EXHIBIT 3 

PART 1 OF 2 

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 1 of 149
424B1

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424(b)(1) 

Registration No. 333-138313

PROSPECTUS

6,500,000 Shares

Ordinary Shares 

We are offering 6,500,000 ordinary shares. No public market currently exists for our ordinary shares. 

Our ordinary shares have been approved for quotation on The Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol 

“ALLT.” 

Investing in our ordinary shares involves risks. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page 8.

 

 

Per 

Share Total 

Public Offering Price $ 12.00 $ 78,000,000 

Underwriting Discount $ 0.84 $ 5,460,000 

Proceeds to Allot Communications (before expenses) $ 11.16 $ 72,540,000 

We have granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 975,000 ordinary shares on 

the same terms and conditions as set forth above if the underwriters sell more than 6,500,000 ordinary shares 

in this offering. 

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or 

disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to 

the contrary is a criminal offense. 

Lehman Brothers, on behalf of the underwriters, expects to deliver the ordinary shares on or about 

November 21, 2006. 

Lehman Brothers Deutsche Bank Securities

CIBC World Markets RBC Capital Markets

November 15, 2006 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (2 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 2 of 149
424B1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 Page 

Prospectus Summary 1 

Risk Factors 8 

Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements 21 

Use of Proceeds 22 

Dividend Policy 22 

Capitalization 23 

Dilution 25 

Selected Consolidated Financial Data 27 

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 30 

Business 48 

Management 63 

Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions 80 

Principal Shareholders 85 

Description of Share Capital 89 

Ordinary Shares Eligible for Future Sale 94 

Taxation and Government Programs 97 

Underwriting 106 

Legal Matters 111 

Experts 111 

Enforceability of Civil Liabilities 111 

Where You Can Find Additional Information 113 

Index to Consolidated Financial Statements 

F1 

Until December 10, 2006, 25 days after the date of this prospectus, all dealers that buy, sell or trade our 

ordinary shares, whether or not participating in this offering, may be required to deliver a prospectus. This is 

in addition to the dealers’ obligation to deliver a prospectus when acting as underwriters and with respect to 

their unsold allotments or subscriptions. 

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus and any free writing prospectus 

prepared by or on our behalf. We have not authorized anyone to provide you with information different from 

that contained in this prospectus. This prospectus is not an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy our 

ordinary shares in any jurisdiction where it is unlawful. 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 ordinary shares. 

i 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (4 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 3 of 149
424B1

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

You should read the following summary together with the entire prospectus, including the more detailed 

information in our consolidated financial statements and related notes appearing elsewhere in this 

prospectus. You should carefully consider, among other things, the matters discussed in “Risk Factors.”

Allot Communications Ltd.

We are a leading designer and developer of broadband service optimization solutions using advanced deep 

packet inspection, or DPI, technology. Our solutions provide broadband service providers and enterprises 

with real-time, highly granular visibility into, and control of, network traffic, and enable them to efficiently 

and effectively manage and optimize their networks. Our carrier-class products are used by service providers 

to offer subscriber-based and application-based tiered services that enable them to optimize their service 

offerings, reduce churn rates and increase average revenue per user, or ARPU. The rapid growth of 

broadband networks, such as cable, DSL and wireless, and the proliferation in the number and complexity of 

broadband applications have led broadband service providers to demand new ways to manage their 

networks. Costly infrastructure upgrades to increase network bandwidth capacity neither address service 

providers’ need for network visibility nor prioritize revenue-generating applications. Furthermore, service 

providers have generally been unsuccessful in capturing the significant new revenue opportunities available 

from providing differentiated, premium broadband services that command higher prices. By capitalizing on 

new revenue opportunities and maximizing the capacity of existing network infrastructure, our DPI 

technology enables service providers to optimize returns on their investments and enhance the quality of the 

services they provide. 

Our products consist of our NetEnforcer traffic management systems and NetXplorer application 

management suite. NetEnforcer employs advanced DPI technology, which identifies applications at high 

speeds by examining data packets and searching for application patterns and behaviors. NetXplorer enables 

the implementation of user-defined network management policies and the collection of detailed statistics on 

the network’s users and applications. Our goal is to be the leading provider of independent network 

inspection and management solutions used by service providers and enterprises to transform generic access 

broadband networks into intelligent broadband networks. 

We generated revenues of $23.0 million in 2005, representing a 27% increase over the prior year, and 

revenues of $24.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2006, representing a 55% increase over 

the same period in the prior year. We had a net loss of $2.4 million in 2005 and had net income of 

$0.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2006. We have incurred net losses in each fiscal year 

since our incorporation in 1996 and may be unable to achieve profitability. Since inception, we have 

financed our operations primarily through private placements of our equity securities and, to a lesser extent, 

through borrowings from financial institutions. We had 232 employees as of September 30, 2006. 

Industry Background

The rapid proliferation of broadband networks in recent years has been largely driven by demand from users 

for faster and more reliable access to the Internet and by the proliferation in the number and complexity of 

broadband applications. According to a May 2006 report by International Data Corporation, or IDC, a 

provider of information about the telecommunications market, the number of broadband subscribers globally 

is expected to reach 396 million by 2010, representing a compound annual growth rate of 14% over the 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (5 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 4 of 149
424B1

206 million in 2005. The applications utilized by broadband subscribers include peer-to-peer file-sharing 

(P2P), voice-over-IP (VoIP), Internet video and online video gaming applications, as well as applications to 

enable online content services. In contrast to traditional applications, such as e-mail and web-browsing, 

these new applications require large amounts of bandwidth and are highly sensitive to network delays, 

thereby increasing the cost of maintaining network performance. As a result of increased competition and 

lack of service differentiation, broadband access has become a commodity, contributing to downward price 

pressure, low ARPU, and high customer churn rates. Yet, because service providers do not have the tools to 

analyze and manage applications on their networks, most service providers still only offer users 

undifferentiated connectivity for a flat fee, regardless of the type of application, its importance to the user 

and level of usage. 

1 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (6 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 5 of 149
424B1

To address these issues, service providers have begun to offer premium, differentiated applications, such as 

VoIP, video and new online content services based on the willingness of subscribers to pay premium rates 

for upgraded quality of service and certain applications. However, to offer premium services, and to 

guarantee service levels, service providers need to be able to identify, control and protect network 

applications used by different subscribers. By offering such tiered services and charging subscribers 

according to the value of these services, service providers can capitalize on the revenue enhancement 

opportunities enabled by different broadband applications. 

The proliferation of network applications also presents significant challenges for enterprises operating widearea networks. Enterprises have also become increasingly dependent on broadband Internet and Intranet 

access, as content distribution between partners and customers, employee remote access, and VoIP, have 

become more common. Applications such as e-mail, customer relationship management, or CRM, enterprise 

resource planning, or ERP, and other online transactional and business applications are critical to 

enterprises’ businesses. In order to guarantee the performance of these mission-critical applications, as well 

as to reduce infrastructure expenses, enterprises seek the tools required to prioritize and control their 

network applications. 

Service providers and enterprises are seeking to transform generic access broadband networks into 

intelligent broadband networks. The ability to identify, distinguish and prioritize different network 

applications plays a major role in intelligent network management, allowing service providers to optimize 

bandwidth usage and reduce operational costs, while maintaining high quality of service. Application 

designers are employing increasingly sophisticated methods to avoid detection by network operators who 

desire to manage network use. For example, applications can disguise themselves as permitted applications 

and also use sophisticated encryption techniques to avoid detection. Unlike traditional network infrastructure 

devices, such as switches and routers, which can perform only a very limited examination of packets, DPI 

solutions offer active control over each application and subscriber in the network. 

The Allot Solution

Our NetEnforcer traffic management systems and NetXplorer application management suite enable our endcustomers to accomplish the following objectives: 

• Network visibility. Our intelligent network solutions enable our end-customers to generate detailed 

real-time and historical reports by identifying bandwidth usage by application, subscriber usage 

patterns, network performance, long- and short-term usage trends and abnormal events, such 

as denial-of-service attacks and worms. 

• Application management and control. Service providers and enterprises apply our intelligent network 

application management technology to improve service quality by optimizing available bandwidth 

usage for different applications. For example, P2P applications that consume large amounts of network 

bandwidth can be de-prioritized to enhance the performance of applications, such as VoIP or Internet 

video, that are more sensitive to delay. Intelligent application controls can ensure the delivery of 

mission-critical applications by deprioritizing non-critical, bandwidth-intensive applications, 

discourage the use of non-business or recreational applications, and warn and protect against security 

threats. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (7 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 6 of 149
424B1

• Subscriber and service management. Our offerings enable service providers to increase total revenue, 

ARPU and customer loyalty by offering tiered service plans and differentiated content offerings to 

better meet varying subscriber needs. Using our systems, service providers can tailor and price service 

plans based on customer needs and demands, such as plans that guarantee performance of certain 

applications, the ability to purchase bandwidth on demand or bandwidth for prioritized content 

delivery. Content providers can also contract with service providers to guarantee high quality service 

to their customers over the service provider’s infrastructure, thereby enabling content providers to 

differentiate their offerings. 

2 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (8 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 7 of 149
424B1

Our Competitive Strengths

Our competitive strengths include the following: 

• Market-leading DPI technology and analytical capabilities. Our focus on developing the most 

efficient means to search for hundreds of different applications, combined with our extensive database 

of algorithms that detect network applications, provide us with a significant competitive advantage. 

We believe that our NetEnforcer AC-2500, is currently the only commercially deployed solution with 

its level of functionality capable of supporting 5 gigabits/second performance and 2 million 

simultaneous connections. 

• Broad product portfolio. We believe that our broad product portfolio with offerings targeted at small, 

midsize and large service providers and enterprises enables us to compete in, and our channel partners 

to serve, a wider range of profitable markets than our competitors. 

• Independence from underlying network infrastructure. Our independent solutions are designed for 

easy deployment and to be less disruptive to existing networks than embedded solutions, which require 

changes or upgrades to the network infrastructure. In addition, independent solutions can be upgraded 

easily to respond to rapid changes in application behavior and subscriber demands, and offer endcustomers flexibility in choosing any infrastructure equipment vendor. 

• Global sales and marketing channels. Our global network of over 300 distributors, resellers and 

systems integrators, through which we make substantially all of our sales, have enabled us to achieve a 

diverse customer base. We also rely on these third parties to install and provide basic technical support 

for our systems. To date, we have deployed over 9,000 NetEnforcer systems in 118 countries. 

• Focus on service optimization solutions. We believe that our dedicated focus on DPI solutions 

differentiates the level of service and support that we provide to our channel partners and endcustomers. This includes our responsiveness to the introduction of new applications and effective 

integration of our products into our customers’ existing billing, customer care and other business 

systems. 

Our Strategy

Our goal is to be the leader in offering service providers and enterprises network inspection and 

management solutions to transform generic access broadband networks into intelligent broadband networks. 

Our strategy to achieve this goal includes the following: 

• Further our technological advantage. We intend to continue investing in the development of market 

leading broadband service optimization technologies and new broadband applications and services. 

Our next generation product, which is designed to support multiple channels of 10 gigabit/second full 

performance throughput rates, will utilize the new Advanced Telecom Computing Architecture 

standards, or ATCA, since it better enables the integration of additional third-party services into our 

product offerings. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (9 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 8 of 149
424B1

• Continue to expand our sales and marketing channels. We intend to expand our world-wide sales and 

marketing channels to further address small and medium-sized service providers and enterprises, 

including the government and education sectors. We intend to seek channel partners in new 

geographical territories, as well as in vertical markets in countries where we have already established a 

presence. 

• Focus on larger service providers. We intend to target larger service providers in response to 

increased demand from them for the ability to differentiate their service offerings. We believe that 

sales to these end-customers are more likely to result in sustained demand for our NetEnforcer systems 

as they deploy our products throughout their networks and as their networks grow. We intend to 

supplement these efforts by expanding our relationships with system integrators and OEMs who have 

existing relationships with larger service providers. 

3 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (10 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 9 of 149
424B1

• Selectively pursue strategic partnerships and acquisitions. We intend to selectively pursue 

partnerships and acquisitions that will provide us access to complementary technologies and 

accelerate our penetration into new markets, including mobile networks, security applications and 

subscriber management. 

