value is a market-based measurement and not
an entity-specific measurement, there were different definitions
of fair value and limited definitions for applying those
definitions under generally accepted accounting principles.
SFAS 157 is effective for the Company on a prospective
basis for the reporting
F-12
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
period beginning January 1, 2008. The Company is evaluating
the impact of SFAS 157 on its financial position, results
of operations and cash flows.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The
Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities
(SFAS 159). SFAS 159 expands
opportunities to use fair value measurements in financial
reporting and permits entities to choose to measure certain
financial instruments at fair value. SFAS 159 is effective
for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. The
Company is evaluating the impact of SFAS 159 on its
financial position, result of operations and cash flows.
In December 2007 the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R),
Business Combinations, (SFAS 141(R))
which replaces SFAS 141. SFAS 141(R) establishes
principles and requirements for how an acquirer recognizes and
measures in its financial statements the identifiable assets
acquired, the liabilities assumed, any noncontrolling interest
in the acquiree and the goodwill acquired. The Statement also
establishes disclosure requirements which will enable users of
the financial statements to evaluate the nature and financial
effects of the business combination. SFAS 141(R) is
effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
2008. The Company has not determined the effect that the
application of SFAS 141(R) will have on its consolidated
financial statements.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interest in Consolidated Financial
Statements an amendment of Accounting Research
Bulletin No. 51 (SFAS 160), which
establishes accounting and reporting standards for ownership
interests in subsidiaries held by parties other than the parent,
the amount of consolidated net income attributable to the parent
and to the noncontrolling interest, changes to a parents
ownership interest and the valuation of retained noncontrolling
equity investments when a subsidiary is deconsolidated. The
Statement also establishes reporting requirements that provide
sufficient disclosures that clearly identify and distinguish
between the interests of the parent and the interests of the
noncontrolling owners. SFAS 160 is effective for fiscal
years beginning after December 15, 2008. The Company has
not determined the effect that the application of SFAS 160
will have on its consolidated financial statements.
|
|
3.
|
PROPERTY
AND EQUIPMENT
|
Property and equipment consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
As of September 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Equipment
|
|
$
|
6,011,620
|
|
|
$
|
8,389,414
|
|
|
$
|
9,253,675
|
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
2,352,938
|
|
|
|
2,806,447
|
|
|
|
2,816,566
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
8,528,586
|
|
|
|
8,828,501
|
|
|
|
9,332,068
|
|
Software
|
|
|
2,586,667
|
|
|
|
3,325,212
|
|
|
|
3,791,765
|
|
Construction in progress
|
|
|
1,105,708
|
|
|
|
189,261
|
|
|
|
314,105
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property and equipment, at cost
|
|
|
20,585,519
|
|
|
|
23,538,835
|
|
|
|
25,508,179
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(5,769,188
|
)
|
|
|
(10,057,552
|
)
|
|
|
(13,554,690
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
14,816,331
|
|
|
$
|
13,481,283
|
|
|
|
11,953,489
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation expense on property and equipment was $1,988,140,
$3,302,897 and $4,716,540 for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively and $3,431,661 and $3,547,599
for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 and 2007,
respectively (unaudited).
During 2005, depreciation expense includes amounts of
approximating $315,000 relating to a change in the estimated
useful lives of certain equipment and leasehold improvements in
connection with the relocation of the Companys
headquarters. Additionally, in connection with the relocation,
the Company wrote off fully
F-13
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
depreciated assets totaling approximately $4,700,000 during
2005. Since the assets were fully depreciated and no longer in
service, there was no impact on the statement of operations.
The summary of available-for-sale securities at
December 31, 2006 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate bonds
|
|
$
|
5,578,874
|
|
|
$
|
(34,046
|
)
|
|
$
|
5,544,828
|
|
Scheduled maturity dates of corporate bonds as of
December 31, 2006 were within one year and therefore
investments are classified as short-term. Realized gains and
losses on sales of these investments were not material for the
periods presented. The Company held no investments at
December 31, 2005 or September 30, 2007.
|
|
5.
|
OPERATING
LEASES AND OTHER COMMITMENTS
|
The Company maintains operating leases for facilities and
certain office equipment. The facility leases contain renewal
options and require payments of certain utilities, taxes, and
shared operating costs of the leased facility. The Company also
rents certain of its leased facilities to third-party tenants.
The rental agreements expire at various dates from 2007 to 2015.
The Company entered into a lease agreement with a new landlord
in connection with the relocation of its corporate offices in
June 2005. The Company assumed possession of the leased space in
January of 2005, with a rent commencement date of June 2005 and
expiration date of June 2015. The Company was not required to
pay rent from January 2005 through June 2005. The Company
recognizes rent escalations and lease incentives for this lease
on a straight-line basis over the lease period from January 2005
(date of possession) to June 2015.
Under the terms of such lease agreement, the landlord provided
approximately $9.4 million in allowances to the Company for
the leasehold improvements for the office space and
reimbursement of moving costs. These lease incentives are being
recorded as a reduction of rent expense on a straight-line basis
over the term of the new lease. The Company has recorded the
leasehold improvements in property and equipment in the
accompanying balance sheets. Moving costs were expensed as
incurred.
Additionally, the landlord agreed to make all payments under the
Companys lease agreement relating to its previous office
space, amounting to approximately $2.1 million. The Company
recognized the lease costs when the Company ceased to use the
previous office space. The payments and incentives received from
the new landlord are being recognized over the new lease term.
The lease agreement contains certain financial and operational
covenants. These covenants provide for restrictions on, among
other things, a change in control of the Company and certain
structural additions to the premises, without prior consent from
the landlord.
Rent expense totaled $1,158,127, $4,942,567 and $2,881,396 for
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2005 and 2006,
respectively. Rent expense for the nine-months ended
September 30, 2006 and September 30, 2007 was
$2,506,045 (unaudited) and $2,147,401 (unaudited), respectively.
Rent expense for the year ended December 31, 2005, includes
a charge of $1,738,441, related to the relocation of the Company
headquarters, when the Company ceased using the previous leased
space. In June 2005, the Company entered into a sub-lease
agreement, which generated rental income of $310,337 and
$165,219 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. Rental income was $82,668 (unaudited) and $122,712
(unaudited) for the nine
F-14
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
months ended September 30, 2006 and September 30, 2007
(unaudited), respectively, and has been recorded as a reduction
in rent expense.
Future minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating
leases as of December 31, 2006 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future Rent
|
|
|
Future Sublease
|
|
Years Ending December 31
|
|
Payments
|
|
|
Income Payments
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
3,655,003
|
|
|
$
|
315,895
|
|
2008
|
|
|
3,782,219
|
|
|
|
195,448
|
|
2009
|
|
|
3,931,380
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
4,087,624
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
4,263,834
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
16,208,120
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments
|
|
$
|
35,928,180
|
|
|
$
|
511,343
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In April 2007, the Company entered into a noncancelable contract
with an availability services provider for data center services
in the event of a service interruption in our primary data
center. The term of the agreement is 36 months, commencing
in July 2007 at a monthly rate of $27,161, for a total payments
of $977,796 over the term of the agreement.
In May 2007, the Company entered into a ten year, noncancelable
lease agreement with a data center provider in Bedford,
Massachusetts. Under the agreement, the Company took possession
of a portion of the contracted space in June 2007. Minimum
payments under the lease total $119,000 in 2007 and $6,133,423
over the life of the agreement.
The Company has a revolving line of credit (LOC)
with a bank, which has a maximum available borrowing amount of
$10 million at December 31, 2006 and was scheduled to
mature in August 2007. The LOC contains certain financial and
nonfinancial covenants. In January 2007, the Company amended the
LOC to adjust the interest rate to the prime rate and amend the
financial covenant related to the Companys adjusted quick
ratio. In May 2007, the Company extended the maturity date of
the LOC to August 2008.
Borrowings under the LOC are limited by the outstanding eligible
accounts receivable balance of the Company, and may be further
limited by accounts receivable concentrations, as defined. The
LOC is collateralized by a first security interest in
receivables, deposit accounts, and investments of the Company
that have not been pledged as collateral under previous
outstanding loan agreements and a second priority interest in
intellectual property (see Note 7). As of December 31,
2006, principal amounts outstanding under the LOC accrue
interest at a per-annum rate equal to the banks prime rate
plus 0.50%. As of September 30, 2007, principal amounts
outstanding under the LOC will accrue interest at a per-annum
rate equal to the banks prime rate. In addition to the
interest payment for outstanding amounts, the Company is
required to pay a commitment fee equal to 0.125% of the average
of the unused portion of the LOC, which is payable quarterly in
arrears and recorded as additional interest expense. The Company
had $4,399,776 and $7,204,034 outstanding under this LOC at
December 31, 2005 and 2006, respectively and no balance
outstanding at September 30, 2007 (unaudited). The interest
rate in effect at December 31, 2006 and September 30,
2007 was 8.75% and 8.00% (unaudited), respectively. The
available borrowings under the LOC at December 31, 2006 and
September 30, 2007 were $442,910 and $8,960,728
(unaudited), respectively.
