Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

12 Months Ended

Jan. 31, 2013

Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Significant Accounting Policies [Text Block]

2. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Significant accounting policies followed in the preparation of the accompanying consolidated financial statements are as follows:

Basis of Presentation and Principles of Consolidation

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. We consolidate the financial statements of our wholly-owned subsidiaries and all intercompany transactions and account balances have been eliminated in consolidation. We also hold minority investments in the capital stock of certain private companies having product offerings or customer relationships that have strategic importance. We evaluate our equity and debt investments and other contractual relationships with affiliate companies in order to determine whether the guidelines regarding the consolidation of variable interest entities (“VIE’s”) should be applied in the financial statements. Consolidation guidelines address consolidation by business enterprises of VIE’s that possess certain characteristics. A VIE is defined as an entity in which equity investors do not have the characteristics of a controlling financial interest or do not have sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support. We use qualitative analysis to determine whether or not we are the primary beneficiary of a VIE. We consider the rights and obligations conveyed by the implicit and explicit variable interest in each VIE and the relationship of these with the variable interests held by other parties to determine whether its variable interests will absorb a majority of a VIE’s expected losses, receive a majority of its expected residual returns, or both. If we determine that our variable interests will absorb a majority of the VIE’s expected losses, receive a majority of their expected residual returns, or both, we consolidate the VIE as the primary beneficiary, and if not, it is not consolidated.

We have reviewed our interest in a partnership in Turkey and equity investment in Hightech ICT BV. The primary beneficiary is required to consolidate the financial position and results of the VIE. We have concluded that we are not the primary beneficiary for any variable interest entities during fiscal 2013. Accordingly, we used the equity method to account for these investments.

In May 2012, we completed the sales of our Broadcast Servers and Storage and Media Services businesses (See Note 3). These consolidated financial statements reflect these businesses as discontinued operations. We have retrospectively adjusted the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss), cash flows and stockholders’ equity for the fiscal years ended January 31, 2012 and 2011 and the consolidated balance sheet for fiscal 2012.

Besides for discontinued operations, we have reclassified other certain prior fiscal year data to conform to our current fiscal year presentation.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of these financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an ongoing basis, management evaluates these estimates and judgments, including those related to revenue recognition, valuation of inventory and accounts receivable, valuation of investments and income taxes, stock-based compensation, goodwill, intangible assets and related amortization. Management bases these estimates on historical and anticipated results and trends and on various other assumptions that management believes are reasonable under the circumstances, including assumptions as to future events. These estimates form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. By their nature, estimates are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty. Actual results may differ from management’s estimates.

Cash Equivalents and Marketable Securities

We account for investments in accordance with authoritative guidance that defines investment classifications. We determine the appropriate classification of debt securities at the time of purchase and reevaluate such designation as of each balance sheet date. Our investment portfolio consists primarily of money market funds at January 31, 2013 and 2012, but can consist of corporate debt investments, asset-backed securities and government-sponsored enterprises. All highly liquid investments with an original maturity of three months or less when purchased are considered to be cash equivalents. All cash equivalents are carried at cost, which approximates fair value. Our marketable securities are classified as available-for-sale and are reported at fair value with unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, reported in stockholders’ equity as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income or loss. The amortization of premiums and accretions of discounts to maturity are computed under the effective interest method and are included in interest income. Interest on securities is recorded as earned and is also included in interest income. Any realized gains or losses would be shown in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) in other income or expense.

We evaluate our investments on a regular basis to determine whether an other-than-temporary decline in fair value has occurred. This evaluation consists of a review of several factors, including, but not limited to: the length of time and extent that an investment has been in an unrealized loss position; the existence of an event that would impair the issuer's future earnings potential; and our intent and ability to hold an investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in fair value. Declines in value below cost for investments where it is considered probable that all contractual terms of the investment will be satisfied, is due primarily to changes in interest rates, and where the company has the intent and ability to hold the investment for a period of time sufficient to allow a market recovery, are not assumed to be other-than-temporary. Any other-than-temporary declines in fair value are recorded in earnings and a new cost basis for the investment is established.

Fair Value Measurements

Definition and Hierarchy

The applicable accounting guidance defines fair value as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. The guidance establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands required disclosure about the fair value measurements of assets and liabilities. This guidance requires us to classify and disclose assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, as well as fair value measurements of assets and liabilities measured on a non-recurring basis in periods subsequent to initial measurement, in a fair value hierarchy.