We face a number of challenges in achieving our goal. In particular, the market for our products in the 

service provider market is still emerging and is highly competitive, and our growth may be harmed if 

carriers do not adopt DPI solutions or if they adopt DPI solutions from our competitors. In addition, sales of 

our products can involve lengthy sales cycles, which may impact the timing of our revenues and result in us 

expending significant resources without making any sales. 

Company Information

We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Israel in November 1996. Our principal executive 

offices are located at 22 Hanagar Street, Neve Ne’eman Industrial Zone B, Hod-Hasharon 45240, Israel, and 

our telephone number is +972 (9) 761-9200. Our website address is www.allot.com. The information on our 

website does not constitute part of this prospectus. 

Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms “Allot,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Allot 

Communications Ltd. and our wholly-owned subsidiaries. 

The terms “NetEnforcer” and “NetReality,” as well as the name “Allot Communications,” are registered 

trademarks and we have filed a trademark application to register our logo. All other registered trademarks 

appearing in this prospectus are owned by their holders. 

4 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (11 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 10 of 149
424B1

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (12 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 11 of 149
424B1

THE OFFERING

Ordinary shares offered by us 6,500,000 shares.

Ordinary shares to be outstanding 

after this offering 20,889,931 shares.

Use of proceeds We intend to use the net proceeds of this offering to fund our 

research and development activities, business development and 

marketing activities, and for general corporate purposes and 

working capital. We also may use a portion of the net proceeds to 

acquire or invest in complementary companies, products or 

technologies although we currently do not have any acquisition or 

investment planned.

Proposed Nasdaq Global Market 

symbol “ALLT.”

The number of ordinary shares to be outstanding after this offering excludes (1) 3,541,171 ordinary shares 

reserved for issuance under our share option plans as of the date of this prospectus, of which options to 

purchase 3,451,439 ordinary shares at a weighted average exercise price of $2.32 per share have been 

granted, (2) 246,479 ordinary shares that have been issued, but are held in trust for the benefit of our founder 

and Chairman, Yigal Jacoby, pending his payment of the purchase price of such shares (see “Certain 

Relationships and Related Party Transactions — Agreements with Directors and Officers — Escrow 

Agreement with Yigal Jacoby”), and (3) up to 163,705 ordinary shares issuable upon the exercise of 

warrants granted to two Israeli banks and an Israeli non-profit organization at a weighted average exercise 

price of $3.37 per share. 

Unless otherwise indicated, all information in this prospectus: 

• reflects the issuance upon the closing of this offering of 284,349 ordinary shares upon the exercise of 

warrants to purchase Series B preferred shares on a cashless and non-cashless basis, and the receipt of 

$1,128 by us from such exercise; 

• reflects the issuance upon the closing of this offering of 14,094 ordinary shares upon the exercise of an 

option to purchase Series B preferred shares and the receipt of NIS 620, representing approximately 

$145, from such exercise, held by Mr. Jacoby; 

• reflects the conversion upon the closing of this offering of (1) all of our issued and outstanding 

Series A, B, C, D and E preferred shares into 10,931,110 ordinary shares, including 236,492 ordinary 

shares resulting from an anti-dilution adjustment for price protection granted to holders of our Series C 

preferred shares in connection with prior financings and this offering, and (2) all of our Series A 

ordinary shares into 611,349 ordinary shares; 

• reflects the initial public offering price of $12.00 per ordinary share; 

• assumes no exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase from us up to 975,000 additional ordinary 

shares; and 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (13 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 12 of 149
424B1

• reflects a 1-for-100 share split effected on February 5, 1998, a share dividend effected on 

September 12, 2000 of three shares for each outstanding share, and a 4.3962-for-1 reverse share split 

effected on October 29, 2006. Such reverse share split was effected through a 10-for-1 consolidation of 

each series of our ordinary and preferred shares, followed by a share dividend of approximately 1.275 

ordinary shares for each ordinary share outstanding and an adjustment to the ordinary share conversion 

ratio of our preferred shares and Series A ordinary shares. We effected the reverse share split in this 

manner in order to maintain a round par value per share and to give our board of directors maximum 

flexibility under Israeli law to determine the amount of the share dividend prior to printing preliminary 

prospectuses for this offering. 

5 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (14 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 13 of 149
424B1

SUMMARY CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

The following table presents summary consolidated financial and operating data derived from our 

consolidated financial statements. You should read this data along with the sections of this prospectus 

entitled “Selected Consolidated Financial Data,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial 

Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial statements and related notes included 

elsewhere in this prospectus. 

 

 Nine Months Ended 

 Year Ended December 31, September 30, 

 2003 2004 2005 2005 2006 

 (unaudited) 

 (in thousands, except share and per share data) 

Consolidated statements of operations data: 

Revenues: 

Products $ 13,122 $ 14,638 $ 18,498 $ 12,576 $ 20,718 

Services 1,653 3,447 4,474 3,317 3,859 

Total revenues 14,775 18,085 22,972 15,893 24,577 

Cost of revenues(1): 

Products 3,229 3,942 4,481 3,237 4,562 

Services 362 679 938 699 845 

Total cost of revenues 3,591 4,621 5,419 3,936 5,407 

Gross profit 11,184 13,464 17,553 11,957 19,170 

Operating expenses: 

Research and development, gross 4,053 4,851 6,652 4,964 6,737 

Less royalty-bearing participation 1,094 894 727 582 1,095 

Research and development, net(1) 2,959 3,957 5,925 4,382 5,642 

Sales and marketing(1) 8,164 10,104 11,887 8,797 10,859 

General and administrative(1) 1,832 2,081 2,380 1,709 2,260 

Impairment of intangible assets — 366 — — — 

Total operating expenses 12,955 16,508 20,192 14,888 18,761 

Operating income (loss) (1,771 ) (3,044 ) (2,639 ) (2,931 ) 409 

Financing and other income (expenses), net (507 ) (241 ) 45 36 229 

Income (loss) before income tax expenses (benefit) (2,278 ) (3,285 ) (2,594 ) (2,895 ) 638 

Income tax expenses (benefit) 2 3 (218 ) (178 ) 75 

Net income (loss) $ (2,280 ) $ (3,288 ) $ (2,376 ) $ (2,717 ) $ 563 

Basic net earnings (loss) per share $ (0.82 ) $ (1.18 ) $ (0.81 ) $ (0.94 ) $ 0.04 

Diluted net earnings (loss) per share $ (0.82 ) $ (1.18 ) $ (0.81 ) $ (0.94 ) $ 0.04 

Weighted average number of shares used in 

computing basic net earnings (loss) per share 2,774,639 2,787,554 2,943,500 2,903,356 13,310,355 

Weighted average number of shares used in 

computing diluted net earnings (loss) per share 2,774,639 2,787,554 2,943,500 2,903,356 15,501,698 

Pro forma basic and diluted net earning (loss) per 

share of ordinary shares (unaudited)(2) $ (0.18 ) $ 0.04 

6 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (15 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 14 of 149
424B1

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (16 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 15 of 149
424B1

(1) Includes stock-based compensation expense related to options granted to employees and others as 

follows:

 

 Nine Months Ended 

 Year Ended December 31, September 30, 

 2003 2004 2005 2005 2006 

 (unaudited) 

 (in thousands) 

Cost of revenues $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 8 

Research and development, net 22 17 12 10 97 

Sales and marketing 40 25 251 240 330 

General and administrative 235 116 42 27 247 

Total $ 297 $ 158 $ 305 $ 277 $ 682 

(2) Pro forma basic and diluted loss per ordinary share gives effect to the conversion upon the closing of 

this offering, assuming such closing occurred on September 30, 2006, of (1) all of our issued and 

outstanding preferred shares into 10,931,155 ordinary shares, and (2) all of our Series A ordinary shares 

into 611,349 ordinary shares. See Note 2r to our consolidated financial statements for an explanation of 

the number of shares used in computing per share data.

 

 As of September 30, 2006 

 Pro Forma as 

 Actual Adjusted 

 (unaudited) 

 (in thousands) 

Consolidated balance sheet data: 

Cash and cash equivalents $ 4,547 $ 75,587 

Marketable securities 8,897 8,897 

Working capital 5,048 75,588 

Total assets 27,524 98,064 

Total liabilities 14,686 14,686 

Accumulated deficit (37,321 ) (37,321 ) 

Total shareholders’ equity 12,838 83,378 

Pro forma as adjusted information included above in the consolidated balance sheet data reflects (1) our 

receipt of estimated net proceeds of $70.5 million from our sale of the ordinary shares in this offering, based 

on the initial public offering price of $12.00 per share, after deducting the underwriting discount and 

estimated offering expenses, of which $0.5 million had been prepaid as of September 30, 2006 and is 

included in working capital, (2) the receipt of $1,128 by us pursuant to the issuance of 284,349 ordinary 

shares pursuant to the exercise on a cashless and non-cashless basis upon the closing of this offering of 

warrants to purchase Series B preferred shares, and (3) the receipt of $145 by us pursuant to the issuance of 

14,094 ordinary shares pursuant to the exercise upon the closing of this offering of an option to purchase 

Series B preferred shares held by our founder and Chairman, Yigal Jacoby. 

7 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (17 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 16 of 149
424B1

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (18 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 17 of 149
424B1

RISK FACTORS

This offering and an investment in our ordinary shares involve a high degree of risk. You should consider 

carefully the risks described below, together with the financial and other information contained in this 

prospectus, before you decide to buy our ordinary shares. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our 

business, financial condition and results of operations would suffer. In this case, the trading price of our 

ordinary shares would likely decline and you might lose all or part of your investment. The risks described 

below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks that we currently do not know about or that we 

currently believe to be immaterial may also impair our business operations.

Risks Relating to Our Business

We have a history of losses, may incur future losses and may not achieve profitability.

We have incurred net losses in each fiscal year since we commenced operations in 1997. We incurred net 

losses of $2.4 million in 2005, $3.3 million in 2004 and $2.3 million in 2003. As of September 30, 2006, our 

accumulated deficit was $37.3 million. Our losses could continue for the next several years as we expand our 

sales and marketing activities and continue to invest in research and development. We may incur losses in 

the future and may not generate sufficient revenues in the future to achieve profitability. 

We are dependent on our NetEnforcer traffic management system and NetXplorer network management 

application suite for all of our revenue.

Our revenues are currently derived solely from sales of our NetEnforcer traffic management system and 

NetXplorer network management application suite, and from maintenance and support contracts related to 

these products. We currently expect that our revenues from these products will continue to account for all or 

substantially all of our revenues for the foreseeable future. As a result, any factor adversely affecting our 

ability to sell, or the pricing of or demand for, these products would severely harm our ability to generate 

revenues. 

We may be unable to compete effectively with other companies in our market who offer, or may in the 

future offer, competing technologies.

We compete in a rapidly evolving and highly competitive sector of the networking technology market. Our 

principal competitors are Cisco Systems, Inc. (through its acquisition of P-Cube, Inc.), Sandvine Inc. and 

Ellacoya Networks, Inc. in the service provider market, and Packeteer Inc. in the enterprise market. We also 

compete in particular geographic areas with a number of smaller local competitors and we compete indirectly 

with router and switch infrastructure companies with features that address some of the problems that our 

products address. We also face competition from companies that offer partial solutions addressing only one 

aspect of the challenges facing broadband providers, such as network monitoring or security. Our 

competitors may announce new products, services or enhancements that better meet the needs of customers 

or changing industry requirements, or may offer alternative methods to achieve customer objectives. One of 

our direct competitors, Cisco Systems, is substantially larger than we are and has significantly greater 

financial, sales and marketing, technical, manufacturing and other resources. The entry of new competitors 

into our market and acquisitions of our existing competitors by companies with significant resources and 

established relationships with our potential customers could result in increased competition and harm our 

business. Increased competition may cause price reductions, reduced gross margins and loss of market share, 

any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or result of operations. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (19 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 18 of 149
424B1

Demand for our products depends in part on the rate of adoption of bandwidth-intensive broadband 

applications, such as peer-to-peer (P2P), and latency-sensitive applications, such as voice-over-Internet 

protocol (VoIP), Internet video and online video gaming applications.