F-15
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The summary of outstanding long-term debt is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Subordinate note
|
|
$
|
12,000,000
|
|
|
$
|
14,000,000
|
|
|
$
|
17,000,000
|
|
Equipment lines of credit
|
|
|
4,148,486
|
|
|
|
6,469,355
|
|
|
|
6,093,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,148,486
|
|
|
|
20,469,355
|
|
|
|
23,093,671
|
|
Less unamortized discount
|
|
|
(411,310
|
)
|
|
|
(380,339
|
)
|
|
|
(276,756
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
15,737,176
|
|
|
|
20,089,016
|
|
|
|
22,816,915
|
|
Less current portion of long term debt
|
|
|
(1,843,504
|
)
|
|
|
(3,116,297
|
)
|
|
|
(7,596,407
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt, net of current portion and debt discount
|
|
$
|
13,893,672
|
|
|
$
|
16,972,719
|
|
|
$
|
15,220,508
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subordinate Note In December 2005, the
Company entered into a $12,000,000 loan and security agreement
(the subordinate note) with a financing company.
Proceeds were used to extinguish the term loan (see below) and
for general operating purposes. The subordinate note is
collateralized by a first security interest in intellectual
property of the Company and second priority interest in
receivables, deposit accounts, and investments of the Company
that have not been pledged as collateral under the LOC (see
Note 6). The subordinate note also contains certain
financial and nonfinancial covenants. Interest is payable
monthly at a rate of prime plus 3%. In connection with the
subordinate note, the Company issued seven-year warrants to
purchase 124,000 shares of the Companys Series E
Preferred Stock at an exercise price of $5.04 per share. The
warrants expire in December 2012 and were valued using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model (see Note 9). The gross
proceeds were allocated between the subordinate note and the
warrants based upon their relative fair values and totaled
$11,602,400 and $397,600, respectively. The difference between
the face amount of the subordinate note and the amount assigned
to the subordinate note was recorded as a debt discount and is
being accreted over the life of the subordinate note as
additional interest expense.
In September 2006, the Company borrowed an additional
$2,000,000, increasing the outstanding balance on the
subordinate note to $14,000,000. Principal payments of $466,666
are scheduled to be made in 30 equal monthly payments beginning
February 1, 2008. In connection with the increase in the
subordinate note, the Company issued seven-year warrants to
purchase 24,000 shares of the Companys Series E
Preferred Stock at an exercise price of $5.04 per share. The
warrants expire in September 2013 and were valued using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model (see Note 9). The additional
proceeds were allocated between the subordinate note and the
warrants based upon their relative fair values and totaled
$1,914,336 and $85,664, respectively. The difference between the
face amount of the additional subordinate note and the amount
assigned to the additional subordinate note was recorded as a
debt discount and is being accreted over the life of the
additional subordinate note as additional interest expense.
The interest rate on the subordinated note at December 31,
2006 was 11.25%. The subordinate notes can be prepaid in whole
or in part subject to a prepayment penalty equal to 3% of the
amount prepaid if prepayment occurs prior to December 28,
2007. After such time, the prepayment penalty decreases to 1% of
the amount prepaid.
In June 2007, the Company amended the subordinate note and
borrowed an additional $3,000,000 from the financing company,
which increased the outstanding balance on the subordinate note
to $17,000,000. The amendment increased the monthly principal
payments to $566,666 commencing February 1, 2008. The
amendment also modified the interest rate on the subordinate
note to the prime rate plus 1.75% (9.75% at
F-16
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
September 30, 2007). In connection with the amendment, the
Company issued seven-year warrants to purchase 5,000 shares
of the Companys Series E Preferred Stock at an exercise
price of $9.30 per share. These warrants expire in June 2014 and
were valued using the Black-Scholes option pricing model (see
Note 9). The proceeds were allocated between the
subordinate note and the warrants and totaled $2,967,140 and
$32,860, respectively. The fair value of the warrants was
recorded as a debt discount and is being accreted over the life
of the additional subordinate note as additional interest
expense. The warrants are included in the warrant liability in
the consolidated balance sheet.
Term Loan In November 2003, the Company
entered into a $6,000,000 term loan with a financing company and
a bank. The term loan was subordinate to the LOC (see
Note 6) and to other loan agreements collateralized by
specific assets. Principal amounts were originally scheduled to
be repaid in 30 equal monthly payments beginning June 2005.
Interest was payable monthly beginning in December 2004 at the
greater of 9.25%, or the prime rate plus 5%, In connection with
the term loan, the Company issued seven-year warrants to
purchase 235,424 shares of the Companys Series D
Preferred Stock at an exercise price of $3.08 per share. The
warrants expire in November 2010 and were valued using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model (see Note 9). The gross
proceeds were allocated between the term loan and warrants based
upon their relative fair value and totaled $5,473,781 and
$526,219, respectively. The difference between the face amount
of the term loan and the amount assigned to the term loan was
recorded as a debt discount and was being accreted over the life
of the term loan as additional interest expense.
In February 2005, the Company amended the term loan, deferring
the beginning of principal repayment until January of 2006. In
connection with this amendment, the bank and the financing
company received 30,000 warrants to purchase Series E
Preferred Stock at an exercise price of $5.04 per share. The
warrants expire in February 2012 and were valued using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model (see Note 9). The
resulting fair value of $95,270, was recorded as additional
interest expense.
In December 2005, the Company paid the balance of the term loan
and recorded additional charges to interest expense of $244,000
to fully amortize the debt discount, write off outstanding
deferred financing fees and recognize a penalty for the early
extinguishment of the debt.
Equipment Lines of Credit A summary of
equipment lines of credit is as follows, which consist of
promissory notes and an equipment line of credit that may be
used to fund capital equipment purchases:
Promissory Notes In March, June and September
of 2006, the Company entered into promissory note and security
agreements (the Promissory Notes) with a finance
company totaling $3,595,783, which are collateralized by
specific equipment. The Promissory Notes are payable in 36 equal
monthly installments, with interest equal to 10.69% per annum.
In connection with the Promissory Notes, the Company issued
seven-year warrants to purchase a total of 7,134 shares of
the Companys Series E Preferred Stock at exercise
prices of $5.04 per share. The warrants expire 7 years from
issuance and were valued using the Black-Scholes option pricing
model (see Note 9). The gross proceeds were allocated
between the Promissory Notes and the warrants based upon their
relative fair values and totaled $3,570,318 and $25,465,
respectively. The difference between the face amount of the
Promissory Notes and the amount assigned to the Promissory Notes
was recorded as a debt discount and is being accreted over the
life of the Promissory Notes as additional interest expense.
In December 2006, the Company entered into an additional
promissory note (the December 2006 Promissory Note)
for $1,157,150, with the same financing company. The December
2006 Promissory Note is payable in 36 equal monthly
installments, with interest equal to 10.48% per annum. In
connection with the December 2006 Promissory Note, the Company
issued seven-year warrants to purchase 2,296 shares of the
Companys series E Preferred Stock at an exercise
price of $5.04 per share. The warrants expire in December of
2013 and were valued using the Black-Scholes option pricing
model (see Note 9). The amounts assigned to the December
2006 Promissory Note and the warrants were $1,148,971
F-17
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
and $8,179, respectively. The difference between the face amount
of the December 2006 Promissory Note and the amount assigned to
the December 2006 Promissory Note was recorded as a debt
discount and is being accreted over the life of the December
2006 Promissory Note as additional interest expense.
As of December 31, 2006 and September 30, 2007, the
Company had $4,064,988 and $4,091,448 (unaudited), respectively,
outstanding under the Promissory Notes and the December 2006
Promissory Note and $23,895 and $12,723 (unaudited) of
unamortized debt discount, respectively. The Promissory Notes
and the December 2006 Promissory Notes are subject to a
prepayment penalty of 3% of the amount repaid if repayment
occurs prior to June 21, 2007, 2% if prepayment occurs
prior to June 2008 and 1% of the amount prepaid if repayment
occurs prior to June 2008.
In March 2007, the Company entered into a promissory note (the
March 2007 Promissory Note) for $400,677 with the
same financing company, which is payable in 36 equal monthly
installments, with interest equal to 11.51% per annum. The March
2007 Promissory Note is collateralized by specific equipment.
In May 2007, the Company entered into a promissory note (the
May 2007 Promissory Note) for $838,205 with the same
financing company, which is payable in 36 equal monthly
installments, with interest equal to 11.58% per annum. The May
2007 Promissory Note is collateralized by specific equipment.
Equipment Line In February 2005, the Company
entered into a $3,500,000 master loan and security agreement
(the Equipment Line) with a financing company. The
Equipment Line allows for the Company to be reimbursed for
eligible equipment purchases, submitted within 120 days of
the applicable equipments invoice date. Each borrowing is
payable in 33 equal monthly installments, commencing on the
first day of the fourth month after the date of the
disbursements of such loan and continuing on the first day of
each month thereafter until paid in full. The interest rate in
effect each month shall be equal to the greater of 9% or the
prime rate in effect on the last day of the month, plus 3.75%.
In connection with the Equipment Line, the Company issued
seven-year warrants to purchase 6,945 shares of the
Companys Series E Preferred Stock at an exercise
price of $5.04 per share. The gross proceeds were allocated
based upon their relative fair value. The amounts assigned to
the Equipment Line and warrants were $3,257,671 and $22,055,
respectively. The debt discount is being accreted over the life
of the Equipment Line as additional interest expense. As of
December 31, 2005 and 2006, the Company had $2,913,778 and
$1,847,034, respectively, outstanding under the Equipment Line
and $13,710 and $4,629, respectively, of unamortized debt
discount. At September 30, 2007, the Company had $952,563
(unaudited) outstanding under the Equipment Line and $1,032
(unaudited) of unamortized debt discount. The interest rate on
the Equipment Line at December 31, 2006 and
September 30, 2007 was 12.0%.
