(2) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Principles of Consolidation

The condensed consolidated financial statements include our financial statements and those of our wholly-owned and majority-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

We do not have off-balance sheet arrangements, financings, or other similar relationships with unconsolidated entities or other persons, also known as special purpose entities. In the ordinary course of business, we lease certain equipment and certain real properties, primarily field sales offices, and research and development facilities, as described in Note 9. “Commitments and Contingencies.”

Revenue Recognition

We report revenue in two categories based on how the revenue is generated: (i) system and software and (ii) service and support.

System and software revenues – We derive system and software revenues from the sale of licenses of software products, emulation hardware systems, and finance fee revenues from our long-term installment receivables from product sales. We primarily license our products using two different license types:

1. Term licenses – We use this license type primarily for software sales. This license type provides the customer with the right to use a fixed list of software products for a specified time period, typically three years, with payments spread over the license term, and does not provide the customer with the right to use the products after the end of the term. Term license arrangements may allow the customer to share products between multiple locations and remix product usage from the fixed list of products at regular intervals during the license term. We generally recognize product revenue from term license arrangements upon product delivery and start of the license term. In a term license agreement where we provide the customer with rights to unspecified or unreleased future products, we recognize revenue ratably over the license term.

2. Perpetual licenses – We use this license type for software and emulation hardware system sales. This license type provides the customer with the right to use the product in perpetuity and typically does not provide for extended payment terms. We generally recognize product revenue from perpetual license arrangements upon product delivery assuming all other criteria for revenue recognition have been met.

We include finance fee revenues from the accretion on the discount of long-term installment receivables in system and software revenues.

Service and support revenues – We derive service and support revenues from software and hardware post-contract maintenance or support services and professional services, which include consulting, training, and other services. We recognize maintenance and support revenue ratably over the support services term. We record professional service revenue as the services are provided to the customer.

We determine whether product revenue recognition is appropriate based upon the evaluation of whether the following four criteria have been met:

1. Persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists – Generally, we use either a customer signed contract or qualified customer purchase order as evidence of an arrangement for both term and perpetual licenses. For professional service engagements, we generally use a signed professional services agreement and a statement of work to evidence an arrangement. Sales through our distributors are evidenced by an agreement governing the relationship, together with binding purchase orders from the distributor on a transaction-by-transaction basis.

2. Delivery has occurred – We generally deliver software and the corresponding access keys to customers electronically. Electronic delivery occurs when we provide the customer access to the software. We may also deliver the software on a compact disc. With respect to emulation hardware systems, we transfer title to the customer upon shipment. Our software license and emulation hardware system agreements generally do not contain conditions for acceptance.

3. Fee is fixed or determinable – We assess whether a fee is fixed or determinable at the outset of the arrangement, primarily based on the payment terms associated with the transaction. We have established a history of collecting under the original contract with installment terms without providing concessions on payments, products, or services. Additionally, for installment contracts, we determine that the fee is fixed or determinable if the arrangement has a payment schedule that is within the term of the licenses and the payments are collected in equal or nearly equal installments, when evaluated on a cumulative basis. If the fee is not deemed to be fixed or determinable, we recognize revenue as payments become due and payable.

Significant judgment is involved in assessing whether a fee is fixed or determinable. We must also make these judgments when assessing whether a contract amendment to a term arrangement (primarily in the context of a license extension or renewal) constitutes a concession. Our experience has been that we are able to determine whether a fee is fixed or determinable for term licenses. If we no longer were to have a history of collecting under the original contract without providing concessions on term licenses, revenue from term licenses would be required to be recognized when payments under the installment contract become due and payable. Such a change could have a material impact on our results of operations.

4. Collectibility is probable – To recognize revenue, we must judge collectibility of the arrangement fees on a customer-by-customer basis pursuant to our credit review process. We typically sell to customers with whom there is a history of successful collection. We evaluate the financial position and a customer’s ability to pay whenever an existing customer purchases new products, renews an existing arrangement, or requests an increase in credit terms. For certain industries for which our products are not considered core to the industry or the industry is generally considered troubled, we impose higher credit standards. If we determine that collectibility is not probable based upon our credit review process or the customer’s payment history, we recognize revenue as payments are received.

Multiple element arrangements involving software licenses – For multiple element arrangements involving software and other software-related deliverables, vendor-specific objective evidence of fair value (VSOE) must exist to allocate the total fee among all delivered and non-essential undelivered elements of the arrangement. If undelivered elements of the arrangement are essential to the functionality of the product, we defer revenue until the essential elements are delivered. If VSOE does not exist for one or more non-essential undelivered elements, we defer revenue until such evidence exists for the undelivered elements, or until all elements are delivered, whichever is earlier. If VSOE of all non-essential undelivered elements exist but VSOE does not exist for one or more delivered elements, we recognize revenue using the residual method. Under the residual method, we defer revenue related to the undelivered elements based upon VSOE and we recognize the remaining portion of the arrangement fee as revenue for the delivered elements, assuming all other criteria for revenue recognition are met. If we can no longer establish VSOE for non-essential undelivered elements of multiple element arrangements, we defer revenue until all elements are delivered or VSOE is established for the undelivered elements, whichever is earlier.