Our products are used by service providers and enterprises to monitor and manage bandwidth-intensive 

applications that cause congestion in broadband networks and impact the quality of experience of users. In 

addition to the general increase in applications delivered over broadband networks that require large amounts 

8 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (20 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 19 of 149
424B1

of bandwidth, such as P2P applications, demand for our products is driven particularly by the growth in 

applications which are highly sensitive to network delays and therefore require efficient network 

management. These applications include VoIP, Internet video and online video gaming applications. If the 

rapid growth in adoption of VoIP and in the popularity of Internet video and online video gaming 

applications does not continue, the demand for our products may not grow as anticipated. 

We depend on third parties to market, sell, install, and provide initial technical support for our products.

We market and sell our products to end-customers through third party channel partners, such as distributors, 

resellers, OEMs and system integrators. Our channel partners are also responsible for installing our products 

and providing initial customer support for them. As a result, we depend on the ability of our channel partners 

to market and sell our products successfully to end-customers. If any significant channel partners fail, 

individually or in the aggregate, to perform as we expect, our sales may suffer. We also depend on our ability 

to maintain our relationships with existing channel partners and develop relationships in key markets with 

new channel partners. We cannot assure you that our channel partners will market our products effectively, 

receive and fulfill customer orders of our products on a timely basis or continue to devote the resources 

necessary to provide us with effective sales, marketing and technical support. Our products are complex and 

it takes time for a new channel partner to gain experience in their operation and installation. Therefore, it 

may take a period of time before a new channel partner can successfully market, sell and support our 

products if an existing channel partner ceases to sell our products. 

Our channel partners install our products and provide initial customer support to end-customers of our 

products. Any failure by our channel partners to provide adequate support to end-customers could result in 

customer dissatisfaction with us or our products, which could result in a loss of customers, harm our 

reputation and delay or limit market acceptance of our products. 

Our agreements with channel partners are generally not exclusive and our channel partners may market and 

sell products that compete with our products. Our agreements with our distributors and resellers are usually 

for an initial one year term and following the expiration of this term, they can be terminated by either party. 

We can give no assurance that these agreements will not be terminated upon proper notice and any such 

termination may adversely affect our profitability and results of operations. 

The market for our products in the service provider market is still emerging and our growth may be 

harmed if carriers do not adopt DPI solutions.

The market for DPI technology is still emerging and the majority of our sales to date have been to small and 

midsize service providers and enterprises. We believe that the largest service providers, referred to as Tier 1 

carriers, as well as cable and mobile operators, present a significant market opportunity and are an important 

element of our long term strategy, but they are still in the early stages of evaluating the benefits and 

applications of DPI technology. Carriers may decide that full visibility into their networks or highly granular 

control over content based applications is not critical to their business. They may also determine that certain 

applications, such as VoIP or video, can be adequately prioritized in their networks by using router and 

switch infrastructure products without the use of DPI technology. They may also, in some instances, face 

regulatory constraints that could change the characteristics of the markets. Furthermore, widespread adoption 

of our products by carriers will require that they migrate to a new business model based on offering 

subscriber and application-based tiered services and market these new services successfully to consumers. If 

carriers decide not to adopt DPI technology, our market opportunity would be reduced and our growth rate 

may be harmed. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (21 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 20 of 149
424B1

Demand for our products may be impacted by government regulation of the telecommunications industry.

Carriers are subject to government regulation in jurisdictions in which we sell our products. For example, 

there has been a series of draft bills introduced to the U.S. Congress in the first half of 2006 that would 

prohibit service providers from prioritizing applications from content providers who are prepared to pay for 

such service. To date, none of these bills has been adopted; however, some of these bills may still be raised 

for consideration and other jurisdictions in which we operate may adopt similar legislation. Advocates for 

the 

9 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (22 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 21 of 149
424B1

legislation claim that collecting premium fees from certain “preferred” customers would distort the market 

for Internet applications in favor of larger and better-funded content providers and would impact end users 

who purchased broadband access only to experience differing response times in interacting with various 

content providers. Opponents of the legislation believe that content providers who support bandwidthintensive applications should be required to pay service providers a premium in order to support further 

network investments. Demand from carriers for the traffic management and subscriber management features 

of our products could be adversely affected if regulations prohibit, or limit, service providers from managing 

traffic on their networks. A decrease in demand for these features could adversely impact sales of our 

products. 

Sales of our products to large service providers can involve a lengthy sales cycle, which may impact the 

timing of our revenues and result in us expending significant resources without making any sales.

The length of our sales cycles to large service providers, including carriers and cable and mobile operators, is 

generally lengthy, as these end-customers undertake significant testing to assess the performance of our 

products within their networks. As a result, we may invest significant time from initial contact with a large 

service provider until that end-customer decides to incorporate our products in its network. We may also 

expend significant resources attempting to persuade large service providers to incorporate our products into 

their networks without success. Even after deciding to purchase our products, initial network deployment of 

our products by a large service provider may last up to three years. Carriers, especially in North America, 

often require that products they purchase meet Network Equipment Building System (NEBS) certification 

requirements, which relate the reliability of telecommunications equipment. Our NetEnforcer AC-1000 

and AC-2500 are designed to meet NEBS certification requirements and are currently undergoing the 

certification process, but carriers may not choose to use our systems until we receive the certification. If a 

competitor succeeds in convincing a large service provider to adopt that competitor’s product, it may be 

difficult for us to displace the competitor because of the cost, time, effort and perceived risk to network 

stability involved in changing solutions. As a result we may incur significant expense without generating any 

sales. 

Our revenues and business will be harmed if we do not keep pace with changes in broadband applications 

and with advances in technology.

We will need to invest heavily in developing our DPI technology in order to keep pace with rapid changes in 

applications, increased broadband network speeds and with our competitors’ efforts to advance their 

technology. Designers of broadband applications that our products are designed to identify and manage are 

using increasingly sophisticated methods to avoid detection and management by network operators. Even if 

our products successfully identify a particular application, it is sometimes necessary to distinguish between 

different types of traffic belonging to a single application. Accordingly, we face significant challenges in 

ensuring that we identify new applications as they are introduced without impacting network performance, 

especially as networks become faster. This challenge is increased as we seek to expand sales of our products 

in new geographic territories because the applications vary from country to country and region to region. If 

we fail to address the needs of customers in particular geographic markets and if we fail to develop 

enhancements to our products in order to keep pace with advances in technology, our business and revenues 

will be adversely affected. 

We currently depend on a single subcontractor, R.H. Electronics Ltd., to manufacture and provide 

hardware warranty support for our NetEnforcer traffic management system and if it experiences delays, 

disruptions, quality control problems or a loss in capacity, it could materially adversely affect our 

operating results.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (23 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:14 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 22 of 149
424B1

We currently depend on a single subcontractor, R.H. Electronics Ltd., to manufacture, assemble, test, 

package and provide hardware warranty support for all of our NetEnforcer traffic management systems, 

although we are negotiating with candidates for an additional third-party manufacturer. In addition, our 

agreement with R.H. Electronics requires it to procure and store key components for the NetEnforcer at its 

facilities. If R.H. Electronics experiences delays, disruptions or quality control problems in manufacturing 

our products, or if we fail to effectively manage the relationship with R.H. Electronics, shipments of 

products to our customers may be delayed and our ability to deliver products to customers could be 

materially adversely 

10 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (24 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 23 of 149
424B1

affected. Our agreement with R.H. Electronics is automatically renewed annually for additional one-year 

terms, unless R.H. Electronics elects not to renew by giving us at least 90 days prior notice to the expiration 

of any such term. Furthermore, R.H. Electronics may terminate our agreement at any time during the term 

upon 120 days prior notice. We expect that it would take approximately six months to transition 

manufacturing of our products to an alternate manufacturer and our inventory of completed products may not 

be sufficient for us to continue delivering products to our customers on a timely basis during any such 

transition. Therefore, the loss of R.H. Electronics would adversely affect our sales and operating results, and 

harm our reputation. 

R.H. Electronics’ facilities are located in northern Israel and are in range of rockets that were fired recently 

from Lebanon into Israel. In the event that the facilities of R.H. Electronics are damaged as a result of hostile 

action, our ability to deliver products to customers could be materially adversely affected. See also “Risk 

Factors — Conditions in Israel could adversely affect our business, and — Our operations may be disrupted 

by the obligations of personnel to perform military service.” 

Certain components for our NetEnforcer traffic management systems come from single or limited 

sources, and we could lose sales if these sources fail to satisfy our supply requirements.

Certain components used in our NetEnforcer systems are obtained from single or limited sources. Since our 

NetEnforcer systems have been designed to incorporate these specific components, any change in these 

components due to an interruption in supply or our inability to obtain such components on a timely basis 

would require engineering changes to our products before we could incorporate substitute components. Such 

changes could be costly and result in lost sales. In particular, the central processing unit for our 

NetEnforcer AC-400 and our NetEnforcer AC-800 is from Intel Corporation and the network processor for 

our NetEnforcer AC-1000 and our NetEnforcer AC-2500 is from Hifn Inc. 

If we or our contract manufacturer fail to obtain components in sufficient quantities when required, our 

business could be harmed. Our suppliers also sell products to our competitors. Our suppliers may enter into 

exclusive arrangements with our competitors, stop selling their products or components to us at 

commercially reasonable prices or refuse to sell their products or components to us at any price. Our inability 

to obtain sufficient quantities of single-source or limited-sourced components, or to develop alternative 

sources for components or products would harm our ability to maintain and expand our business. 

The slowdown in capital expenditures by telecommunications service providers in prior years had a 

material adverse effect on our results of operations. Another down turn in technology spending could 

have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

A deterioration of economies around the world and economic uncertainty in the telecommunications market 

began in 2000 and continued through 2003. There was a curtailment of capital investment by 

telecommunications carriers and service providers as well as by businesses that use our products, referred to 

as the enterprise market. Recent increased expenditures in the telecommunications industry in general or in 

the broadband portion of the market in particular may not continue. Since a substantial portion of our 

operating expenses consist of salaries, we may not be able to reduce our operating expenses in line with any 

reduction in revenues or may elect not to do so for business reasons. We will need to continue to generate 

increased revenues and manage our costs to maintain profitability. Any future industry downturn may 

increase our inventories, decrease our revenues, result in additional pressure on the price of our products and 

prolong the time until we are paid, all of which would have a material adverse effect on the results of our 

operations and on our cash flow from operations. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (25 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 24 of 149
424B1

We use certain “open-source” software tools that carry the risk of being subject to intellectual property 

infringement claims, the assertion of which could impair our product development plans, interfere with 

our ability to support our customers or require us to pay licensing fees.

Our NetEnforcer traffic management systems and NetXplorer management application suite contain software 

from open source code sources. Open source code is software that is accessible, usable and modifiable by 

anyone, provided that users and modifiers abide by certain licensing requirements. The original 

11 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (26 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 25 of 149
424B1

developers of the open source code provide no warranties on such code. Our products include, for example, 

open source code such as the Linux kernel and the GNU/Linux operating system. The Linux kernel and the 

GNU/Linux operating system have been developed under a license (known as a General Public License or 

GPL), which permits them to be liberally copied, modified and distributed. 

Under certain conditions, the use of some open source code to create derivative code may obligate us to 

make the resulting derivative code available to others at no cost. The circumstances under which our use of 

open source code would compel us to offer derivative code at no cost are subject to different interpretations. 

While we have periodically undertaken reviews of our use of open source code in an effort to avoid 

situations that would require us to make parts of our core proprietary technology freely available as open 

source code, we cannot guarantee that such circumstances will not occur or that a court would not conclude 

that, under a different interpretation of an open source license, certain of our core technology must be made 

available as open source code. The use of such open source code may also ultimately require us to take 

remedial action, such as replacing certain code used in our products, paying a royalty to use some open 

source code, making certain proprietary source code available to others or discontinuing certain products, 

that may divert resources away from our development efforts. 

The license under which we licensed the Linux kernel and GNU/Linux operating system, is currently the 

subject of litigation in the case of The SCO Group, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corp., pending in 

the United States District Court for the District of Utah. SCO filed its complaint in 2003. According to the 

current schedule, the parties will complete summary judgment briefing by December 8, 2006 and the court 

has postponed the jury-trial date of February 26, 2007, pending the outcome of the motions. SCO has alleged 

that certain versions of the Linux kernel and GNU/Linux operating system contributed by IBM contain 

unauthorized UNIX code or derivative works of UNIX code, which SCO claims it owns. If the court were to 

rule in SCO’s favor and find, for example, that GNU/Linux-based products, or significant portions of them, 

may not be liberally copied, modified or distributed, we may have to modify our products and/or seek a 

license to use the code in question, which may or may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, 

and this could have a material adverse effect on our business. Regardless of the merit of SCO’s allegations, 

uncertainty concerning SCO’s allegations could adversely affect our products and customer relationships. 