The fair value hierarchy is broken down into three levels based on the reliability of inputs and requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs, where available. The following summarizes the three levels of inputs required, as well as the assets and liabilities that we value using those levels of inputs:

· Level 1 – Observable inputs that reflect quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets. Assets utilizing Level 1 inputs include money market funds and U.S. government securities.

· Level 2 – Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not very active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. We primarily use broker quotes for valuation of our short-term investments. We did not have any Level 2 assets or liabilities at January 31, 2013 or January 31, 2012.

· Level 3 – Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities. The fair value measurements of the contingent consideration obligations related to the acquisitions of Flashlight, VividLogic and eventIS are valued using Level 3 inputs.

Valuation Techniques

We measure certain financial assets and liabilities at fair value based on valuation techniques using the best information available, which may include quoted market prices, market comparables and discounted cash flow projections. Financial instruments include money market funds, corporate debt investments, asset-backed securities, government-sponsored enterprises and state municipal obligations.

In general, and where applicable, we use quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities to determine fair value. If quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities are not available to determine fair value, then we use quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities or inputs that are observable either directly or indirectly. In periods of market inactivity, the observability of prices and inputs may be reduced for certain instruments. This condition could cause an instrument to be reclassified from Level 1 to Level 2 or from Level 2 to Level 3. Based on additional information, we made a revision to reclassify $5.6 million of investments from Level 2 to Level 1 as of January 31, 2012. Management believes that the revision is not significant to the financial statements.

Concentration of Credit Risk and Major Customers

Financial instruments which potentially expose us to concentrations of credit risk include cash equivalents, investments in treasury bills, certificates of deposits and commercial paper, trade accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities. We restrict our cash equivalents and investments in marketable securities to repurchase agreements with major banks and U.S. government and corporate securities which are subject to minimal credit and market risk.

For trade accounts receivable, we evaluate customers’ financial condition, require advance payments from certain of our customers and maintain reserves for potential credit losses. We perform ongoing credit evaluations of customers’ financial condition but generally do not require collateral. For some international customers, we require an irrevocable letter of credit to be issued by the customer before the purchase order is accepted. We monitor payments from customers and assess any collection issues. We maintain allowances for specific doubtful accounts and other risk categories of accounts based on estimates of losses resulting from the inability of the Company’s customers to make required payments and record these allowances as a charge to general and administrative expenses. We base our allowances for doubtful accounts on historical collections and write-off experience, current trends, credit assessments, and other analysis of specific customer situations. At January 31, 2013 and 2012, we had an allowance for doubtful accounts of $0.8 million and $1.0 million, respectively, to provide for potential credit losses. At January 31, 2013, two separate customers accounted for 19% and 11%, respectively, of our gross accounts receivable balance and one customer accounted for 20% of our January 31, 2012 balance. For fiscal 2013 and 2012, two customers each accounted for more than 10%, and collectively accounted for 30% and 35%, respectively, of our total revenues.

Inventory Valuation

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Cost is determined using the first-in, first-out (“FIFO”) method. Inventories consist primarily of components and subassemblies and finished products held for sale. The values of inventories are reviewed quarterly to determine that the carrying value is stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value. We record charges to reduce inventory to its net realizable value when impairment is identified through a quarterly review process. The obsolescence evaluation is based upon assumptions and estimates about future demand, or possible alternative uses and involves significant judgments. For the years ended January 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, we recorded $2.1 million, $1.0 million and $3.0 million in inventory write-downs, respectively, of which $1.8 million was booked to cost of sales in fiscal 2013 and $0.4 million and $2.5 million were booked to restructuring expense in fiscal 2012 and fiscal 2011, respectively.

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment consists of land and buildings, office and computer equipment, leasehold improvements, demonstration equipment, deployed assets and spare components and assemblies used to service our installed base. Property and equipment are recorded at cost and depreciated over their estimated useful lives. Determining the useful lives of property and equipment requires us to make significant judgments that can materially impact our operating results. If our estimates require adjustment, it could have a material impact on our reported results.