We base our VSOE for certain product elements of an arrangement upon the pricing in comparable transactions when the element is sold separately. We primarily base our VSOE for term and perpetual support services upon customer renewal history where the services are sold separately. We also base VSOE for professional services and installation services for emulation hardware systems upon the price charged when the services are sold separately.

Multiple element arrangements involving hardware – For multiple element arrangements involving our emulation hardware systems, we allocate revenue to each element based on the relative selling price of each deliverable. In order to meet the separation criteria to allocate revenue to each element we must determine the standalone selling price of each element using a hierarchy of evidence. The authoritative guidance requires that, in the absence of VSOE or third-party evidence (TPE), a company must develop an estimated selling price (ESP). ESP is defined as the price at which the vendor would transact if the deliverable was sold by the vendor regularly on a standalone basis. A company should consider market conditions as well as entity-specific factors when estimating a selling price.

When VSOE or TPE does not exist, we base our ESP for certain elements in arrangements on either costs incurred to manufacture a product plus a reasonable profit margin or standalone sales to similar customers. In determining profit margins, we consider current market conditions, pricing strategies related to the class of customer, and the level of penetration we have with the customer. We may have limited sales on a standalone basis to the same or similar customers and/or guaranteed pricing on future purchases of the same item. If we are unable to demonstrate value on a standalone basis of an element, we could be required to combine elements which may impact the timing of revenue recognition if not delivered together.

Noncontrolling Interest with Redemption Feature

As of October 31, 2011, we have presented a noncontrolling interest in a privately-held company as a result of a business combination. In conjunction with this business combination, we also entered into an agreement which allows the other owners of the company to require us to purchase their noncontrolling interest at a future date for a price based on a formula defined in the agreement. The noncontrolling interest adjusted for this redemption feature is presented on the condensed consolidated balance sheet under the caption “Noncontrolling interest with redemption feature.” Because the redemption of the noncontrolling interest is outside of our control, we have presented this interest outside of stockholders’ equity.

The results of the majority-owned subsidiary will be presented in our consolidated results with an adjustment reflected on the face of our statement of operations for the noncontrolling investors’ interest in the results of the subsidiary. Additionally, adjustments to the redemption feature will be recorded with an adjustment to retained earnings.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2011-04, “Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards.” ASU 2011-04 is intended to improve the comparability of fair value measurements presented and disclosed in financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. ASU 2011-04 will become effective prospectively for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is not permitted for public entities. We are currently evaluating the impact of ASU 2011-04 on our consolidated financial statements.

In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-05, “Presentation of Comprehensive Income.” ASU 2011-05 increases the prominence of other comprehensive income in the financial statements and gives entities the option to present the components of net income and comprehensive income as either a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. ASU 2011-05 eliminates the option to present other comprehensive income in the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. ASU 2011-05 will become effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. We are currently evaluating the impact of ASU 2011-05 on the presentation of our consolidated financial statements.

In September 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update ASU 2011-08, “Testing Goodwill for Impairment,” which amends Accounting Standards Codification 350, “Intangibles — Goodwill and Other.” The amended guidance reduces complexity and cost by allowing an entity 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. This initial assessment serves as a basis for determining if performing the two-step goodwill impairment test is necessary. The amendments are effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. The implementation of this amended accounting guidance is not expected to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

Reclassifications

Certain items have been reclassified between cost of revenues and operating expenses, and within operating expenses for the three and nine months ended October 31, 2010. We have reclassified a portion of our information technology administrative costs out of general and administration into cost of revenues, research and development, and marketing and selling. Additionally, we have reclassified technical publication expenses associated with our products from research and development to cost of revenues. Finally, we have reclassified the salaries and other related costs of our Technical Marketing Engineers from marketing and selling to research and development. While these reclassifications reduced gross margin, they had no impact on operating income (loss) or net income (loss) for the three and nine months ended October 31, 2010.

The reclassification of our previously issued condensed consolidated statement of operations was made to conform to current period presentation. These reclassifications were the result of a refinement of our allocation of costs to more closely align these activities with utilization. In addition these reclassifications more closely align our cost allocations with other companies in our industry.

The amounts have been reclassified in our condensed consolidated statement of operations for the time periods noted below as follows:


	Three months ended October 31, 2010						Nine months ended October 31, 2010
	As Originally Reported			As Reclassified			As Originally Reported			As Reclassified
Revenues	$	238,937		$	238,937		$	607,448		$	607,448
Cost of revenues
System and software		11,218			14,261			20,409			28,881
Service and support		24,445			25,430			69,511			72,230
Amortization of purchased technology		3,299			3,299			10,428			10,428

Total cost of revenues		38,962			42,990			100,348			111,539

Gross margin		199,975			195,947			507,100			495,909

Operating expenses:
Research and development		70,727			73,622			199,904			208,058
Marketing and selling		82,603			80,591			230,889			225,135
General and administration		23,396			18,485			69,118			55,527
Equity in earnings of Frontline		(415	)		(415	)		(1,761	)		(1,761	)
Amortization of intangible assets		1,445			1,445			5,742			5,742
Special charges		1,578			1,578			8,052			8,052

Total operating expenses		179,334			175,306			511,944			500,753

Operating income (loss)	$	20,641		$	20,641		$	(4,844	)	$	(4,844	)