If we are unable to successfully protect the intellectual property embodied in our technology, our business 

could be harmed significantly.

Know-how relating to networking protocols, building carrier-grade systems and identifying applications is an 

important aspect of our intellectual property. To protect our know-how, we customarily require our 

employees, distributors, resellers, software testers and contractors to execute confidentiality agreements or 

agree to confidentiality undertakings when their relationship with us begins. Typically, our employment 

contracts also include the following clauses: assignment of intellectual property rights for all inventions 

developed by employees, non-disclosure of all confidential information, and non-compete clauses for six 

months following termination of employment. The enforceability of non-compete clauses in Israel is limited. 

We cannot provide any assurance that the terms of these agreements are being observed and will be observed 

in the future. Because our product designs and software are stored electronically and thus are highly portable, 

we attempt to reduce the portability of our designs and software by physically protecting our servers through 

the use of closed networks, which prevent external access to our servers. We cannot be certain, however, that 

such protection will adequately deter individuals or groups from wrongful access to our technology. 

Monitoring unauthorized use of intellectual property is difficult, and some foreign laws do not protect 

proprietary rights to the same extent as the law of the United States. We cannot be certain that the steps we 

have taken to protect our proprietary information will be sufficient. In addition, to protect our intellectual 

property, we may become involved in litigation, which could result in substantial expenses, divert the 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (27 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 26 of 149
424B1

attention of management, cause significant delays, materially disrupt the conduct of our business or 

adversely affect our revenue, financial condition and results of operations. 

As of September 30, 2006, we had a limited patent portfolio. We had two issued U.S. patents and four 

pending U.S. patent applications. We also have one pending counterpart application outside of the United 

12 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (28 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 27 of 149
424B1

States, filed pursuant to the Patent Cooperation Treaty. While we plan to protect our intellectual property 

with, among other things, patent protection, there can be no assurance that: 

• current or future U.S. or foreign patents applications will be approved; 

• our issued patents will protect our intellectual property and not be held invalid or unenforceable if 

challenged by third parties; 

• we will succeed in protecting our technology adequately in all key jurisdictions in which we or our 

competitors operate; 

• the patents of others will not have an adverse effect on our ability to do business; or 

• others will not independently develop similar or competing products or methods or design around any 

patents that may be issued to us. 

The failure to obtain patents, inability to obtain patents with claims of a scope necessary to cover our 

technology, or the invalidation of our patents, may weaken our competitive position and may adversely 

affect our revenues. 

We may be subject to claims of intellectual property infringement by third parties that, regardless of merit, 

could result in litigation and our business, operating results or financial condition could be materially 

adversely affected.

There can be no assurance that we will not receive communications from third parties asserting that our 

products and other intellectual property infringe, or may infringe their proprietary rights. We are not 

currently subject to any proceedings for infringement of patents or other intellectual property rights and are 

not aware of any parties that intend to pursue such claims against us. Any such claims, regardless of merit, 

could result in litigation, which could result in substantial expenses, divert the attention of management, 

cause significant delays and materially disrupt the conduct of our business. As a consequence of such claims, 

we could be required to pay a substantial damage award, develop non-infringing technology, enter into 

royalty-bearing licensing agreements, stop selling our products or re-brand our products. If it appears 

necessary, we may seek to license intellectual property that we are alleged to infringe. Such licensing 

agreements may not be available on terms acceptable to us or at all. Litigation is inherently uncertain and any 

adverse decision could result in a loss of our proprietary rights, subject us to significant liabilities, require us 

to seek licenses from others and otherwise negatively affect our business. In the event of a successful claim 

of infringement against us and our failure or inability to develop non-infringing technology or license the 

infringed or similar technology, our business, operating results or financial condition could be materially 

adversely affected. 

Our products are highly technical, and any undetected software or hardware errors in our products could 

have a material adverse effect on our operating results.

Our products are complex and are incorporated into broadband networks which are a major source of 

revenue for service providers and which support critical applications for subscribers and enterprises. Due to 

the complexity of our products and variations among customers’ network environments, we may not detect 

product defects until full deployment in our customers’ networks. Regardless of whether warranty coverage 

exists for a product, we may be required to dedicate significant technical resources to resolve any defects. If 

we encounter significant product problems, we could experience, among other things, loss of major 

customers, cancellation of product orders, increased costs, delay in recognizing revenue, and damage to our 

reputation. In addition, we could face claims for product liability, tort, or breach of warranty. Defending a 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (29 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 28 of 149
424B1

lawsuit, regardless of its merit, is costly and may divert management’s attention. In addition, if our business 

liability insurance is inadequate or future coverage is unavailable on acceptable terms or at all, our financial 

condition could be harmed. 

13 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (30 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 29 of 149
424B1

We need to increase the functionality of our products and offer additional features in order to maintain or 

increase our profitability.

The market in which we operate is highly competitive and unless we continue to enhance the functionality of 

our products and add additional features, our competitiveness may be harmed and the average selling prices 

for our products may decrease over time. Such a decrease would generally result from the introduction by 

competitors of competing products and from the standardization of DPI technology. To counter this trend, 

we endeavor to enhance our products by offering higher system speeds, and additional features, such as 

additional security functions, supporting additional applications and enhanced reporting tools. We may also 

need to reduce our per unit manufacturing costs at a rate equal to or faster than the rate at which selling 

prices decline. If we are unable to reduce these costs or to offer increased functionally and features, our 

profitability may be adversely affected. 

If we fail to attract and retain skilled employees, we may not be able to timely develop, sell or support our 

products.

Our success depends in large part on the continued contribution of our research and development, sales and 

marketing and managerial personnel. If our business continues to grow, we will need to hire additional 

qualified research and development, sales and marketing and managerial personnel to succeed. The process 

of hiring, training and successfully integrating qualified personnel into our operation is a lengthy and 

expensive one. The market for qualified personnel is very competitive because of the limited number of 

people available with the necessary technical skills, sales skills and understanding of our products and 

technology. This is particularly true in Israel, where competition for qualified personnel is intense. Our 

failure to hire and retain qualified personnel could cause our revenues to decline and impair our ability to 

meet our research and development and sales objectives. 

The European Union has issued directives relating to the sale in member countries of electrical and 

electronic equipment, including products sold by us. If our products fail to comply with these directives, 

we could be subject to penalties and sanctions that could materially adversely affect our business.

A directive issued by the European Union, or EU, on the Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous 

Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment, referred to as RoHS, came into effect on July 1, 2006. 

The RoHS directive, lists a number of substances, including lead, mercury, cadmium and hexavalent 

chromium, which must either be removed, or reduced to maximum permitted concentrations, in any products 

containing electrical or electronic components that are sold within the EU. Our products fall within the scope 

of the RoHS directive. We believe that our products are currently compliant with the RoHS directive. There 

can, however, be no assurance that we will continue to comply with the RoHS directive or any similar 

directives in other jurisdictions in the future. 

In 2003, the EU approved a directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment, or WEEE, which 

promotes waste recovery with a view to reducing the quantity of waste for disposal and saving natural 

resources, in particular by reuse, recycling, composting and recovering energy from waste. The WEEE 

directive covers all electrical and electronic equipment used by consumers and electronic equipment intended 

for professional use. The directive, which went into effect in August 2005, requires that all new electrical 

and electronic equipment placed for sale in the EU be appropriately labeled regarding waste disposal and 

contains other obligations regarding the collection and recycling of waste electrical and electronic 

equipment. Our products fall within the scope of the WEEE directive, with which we believe we are 

compliant and are taking all requisite steps to ensure continued compliance. 

The countries of the EU form the largest single market for our products. If our products fail to comply with 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (31 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 30 of 149
424B1

WEEE or RoHS directives, we could be subject to heavy penalties and other sanctions that could have a 

material adverse affect on our results of operations and financial condition. 

14 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (32 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 31 of 149
424B1

Our international operations expose us to the risk of fluctuation in currency exchange rates.

In 2005, we derived our revenues principally in U.S. dollars and to a lesser extent in euros and shekels. 

Although a majority of our expenses were denominated in U.S. dollars, a significant portion of our expenses 

were denominated in shekels and to a lesser extent in euros and yen. Our shekel-denominated expenses 

consist principally of salaries and related personnel expenses. We anticipate that a material portion of our 

expenses will continue to be denominated in shekels. If the U.S. dollar weakens against the shekel, there will 

be a negative impact on our profit margins. We currently do not hedge our currency exposure through 

financial instruments. In addition, if we wish to maintain the dollar-denominated value of our products 

in non-U.S. markets, devaluation in the local currencies of our customers relative to the U.S. dollar could 

cause our customers to cancel or decrease orders or default on payment. 

We may expand our business or enhance our technology through acquisitions that could result in 

diversion of resources and extra expenses. This could disrupt our business and adversely affect our 

financial condition.

Part of our strategy is to selectively pursue partnerships and acquisitions that provide us access to 

complementary technologies and accelerate our penetration into new markets. For example, in 2002 we 

acquired the assets of NetReality, an Israeli manufacturer of traffic management solutions, which increased 

our customers base and enhanced our engineering capabilities and technology. The negotiation of 

acquisitions, investments or joint ventures, as well as the integration of acquired or jointly developed 

businesses or technologies, could divert our management’s time and resources. Acquired businesses, 

technologies or joint ventures may not be successfully integrated with our products and operations. We may 

not realize the intended benefits of any acquisition, investment or joint venture and we may incur future 

losses from any acquisition, investment or joint venture. 

In addition, acquisitions could result in: 

• substantial cash expenditures; 

• potentially dilutive issuances of equity securities; 

• the incurrence of debt and contingent liabilities; 

• a decrease in our profit margins; 

• amortization of intangibles and potential impairment of goodwill; and 

• write-offs of in-process research and development. 

If acquisitions disrupt our operations, our business may suffer. 

Under current U.S. and Israeli law, we may not be able to enforce employees’ covenants not to compete 

and therefore may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of some of our 

former employees.

It is our practice to have our employees sign appropriate non-compete agreements. These agreements 

prohibit our employees, if they cease working for us, from competing directly with us or working for our 

competitors for a limited period. Under current U.S. and Israeli law, we may be unable to enforce these 

agreements and it may be difficult for us to restrict our competitors from gaining the expertise our former 

employees gained while working for us. If we cannot enforce our employees’ non-compete agreements, we 

may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of our former employees. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (33 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 32 of 149
424B1

We have not yet evaluated our internal controls over financial reporting in compliance with Section 404 

of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

We are required to comply with the internal control evaluation and certification requirements of Section 404 

of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act by no later than the end of our 2007 fiscal year. We are in the process of 

determining whether our existing internal controls over financial reporting systems are compliant with 

15 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (34 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 33 of 149
424B1

Section 404. This process may divert internal resources and will take a significant amount of time and effort 

to complete. If it is determined that we are not in compliance with Section 404, we may be required to 

implement new internal control procedures and reevaluate our financial reporting. We may experience higher 

than anticipated operating expenses as well as higher independent auditor fees during the implementation of 

these changes and thereafter. Further, we may need to hire additional qualified personnel in order for us to 

comply with Section 404. If we are unable to implement these changes effectively or efficiently, it could 

harm our operations, financial reporting or financial results and could result in our being unable to obtain an 

unqualified report on internal controls from our independent auditors. 

Risks Related to this Offering

There has been no prior market for our ordinary shares and our share price may be volatile.

Prior to this offering there has been no public market for our ordinary shares. We cannot predict the extent to 

which investor interest will lead to the development of an active trading market in our ordinary shares or 

whether such a market will be sustained. The market price of our ordinary shares may be volatile and could 

fluctuate substantially due to many factors, including: 

• announcements or introductions of technological innovations or new products, or product 

enhancements or pricing policies by us or our competitors; 

• disputes or other developments with respect to our or our competitors’ intellectual property rights; 

• announcements of strategic partnerships, joint ventures or other agreements by us or our competitors; 

• recruitment or departure of key personnel; 

• regulatory developments in the markets in which we sell our product; 

• our sale of ordinary shares or other securities in the future; 

• changes in the estimation of the future size and growth of our markets; and 

• market conditions in our industry, the industries of our customers and the economy as a whole. 