Demonstration equipment consists of systems manufactured by us for use in marketing and selling activities. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of their estimated useful lives or the term of the respective leases using the straight-line method. Deployed assets consist of movie systems owned and manufactured by us that are installed in a hotel environment. Deployed assets are depreciated over the life of the related service agreements. Capitalized service and spare components are depreciated over the estimated useful lives using the straight-line method. Maintenance and repair costs are expensed as incurred. Upon retirement or sale, the cost of the assets disposed of, and the related accumulated depreciation, are removed from the accounts, and any resulting gain or loss is included in the determination of net income or loss.

Equity Investments

Our investments in affiliates include investments accounted for under the cost method and the equity method of accounting. The investments that represent less than a 20% ownership interest of the common shares of the affiliate are carried at cost. Under the equity method of accounting, which generally applies to investments that represent 20% to 50% ownership of the common shares of the affiliate, our proportionate ownership share of the earnings or losses of the affiliate are included in equity income in earnings of affiliates in our consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss).

We periodically review indicators of the fair value of our investments in affiliates in order to assess whether available facts or circumstances, both internally and externally, may suggest an “other than temporary” decline in the value of the investment. The carrying value of an investment in an affiliate may be affected by the affiliate’s ability to obtain adequate funding and execute its business plans, general market conditions, industry considerations specific to the affiliate’s business, and other factors. The inability of an affiliate to obtain future funding or successfully execute its business plan could adversely affect our equity earnings of the affiliate in the periods affected by those events. Future adverse changes in market conditions or poor operating results of the affiliates could result in equity losses or an inability to recover the carrying value of the investments in affiliates that may not be reflected in an investment’s current carrying value, thereby possibly requiring an impairment charge in the future. We record an impairment charge when we believe an investment has experienced a decline in value that is other-than-temporary.

Goodwill and Long-Lived Assets

In connection with acquisitions of operating entities, we recognize the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net assets acquired as goodwill. Goodwill is not amortized, but is evaluated for impairment, at the reporting unit level, annually in our third quarter beginning August 1. Goodwill of a reporting unit may be tested for impairment on an interim basis in addition to the annual evaluation if an event occurs or circumstances change such as declines in sales, earnings or cash flows, decline in the Company’s stock price, or material adverse changes in the business climate, which would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. The process of evaluating goodwill for impairment requires several judgments and assumptions to be made to determine the fair value of the reporting units, including the method used to determine fair value, discount rates, expected levels of cash flows, revenues and earnings, and the selection of comparable companies used to develop market based assumptions. We may employ three generally accepted approaches for valuing businesses: the market approach, the income approach and the asset-based (cost) approach to arrive at the fair value. In calculating the fair value, we derived the standalone projected five year cash flows for the Company. This process starts with the projected cash flows which were discounted. The choice of which approach and methods to use in a particular situation depends on the facts and circumstances.

We account for business acquisitions in accordance with authoritative guidance which determines and records the fair values of assets acquired, liabilities, contractual contingencies and contingent consideration assumed as of the dates of acquisition. The purchase price allocation process requires management to make significant estimates and assumptions, especially at the acquisition date with respect to intangible assets and estimated contingent consideration payments.

In-process research and development (“IPR&D”) assets as of the acquisition date are recorded as indefinite-lived intangible assets and are subject to impairment testing at least annually. The useful life of the intangible asset recognized will be reconsidered if and when an IPR&D project is completed or abandoned.

We also evaluate property and equipment, intangible assets and other long-lived assets on a regular basis for the existence of facts or circumstances, both internal and external that may suggest an asset is not recoverable. If such circumstances exist, we evaluate the carrying value of long-lived assets to determine if impairment exists based upon estimated undiscounted future cash flows over the remaining useful life of the assets and compares that value to the carrying value of the assets. Our cash flow estimates contain management’s best estimates, using appropriate and customary assumptions and projections at the time.

Intangible assets consist of customer contracts, completed technology, non-competition agreements, patents and trademarks. IPR&D assets are included in other intangible assets at January 31, 2013 and 2012. The intangible assets are amortized to cost of sales and operating expenses, as appropriate, on a straight-line or accelerated basis in order to reflect the period that the assets will be consumed.

We develop software for resale in markets that are subject to rapid technological change, new product development and changing customer needs. The time period during which software development costs can be capitalized from the point of reaching technological feasibility until the time of general product release is very short, and consequently, the amounts that could be capitalized are not material to our financial position or results of operations. Software development costs relating to sales of software requiring significant modification or customization are charged to costs of product revenues.