In June 2007, the Company entered into a $6,000,000 master
loan and security agreement (the June 2007 Equipment
Line) with a financing company. The Equipment Line allows
for the Company to be reimbursed for eligible equipment
purchases, submitted within 90 days of the applicable
equipments invoice date. Each borrowing is payable in 36
equal monthly installments, commencing on the first day of the
fourth month after the date of the disbursements of such loan
and continuing on the first day of each month thereafter until
paid in full. At September 30, 2007, the Company had $878,036
(unaudited) outstanding under the Equipment Line. The weighted
average interest rate on the Equipment Line at
September 30, 2007 was 5.6%.
Security Agreement In August 2002, the
Company entered into a $500,000 master security agreement (the
Security Agreement) with a leasing company, which is
collateralized by specific equipment. The Company amended the
Security Agreement at various dates through June 2004, which
increased the commitment amount to $2,256,068. The Security
Agreement allows the Company to be reimbursed for eligible
equipment purchased. The amounts borrowed under the Security
Agreement are payable over 36 to 42 months with interest
ranging from 7.89% to 8.89%. Interest rates on certain
borrowings may be increased or decreased
F-18
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
by the number of points that the yield on three-year interest
rate swaps on the term commencement date is above or below
2.56%. At December 31, 2005 and 2006, the Company had
$1,083,190 and $557,333, respectively, outstanding under the
Security Agreement. At September 30, 2007, the Company had
$171,630 (unaudited) outstanding under the Security Agreement.
The interest rates in effect at December 31, 2006 and
September 30, 2007 ranged from 7.91% to 8.87% (unaudited).
The Security Agreement can be repaid prior to the maturity date,
however the instrument has prepayment penalties ranging from 1%
to 4%, based upon dates of prepayments.
In addition, during 2005, the Company repaid the balance due of
$151,518 under a master equipment lease agreement originating in
November 2002.
Future principal payments on debt as of December 31, 2006,
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ending December 31
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
$
|
3,116,297
|
|
2008
|
|
|
7,512,544
|
|
2009
|
|
|
6,573,845
|
|
2010
|
|
|
3,266,669
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
20,469,355
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less current portion
|
|
|
(3,116,297
|
)
|
Less unamortized debt discount
|
|
|
(380,339
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term portion
|
|
$
|
16,972,719
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys borrowings are secured by substantially all
of the Companys assets, including intellectual property
and our loan agreements restrict our ability to incur
indebtedness, create liens, make investments, sell assets, pay
dividends or make distributions on and, in certain cases,
repurchase shares of the Companys stock or consolidate or
merge with other entities.
Interest paid was $1,218,184, $1,252,382, and $1,944,866 for the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2005 and 2006, respectively
and $1,862,465 and $2,388,146 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 and September 30, 2007,
respectively (unaudited).
|
|
8.
|
CONVERTIBLE
PREFERRED STOCK
|
The Company has designated seven series of convertible preferred
stock (preferred stock). All series have a par value
of $0.01 per share. A summary of the preferred stock at
December 31, 2005 and 2006 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Par
|
|
|
Liquidation
|
|
|
|
Authorized
|
|
|
Issued
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Series A-1
|
|
|
1,600,000
|
|
|
|
1,600,000
|
|
|
|
1,600,000
|
|
|
$
|
16,000
|
|
|
$
|
1,600,000
|
|
Series A-2
|
|
|
1,045,015
|
|
|
|
1,041,310
|
|
|
|
787,748
|
|
|
|
10,413
|
|
|
|
1,063,460
|
|
Series B-1
|
|
|
1,250,000
|
|
|
|
1,077,000
|
|
|
|
627,000
|
|
|
|
10,770
|
|
|
|
30,096
|
|
Series B-2
|
|
|
127,605
|
|
|
|
116,367
|
|
|
|
19,395
|
|
|
|
1,164
|
|
|
|
20,947
|
|
Series C
|
|
|
8,000,000
|
|
|
|
7,214,288
|
|
|
|
7,214,288
|
|
|
|
72,143
|
|
|
|
10,100,003
|
|
Series D
|
|
|
12,977,380
|
|
|
|
9,993,342
|
|
|
|
9,993,342
|
|
|
|
99,933
|
|
|
|
30,779,493
|
|
Series E
|
|
|
1,389,684
|
|
|
|
1,289,684
|
|
|
|
1,289,684
|
|
|
|
12,897
|
|
|
|
6,500,007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
26,389,684
|
|
|
|
22,331,991
|
|
|
|
21,531,457
|
|
|
$
|
223,320
|
|
|
$
|
50,094,006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-19
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
All outstanding shares of the Companys convertible
preferred stock were converted into 21,531,457 shares
(unaudited) of common stock upon completion of the initial
public offering in September 2007.
A summary of the rights, preferences, and privileges of the
preferred stock is as follows:
Dividends The holders of each series of
preferred stock are entitled to receive, prior to any
distribution to the holders of common stock, preferential,
noncumulative dividends when and if declared by the Board of
Directors of the Company. No dividends shall be paid or declared
on common shares unless and until dividends on the preferred
stock have been paid or declared and set aside for payments in
amounts equal to the stated dividend rights. The holders of
Series C Preferred, Series D Preferred, and
Series E Preferred Stock shall be entitled to receive
noncumulative dividends at a rate of 8% per annum, when and if
declared by the Board of Directors. No dividends of any kind
have been declared to date.
Liquidation In the event of any liquidation,
dissolution, or
winding-up
of the Company (including a change of control), the holders of
preferred stock are entitled to receive, out of the assets of
the Company available for distribution to its stockholders, a
per-share amount equal to $1 per share in the case of the
Series A-1
Preferred Stock, $1.35 per share in the case of the
Series A-2
Preferred Stock, $.048 per share in the case of the Series B-1
Preferred Stock, $1.08 per share in the case of the
Series B-2
Preferred Stock, $1.40 per share in the case of the
Series C Preferred Stock, $3.08 per share in the case of
the Series D Preferred Stock, and $5.04 per share in the
case of Series E Preferred Stock, plus any accrued but
unpaid dividends (the liquidation value). In the
event of liquidation, the order of these preference payments
would be as follows: E, D, C,
A-2,
A-1, B-2,
and B-1. These distributions will be made prior to any
distributions to other stockholders. Any amounts remaining after
such distributions will be distributed to the holders of the
common stock and the preferred stock on parity with each other
(on an as-converted basis). In the event that holders of
preferred stock do not convert their shares to common,
liquidation payments are limited to $7.70 per share for
Series E Preferred Stock and Series D Preferred Stock
and to $4.00 per share for Series C Preferred Stock.
Conversion Holders of shares of preferred
stock have the right to convert their shares, at any time, into
shares of common stock. The conversion rate for each series of
preferred stock is one for one. The conversion rate for each
series of preferred stock is subject (i) to proportional
adjustments for splits, reverse splits, recapitalizations, etc.
and (ii) to formula-weighted-average adjustments in the
event that the Company issues additional shares of common stock
or securities convertible into or exercisable for common stock
at a purchase price less than the applicable conversion price
then in effect, other than the issuance of shares to directors,
officers, employees, and consultants pursuant to stock plans
approved by the Board of Directors and certain other exceptions.
Each share of preferred stock will be automatically converted
into shares of common stock upon the closing of the sale of
shares of common stock at a price of $7.56 per share or greater
(subject to appropriate adjustment for stock dividends, stock
splits, combinations, and other similar recapitalizations
affecting such shares) in an underwritten public offering,
pursuant to an effective registration statement under the
Securities Act of 1933, resulting in at least $50 million
in gross proceeds. At the issuance date of each series of
preferred stock, the Company determined that no beneficial
conversion features existed. In addition, no contingent events
have occurred through September 30, 2007 that have created
any beneficial conversion features.
Voting Generally, holders of shares of
preferred stock vote on all matters, including the election of
directors, with the holders of shares of common stock on an
as-if-converted basis, except when law requires a class vote.
Redemption On or after April 15, 2009,
at the written election of the holders of at least two-thirds in
interest of the Series E Preferred Stock and Series D
Preferred Stock, voting together as a single class, and upon
notice to the Company, the Company shall redeem 50% of all of
the shares of the Series E Preferred Stock and
Series D Preferred Stock then outstanding. The Company
shall redeem the remaining
F-20
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
outstanding shares of Series E Preferred Stock and
Series D Preferred Stock on the first anniversary of the
redemption date. Each share of the Series E Preferred Stock
and Series D Preferred Stock will be redeemed for $5.04 and
$3.08, respectively, plus any declared but unpaid dividends.
Investor Rights The holders of preferred
stock, warrants to purchase shares of preferred stock and
warrants to purchase shares of common stock have certain rights
to register shares of common stock received upon conversion of
such instruments under the Securities Act of 1933 pursuant to a
registration rights agreement and an investor rights agreement.
These holders are entitled, if the Company registers common
stock, to include their shares of common stock in such
registration; however, the number of shares which may be
registered thereby is subject to limitation by the underwriters.
The investors will also be entitled to unlimited piggyback
registration rights on registrations of the Company, subject to
certain limitations. The Company will bear all fees, costs and
expenses of these registrations, other than underwriting
discounts and commissions.