Share price fluctuations may be exaggerated if the trading volume of our ordinary shares is too low. The lack 

of a trading market may result in the loss of research coverage by securities analysts. Moreover, we cannot 

assure you that any securities analysts will initiate or maintain research coverage of our company and our 

ordinary shares. If our future quarterly operating results are below the expectations of securities analysts or 

investors, the price of our ordinary shares would likely decline. Securities class action litigation has often 

been brought against companies following periods of volatility. Any securities litigation claims brought 

against us could result in substantial expense and divert management’s attention from our business. 

Following the closing of this offering, a small number of significant beneficial owners of our shares 

acting together will have a controlling influence over matters requiring shareholder approval, which 

could delay or prevent a change of control.

Following the closing of this offering, the largest beneficial owners of our shares, entities and individuals 

affiliated with Tamir Fishman Ventures, the Gemini Group, Genesis Partners, and Odem Rotem Holdings 

Ltd., a company owned and controlled by our Chairman, Yigal Jacoby, each of which currently beneficially 

owns more than 10.0% of our outstanding shares, will beneficially own in the aggregate 38.6% of our 

ordinary shares or 36.9% if the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional shares. As a result, 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (35 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 34 of 149
424B1

these shareholders, acting together, could exercise a controlling influence over our operations and business 

strategy and will have sufficient voting power to control the outcome of matters requiring shareholder 

approval. These matters may include: 

• the composition of our board of directors which has the authority to direct our business and to appoint 

and remove our officers; 

• approving or rejecting a merger, consolidation or other business combination; 

16 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (36 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 35 of 149
424B1

• raising future capital; and 

• amending our articles of association which govern the rights attached to our ordinary shares. 

This concentration of ownership of our ordinary shares could delay or prevent proxy contests, mergers, 

tender offers, open-market purchase programs or other purchases of our ordinary shares that might otherwise 

give you the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of our ordinary shares. 

This concentration of ownership may also adversely affect our share price. 

Future sales of our ordinary shares following this offering could cause the market price of our ordinary 

shares to drop significantly, even if our business is profitable.

Upon completion of this offering, we will have 20,889,931 ordinary shares outstanding. The 6,500,000 

ordinary shares we are selling in this offering will be freely tradable without restriction immediately 

following this offering. Our directors and officers, and holders of nearly all of our outstanding shares, have 

signed lock-up agreements for a period of 180 days following the date of this prospectus, subject to 

extension in the case of an earnings release or material news or a material event relating to us. Lehman 

Brothers Inc. may, in its sole discretion and without notice, release all or any portion of the ordinary shares 

subject to lock-up agreements. As restrictions on resale end, the market price of our ordinary shares could 

drop significantly if the holders of these restricted shares sell them or are perceived by the market as 

intending to sell them. These factors could also make it more difficult for us to raise additional funds 

through future offerings of our ordinary shares or other securities. The following chart shows when we 

expect that the remaining 14,389,931 ordinary shares that are not being sold in this offering will be available 

for resale in the public markets. 

Number of Shares/ 

Percentage of Total 

Outstanding Date of Availability for Resale Into the Public Market 

218,864/1.0% Upon the date of this prospectus. 

161,302/0.8% 90 days after the date of this prospectus. 

13,899,972/66.5% 

 

180 days after the date of this prospectus of which 9,828,102, or 47.0%, are subject to 

volume limitations under Rule 144. 

109,793/0.5% More than 180 days after the date of this prospectus. 

In addition to our outstanding shares, as of the date of this prospectus, we have granted options to purchase 

3,451,439 ordinary shares under our share option plans. The holders of options to purchase 88,409 ordinary 

shares that are vested and exercisable as of the date of this prospectus are not required to sign lock-up 

agreements with respect to such shares in the event that they exercise options. Accordingly, following any 

such exercise, these optionholders will be able to sell the shares underlying the options into the public 

markets beginning 90 days after the date of this prospectus pursuant to Rule 701. The holders of nearly all of 

the remaining options that we have granted under the terms of our share option plans are required to sign 

a lock-up agreement upon our request and we have undertaken to the underwriters to require any such 

optionholder exercising an option during the 180-day period following this offering to sign such a lock-up 

agreement. In addition, we have agreed that we will not file a registration statement on Form S-8 for the 

resale of securities underlying employee share options until at least 90 days after the date of this prospectus. 

After 180 days following this offering, subject to the lock-up agreement described above, holders of 

11,520,845 ordinary shares and options and warrants to purchase ordinary shares are entitled to request that 

we register their shares for resale and these shareholders, optionholders and warrantholders have the right to 

include their shares in a registration statement for any public offering we undertake in the future. The 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (37 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 36 of 149
424B1

registration or sale of any of these shares could cause the market price of our ordinary shares to drop 

significantly. See “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions — Registration Rights.” 

Our U.S. shareholders may suffer adverse tax consequences if we are characterized as a Passive Foreign 

Investment Company.

Generally, if for any taxable year 75% or more of our gross income is passive income, or at least 50% of our 

assets are held for the production of, or produce, passive income, we would be characterized as a passive 

foreign investment company for U.S. federal income tax purposes. To determine if at least 50% of our assets 

17 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (38 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 37 of 149
424B1

are held for the production of, or produce, passive income we may use the market capitalization method for 

certain periods. Under the market capitalization method, the total asset value of the Company would be 

considered to equal the fair market value of its outstanding shares plus outstanding indebtedness on a 

relevant testing date. Because the market price of our ordinary shares is likely to fluctuate after this offering, 

the market price of the shares of technology companies has been especially volatile, and the market price 

may affect the determination of whether we will be considered a passive foreign investment company, there 

can be no assurance that we will not be considered a passive foreign investment company for any taxable 

year. If we are characterized as a passive foreign investment company, our U.S. shareholders may suffer 

adverse tax consequences, including having gains realized on the sale of our ordinary shares treated as 

ordinary income, rather than capital gain, the loss of the preferential rate applicable to dividends received on 

our ordinary shares by individuals who are U.S. holders, and having potentially punitive interest charges 

apply to the proceeds of share sales. See “Taxation and Government Programs — United States Federal 

Income Taxation — Distributions — Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations.” 

You will experience immediate and substantial dilution in the net tangible book value of the ordinary 

shares you purchase in this offering.

The initial public offering price of our ordinary shares is expected to exceed substantially the net tangible 

book value per share of our ordinary shares immediately after this offering. Therefore, based on the initial 

public offering price of $12.00 per share, if you purchase our ordinary shares in this offering, you will suffer 

immediate dilution of $8.01 per share or $7.69 if the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional 

ordinary shares. As a result of this dilution, investors purchasing 6,500,000 ordinary shares from us will have 

contributed 64.3% of the total amount of our total funding to date but will only own 31.1% of our equity. If 

outstanding options and warrants to purchase our ordinary shares are exercised in the future, you will 

experience additional dilution. 

Our management will have broad discretion over the use of proceeds from this offering and may not 

obtain a favorable return on the use of these proceeds.

Our management will have broad discretion in determining how to spend the net proceeds from this offering 

and may spend the proceeds in a manner that our shareholders may not deem desirable. We currently intend 

to use the net proceeds from this offering to fund our research and development activities, expand our 

business development and marketing activities, and other general corporate purposes and working capital. 

We may also use a portion of the net proceeds to acquire or invest in complementary companies, products or 

technologies. We cannot assure you that these uses or any other use of the net proceeds of this offering will 

yield favorable returns or results. 

Risks Relating to our Location in Israel

Conditions in Israel could adversely affect our business.

We are incorporated under Israeli law and our principal offices, and research and development facilities are 

located in Israel. In addition, the subcontractor for our products is located in Israel. Accordingly, political, 

economic and military conditions in Israel directly affect our business. Since the State of Israel was 

established in 1948, a number of armed conflicts have occurred between Israel and its Arab neighbors. 

Although Israel has entered into various agreements with Egypt, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority, there 

has been an increase in unrest and terrorist activity, which began in September 2000 and has continued with 

varying levels of severity into 2006. The recent election of representatives of the Hamas movement to a 

majority of seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council has resulted in an escalation in violence and among 

Israel, the Palestinian Authority and other groups. In July and August 2006, significant fighting took place 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (39 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 38 of 149
424B1

between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, resulting in rockets being fired from Lebanon up to 50 miles into 

Israel. Furthermore, several countries, principally in the Middle East, still restrict doing business with Israel 

and Israeli companies, and additional countries may impose restrictions on doing business with Israel and 

Israeli companies if hostilities in Israel continue or increase. These restrictions may limit materially our 

ability to sell our solutions to companies in these countries. Any hostilities involving Israel or the 

interruption or curtailment of trade 

18 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (40 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 39 of 149
424B1

between Israel and its present trading partners, or a significant downturn in the economic or financial 

condition of Israel, could adversely affect our operations and product development, cause our revenues to 

decrease and adversely affect the share price of publicly traded companies having operations in Israel, such 

as us. Additionally, any hostilities involving Israel may have a material adverse effect on R.H. Electronics 

and its facilities in which event, all or a portion of our inventory may be damaged, and our ability to deliver 

products to customers may be materially adversely affected. 

Our operations may be disrupted by the obligations of personnel to perform military service.

As of September 30, 2006, we had 232 employees of whom 170 were based in Israel. Our employees in 

Israel, including three executive officers, may be called upon to perform up to one month (in some cases 

more) of annual military reserve duty until they reach age 45 and, in emergency circumstances, could be 

called to active duty. In response to increased tension and hostilities, there have been since September 2000 

occasional call-ups of military reservists, including in connection with recent hostilities in Lebanon, and it is 

possible that there will be additional call-ups in the future. Our operations could be disrupted by the absence 

of a significant number of our employees related to military service or the absence for extended periods of 

one or more of our key employees for military service. Such disruption could materially adversely affect our 

business and results of operations. Additionally, the absence of a significant number of the employees of R.

H. Electronics related to military service or the absence for extended periods of one or more of R.H. 

Electronics’ key employees for military service may disrupt its operations in which event our ability to 

deliver products to customers may be materially adversely affected. 

The tax benefits that are available to us require us to meet several conditions and may be terminated or 

reduced in the future, which would increase our costs and taxes.

Our investment program in equipment at our facility in Hod-Hasharon, Israel has been granted approved 

enterprise status and we are therefore eligible for tax benefits under the Israeli Law for the Encouragement of 

Capital Investments, 1959, referred to as the Investment Law. We expect to utilize these tax benefits after we 

utilize our net operating loss carry forwards. As of December 31, 2005, the end of our last fiscal year, our net 

operating loss carry forwards for Israeli tax purposes amounted to approximately $20.5 million. To remain 

eligible for these tax benefits, we must continue to meet certain conditions stipulated in the Investment Law 

and its regulations and the criteria set forth in the specific certificate of approval, including, among other 

conditions, that the approved enterprise be operated over a seven-year period and that at least 30% of our 

investment in fixed assets of the approved enterprise be funded by additional paid-up ordinary share capital. 

If we do not meet the conditions stipulated in the Investment Law and its regulations and the criteria set forth 

in the specific certificate of approval in the future, the tax benefits would be canceled and we could be 

required to refund any tax benefits that we have received. These tax benefits may not be continued in the 

future at their current levels or at any level. 

Effective April 1, 2005, the Israeli Law for the Encouragement of Capital Investments was amended. As a 

result, the criteria for new investments qualified to receive tax benefits were revised. No assurance can be 

given that we will, in the future, be eligible to receive additional tax benefits under this law. The termination 

or reduction of these tax benefits would increase our tax liability in the future, which would reduce our 

profits or increase our losses. Additionally, if we increase our activities outside of Israel, for example, by 

future acquisitions, our increased activities might not be eligible for inclusion in Israeli tax benefit programs. 

See “Taxation and Government Programs — Israeli Tax Considerations and Government Programs — Law 

for the Encouragement of Capital Investments, 1959.” 