Amortization expense is recorded over the period of economic consumption or the life of the agreement, whichever results in the higher expense, starting with the first shipment of the product to a customer. Amortization expense charged to cost of sales was $2.4 million, $2.5 million and $2.0 million for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Income Taxes

As part of the process of preparing our financial statements, we are required to estimate our provision for income taxes in each of the jurisdictions in which we operate. This process involves estimating our actual current tax exposure, including assessing the risks associated with tax audits, together with assessing temporary differences resulting from the different treatment of items for tax and accounting purposes. These differences result in deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are included within our balance sheet.

Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective income tax bases, and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. We evaluate the weight of all available evidence to determine whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred income tax assets will not be realized. We will record a valuation allowance if the likelihood of realization of the deferred tax assets in the future is reduced based on an evaluation of objective verifiable evidence. Significant management judgment is required in determining our income tax provision, our deferred tax assets and liabilities and any valuation allowance recorded against our deferred tax assets. We have established a 100% valuation allowance against our U.S. deferred tax assets due to indications that they may not be fully realized. The amount of the deferred tax asset considered realizable is subject to change based on future events, including generating sufficient pre-tax income in future periods. In the event that actual results differ from these estimates, our provision for income taxes could be materially impacted. We do not provide for U.S. federal and state income taxes on the undistributed earnings of our non-U.S. subsidiaries that are considered indefinitely reinvested in the operations outside the United States.

Authoritative guidance as it relates to income tax liabilities states that the minimum threshold a tax position is required to meet before being recognized in the financial statements is “more likely than not” (i.e., a likelihood of occurrence greater than 50%). The recognition threshold is met when an entity concludes that a tax position, based solely on its technical merits, is more likely than not to be sustained upon examination by the relevant taxing authority. Those tax positions failing to qualify for initial recognition are recognized in the first interim period in which they meet the more likely than not standard, or are resolved through negotiation or litigation with the taxing authority, or upon expiration of the statute of limitations. Derecognition of a tax position that was previously recognized occurs when an entity subsequently determines that a tax position no longer meets the more likely than not threshold of being sustained.

We file annual income tax returns in multiple taxing jurisdictions around the world. A number of years may elapse before an uncertain tax position is audited and finally resolved. While it is often difficult to predict the final outcome or the timing of resolution of any particular uncertain tax position, we believe that our reserves for income taxes reflect the most likely outcome. We adjust these reserves as well as the related interest and penalties, in light of changing facts and circumstances. If our estimate of tax liabilities proves to be less than the ultimate assessment, a further charge to expense would result. If payment of these amounts ultimately proves to be unnecessary, the reversal of the liabilities would result in tax benefits being recognized in the period when we determine the liabilities are no longer necessary. The changes in estimate could have a material impact on our financial position and operating results. In addition, settlement of any particular position could have a material and adverse effect on our cash flows and financial position.

Restructuring

We record restructuring charges consisting of employee severance and the disposal of fixed assets. Restructuring charges represent our best estimate of the associated liability at the date the charges are recognized. Adjustments for changes in assumptions are recorded as a component of operating expenses in the period they become known. Differences between actual and expected charges and changes in assumptions could have a material effect on our restructuring accrual as well as our consolidated results of operations.

Foreign Currency Translation

For subsidiaries where the U.S. dollar is designated as the functional currency of the entity, we translate that entity’s monetary assets and liabilities denominated in local currencies into U.S. dollars (the functional and reporting currency) at current exchange rates, as of each balance sheet date. Non-monetary assets (e.g., inventories, property, plant, and equipment and intangible assets) and related income statement accounts (e.g., cost of sales, depreciation, amortization of intangible assets) are translated at historical exchange rates between the functional currency (the U.S. dollar) and the local currency. Revenue and other expense items are translated using average exchange rates during the fiscal period. Translation adjustments and transactions gains and losses on foreign currency transactions, and any unrealized gains and losses on short-term inter-company transactions are included in other income or expense, net.