Presentation As a result of the change in
control provision for all series of preferred stock and the
redemption features of the Series D and Series E
Preferred Stock, the Company has classified the preferred stock
outside of permanent equity to comply with the provisions of
Accounting Series Release No. 268, Redeemable
Preferred Stocks, and Emerging Issues Task Force
(EITF) D-98, Classification and Measurement of
Redeemable Securities. The preferred stock is carried at
redemption value in the Companys consolidated balance
sheets, as appropriate.
|
|
9.
|
COMMON
STOCK AND WARRANTS
|
Common Stock Common stockholders are entitled
to one vote per share and dividends when declared by the Board
of Directors, subject to the preferential rights of preferred
stockholders.
Warrants In connection with a bridge
financing with a bank in August 1999 and the LOC in March 2000,
the Company issued warrants to purchase 31,481 and
28,571 shares, respectively, of the Companys
Series A-2
and Series C Preferred Stock at exercise prices of $1.35
and $1.40 per share, respectively. The warrants are exercisable
through 2009 and 2010, respectively.
During September 2004, the
Series A-2
Preferred Stock warrants issued to a bank under the previous
bridge financing, which were due to expire, were extended by the
Company. Accordingly, the fair value of the warrants was
remeasured at the extension date, resulting in additional
interest expense of $126,735 being recorded in the statement of
operations for the year ended December 31, 2004. The fair
value of the warrants was determined using the Black-Scholes
valuation with a risk-free interest rate of 3%, no dividend
yield, volatility of 69%, and a contractual life of three years.
In connection with equipment financing with a finance company
and a bank in May 2001, the Company issued warrants to purchase
64,936 shares of the Companys Series D Preferred
Stock at an exercise price of $3.08 per share. The warrants are
exercisable through May 2011.
In connection with a master equipment lease agreement entered
into in November 2002 (see Note 7), the Company issued
warrants to purchase 75,000 shares of the Companys
common stock at an exercise price of $0.62 per share. The
warrants are exercisable through October 2012.
In connection with the LOC in November 2003 (see Note 7),
the Company issued warrants to purchase 235,424 shares of
the Companys Series D Preferred Stock at an exercise
price of $3.08 per share. The warrants are exercisable through
November 2010. The fair value of the warrants was determined
using the Black-Scholes valuation method with a risk-free
interest rate of 3%, no dividend yield, volatility of 78%, and a
contractual life of seven years.
In connection with the amendment to the term loan in February
2005 (see Note 7), the Company issued warrants to purchase
36,945 shares of the Companys Series E Preferred
Stock at an exercise price of $5.04
F-21
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
per share. The warrants are exercisable through February 2012.
The fair value of the warrants was determined using the
Black-Scholes valuation method with a risk-free interest rate of
3.97%, no dividend yield, volatility of 60% and a contractual
life of seven years.
In connection with the Subordinate Note in December 2005 (see
Note 7), the Company issued warrants to purchase
124,000 shares of the Companys Series E
Preferred Stock at an exercise price of $5.04 per share. The
warrants are exercisable through December 2012. The fair value
of the warrants was determined using the Black-Scholes valuation
method with a risk-free interest rate of 4.41%, no dividend
yield, volatility of 60%, and a contractual life of seven years.
In connection with the September 2006 amendment to the
Subordinate Note (see Note 7), the Company issued
additional warrants to purchase 24,000 shares of the
Companys Series E Preferred Stock at an exercise
price of $5.04 per share to the financing company. The warrants
are exercisable through September 2013. The fair value of the
warrants was determined using the Black-Scholes valuation method
with a risk-free interest rate of 4.83%, no dividend yield,
volatility of 71% and a contractual life of seven years.
In connection with the Promissory Notes entered into in March,
June and September 2006 (see Note 7), the Company issued
warrants to purchase 7,134 shares of the Companys
Series E Preferred Stock at exercise prices of $5.04 per
share, respectively. These warrants are exercisable through
March, June and September 2013. The fair value of the warrants
was determined using the Black-Scholes valuation method with a
risk-free interest rate of 4.71% and 5.03% respectively, no
dividend yield, volatility of 71%, and a contractual life of
seven years.
In connection with promissory notes entered into in September
2006 and December 2006 (see Note 7), the Company issued
warrants to purchase 1,050 and 2,296 shares of the
Companys Series E Preferred Stock at an exercise
price of $5.04 per share, respectively. These warrants are
exercisable through September 2013 and December 2013
respectively. The fair value of the warrants was determined
using the Black-Scholes valuation method with a risk-free
interest rate of 4.83% and 4.70% respectively, no dividend
yield, volatility of 71% and a contractual life of seven years.
A summary of warrants outstanding at December 31, 2006 is
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warrants
|
|
|
Average Exercise
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
Expiration
|
|
Common stock
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
$
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
10 years
|
|
|
2012
|
Preferred stock:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A-2
|
|
|
31,481
|
|
|
|
1.35
|
|
|
|
8 years
|
|
|
2012
|
Series C
|
|
|
28,571
|
|
|
|
1.40
|
|
|
|
10 years
|
|
|
2010
|
Series D
|
|
|
300,360
|
|
|
|
3.08
|
|
|
|
7 years
|
|
|
2008 - 2010
|
Series E
|
|
|
194,375
|
|
|
|
5.04
|
|
|
|
7 years
|
|
|
2012 - 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
629,787
|
|
|
$
|
3.23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In connection with the June 2007 amendment to the
Subordinate Note (see Note 7), the Company issued
additional warrants to purchase 5,000 shares of the
Companys Series E Preferred Stock at an exercise price of
$9.30 per share to a financing company. The warrants are
exercisable through June 2014. The fair value of the
warrants was determined using the Black-Scholes valuation method
with a risk-free interest rate of 4.69%, no dividend yield,
volatility of 71% and a contractual life of seven years.
Upon completion of the IPO, all of the Companys
outstanding preferred stock was automatically converted into
common stock and, accordingly, all warrants to purchase
preferred stock were converted into warrants to purchase common
stock. As of September 30, 2007 (unaudited), there were
154,936 common stock
F-22
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
warrants outstanding at a weighted average exercise price of
$2.08 per share. During the nine months ended September 30,
2007 (unaudited), warrant holders exercised approximately
470,421 warrants resulting in net proceeds to the Company of
$1,710,627 (unaudited). Warrants were also exercised during the
nine months ended September 30, 2007 (unaudited), using the
net issue exercise provision allowed under the terms of the
agreement, resulting in an additional 8,075 shares of
common stock issued to the warrant holder on the exercise of
9,430 warrants.
Effective with the adoption of
FSP 150-5
(see Note 2), the fair value of the Series D and
Series E Preferred Stock warrants are reported as warrant
liabilities at December 31, 2006. Upon completion of the
IPO, all of the Companys outstanding preferred stock was
automatically converted into common stock and, accordingly, all
warrants to purchase preferred stock were converted into
warrants to purchase common stock. Accordingly, the warrant
liability of $7,450,589 (unaudited) was reclassified to
additional paid-in capital upon completion of the initial public
offering.
Shares Reserved for Future Issuance The
Company has reserved shares of common stock for future issuance
for the following purposes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Conversion of preferred stock to common stock, including
preferred stock warrants
|
|
|
22,086,244
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock award plans
|
|
|
2,849,174
|
|
|
|
4,002,905
|
|
Warrants to purchase common stock
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
|
154,936
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
25,010,418
|
|
|
|
4,157,841
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Companys stock award plans provide the opportunity for
employees, consultants, and directors to be granted options to
purchase, receive awards, or make direct purchases of shares of
the Companys common stock, up to 5,237,821 shares. On
January 30, 2007, the Companys board of directors
voted to increase the number of shares eligible for grant under
the Companys stock award plans by 447,734. On May 2,
2007, the Companys board of directors voted to increase
the number of shares eligible for grant under the Companys
stock awards plans by 148,626. Options granted under the plan
may be incentive stock options or nonqualified options under the
applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code.
On August 31, 2007 the Companys 2007 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan (2007 ESPP) was adopted by the board
of directors and approved by the stockholders. A total of
500,000 shares of common stock has been reserved for future
issuance to participating employees under the 2007 ESPP.
Employees may authorize deductions from 1% to 10% of
compensation for each payroll period during the offering period.
Under the terms of the 2007 ESPP, the purchase price shall be
equal to 85% of the closing price of the common stock on the
purchase date.
On July 27, 2007, the board of directors and the
Companys shareholders of the Company approved the 2007
Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the 2007 Stock Option
Plan) effective as of the close of the Companys IPO
which occurred on September 25, 2007. The board of
directors authorized 1.0 million shares in addition to the
shares available under the Companys 2007 Stock Option
Plan. Options granted under the plan may be incentive stock
options or nonqualified options under the applicable provisions
of the Internal Revenue Code. The 2007 Stock Option Plan
includes an evergreen provision that allows for an
annual increase in the number of shares of common stock
available for issuance under the Plan. The annual increase will
be added on the first day of each fiscal year from 2008 through
2013, inclusive, and will be equal to the
F-23
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
lesser of (i) 5.0% of the number of then-outstanding shares
of stock and of the preceding December 31 and (ii) a number
as determined by the board of directors.
Incentive stock options are granted at or above the fair value
of the Companys common stock at the grant date as
determined by the Board of Directors. Incentive stock options
granted to employees who own more than 10% of the voting power
of all classes of stock are granted at 110% of the fair value of
the Companys common stock at the date of the grant.
Nonqualified options may be granted at amounts up to the fair
value of the Companys common stock on the date of the
grant, as determined by the Board of Directors. All options
granted vest over a range of one to four years and have
contractual terms of between five and ten years. Options granted
for new hires typically vest 25% per year over a total of four
years at each anniversary. Options granted as part of annual
assessments of performance (typically after year-end results are
evaluated) vest 60% ratably over the first three years and 40%
ratably over the last year of a four-year vesting term.