The government grants we have received for research and development expenditures restrict our ability to 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (41 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 40 of 149
424B1

manufacture products and transfer technologies outside of Israel and require us to satisfy specified 

conditions. If we fail to comply with such restrictions or these conditions, we may be required to refund 

grants previously received together with interest and penalties, and may be subject to criminal charges.

We have received grants from the government of Israel through the Office of the Chief Scientist of the 

Ministry of Industry, Trade and Labor, for the financing of a portion of our research and development 

19 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (42 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 41 of 149
424B1

expenditures in Israel, pursuant to the provisions of The Encouragement of Industrial Research and 

Development Law, 1984, referred to as the Research and Development Law. In 2003, 2004 and 2005, we 

received and accrued grants totaling $2.7 million from the Office of the Chief Scientist, representing 27.0%, 

18.4% and 10.9%, respectively, of our gross research and development expenditures in these periods. We 

may not receive future grants from the Office of the Chief Scientist and our failure to receive additional 

grants in the future could adversely affect our profitability. 

The terms of the grants prohibit us from manufacturing products outside of Israel or transferring intellectual 

property rights in technologies developed using these grants inside or outside of Israel without special 

approvals. Even if we receive approval to manufacture our products outside of Israel, we may be required to 

pay an increased total amount of royalties, which may be up to 300% of the grant amount plus interest, 

depending on the manufacturing volume that is performed outside of Israel. This restriction may impair our 

ability to outsource manufacturing or engage in similar arrangements for those products or technologies. 

Know-how developed under an approved research and development program may not be transferred to any 

third parties, except in certain circumstances and subject to prior approval. In addition, if we fail to comply 

with any of the conditions and restrictions imposed by the Research and Development Law or by the specific 

terms of under which we received the grants, we may be required to refund any grants previously received 

together with interest and penalties, and may be subject to criminal charges. In recent years, the government 

of Israel has accelerated the rate of repayment of the Office of Chief Scientist grants and may further 

accelerate them in the future. 

It may be difficult to enforce a U.S. judgment against us, our officers and directors and the Israeli experts 

named in this prospectus in Israel or the United States, or to assert U.S. securities laws claims in Israel or 

serve process on our officers and directors and these experts.

We are incorporated in Israel. The majority of our executive officers and directors and the Israeli experts 

named in this prospectus are not residents of the United States, and the majority of our assets and the assets 

of these persons are located outside the United States. Therefore, it may be difficult for an investor, or any 

other person or entity, to enforce a U.S. court judgment based upon the civil liability provisions of the U.

S. federal securities laws against us or any of these persons in a U.S. or Israeli court, or to effect service of 

process upon these persons in the United States. Additionally, it may be difficult for an investor, or any other 

person or entity, to assert U.S. securities law claims in original actions instituted in Israel. Israeli courts may 

refuse to hear a claim based on a violation of U.S. securities laws on the grounds that Israel is not the most 

appropriate forum in which to bring such a claim. Even if an Israeli court agrees to hear a claim, it may 

determine that Israeli law and not U.S. law is applicable to the claim. If U.S. law is found to be applicable, 

the content of applicable U.S. law must be proved as a fact which can be a time-consuming and costly 

process. Certain matters of procedure will also be governed by Israeli law. There is little binding case law in 

Israel addressing the matters described above. See “Enforceability of Civil Liabilities.” 

Provisions of Israeli law and our articles of association may delay, prevent or make undesirable an 

acquisition of all or a significant portion of our shares or assets.

Our articles of association contain certain provisions that may delay or prevent a change of control, including 

a classified board of directors. In addition, Israeli corporate law regulates acquisitions of shares through 

tender offers and mergers, requires special approvals for transactions involving significant shareholders and 

regulates other matters that may be relevant to these types of transactions. These provisions of Israeli law 

could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control and may make it more difficult for a third 

party to acquire us, even if doing so would be beneficial to our shareholders, and may limit the price that 

investors may be willing to pay in the future for our ordinary shares. Furthermore, Israeli tax considerations 

may make potential transactions undesirable to us or to some of our shareholders. See “Description of 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (43 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 42 of 149
424B1

Ordinary Shares — Anti-Takeover Provisions under Israeli Law” and “Acquisitions under Israeli Law.” 

20 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (44 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 43 of 149
424B1

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This prospectus contains forward-looking statements. We have based these forward-looking statements on 

our current expectations and projections about future events. These statements include but are not limited to: 

• statements regarding the expected growth in the use of particular broadband applications; 

• statements as to our ability to meet anticipated cash needs based on our current business plan; 

• statements as to the impact of the rate of inflation and the political and security situation on our 

business; and 

• our intended uses of the proceeds from this offering. 

These statements may be found in the sections of this prospectus entitled “Prospectus Summary,” “Risk 

Factors,” “Use of Proceeds,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of 

Operations” and “Business” and in this prospectus generally, including the section of this prospectus entitled 

“Business — Overview” and “Business — Industry Overview,” which contains information obtained from 

independent industry sources. Actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forwardlooking statements as a result of various factors, including all the risks discussed in “Risk Factors” and 

elsewhere in this prospectus. 

In addition, statements that use the terms “believe,” “expect,” “plan,” “intend,” “estimate,” “anticipate” and 

similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements in 

this prospectus reflect our current views about future events and are based on assumptions and are subject to 

risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from future results expressed or 

implied by the forward-looking statements. Many of these factors are beyond our ability to control or predict. 

You should not put undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Unless we are required to do so under 

U.S. federal securities laws or other applicable laws, we do not intend to update or revise any forwardlooking statements. 

The forward looking statements contained in this prospectus are excluded from the safe harbor protection 

provided by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and Section 27A of the Securities Act of 

1933, as amended. 

21 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (45 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 44 of 149
424B1

USE OF PROCEEDS

Based on the initial public offering price of $12.00 per share, we estimate that we will receive total net 

proceeds from this offering of $70.5 million, after deducting the underwriting discount and estimated 

offering expenses payable by us. 

If the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional ordinary shares, we estimate that we will 

receive an additional $10.9 million in net proceeds. 

We intend to use the net proceeds of this offering for research and development activities, expand our 

business development and marketing activities, and the remaining proceeds for general corporate purposes 

and working capital. We may also use a portion of the net proceeds to acquire or invest in complementary 

companies, products or technologies, although we currently do not have any acquisitions or investments 

planned. 

We will have broad discretion in the way that we use the net proceeds of this offering. The amounts that we 

actually spend for the purposes described above may vary significantly and will depend, in part, on the 

timing and amount of our future revenues. 

Pending use of the net proceeds as described above, we intend to invest the net proceeds in interest-bearing, 

investment-grade instruments with maturities of less than one year or deposit the net proceeds in bank 

accounts in Israel or outside of Israel. 

DIVIDEND POLICY

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our ordinary shares and we do not anticipate paying 

any cash dividends on our ordinary shares in the future. We currently intend to retain all future earnings to 

finance our operations and to expand our business. Any future determination relating to our dividend policy 

will be made at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on a number of factors, including 

future earnings, capital requirements, financial condition and future prospects and other factors our board of 

directors may deem relevant. 

22 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (46 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 45 of 149
424B1

CAPITALIZATION

The following table presents our capitalization as of September 30, 2006, assuming the closing of this 

offering on such date: 

• on an actual basis; 

• on a pro forma basis to give effect to the conversion upon the closing of this offering of (1) all of our 

issued and outstanding preferred shares into 10,931,155 ordinary shares, including 236,537 ordinary 

shares resulting from an anti-dilution adjustment for price protection granted to holders of our Series C 

preferred shares in connection with prior financings and this offering, and (2) all of our Series A 

ordinary shares into 611,349 ordinary shares; and 

• on a pro forma as adjusted basis to give effect to: 

• the issuance upon the closing of this offering of 284,349 ordinary shares upon the exercise of 

warrants to purchase Series B preferred shares on a cashless and non-cashless basis, and the receipt 

of $1,128 by us from such exercise; 

• the issuance upon the closing of this offering of 14,094 ordinary shares upon the exercise of an 

option to purchase Series B preferred shares and the receipt of NIS 620, representing approximately 

$145, from such exercise, held by our founder and Chairman, Yigal Jacoby; and 

• the sale by us of 6,500,000 ordinary shares in this offering at the initial public offering price of 

$12.00 per ordinary share and the receipt by us of the estimated net proceeds of $70.5 million, after 

deducting the underwriting discount and estimated offering expenses payable by us. 

You should read this table in conjunction with “Selected Consolidated Financial Data,” “Management’s 

Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial 

statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. 

 As of September 30, 2006 

 Pro Forma 

 Actual 

Pro 

Forma 

as 

Adjusted 

 (unaudited) 

 (in thousands) 

Shareholders’ equity: 

Ordinary shares and Series A ordinary shares: NIS 0.10 par value; 

8,297,393 shares authorized actual and 200,000,000 shares 

authorized, pro forma and pro forma as adjusted; 2,815,439 shares 

issued and outstanding, actual; 14,335,661 shares issued, pro 

forma*; 14,089,182 shares outstanding, pro forma; 

21,134,104 shares issued, pro forma as adjusted*; 

20,887,625 shares outstanding, pro forma as adjusted $ 33 $ 151 $ 467 

Series A through E preferred shares, NIS 0.10 par value; 

5,102,632 shares authorized, actual and zero shares authorized, pro 

forma and pro forma as adjusted; 4,809,926 shares issued, actual*; 

4,701,569 shares outstanding, actual; zero issued and outstanding, 

pro forma and pro forma as adjusted 113 — — 

Additional paid-in capital 50,095 50,090 120,314 

Deferred stock compensation (43 ) (43 ) (43 ) 

Additional other compensation loss (39 ) (39 ) (39 ) 

Accumulated deficit (37,321 ) (37,321 ) (37,321 ) 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (47 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 46 of 149
424B1

Total shareholders’ equity $ 12,838 $ 12,838 $ 83,378 

Total capitalization $ 27,524 $ 27,524 $ 98,064 

* Includes 246,479 ordinary shares that have been issued but are not outstanding, which are held in trust for 

the benefit of Mr. Jacoby pending his payment of the purchase price of such shares.

23 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (48 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 47 of 149
424B1

The preceding table excludes (1) 3,543,522 ordinary shares reserved for issuance under our share option 

plans as of September 30, 2006, of which options to purchase 3,470,318 ordinary shares at a weighted 

average exercise price of $2.26 per share have been granted, (2) except to the extent stated in the preceding 

table, 246,479 ordinary shares that had been issued, but are held in trust for the benefit of Mr. Jacoby 

pending his payment of the full purchase price of such shares, and (3) up to 163,705 ordinary shares issuable 

upon the exercise of warrants granted to two Israeli banks and an Israeli non-profit organization at a 

weighted average exercise price of $3.37 per share. 

24 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (49 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 48 of 149
424B1

DILUTION

Our pro forma consolidated net tangible book value as of September 30, 2006 was $12.7 million, or 

$0.90 per ordinary share. Pro forma consolidated net tangible book value per share represents consolidated 

tangible net assets less consolidated liabilities divided by the number of ordinary shares outstanding on a pro 

forma basis after giving effect to the conversion of all outstanding preferred and Series A ordinary shares 

into ordinary shares. Our pro forma as adjusted consolidated net tangible book value as of September 30, 

2006 would have been $83.3 million or $3.99 per ordinary share assuming the closing of this offering on 

such date after giving effect to: 

• the issuance upon the closing of this offering of 284,349 ordinary shares upon the exercise of warrants 

to purchase Series B preferred shares on a cashless and non-cashless basis, and the receipt of $1,128 by 

us from such exercise; 

• the issuance upon the closing of this offering of 14,094 ordinary shares upon the exercise of an option 

to purchase Series B preferred shares and the receipt of NIS620, approximately $145, from such 

exercise, held by our founder and Chairman, Yigal Jacoby; 

• the conversion upon the closing of this offering of (1) all of our issued and outstanding preferred shares 

into 10,931,155 ordinary shares, including 236,537 ordinary shares resulting from an anti-dilution 

adjustment for price protection granted to holders of our Series C preferred shares in connection with 

prior financings and this offering, and (2) all of our Series A ordinary shares into 611,349 ordinary 

shares; 

• the sale by us of 6,500,000 ordinary shares in this offering at the initial public offering price of 

$12.00 per ordinary share and the receipt by us of the estimated net proceeds of $70.5 million, after 

deducting the underwriting discount and estimated offering expenses payable by us. 