For subsidiaries where the local currency is designated as the functional currency, we translate our assets and liabilities into U.S. dollars (the reporting currency) at current exchange rates as of each balance sheet date. Revenue and expense items are translated using average exchange rates during the period. Cumulative translation adjustments are presented as a separate component of stockholders’ equity. Exchange gains and losses on foreign currency transactions and unrealized gains and losses on short-term inter-company transactions are included in other income or expense, net.

The aggregate foreign exchange transaction losses included as other expense, net on the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss) were approximately $23,000, $0.2 million and $1.2 million for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Comprehensive (Loss) Income

We present accumulated other comprehensive loss and total comprehensive (loss) income in the consolidated statement of operations. At the end of fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, our total comprehensive (loss) income of ($9.4) million, ($5.0) million and $28.4 million consists primarily of net loss, cumulative translation adjustments and unrealized gains and losses on marketable securities, net of income tax.=

Revenue Recognition

Our transactions frequently involve the sales of hardware, software, systems and services in multiple-element arrangements. Revenues from sales of hardware, software and systems that do not require significant modification or customization of the underlying software are recognized when:

· title and risk of loss have passed to the customer;

· there is evidence of an arrangement;

· fees are fixed or determinable; and

· collection of the related receivable is considered probable.

Customers are billed for installation, training, project management and at least one year of product maintenance and technical support at the time of the product sale. Revenue from these activities is deferred at the time of the product sale and recognized ratably over the period these services are performed. Revenue from ongoing product maintenance and technical support agreements is recognized ratably over the period of the related agreements. Revenue from software development contracts that include significant modification or customization, including software product enhancements, is recognized based on the percentage of completion contract accounting method using labor efforts expended in relation to estimates of total labor efforts to complete the contract. Accounting for contract amendments and customer change orders are included in contract accounting when executed. Revenue from shipping and handling costs and other out-of-pocket expenses reimbursed by customers are included in revenues and cost of revenues. Our share of intercompany profits associated with sales and services provided to affiliated companies are eliminated in consolidation in proportion to our equity ownership.

We have historically applied the software revenue recognition rules as prescribed by ASC 985-605. In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-14, “Certain Revenue Arrangements That Include Software Elements,” which amended ASC 985-605. This ASU removes tangible products containing software components and non-software components that function together to deliver the product’s essential functionality from the scope of the software revenue recognition rules. In the case of our hardware products with embedded software, we have determined that the hardware and software components function together to deliver the product’s essential functionality, and therefore, the revenue from the sale of these products no longer falls within the scope of the software revenue recognition rules. Revenue from the sale of software-only products remains within the scope of the software revenue recognition rules. Maintenance and support, training, consulting, and installation services no longer fall within the scope of the software revenue recognition rules, except when they are sold with and relate to a software-only product. Revenue recognition for products that no longer fall under the scope of the software revenue recognition rules are similar to that for other tangible products and ASU 2009-13, “Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements,” which amended ASC 605 and was also issued in October 2009, which is applicable for multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements. ASU 2009-13 allows companies to allocate revenue in a multiple-deliverable arrangement in a manner that better reflects the transaction’s economics. ASU 2009-13 and ASU 2009-14 are effective for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in our fiscal year 2012 and thereafter.

Under the software revenue recognition rules, the fee is allocated to the various elements based on VSOE of fair value. Under this method, the total arrangement value is allocated first to undelivered elements, based on their fair values, with the remainder being allocated to the delivered elements. Where fair value of undelivered service elements has not been established, the total arrangement value is recognized over the period during which the services are performed. The amounts allocated to undelivered elements, which may include project management, training, installation, maintenance and technical support and certain hardware and software components, are based upon the price charged when these elements are sold separately and unaccompanied by the other elements. The amount allocated to installation, training and project management revenue is based upon standard hourly billing rates and the estimated time to complete the service. These services are not essential to the functionality of systems as these services do not alter the equipment’s capabilities, are available from other vendors and the systems are standard products. For multiple-element arrangements that include software development with significant modification or customization and systems sales where VSOE of the fair value does not exist for the undelivered elements of the arrangement (other than maintenance and technical support), percentage of completion accounting is applied for revenue recognition purposes to the entire arrangement with the exception of maintenance and technical support. All multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements negotiated prior to February 1, 2011 and the sale of all software-only products and associated services have been accounted for under this guidance.