Under the terms of their employment agreements, certain
executives are due to receive options to purchase common stock
upon the achievement of specified Company milestones. Options
for the purchase of 230,000 shares of common stock would be
granted to these executives upon achievement of the milestone at
exercise prices equal to the fair value of the Companys
common stock on the grant date. In accordance with the
transition provisions under the prospective method of
SFAS 123(R), these options continue to be accounted for
under APB 25, whereby compensation expense is recognized in an
amount equal to the excess of the fair value over the exercise
price of the award. The Company has not achieved these
milestones as of September 30, 2007. Under the terms of
these awards, the exercise price will equal fair value at the
grant date and therefore no compensation expense has been
recognized to date.
Pursuant to stock option agreements between the Company and each
of its named executive officers, unvested stock options awarded
under these agreements shall become accelerated by a period of
one year upon the consummation of an acquisition of the Company.
For purposes of these agreements, an acquisition is defined as:
(i) the sale of the Company by merger in which its
shareholders in their capacity as such no longer own a majority
of the outstanding equity securities of the Company;
(ii) any sale of all or substantially all of the assets or
capital stock of the Company; or (iii) any other
acquisition of the business of the Company, as determined by its
board of directors.
At December 31, 2006 and September 30, 2007 there were
approximately 23,488 and 1,106,788 shares (unaudited),
respectively, available for grant under the Companys stock
award plans.
F-24
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table presents the stock option activity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In years)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding January 1, 2006
|
|
|
2,437,794
|
|
|
$
|
1.48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
702,532
|
|
|
|
6.08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(183,737
|
)
|
|
|
1.06
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(130,903
|
)
|
|
|
2.09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding December 31, 2006
|
|
|
2,825,686
|
|
|
$
|
2.62
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
12,945,901
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted (unaudited)
|
|
|
610,350
|
|
|
$
|
8.69
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised (unaudited)
|
|
|
(422,115
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited (unaudited)
|
|
|
(117,804
|
)
|
|
$
|
6.24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at September 30, 2007 (unaudited)
|
|
|
2,896,117
|
|
|
$
|
3.90
|
|
|
|
7.3
|
|
|
$
|
90,004,092
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable December 31, 2006
|
|
|
2,416,475
|
|
|
$
|
2.38
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
11,647,410
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at September 30, 2007 (unaudited)
|
|
|
2,360,659
|
|
|
$
|
3.10
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
$
|
75,243,483
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested and expected to vest at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
2,820,875
|
|
|
$
|
2.21
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
$
|
14,076,166
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vested and expected to vest at September 30, 2007
(unaudited)
|
|
|
2,607,896
|
|
|
$
|
3.56
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
$
|
79,158,921
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average fair value of options granted during the year
ended December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average fair value of options granted for the nine
months ended September 30, 2007 (unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.85
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-25
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The summary information about stock options outstanding at
December 31, 2006 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
Range of Exercise Price
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Life
|
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Life
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Years)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Years)
|
|
|
$0.28 - $0.45
|
|
|
109,541
|
|
|
$
|
0.28
|
|
|
|
3.50
|
|
|
|
109,541
|
|
|
$
|
0.28
|
|
|
|
3.50
|
|
0.46 - 0.92
|
|
|
1,298,868
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
6.10
|
|
|
|
1,214,516
|
|
|
|
0.62
|
|
|
|
6.10
|
|
0.93 - 2.50
|
|
|
152,245
|
|
|
|
2.02
|
|
|
|
7.70
|
|
|
|
133,392
|
|
|
|
2.00
|
|
|
|
7.70
|
|
2.51 - 3.50
|
|
|
470,913
|
|
|
|
3.42
|
|
|
|
8.30
|
|
|
|
425,756
|
|
|
|
3.42
|
|
|
|
8.30
|
|
3.51 - 4.50
|
|
|
18,744
|
|
|
|
3.80
|
|
|
|
8.50
|
|
|
|
6,434
|
|
|
|
3.80
|
|
|
|
8.60
|
|
4.51 - 5.26
|
|
|
255,073
|
|
|
|
4.98
|
|
|
|
9.00
|
|
|
|
123,362
|
|
|
|
5.02
|
|
|
|
8.90
|
|
5.27 - 6.50
|
|
|
168,502
|
|
|
|
5.88
|
|
|
|
9.40
|
|
|
|
73,474
|
|
|
|
6.02
|
|
|
|
9.10
|
|
6.51 - 7.50
|
|
|
351,800
|
|
|
|
6.58
|
|
|
|
9.70
|
|
|
|
330,000
|
|
|
|
6.58
|
|
|
|
9.70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,825,686
|
|
|
$
|
2.62
|
|
|
|
7.40
|
|
|
|
2,416,475
|
|
|
$
|
2.38
|
|
|
|
7.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a result of adoption of SFAS 123(R) on January 1,
2006, the Company recorded compensation expense of $356,329 for
the year ended December 31, 2006. The per share impact of
stock-based compensation for the year ended December 31,
2006 was ($0.08) per share, on a basic and diluted basis. There
was no impact on the presentation in the consolidated statements
of cash flows as no excess tax benefits have been realized
subsequent to adoption.
Stock-based compensation expense for the year ended
December 31, 2006 and for the nine months ended
September 30, 2006 and 2007 (unaudited) are as follows (no
amounts were capitalized):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation charged to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct operating
|
|
$
|
63,645
|
|
|
$
|
42,720
|
|
|
$
|
136,684
|
|
Selling and marketing
|
|
|
43,789
|
|
|
|
31,467
|
|
|
|
84,028
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
52,859
|
|
|
|
37,349
|
|
|
|
177,702
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
196,036
|
|
|
|
59,696
|
|
|
|
538,853
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
356,329
|
|
|
$
|
171,232
|
|
|
$
|
937,267
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model to value
share-based awards and determine the related compensation
expense. The assumptions used in calculating the fair value of
share-based awards represent managements best estimates.
The following table illustrates the weighted average assumptions
used to compute stock-based compensation expense for awards
granted during the year ended December 31, 2006 and the
nine months ended September 30, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
September 30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
4.9%
|
|
|
|
4.7%
|
|
Expected dividend yield
|
|
|
0.0%
|
|
|
|
0.0%
|
|
Expected option term (years)
|
|
|
6.25
|
|
|
|
6.25
|
|
Expected stock volatility
|
|
|
71.0%
|
|
|
|
71.0%
|
|
F-26
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The risk-free interest rate estimate was based on the
U.S. Treasury rates for U.S. Treasury zero-coupon
bonds with maturities similar to those of the expected term of
the award being valued.
The expected dividend yield was based on the Companys
expectation of not paying dividends in the foreseeable future.
The weighted average expected option term reflects the
application of the simplified method set forth in the Securities
and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107,
which was issued in March 2005 and is available for options
granted prior to December 31, 2007. The simplified method
defines the life as the average of the contractual term of the
options and the weighted average vesting period for all option
tranches.
The Company bases its estimate of expected volatility using
volatility data from comparable public companies in similar
industries and markets because there is currently no public
market for the Companys common stock, and therefore a lack
of market based company-specific historical and implied
volatility information. The Company intends to continue to
consistently apply this process using the same or similar
entities until a sufficient amount of historical information
regarding the volatility of its own share price becomes
available, or unless circumstances change such that the
identified entities are no longer similar to the Company.
SFAS 123(R) requires that the Company recognize
compensation expense for only the portion of options that are
expected to vest. In developing a forfeiture rate estimate, the
Company considered its historical experience and if necessary,
will revise such amounts in subsequent periods if actual
forfeitures differ from those estimates. The Company applied a
forfeiture rate of 17% in determining stock based compensation
expense for the year ended December 31, 2006 and the nine
months ended September 30, 2007 (unaudited).
At December 31, 2006 and September 30, 2007, there was
$2,460,284 and $4,618,400 (unaudited), respectively, of
unrecognized stock compensation expense related to unvested
share-based compensation arrangements granted under the
Companys stock award plans. This expense is expected to be
recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately
3.1 years.
Cash received from stock option exercises during the year ended
December 31, 2006 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2007 was $194,469 and $674,670 (unaudited),
respectively. The intrinsic value of the shares issued from
option exercises in the year ended December 31, 2006 and
the nine months ended September 30, 2007 was $898,535 and
$3,211,625 (unaudited), respectively. The Company generally
issues previously unissued shares for the exercise of stock
options, however the Company may reissue previously acquired
treasury shares to satisfy these issuances in the future.
F-27
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The components of the Companys deferred income taxes at
December 31, 2005 and 2006, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal net operating loss carryforward
|
|
$
|
15,951,800
|
|
|
$
|
18,918,800
|
|
State net operating loss carryforward
|
|
|
2,695,400
|
|
|
|
1,334,400
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
2,167,400
|
|
|
|
400,900
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
160,900
|
|
|
|
224,400
|
|
Fixed assets
|
|
|
330,900
|
|
|
|
555,900
|
|
Research and development tax credits
|
|
|
617,400
|
|
|
|
988,700
|
|
Deferred rent obligation
|
|
|
2,708,200
|
|
|
|
2,218,000
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
1,166,800
|
|
|
|
1,435,800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,798,800
|
|
|
|
26,075,500
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized software development
|
|
|
(841,900
|
)
|
|
|
(682,300
|
)
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
(2,052,000
|
)
|
|
|
(1,822,500
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,893,900
|
)
|
|
|
(2,504,800
|
)
|
Less valuation allowance
|
|
|
(22,904,900
|
)
|
|
|
(23,570,700
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company has recognized a full valuation allowance to offset
the net deferred tax assets as the Companys history of
losses does not support that it is more-likely than not that
these assets will be realized. The change in valuation allowance
during 2004, 2005 and 2006 was $1,741,600, $5,314,100, and
$665,800 respectively.