This represents an immediate increase in pro forma consolidated net tangible book value of $3.09 per 

ordinary share to existing shareholders and an immediate dilution of $8.01 per ordinary share to new 

investors purchasing ordinary shares in this offering. Dilution per share represents the difference between the 

price per share to be paid by new investors for the ordinary shares sold in this offering and the pro forma 

consolidated net tangible book value per share immediately after this offering. The following table illustrates 

this per share dilution: 

 

Initial public offering price per share $ 12.00 

Pro forma consolidated net tangible book value per share as of September 30, 2006 $ 0.90 

Increase in pro forma consolidated net tangible book value per share attributable to 

new investors in this offering 3.09 

Pro forma consolidated net tangible book value per share after this offering 3.99 

Dilution per share to new investors $ 8.01 

25 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (50 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 49 of 149
424B1

The following table presents the differences between the total consideration paid to us and the average price 

per share paid by existing shareholders and by new investors purchasing ordinary shares in this offering, 

before deducting the estimated underwriting discounts and estimated offering expenses payable by us: 

 

 

Ordinary Shares 

Purchased 

Total 

Consideration Average Price 

 Number Percent Amount Percent Per Share 

Existing shareholders 14,387,625 68.9 % $ 43.3 35.7 % $ 3.01 

New investors 6,500,000 31.1 78.0 64.3 12.00 

Total 20,887,625 100.0 % $ 121.3 100.0 % 

The preceding table excludes (1) 3,543,522 ordinary shares reserved for issuance under our share option 

plans as of September 30, 2006, of which options to purchase 3,470,318 ordinary shares at a weighted 

average exercise price of $2.26 per share had been granted, (2) 246,479 ordinary shares that have been 

issued, but are held in trust for the benefit of Mr. Jacoby pending his payment of the purchase price of such 

shares, and (3) up to 163,705 ordinary shares issuable upon the exercise of warrants granted to two Israeli 

banks and an Israeli non-profit organization at a weighted average exercise price of $3.37 per share. 

Assuming the exercise in full of the underwriters’ option to purchase 975,000 ordinary shares to cover overallotments, the pro forma net tangible book value after giving effect to this offering would be $4.31 per 

share, and the dilution in pro forma net tangible book value per share to investors in this offering would be 

$7.69 per share. 

26 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (51 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 50 of 149
424B1

SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA

You should read the following selected consolidated financial data in conjunction with “Management’s 

Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial 

statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. The consolidated statements of 

operations data for the years ended December 31, 2003, 2004 and 2005 and the consolidated balance sheet 

data as of December 31, 2004 and 2005 are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements 

included elsewhere in this prospectus, which have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted 

accounting principles in the United States. The consolidated statements of operations for the years ended 

December 31, 2001 and 2002 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2001, 2002 and 

2003 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements which are not included in this 

prospectus. The consolidated statements of operations data for the nine months ended September 30, 2005 

and 2006 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of September 30, 2006 are derived from our unaudited 

consolidated financial statements that are included elsewhere in this prospectus. In the opinion of 

management, these unaudited interim consolidated financial statements include all adjustments, consisting of 

normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of our financial position and operating results 

for these periods. Results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be 

expected for the entire year. 

27 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (52 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 51 of 149
424B1

 

 Nine Months Ended 

 Year Ended December 31, September 30, 

 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2005 2006 

 (unaudited) 

 (in thousands, except share and per share data) 

Consolidated statements 

of operations data: 

Revenues: 

Products $ 5,881 $ 7,819 $ 13,122 $ 14,638 $ 18,498 $ 12,576 $ 20,718 

Services 258 946 1,653 3,447 4,474 3,317 3,859 

Total revenues 6,139 8,765 14,775 18,085 22,972 15,893 24,577 

Cost of revenues:(1) 

Products 1,838 1,914 3,229 3,942 4,481 3,237 4,562 

Services 224 270 362 679 938 699 845 

Total cost of revenues 2,062 2,184 3,591 4,621 5,419 3,936 5,407 

Gross profit 4,077 6,581 11,184 13,464 17,553 11,957 19,170 

Operating expenses: 

Research and 

development, gross 6,244 4,041 4,053 4,851 6,652 4,964 6,737 

Less royalty-bearing 

participation 1,710 1,144 1,094 894 727 582 1,095 

Research and 

development, net(1) 4,534 2,897 2,959 3,957 5,925 4,382 5,642 

Sales and marketing(1) 7,295 6,856 8,164 10,104 11,887 8,797 10,859 

General and 

administrative(1) 2,739 1,679 1,832 2,081 2,380 1,709 2,260 

Impairment of 

intangible assets — — — 366 — — — 

Total operating expenses 14,568 11,432 12,955 16,508 20,192 14,888 18,761 

Operating income (loss) (10,491 ) (4,851 ) (1,771 ) (3,044 ) (2,639 ) (2,931 ) 409 

Financing and other 

income (expenses), net (29 ) (490 ) (507 ) (241 ) 45 36 229 

Income (loss) before 

income tax expenses 

(benefit) (10,520 ) (5,341 ) (2,278 ) (3,285 ) (2,594 ) (2,895 ) 638 

Income tax expenses 

(benefit) 2 2 2 3 (218 ) (178 ) 75 

Net income (loss) $ (10,522 ) $ (5,343 ) $ (2,280 ) $ (3,288 ) $ (2,376 ) $ (2,717 ) $ 563 

Basic net earnings (loss) 

per share $ (4.02 ) $ (1.94 ) $ (0.82 ) $ (1.18 ) $ (0.81 ) $ (0.94 ) $ 0.04 

Diluted net earnings (loss) 

per share $ (4.02 ) $ (1.94 ) $ (0.82 ) $ (1.18 ) $ (0.81 ) $ (0.94 ) $ 0.04 

Weighted average number 

of shares used in 

computing basic net 

earnings (loss) per share 2,620,442 2,756,954 2,774,639 2,787,554 2,943,500 2,903,356 13,310,355 

Weighted average number 

of shares used in 

computing diluted net 

earnings (loss) per share 2,620,442 2,756,954 2,774,639 2,787,554 2,943,500 2,903,356 15,501,698 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (53 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 52 of 149
424B1

Pro forma basic and 

diluted net earnings (loss) 

per share of ordinary 

shares (unaudited)(2) $ (0.18 ) $ 0.04 

(1) Includes stock-based compensation expense related to options granted to employees and others as 

follows:

28 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (54 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 53 of 149
424B1

 

 Nine Months Ended 

 Year Ended December 31, September 30, 

 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2005 2006 

 (unaudited) 

 (in thousands) 

Cost of revenues $ 4 $ 4 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 8 

Research and development, net 1,615 159 22 17 12 10 97 

Sales and marketing 740 231 40 25 251 240 330 

General and administrative 1,274 392 235 116 42 27 247 

Total $ 3,633 $ 786 $ 297 $ 158 $ 305 $ 277 $ 682 

(2) Pro forma basic and diluted loss per ordinary share gives effect to the conversion upon the closing of 

this offering, assuming such closing occurred on September 30, 2006, of (1) all of our issued and 

outstanding preferred shares into 10,931,155 ordinary shares, including 236,537 ordinary shares 

resulting from an anti-dilution adjustment for price protection granted to holders of our Series C 

preferred shares in connection with prior financings and this offering, and (2) all of our Series A 

ordinary shares into 611,349 ordinary shares. See Note 2r to our consolidated financial statements for an 

explanation of the number of ordinary shares used in computing per share data.

 

 As of 

 As of December 31, September 30, 

 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 

 (unaudited) 

 (in thousands) 

Consolidated balance sheet data: 

Cash and cash equivalents $ 4,953 $ 2,832 $ 3,631 $ 4,095 $ 3,677 $ 4,547 

Marketable securities — — — 4,846 4,581 8,897 

Working capital 2,698 4,107 2,481 6,640 4,274 5,048 

Total assets 10,429 11,075 10,771 17,167 17,591 27,524 

Total liabilities 6,425 5,651 7,326 8,974 11,465 14,686 

Accumulated deficit (24,597 ) (29,940 ) (32,220 ) (35,508 ) (37,884 ) (37,321 ) 

Total shareholders’ equity 4,004 5,424 3,446 8,193 6,126 12,838 

29 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (55 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 54 of 149
424B1

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF 

FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations 

contains forward-looking statements which involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ 

materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, 

including those set forth under “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this prospectus. We assume no obligation to 

update forward-looking statements or the risk factors. You should read the following discussion in 

conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this 

prospectus.

Overview

We are a leading designer and developer of broadband service optimization solutions using advanced deep 

packet inspection, or DPI, technology. Our solutions provide broadband service providers and enterprises 

with real-time, highly granular visibility into, and control of, network traffic, and enable them to efficiently 

and effectively manage and optimize their networks. End-customers use our solutions to create sophisticated 

policies to monitor network applications, enforce quality of service policies that guarantee mission-critical 

application performance, mitigate security risks and leverage network infrastructure investments. Our carrierclass products are used by service providers to offer subscriber-based and application-based tiered services 

that enable them to optimize their service offerings, reduce churn rates and increase ARPU. 

We were incorporated in late 1996 and commenced operations in 1997. Between 1998 and 2000, we focused 

primarily on developing our technology and products. In 1998, we shipped our first traffic management 

product. Between 2000 and 2003, we continued to develop our technology, including through our acquisition 

of the assets of NetReality, an Israeli manufacturer of traffic management solutions, which increased our 

customer base and resulted in an enhancement of our engineering capabilities. In 2003, we introduced our 

NetEnforcer AC-1000 product, which was the first commercially available network traffic management 

system operating above 1 gigabit full duplex throughput per second. In 2004, we increased our sales and 

marketing efforts to the service provider market and in late 2004 and in 2005 we accelerated sales to large 

service providers. In late 2005, we introduced our NetXplorer management application suite, which 

complements our NetEnforcer system, by adding a centralized management capability, and monitoring and 

reporting capabilities. In 2006, we introduced the NetEnforcer AC-2500, which supports up to 5 gigabit 

throughput per second, and our Subscriber Management Platform, which enhances our NetXplorer 

management application suite to include subscriber management. 

We market and sell our products through our channel partners, which include distributors, resellers, OEMs 

and system integrators. End customers of our products include carriers, cable operators, wireless and wireline 

Internet service providers, educational institutions, governments and enterprises. 

Revenues

We generate revenues from two sources: (1) sales of our NetEnforcer network traffic management system 

and our application suites, including our NetXplorer management application suite, and (2) maintenance and 

support services, including installation and training. We provide maintenance and support services pursuant 

to a one- or three-year maintenance and support program, which may be purchased by customers at the time 

of product purchase or on a renewal basis. 

We recognize revenues from product sales when persuasive evidence of an agreement exists, delivery of the 

product has occurred, no significant obligations with respect to implementation remain, the fee is fixed or 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (56 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 55 of 149
424B1

determinable, and collection is probable. We grant a one-year hardware warranty and a three-month software 

warranty on all of our products and take a reserve against revenues on account of possible warranty claims 

based on our historical experience. Warranty claims have to date been immaterial to our results of 

operations. We recognize revenues associated with our maintenance and support programs on a straight-line 

basis over the term of the maintenance and support agreement. See “Critical Accounting Policies and 

Estimates — Revenue Recognition.” 

30 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (57 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 56 of 149
424B1

Customer concentration. We derived approximately 13% of our revenues in 2003, 12% of our revenues in 

2004 and 9% of our revenues in 2005 from a single U.S. distributor of our products to other resellers and 

system integrators in the United States. We derived 16% of our revenues in 2005 and 27% in the first nine 

months of 2006 from a single system integrator for our products in the United Kingdom, primarily in 

connection with the deployment of our products by NTL Group Limited, a leading United Kingdom cable 

operator. During these periods no other end-customer accounted for more than 5% of our revenues. We 

expect that sales attributable to NTL will decline significantly as a percentage of revenue in the last quarter 

of 2006 and in 2007 as deployment of a majority of our products by NTL is completed and as sales to other 

customers increase. 