Under the revenue recognition rules for tangible products as amended by ASU 2009-13, the fee from a multiple-deliverable arrangement is allocated to each of the deliverables based upon their relative selling prices as determined by a selling-price hierarchy. A deliverable in an arrangement qualifies as a separate unit of accounting if the delivered item has value to the customer on a stand-alone basis. A delivered item that does not qualify as a separate unit of accounting is combined with the other undelivered items in the arrangement and revenue is recognized for those combined deliverables as a single unit of accounting. The selling price used for each deliverable is based upon VSOE if available, TPE if VSOE is not available, and BESP if neither VSOE nor TPE are available. TPE is the price of the Company’s, or any competitor’s, largely interchangeable products or services in stand-alone sales to similarly situated customers. BESP is the price at which we would sell the deliverable if it were sold regularly on a stand-alone basis, considering market conditions and entity-specific factors. All multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements negotiated after February 1, 2011, excluding the sale of all software-only products and associated services, have been accounted for under this guidance.

The selling prices used in the relative selling price allocation method for certain of our services are based upon VSOE. The selling prices used in the relative selling price allocation method for third-party products from other vendors are based upon TPE. The selling prices used in the relative selling price allocation method for our hardware products, software, subscriptions, and customized services for which VSOE does not exist are based upon BESP. We do not believe TPE exists for these products and services because they are differentiated from competing products and services in terms of functionality and performance and there are no competing products or services that are largely interchangeable. Management establishes BESP with consideration for market conditions, such as the impact of competition and geographic considerations, and entity-specific factors, such as the cost of the product, discounts provided and profit objectives. Management believes that BESP is reflective of reasonable pricing of that deliverable as if priced on a stand-alone basis.

Since all of our revenue prior to the adoption of ASU 2009-14 fell within the scope of the software revenue recognition rules and we have only established VSOE for services and revenue in a multiple-deliverable arrangement involving products, revenue was frequently deferred until the last item was delivered. The adoption of ASU 2009-13 and ASU 2009-14 has resulted in earlier revenue recognition in multiple-deliverable arrangements involving our hardware products with embedded software because revenue can be recognized for each of these deliverables based upon their relative selling prices as defined above.

Service revenue from content processing provided to our customers is recognized when services are provided, based on contracted rates. Upfront fees received for services are recognized ratably over the period earned, whichever is the longer of the contract term or the estimated customer relationship.

Any taxes assessed by a governmental authority to revenue-producing transactions (e.g. sales or value-added taxes) are reported on a net basis and excluded from revenues.

Stock-Based Compensation

We account for all employee and non-employee director stock-based compensation awards using the authoritative guidance regarding stock-based payments. We have continued to use the Black-Scholes pricing model as the most appropriate method for determining the estimated fair value of all applicable awards. We also use the Monte Carlo pricing model for our market-based option awards. Determining the appropriate fair value model and calculating the fair value of stock-based payment awards requires the input of highly subjective assumptions, including the expected life of the stock-based payment awards and stock price volatility. Management estimated the volatility based on the historical volatility of our stock. The assumptions used in calculating the fair value of stock-based payment awards represent management’s best estimates, but these estimates involve inherent uncertainties and the application of management’s judgment. As a result, if circumstances change and we use different assumptions, our stock-based compensation expense could be materially different in the future. In addition, we are required to estimate the expected forfeiture rate and only recognize expense for those shares expected to vest. If our actual forfeiture rate is materially different from our estimate, the stock-based compensation expense could be significantly different from what it has recorded in the current period. The estimated fair value of our stock-based options and performance-based RSUs, less expected forfeitures, is amortized over the awards’ vesting period on a graded vesting basis, whereas the RSUs and employee stock purchase plan stock units are amortized on a straight-line basis.

Advertising Costs

Advertising costs are charged to expense as incurred. Advertising costs were $0.2 million, $0.4 million and $0.3 million for fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.

Earnings Per Share

Earnings per share are presented in accordance with authoritative guidance which requires the presentation of “basic” earnings per share and “diluted” earnings per share. Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing earnings available to common shareholders by the weighted-average shares of common stock outstanding during the period. For the purposes of calculating diluted earnings per share, the denominator includes both the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period and the weighted average number of potential common stock, such as stock options, employee stock purchase plan and restricted stock, calculated using the treasury stock method.