At December 31, 2006, the Company has federal and state net
operating loss carryforwards of approximately $55,640,000 and
$23,383,000, respectively to offset future federal and state
taxable income that begin to expire in 2007 and expire at
various times through 2025. The Company also has federal and
state research and development tax credit carryforwards of
approximately $690,800 and $297,900, respectively, available to
offset future federal and state taxes. Such credits expire at
various times through 2021. The utilization of net operating
loss and research and development tax credit carryforwards may
be subject to annual limitations under Sections 382 and 383
of the Internal Revenue Code.
F-28
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
A reconciliation of the federal statutory income tax rate to the
Companys effective income tax rate is as follows for the
years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Income tax computed at federal statutory tax rate
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
State taxes, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
Change in valuation allowance
|
|
|
(45)
|
%
|
|
|
(7)
|
%
|
Rate change and prior year adjustments
|
|
|
6
|
%
|
|
|
(29)
|
%
|
Research and development credits
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
Permanent differences
|
|
|
(1)
|
%
|
|
|
(5)
|
%
|
Other
|
|
|
(1)
|
%
|
|
|
(2)
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.
|
EMPLOYEE
BENEFIT PLAN
|
The Company sponsors a 401(k) retirement savings plan (the
401(k) Plan), under which eligible employees may
contribute, on a pre-tax basis, specified percentages of their
compensation, subject to maximum aggregate annual contributions
imposed by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. All
employee contributions are allocated to the employees
individual account and are invested in various investment
options as directed by the employee. Employees cash
contributions are fully vested and nonforfeitable. The Company
may make a discretionary contribution in any year, subject to
authorization by the Companys Board of Directors. During
the years ended December 31, 2004, 2005 and 2006 and the
nine months ended September 30, 2006 the Company did not
make any such discretionary contributions. During the nine
months ended September 30, 2007, the Companys
contribution to the Plan was $106,937 (unaudited).
In February 2005, the Company was sued by Billingnetwork Patent,
Inc. in Florida federal court alleging infringement of its
patent issued in 2002 entitled Integrated Internet
Facilitated Billing, Data Processing and Communications
System. In April 2005, the Company moved to dismiss that
case, and oral arguments on that motion were heard by the court
in March of 2006. The Company is awaiting further action from
the court at this time, however the potential outcome of this
case is neither probable nor estimable and therefore there is no
accrual for such claim recorded at December 31, 2005, 2006
or September 30, 2007.
The Company is engaged in certain other legal actions arising in
the ordinary course of business, including employment
discrimination claims and challenges to the Companys
intellectual property. The Company believes that it has adequate
legal defenses and believes that it is remote that the ultimate
dispositions of these actions will have a material effect on the
Companys financial position, results of operations, or
cash flows. There are no accruals for such claims recorded at
December 31, 2005, 2006 or September 30, 2007.
The Companys services are subject to sales and use taxes
in certain jurisdictions. The Companys contractual
agreements with its customers provide that payment of any sales
or use tax assessments are the responsibility of the customer.
Accordingly, the Company believes that sales and use tax
assessments, if applicable, will not have a material adverse
effect on the Companys financial position, results of
operations, or cash flows.
F-29
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
14.
|
RELATED
PARTY TRANSACTIONS
|
On May 24, 2007, the Company entered into a marketing and
sales agreement with PSS World Medical Shared Services
(PSS). Under the terms of the agreement, the Company
will pay PSS sales commissions based upon the estimated contract
value of orders placed with PSS, which will be adjusted
15 months after the go-live date of the service to reflect
actual revenue received by the Company from the customer.
Subsequent commissions will be based upon a specified percentage
of actual revenue generated from orders placed with PSS. The
Company will be responsible for funding $300,000 toward the
establishment of an incentive plan for the PSS sales
representatives during the first twelve months of the agreement,
as well as co-sponsoring training sessions for PSS sales
representatives and conducting on-line education for PSS sales
representatives. The term of the agreement is three years with
automatic one-year renewals and can be terminated without cause
by either party with 120 days notice. In the event of
termination, the Company would be required to continue to pay a
commission from PSS identified clients for two years, to
the extent that the clients continue to use the services of the
Company.
On June 29, 2007, certain of the Companys preferred
stockholders sold a portion of their shares to PSS. The Company
was obligated to pay certain financial advisor fees in
connection with this transaction. Under the terms of the stock
purchase agreement, PSS agreed to pay for the Companys
costs incurred in connection with this transaction up to
$592,000. The Company has accounted for the payment of these
costs as an expense included in other expense in the statement
of operations and a contribution to additional paid-in-capital
as these costs were paid by a shareholder.
|
|
15.
|
SUBSEQUENT
EVENTS (UNAUDITED)
|
On October 1, 2007, the Company paid the balance of the
promissory notes, totaling $4,091,448 (See Note 7). The Company
recorded additional charges to interest expense of $157,832 to
fully amortize the debt discount, write off outstanding deferred
financing fees, recognize accrued interest expense and recognize
a penalty for early extinguishment of the debt.
On October 1, 2007, the Company paid the balance of the
Equipment Line totaling $952,563 (See Note 7) and recorded
additional charges to interest expense of $10,037 to fully
amortize the debt discount, write off outstanding deferred
financing fees and recognize accrued interest expense.
On October 1, 2007, the Company paid the balance of the
Security Agreement totaling $171,630 (See Note 7) and recorded
additional charges to interest expense of $22,672 to recognize
accrued interest expense and recognize a penalty for early
extinguishment of the debt.
On November 28, 2007, we entered into a purchase and sale
agreement with a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bank of America
Corporation for the purchase of a complex of buildings,
including approximately 133,000 square feet of office
space, on approximately 53 acres of land located in
Belfast, Maine, for a total purchase price of $6.1 million.
The purchase is expected to close in the first quarter of 2008,
subject to customary closing conditions, including the
completion of our due diligence. We intend to utilize this
facility as a second operational service site, and to lease a
small portion of the space to commercial tenants.
On December 31, 2007, the Company paid the balance of the
$17,000,000 subordinate note (See Note 7). The Company recorded
additional charges to interest expense of $671,741 to fully
amortize the debt discount, write off outstanding deferred
financing fees, recognize accrued interest expense and recognize
a penalty for early extinguishment of the debt.
From October 1, 2007 through January 2, 2008, there
were 179,025 options granted at a weighted average exercise
price of $35.21. On December 9, 2007, the Board approved
245,000 options to be granted at a price to be set to the
closing price of the Companys stock on February 1,
2008.
F-30
athenahealth,
Inc.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
In October 2007, the Company received an audit notification from
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Revenue
requesting materials relating to the amount of use tax the
Company paid on account of purchases by the Company for the
audit periods between January 1, 2004 and December 31,
2006. The audit is ongoing as of December 31, 2007. During
the fourth quarter of 2007, the Company accrued a liability of
approximately $50,000 in connection with this ongoing audit.
F-31
PART II
INFORMATION
NOT REQUIRED IN PROSPECTUS
|
|
Item 13.
|
Other
Expenses of Issuance and Distribution.
|
The following table sets forth the fees and expenses, other than
underwriting discounts and commissions, payable in connection
with the registration of the common stock hereunder. All amounts
are estimates except the SEC registration fee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount to be Paid
|
|
|
SEC registration fee
|
|
$
|
*
|
|
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. fee
|
|
|
*
|
|
Nasdaq Global Market listing fee
|
|
|
*
|
|
Printing and mailing
|
|
|
*
|
|
Legal fees and expenses
|
|
|
*
|
|
Accounting fees and expenses
|
|
|
*
|
|
Transfer agent and registrar fees and expenses
|
|
|
*
|
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
To be filed by amendment. |
|
|
Item 14.
|
Indemnification
of Directors and Officers.
|
Section 145(a) of the Delaware General Corporation Law
provides, in general, that a corporation may indemnify any
person who was or is a party 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 the
corporation), because he or she is or was a director, officer,
employee or agent of the corporation, or is or was serving at
the request of the corporation as a director, officer, employee
or agent of another corporation, partnership, joint venture,
trust or other enterprise, against expenses (including
attorneys fees), judgments, fines and amounts paid in
settlement actually and reasonably incurred by the person in
connection with such action, suit or proceeding, if he or she
acted in good faith and in a manner he or she reasonably
believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the
corporation and, with respect to any criminal action or
proceeding, had no reasonable cause to believe his or her
conduct was unlawful.
Section 145(b) of the Delaware General Corporation Law
provides, in general, that a corporation may indemnify any
person who was or is a party or is threatened to be made a party
to any threatened, pending or completed action or suit by or in
the right of the corporation to procure a judgment in its favor
because the person is or was a director, officer, employee or
agent of the corporation, or is or was serving at the request of
the corporation as a director, officer, employee or agent of
another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust or other
enterprise, against expenses (including attorneys fees)
actually and reasonably incurred by the person in connection
with the defense or settlement of such action or suit if he or
she acted in good faith and in a manner he or she reasonably
believed to be in or not opposed to the best interests of the
corporation, except that no indemnification shall be made with
respect to any claim, issue or matter as to which he or she
shall have been adjudged to be liable to the corporation unless
and only to the extent that the Court of Chancery or other
adjudicating court determines that, despite the adjudication of
liability but in view of all of the circumstances of the case,
he or she is fairly and reasonably entitled to indemnity for
such expenses which the Court of Chancery or other adjudicating
court shall deem proper.