For fiscal 2013, 2012 and 2011 respectively 1,649,210, 1,566,726 and 2,459,389 of common shares issuable upon the exercise of stock options are anti-dilutive and have been excluded from the diluted earnings per share computation as the exercise prices of these common shares were above the market price of the common stock for the periods indicated. For fiscal 2013 and fiscal 2012, an additional 495,185 and 1,004,158 stock awards, respectively, have been excluded from diluted earnings per share due to the net loss. Below is a summary of the shares used in calculating basic and diluted earnings per share for the periods indicated:

	January 31,
	2013		2012		2011
Weighted average shares used in calculating earnings per share—Basic		32,493,799		32,093,125		31,434,398
Dilutive common stock equivalents		-		-		551,404
Weighted average shares used in calculating earnings per share—Diluted		32,493,799		32,093,125		31,985,802

Recent Accounting Standard Updates

Impact of Recently Adopted Accounting Guidance

Goodwill Impairment Test

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08, “Intangibles – Goodwill and Other: Testing Goodwill for Impairment,” which provided additional guidance on the annual and interim goodwill impairment testing. The guidance became effective for the Company at the beginning of fiscal 2013. This guidance provides entities with an option to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If it is determined, on the basis of qualitative factors, that the fair value of the reporting unit is more likely than not less than the carrying amount, the two-step goodwill impairment test will be required. The adoption of this update had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. See Note 8, “Goodwill and Intangible Assets”, for further information on the Company’s annual impairment tests.

Fair Value Measurements

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, “Fair Value Measurement – Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRS,” which amended previous guidance clarifying how to measure and disclose fair value. The guidance became effective for us at the beginning of fiscal 2013. The update amends the application of the “highest and best use” concept to be used only in the measurement of the fair value of nonfinancial assets, clarifies that the measurement of the fair value of equity-classified financial instruments should be performed from the perspective of a market participant who holds the instrument as an asset, clarifies that an entity that manages a group of financial assets and liabilities on the basis of its net risk exposure to those risks can measure those financial instruments on the basis of its net exposure to those risks, and clarifies when premiums and discounts should be taken into account when measuring fair value. This guidance results in a consistent definition of fair value and common requirements for the measurement of and disclosure about fair value between International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) and U.S. GAAP. The guidance also changes some fair value measurement principles and enhances disclosure requirements related to activities in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. Besides a change in disclosure requirements, the adoption of this update had no impact on our consolidated financial statements.

Recent Accounting Guidance Not Yet Effective

Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income

In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-02, “Comprehensive Income: Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income,” with the objective of improving the reporting of reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income. This update requires the effect of significant reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income be shown by component. Significant reclassifications should be shown by the respective line items of net income only if the amount reclassified is required to be reclassified to net income under U.S. GAAP. If the reclassification to net income is not required under U.S. GAAP, an entity is required to cross-reference to other disclosures that provide additional details about those amounts. This update is effective prospectively for our fiscal 2014 and early adoption is permitted. Besides changes to disclosures, we do not expect the adoption of this update to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

Balance Sheet Offsetting

In January 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-01, “Balance Sheet (Topic 220)-Clarifying the Scope of Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities,” which amends previous guidance on the disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities on the balance sheet to clarify that the scope of this guidance applies to derivatives (including bifurcated embedded derivatives), repurchase agreements (and reverse repurchase agreements) and securities borrowing (and lending) transactions that are offset or subject to an enforceable master netting arrangement or similar agreement. The guidance becomes effective at the beginning of our fiscal 2014 and should be applied retrospectively for all comparative periods. The adoption of this update is not expected to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.

Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets

In July 2012, the FASB issued ASU 2012-02, “Intangibles – Goodwill and Other: Testing Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment,” which amends previous guidance on the annual and interim testing of indefinite-lived intangible assets for impairment. The guidance becomes effective at the beginning of our 2014 fiscal year, although early adoption is permitted. The update provides entities with the option of first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether it is more than likely than not that the fair value of an indefinite-lived intangible asset is less than its carrying amount. If it is determined, on the basis of qualitative factors, that the fair value of the indefinite-lived intangible asset is more likely than not less than the carrying amount, a quantitative impairment test would still be required. We perform annual impairment tests as of August 1^st of each fiscal year. The adoption of this update is not expected to have a significant impact on our consolidated financial statements.