Section 145(g) of the Delaware General Corporation Law
provides, in general, that a corporation may purchase and
maintain insurance on behalf of any person who is or was a
director, officer, employee or agent of the corporation, or is
or was serving at the request of the corporation as a director,
officer, employee or agent of another corporation, partnership,
joint venture, trust or other enterprise against any liability
asserted
II-1
against such person and incurred by such person in any such
capacity, or arising out of his or her status as such, whether
or not the corporation would have the power to indemnify the
person against such liability under Section 145 of the
Delaware General Corporation Law.
Article VII of our restated certificate of incorporation
(the Charter), provides that no director of our
company shall be personally liable to us or our stockholders for
monetary damages for any breach of fiduciary duty as a director,
except for liability (1) for any breach of the
directors duty of loyalty to us or our stockholders,
(2) for acts or omissions not in good faith or which
involve intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law,
(3) in respect of unlawful dividend payments or stock
redemptions or repurchases, or (4) for any transaction from
which the director derived an improper personal benefit. In
addition, our Charter provides that if the Delaware General
Corporation Law is amended to authorize the further elimination
or limitation of the liability of directors, then the liability
of a director of our company shall be eliminated or limited to
the fullest extent permitted by the Delaware General Corporation
Law, as so amended.
Article VII of the Charter further provides that any repeal
or modification of such article by our stockholders or an
amendment to the Delaware General Corporation Law will not
adversely affect any right or protection existing at the time of
such repeal or modification with respect to any acts or
omissions occurring before such repeal or modification of a
director serving at the time of such repeal or modification.
Article V of our restated by-laws (the
By-Laws), provides that we will indemnify each of
our directors and officers and, in the discretion of our board
of directors, certain employees, to the fullest extent permitted
by the Delaware General Corporation Law as the same may be
amended (except that in the case of an amendment, only to the
extent that the amendment permits us to provide broader
indemnification rights than the Delaware General Corporation Law
permitted us to provide prior to such the amendment) against any
and all expenses, judgments, penalties, fines and amounts
reasonably paid in settlement that are incurred by the director,
officer or such employee or on the directors,
officers or employees behalf in connection with any
threatened, pending or completed proceeding or any claim, issue
or matter therein, to which he or she is or is threatened to be
made a party because he or she is or was serving as a director,
officer or employee of our company, or at our request as a
director, partner, trustee, officer, employee or agent of
another corporation, partnership, joint venture, trust, employee
benefit plan or other enterprise, if he or she acted in good
faith and in a manner he or she reasonably believed to be in or
not opposed to the best interests of our company and, with
respect to any criminal proceeding, had no reasonable cause to
believe his or her conduct was unlawful. Article V of the
By-Laws further provides for the advancement of expenses to each
of our directors and, in the discretion of the board of
directors, to certain officers and employees.
In addition, Article V of the By-Laws provides that the
right of each of our directors and officers to indemnification
and advancement of expenses shall be a contract right and shall
not be exclusive of any other right now possessed or hereafter
acquired under any statute, provision of the Charter or By-Laws,
agreement, vote of stockholders or otherwise. Furthermore,
Article V of the By-Laws authorizes us to provide insurance
for our directors, officers and employees, against any
liability, whether or not we would have the power to indemnify
such person against such liability under the Delaware General
Corporation Law or the provisions of Article V of the
By-Laws.
In connection with the sale of common stock being registered
hereby, we intend to enter into indemnification agreements with
each of our directors and our executive officers. These
agreements will provide that we will indemnify each of our
directors and such officers to the fullest extent permitted by
law and the Charter and By-Laws.
We also maintain a general liability insurance policy which
covers certain liabilities of directors and officers of our
company arising out of claims based on acts or omissions in
their capacities as directors or officers.
In any underwriting agreement we enter into in connection with
the sale of common stock being registered hereby, the
underwriters will agree to indemnify, under certain conditions,
us, our directors, our officers and persons who control us
within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
against certain liabilities.
II-2
|
|
Item 15.
|
Recent
Sales of Unregistered Securities.
|
In the three years preceding the filing of this registration
statement, the registrant has issued the following securities
that were not registered under the Securities Act:
Issuances
of Warrants in Financings.
In February 2005, we issued (i) a warrant to purchase
10,000 shares of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock
at an exercise price of $5.04 per share to Silicon Valley Bank
and (ii) a warrant to purchase 26,945 shares of
Series E Convertible Preferred Stock at an exercise price
of $5.04 per share to ORIX Venture Finance LLC. In November
2006, ORIX Venture Finance LLC assigned the rights to 5,000 of
their shares under the February 2005 warrant. Consequently, we
cancelled their February 2005 warrant and issued (i) a
warrant to purchase 5,000 shares of Series E
Convertible Preferred Stock at an exercise price of $5.04 per
share to Banc of America Strategic Investments Corporation and
(ii) a warrant to purchase 21,945 shares of
Series E Convertible Preferred Stock at an exercise price
of $5.04 per share to ORIX Venture Finance LLC.
In December 2005, we issued a warrant to purchase
124,000 shares of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock
at an exercise price of $5.04 per share to ORIX Venture Finance
LLC.
In March 2006, we issued a warrant to purchase 3,711 shares
of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock at an exercise
price of $5.04 per share to Oxford Finance Corporation.
In June 2006, we issued a warrant to purchase 2,373 shares
of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock at an exercise
price of $5.04 per share to Oxford Finance Corporation.
In September 2006, we issued (i) a warrant to purchase
1,050 shares of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock
at an exercise price of $5.04 per share to Oxford Finance
Corporation and (ii) a warrant to purchase
24,000 shares of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock
at an exercise price of $5.04 per share to ORIX Venture Finance
LLC.
In December 2006, we issued a warrant to purchase
2,296 shares of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock
at an exercise price of $5.04 per share to Oxford Finance
Corporation.
In June 2007, we issued a warrant to purchase 5,000 shares
of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock at an exercise
price of $9.30 per share to ORIX Venture Finance LLC.
We issued each of these warrants to financial institutions in
consideration of these institutions entering into debt financing
arrangements with us. No cash or additional consideration was
received by us in consideration of our issuance of these
securities.
No underwriters were used in the foregoing transactions. All
sales of securities described above were made in reliance upon
the exemption from registration provided by Section 4(2) of
the Securities Act for transactions by an issuer not involving a
public offering. In the case of each warrant issuance, these
warrants were only offered to the individual warrantholder. As a
result, none of these transactions involved a public offering.
All of the purchasers in these transactions represented to us in
connection with their purchase that they were accredited
investors or not U.S. persons, as applicable, and were
acquiring the shares for investment and not distribution, that
they could bear the risks of the investment and could hold the
securities for an indefinite period of time. Such purchasers
received written disclosures that the securities had not been
registered under the Securities Act and that any resale must be
made pursuant to a registration or an available exemption from
such registration. All of the foregoing securities are deemed
restricted securities for the purposes of the Securities Act.
Grants
and Exercises of Stock Options.
Since June 1, 2004, we have granted stock options to
purchase 2,705,548 shares of common stock with exercise
prices ranging from $1.97 to $43.75 per share, to employees,
directors and consultants pursuant to our stock option plans.
All of these options were issued in consideration of services
rendered to us, with exercise prices equal to the estimated fair
value of our common stock on the date of grant. No cash or
additional
II-3
consideration was received by us in consideration of our
issuance of these options. Of the options granted after
June 1, 2004, 103 holders of those options to purchase
shares of our common stock exercised those options for an
aggregate of 274,423 shares at a weighted average exercise price
of $7.21. The issuances of these options and the common stock
upon exercise of these options were exempt either pursuant to
Rule 701, as a transaction pursuant to a compensatory benefit
plan, or pursuant to Section 4(2), as a transaction by an issuer
not involving a public offering. The common stock issued upon
exercise of options are deemed restricted securities for the
purposes of the Securities Act.
|
|
Item 16.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules.
|
(a) Exhibits:
See the Exhibit Index on the page immediately following the
signature page for a list of exhibits filed as part of this
registration statement on
Form S-1,
which Exhibit Index is incorporated herein by reference.
(b) Consolidated Financial Statements Schedules:
Schedules have been omitted because the information required to
be set forth therein is not applicable or is shown in the
financial statements or notes thereto.
The undersigned registrant hereby undertakes to provide to the
underwriter at the closing specified in the underwriting
agreements, certificates in such denominations and registered in
such names as required by the underwriter to permit prompt
delivery to each purchaser.
Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the
Securities Act of 1933 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 Securities Act of 1933 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 Securities Act of 1933
and will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.
The undersigned hereby undertakes that:
(1) For purposes of determining any liability under the
Securities Act of 1933, the information omitted from the form of
prospectus filed as part of this registration statement in
reliance upon Rule 430A and contained in a form of
prospectus filed by the registrant pursuant to
Rule 424(b)(1) or (4) or 497(h) under the Securities
Act of 1933 shall be deemed to be part of this registration
statement as of the time it was declared effective.
(2) For the purpose of determining any liability under the
Securities Act of 1933, each post-effective amendment that
contains a form of prospectus 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.
II-4
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, the
registrant has duly caused this Registration Statement on
Form S-1
to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized, in Watertown, Massachusetts on January 7, 2008.
ATHENAHEALTH, INC.
Jonathan Bush
Chief Executive Officer, President and
Chairman of the Board
POWER OF
ATTORNEY AND SIGNATURES
KNOW ALL BY THESE PRESENT, that each individual whose signature
appears below hereby constitutes and appoints each of Jonathan
Bush and Carl B. Byers as such persons true and lawful
attorney-in-fact and agent with full power of substitution and
resubstitution, for such person in such persons name,
place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign any and all
amendments (including post-effective amendments) to this
Registration Statement (or any Registration Statement for the
same offering that is to be effective upon filing pursuant to
Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act of 1933), and to file
the same, with all exhibits thereto, and all documents in
connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission granting unto each said attorney-in-fact and agent
full power and authority to do and perform each and every act
and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the
premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as such person
might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all
that any said attorney-in-fact and agent, or any substitute or
substitutes of any of them, may lawfully do or cause to be done
by virtue hereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, this Registration Statement and Power of Attorney has
been signed by the following person in the capacities and on the
date indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
/s/ JONATHAN
BUSH
Jonathan
Bush
|
|
Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of the Board
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ CARL
B. BYERS
Carl
B. Byers
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ RUBEN
J. KING-SHAW, JR.
Ruben
J. King-Shaw, Jr.
|
|
Lead Director
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JAMES
L. MANN
James
L. Mann
|
|
Director
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ANN
H. LAMONT
Ann
H. Lamont
|
|
Director
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
II-5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
/s/ BRYAN
E. ROBERTS
Bryan
E. Roberts
|
|
Director
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ RICHARD
N. FOSTER
Richard
N. Foster
|
|
Director
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ BRANDON
H. HULL
Brandon
H. Hull
|
|
Director
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JOHN
A. KANE
John
A. Kane
|
|
Director
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ TODD
Y.
PARK Todd
Y. Park
|
|
Director
|
|
January 7, 2008
|
II-6
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
No.
|
|
Exhibit Index
|
|
|
1
|
.1**
|
|
Form of Underwriting Agreement
|
|
3
|
.1(i)
|
|
Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the
Registrant
|
|
3
|
.2(i)
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Registrant
|
|
4
|
.1(i)
|
|
Specimen Certificate evidencing shares of common stock
|
|
5
|
.1**
|
|
Opinion of Goodwin Procter LLP
|
|
10
|
.1(i)
|
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement, to be entered into between
the registrant and each of its directors and officers
|
|
10
|
.2(i)
|
|
1997 Stock Plan of the Registrant and form of agreements
thereunder
|
|
10
|
.3(i)
|
|
2000 Stock Option and Incentive Plan of the Registrant, as
amended, and form of agreements thereunder
|
|
10
|
.4(i)
|
|
2007 Stock Option and Incentive Plan of the Registrant, and form
of agreements thereunder
|
|
10
|
.5(i)
|
|
2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
|
|
#10
|
.6(i)
|
|
Lease between President and Fellows of Harvard College and the
Registrant, dated November 8, 2004 for space at the
premises located at 300 North Beacon Street, Watertown, MA 02472
and 311 Arsenal Street, Watertown, MA 02472
|
|
10
|
.7(i)
|
|
Agreement to Lease by and between Ramaniyam Real Estate Private
Ltd. and Athena Net India Private Limited, dated August 25,
2006 for space at the premises located at Nos. 57, 59, 61 &
63, Taylors Road, Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010
|
|
#10
|
.8(i)
|
|
Agreement of Lease by and between Sentinel
Properties Bedford, LLC and the Registrant, dated
May 8, 2007
|
|
#10
|
.9(i)
|
|
Master Agreement for U.S. Availability Services by and between
Sungard Availability Services LP and the Registrant, dated
March 31, 2007, as amended
|
|
#10
|
.10(i)
|
|
Amended and Restated Marketing and Sales Agreement by and
between the Registrant and Worldmed Shared Services, Inc. (d/b/a
PSS World Medical Shared Services, Inc.) dated May 24, 2007
|
|
#10
|
.11(i)
|
|
Services Agreement by and among Vision Healthsource, Inc.,
Vision Healthsource India Private Ltd., and the Registrant,
dated December 9, 2002, as amended
|
|
#10
|
.12(i)
|
|
Master Service Agreement by and between Exodus Communications,
Inc. and the Registrant, dated September 1999
|
|
10
|
.13(i)
|
|
Second Amended and Restated Investor Rights Agreement, dated
April 16, 2004
|
|
10
|
.14(i)
|
|
Registration Rights Agreement by and between Silicon Valley Bank
and ORIX Venture Partners LLC and the Registrant, as amended
|
|
10
|
.15(i)
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and Jonathan
Bush, as amended
|
|
10
|
.16(i)
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and Todd
Park, as amended
|
|
10
|
.17(i)
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and James
MacDonald, dated August 30, 2006
|
|
10
|
.18(i)
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and Carl
Byers, as amended
|
|
10
|
.19(i)
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and
Christopher Nolin, dated April 1, 2001
|
|
10
|
.20(i)
|
|
Loan and Security Agreement by and between Silicon Valley Bank
and the Registrant, dated August 20, 2002, as amended
|
|
10
|
.21(i)
|
|
Loan and Security Agreement by and between ORIX Venture Finance
LLC and the Registrant, dated December 28, 2005, as amended
|
|
10
|
.22(i)
|
|
Secured Promissory Notes issued to ORIX Venture Finance LLC on
December 28, 2005, September 21, 2006 and June 8,
2007
|
|
10
|
.23(i)
|
|
Loan and Security Agreement by and between Bank of America, N.A.
and the Registrant, dated March 31, 2006
|
|
10
|
.24(i)
|
|
Equipment Loan Note issued to Bank of America, N.A. on
March 31, 2006
|
|
10
|
.25(i)
|
|
Master Security Agreement No. 6081111 by and between Oxford
Finance Corporation and the Registrant, dated March 31,
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
No.
|
|
Exhibit Index
|
|
|
10
|
.26(i)
|
|
Promissory Notes issued to Oxford Finance Corporation on
March 31, 2006, June 21, 2006, September 27,
2006, December 15, 2006 and March 19, 2007
|
|
10
|
.27(i)
|
|
Master Security Agreement by and between General Electric
Capital Corporation and the Registrant, dated August 23,
2002
|
|
10
|
.28(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase 75,000 Shares of the Registrants
Common Stock, issued to Pentech Financial Services, Inc. on
November 1, 2002
|
|
10
|
.29(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase Shares of the Registrants
Series A-2
Convertible Preferred Stock, issued to Silicon Valley Bank on
September 9, 1999, as amended
|
|
10
|
.30(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase 28,571 Shares of the Registrants
Series C Convertible Preferred Stock, issued to Silicon
Valley Bank on March 31, 2000
|
|
10
|
.31(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase 78,475 Shares of the Registrants
Series D Convertible Preferred Stock, issued to Silicon
Valley Bank on November 4, 2003
|
|
10
|
.32(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase 32,468 Shares of the Registrants
Series D Convertible Preferred Stock, issued to GATX
Ventures, Inc. on May 31, 2001
|
|
10
|
.33(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase 32,468 Shares of the Registrants
Series D Convertible Preferred Stock, issued to TBCC
Funding Trust II on May 31, 2001
|
|
10
|
.34(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase 156,949 Shares of the Registrants
Series D Convertible Preferred Stock, issued to ORIX
Venture Finance LLC on November 4, 2003
|
|
10
|
.35(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase 10,000 Shares of the Registrants
Series E Convertible Preferred Stock, issued to Silicon
Valley Bank on February 28, 2005
|
|
10
|
.36(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase 21,945 Shares of the Registrants
Series E Convertible Preferred Stock, issued to ORIX
Venture Finance LLC on November 8, 2006
|
|
10
|
.37(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase 5,000 Shares of the Registrants
Series E Convertible Preferred Stock, issued to Banc of
America Strategic Investments Corporation on November 8,
2006
|
|
10
|
.38(i)
|
|
Warrant to Purchase 5,000 Shares of the Registrants
Series E Convertible Preferred Stock, issued to ORIX
Venture Finance LLC on June 6, 2007
|
|
10
|
.39(i)
|
|
Master Equipment Lease Agreement by and between CIT Technologies
Corporation and the Registrant, dated June 1, 2007
|
|
10
|
.40(ii)
|
|
Purchase at Sole Agreement dated November 28, 2007 between
the Registrant and Bracebridge Corporation
|
|
10
|
.41**
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and Robert
Cosinuke
|
|
10
|
.42**
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and Robert
Hueber
|
|
10
|
.43**
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between the Registrant and Nancy
Brown
|
|
21
|
.1(i)
|
|
Subsidiaries of the Registrant
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP
|
|
23
|
.2**
|
|
Consent of Goodwin Procter LLP (included in Exhibit 5.1)
|
|
24
|
.1
|
|
Power of Attorney (included in
page II-5)
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Previously filed. |
|
** |
|
To be included by amendment |
|
|
|
Indicates a management contract or any compensatory plan,
contract or arrangement. |
|
# |
|
Application has been made to the Securities and Exchange
Commission for confidential treatment of certain provisions.
Omitted material for which confidential treatment has been
requested has been filed separately with the Securities and
Exchange Commission. |
|
|
|
(i) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants registration
statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-143998) |
|
(ii) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants current
report on Form 8-K, filed November 29, 2007. |