Geographical breakdown. The following table sets forth the geographic breakdown of our revenues for the 

periods indicated: 

 

 Nine Months Ended 

 Year Ended December 31, September 30, 

 2003 2004 2005 2005 2006 

 (unaudited) 

United Kingdom 5 % 12 % 25 % 25 % 33 % 

United States 39 35 29 31 22 

Europe (excluding United Kingdom) 24 26 21 18 17 

Asia and Oceania 18 20 18 19 20 

Middle East and Africa 3 4 4 3 5 

Americas (excluding United States) 11 3 3 4 3 

Total 100 % 100 % 100 % 100 % 100 % 

The increase in our revenues in the United Kingdom in 2005 and the first nine months of 2006 compared to 

our revenues in the other areas for the same periods is mainly attributable to sales to a local system 

integrator, primarily in connection with the deployment of our products by NTL. We expect that the 

percentage of our revenues from the United Kingdom will return to historical levels in the last quarter of 

2006 and in 2007, as deployment of a majority of our products by NTL is completed and as sales in other 

geographic areas increase. 

Cost of revenues

Our product cost of revenues consists primarily of costs of materials, manufacturing services and overhead, 

warehousing, testing and royalties paid to the Office of the Chief Scientist of the Israeli Ministry of Industry, 

Trade and Labor. Our services cost of revenues consist primarily of salaries and related personnel costs for 

our help desk staff. We expect cost of revenues to increase primarily as a result of the increase in our product 

and service revenues, although we expect our gross margins to approximate current levels. 

Operating expenses

Research and development. Our research and development expenses consist primarily of salaries and related 

personnel costs, costs for subcontractor services, depreciation, rent and costs of materials consumed in 

connection with the design and development of our products. We expense all of our research and 

development costs as they are incurred. Our net research and development expenses are our gross research 

and development expenses offset by financing through royalty-bearing grants from the Office of the Chief 

Scientist. Such participation grants are recognized at the time at which we are entitled to such grants on the 

basis of the costs incurred and included as a deduction of research and development expenses (See 

“— Government Grants” below). We believe significant investment in research and development is essential 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (58 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 57 of 149
424B1

to our future success and expect that in future periods our research and development expenses will increase 

on an absolute basis but decrease as a percentage of revenues as sales increase. 

Sales and marketing. Our sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of salaries and related personnel 

costs, travel expenses, costs associated with promotional activities such as public relations, conventions and 

exhibitions, rental expenses, depreciation and commissions paid to third parties. We intend to 

31 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (59 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 58 of 149
424B1

continue our activities to target the service provider market and therefore we expect that sales and marketing 

expenses will increase on an absolute basis in the future as we hire additional sales, marketing and 

engineering personnel, continue to promote our brand and establish marketing channels and sales offices in 

additional U.S. and international locations. We expect that our sales and marketing expenses will decrease as 

a percentage of revenues as sales increase. 

General and administrative. Our general and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries and 

related personnel costs, rental expenses, costs for professional services and depreciation. We expect these 

expenses to increase on an absolute basis as we hire additional personnel and incur additional costs related to 

the growth of our business as well as the costs associated with being a public company, including corporate 

governance compliance under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and rules implemented by the U.S. Securities 

and Exchange Commission and Nasdaq, as well as director and officer liability insurance. 

Amortization of deferred stock-based compensation. We have granted options to purchase our ordinary 

shares to our employees and consultants at prices below the fair market value of the underlying ordinary 

shares on the grant date. These options were considered compensatory because the deemed fair market value 

of the underlying ordinary shares was greater than the exercise prices determined by our board of directors 

on the option grant date. The determination of the fair market value of the underlying ordinary shares prior to 

this offering involved subjective judgment, third party valuations and the consideration by our board of 

directors of a variety of factors. Because there has been no public market for our ordinary shares prior to this 

offering, the amount of the compensatory charge was not based on an objective measure, such as the trading 

price of our ordinary shares. We discuss in detail the factors affecting our determination of the deemed fair 

value of the underlying ordinary shares below in “Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates — Accounting 

for Stock-Based Compensation.” As of January 1, 2006, we adopted Statement of Financial Accounting 

Standards No. 123(R) “Share Based Payment”, or SFAS No. 123(R), which requires us to expense the fair 

value of employee stock options. We adopted the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123(R), 

using the modified prospective method for grants that were measured using the fair value method and 

adopted SFAS No. 123(R) using the prospective-transition method for grants that were measured using the 

Minimum Value method in SFAS No. 123 for either recognition or pro forma disclosures. The fair value of 

stock-based awards granted after January 1, 2006, was estimated using the binominal model. As a result of 

adopting SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006, our net income for the nine month period ended 

September 30, 2006, is $252,000 lower with a negative effect of $0.01 on basic or diluted earnings per share, 

than if it had continued to account for stock based compensation under Accounting Principles Board 

Opinion 25 “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees”, or APB 25. 

In connection with the grant of options, we recorded total stock-based compensation expenses of $297,000 in 

2003, $158,000 in 2004 and $305,000 in 2005. We also recorded a total stock-based compensation expense 

of $682,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2006, of which $8,000, $97,000, $330,000 and 

$247,000 resulted from cost of revenue, research and development expenses, sales and marketing expenses 

and general and administrative expenses, respectively, based on the division in which the recipient of the 

option grant was employed. As of September 30, 2006, we had an aggregate of $3.1 million of deferred 

unrecognized stock-based compensation remaining to be recognized. We estimate that this deferred 

unrecognized stock-based compensation balance will be amortized as follows: approximately $0.4 million 

during the remainder of 2006, approximately $1.0 million in 2007 and approximately $0.8 million in 2008 

and approximately $0.9 million in 2009 and thereafter. 

Financial income (expenses), net

Financial income consists primarily of interest earned on our cash balances and other financial investments, 

foreign currency exchange gains and, to a lesser extent, interest accrued on loans made to employees. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (60 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 59 of 149
424B1

Financing expenses consist primarily of amortization of discounts on bank-credit lines, bank fees, foreign 

currency exchange losses and interest accrued on banks loans. 

32 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (61 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 60 of 149
424B1

Corporate Tax

Israeli companies are generally subject to corporate tax at the rate of 31% of their taxable income in 2006. 

The rate is scheduled to decline to 29% in 2007, 27% in 2008, 26% in 2009 and 25% in 2010 and thereafter. 

However, the effective tax rate payable by a company that derives income from an Approved Enterprise 

designated as such under the Law for the Encouragement of Capital Investments, 1959 (the “Investment 

Law”) may be considerably less. Our investment programs in equipment at our facilities in Hod-Hasharon, 

Israel have been granted Approved Enterprise status under the Investment Law and enjoys certain tax 

benefits. We expect to utilize these tax benefits after we utilize our net operating loss carry forwards. As of 

December 31, 2005, the end of our last fiscal year, our net operating loss carry forwards for Israeli tax 

purposes amounted to approximately $20.5 million. Income derived from other sources, other than the 

“Approved Enterprise,” during the benefit period will be subject to tax at the regular corporate tax rate. For 

more information about the tax benefits available to us as an Approved Enterprise see “Taxation and 

Government Programs — Law for the Encouragement of Capital Investments, 1959.” 

NetReality

In September 2002, we acquired the assets of NetReality, from a receiver pursuant to a court ruling. In 

consideration for the assets acquired, we granted to NetReality’s receiver a fully-vested warrant to purchase 

48,267 Series B preferred shares (with an exercise price of NIS 0.10 per share) and undertook to pay the 

receiver a minimum of $1 million and maximum of $2.5 million in royalties over a period of five years from 

the date of the acquisition at the rate of the higher of (1) 7% of sales of the NetReality products and (2) 1% 

of our total sales. The purchase price was valued at approximately $1.3 million, based on the fair value of the 

warrant granted, and the minimum commitment of such royalties. We also assumed the commitment to pay 

royalties to the Office of the Chief Scientist as discussed under the subheading “Government Grants” below. 

The acquisition increased our customer base and resulted in an enhancement of our engineering capabilities. 

In the fourth quarter of 2004, we decided to cease sales of the NetReality product line, although we continue 

selling maintenance and support programs relating to the NetReality products. Consequently, an impairment 

of intangible assets relating to the NetReality acquisition of $0.4 million was recorded to operating expenses 

at the end of 2004. We do not expect our ongoing sales of maintenance and support programs relating to the 

NetReality products to be a significant source of revenue in the future. 

Government Grants

Our research and development efforts have been financed, in part, through grants from the Office of the 

Chief Scientist under our approved plans in accordance with the Israeli Law for Encouragement of Research 

and Development in the Industry, 1984, or the R&D Law. Through September 30, 2006, we had applied and 

received approval for grants totaling $9.4 million from the Office of the Chief Scientist. Under Israeli law 

and the approved plans, royalties on the revenues derived from sales of all of our products are payable to the 

Israeli government, generally at the rate of 3.0% during the first three years and 3.5% beginning with the 

fourth year, up to the amount of the received grants as adjusted for fluctuation in the U.S. dollar/shekel 

exchange rate. The amounts received after January 1, 1999 bear interest equal to the 12-month London 

Interbank Offered Rate applicable to dollar deposits that is published on the first business day of each 

calendar year. Royalties are paid on our consolidated revenues. 

The government of Israel does not own proprietary rights in knowledge developed using its funding and 

there is no restriction related to such funding on the export of products manufactured using the know-how. 

The know-how is, however, subject to other legal restrictions, including the obligation to manufacture the 

product based on the know-how in Israel and to obtain the Office of the Chief Scientist’s consent to transfer 

the know-how to a third party, whether in or outside Israel. These restrictions may impair our ability to 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (62 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 61 of 149
424B1

outsource manufacturing or enter into similar arrangements for those products or technologies and they 

continue to apply even after we have paid the full amount of royalties payable for the grants. 

If the Office of the Chief Scientist consents to the manufacture of the products outside Israel, the regulations 

allow the Office of the Chief Scientist to require the payment of increased royalties, ranging from 

33 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (63 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 62 of 149
424B1

120% to 300% of the amount of the grant plus interest, depending on the percentage of foreign manufacture. 

If the manufacturing is performed outside of Israel by us, the rate of royalties payable by us on revenues 

from the sale of products manufactured outside of Israel will increase by 1% over the regular rates. If the 

manufacturing is performed outside of Israel by a third party, the rate of royalties payable by us on those 

revenues will be a percentage equal to the percentage of our total investment in our products that was funded 

by grants. The R&D Law further permits the Office of the Chief Scientist, among other things, to approve 

the transfer of manufacturing or manufacturing rights outside Israel in exchange for an import of certain 

manufacturing or manufacturing rights into Israel as a substitute, in lieu of the increased royalties. 

The R&D Law provides that the consent of the Office of the Chief Scientist for the transfer outside of Israel 

of know-how derived out of an approved plan may only be granted under special circumstances and subject 

to fulfillment of certain conditions specified in the R&D Law as follows: (a) the grant recipient pays to the 

Office of the Chief Scientist a portion of the sale price paid in consideration for such Office of the Chief 

Scientist-funded know-how (according to certain formulas), except if the grantee receives from the transferee 

of the know-how an exclusive, irrevocable, perpetual unlimited license to fully utilize the know-how and all 

related rights; (b) the grant recipient receives know-how from a third party in exchange for its Office of the 

Chief Scientist funded know-how; or (c) such transfer of Office of the Chief Scientist funded know-how 

arises in connection with certain types of cooperation in research and development activities. 

In connection with the NetReality acquisition, we assumed a commitment to pay royalties to the Office of 

the Chief Scientist up to the amount of the contingent liabilities derived from the grants that had been 

received by NetReality prior to the acquisition. 

As of September 30, 2006, we had an outstanding contingent obligation to pay royalties in the amount of 

approximately $11.7 million, including obligations assumed in connection with the purchase of the 

operations of NetReality. 

Factors Affecting Our Performance

Our business, financial position and results of operations, as well as the period-to-period comparability of 

our financial results, are significantly affected by a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control, 

including: 

• mix between product and service revenues; 

• size of end-customers and sales cycles; 

• declines in average selling prices; and 

• cost of revenues and cost reductions. 

Mix between product and service revenues. The following table sets forth information for the periods 

presented regarding the percentage of our revenues derived from product and service: 

 

 Nine Months Ended 

 Year Ended December 31, September 30, 

 2003 2004 2005 2005 2006 

 (unaudited) 

Product revenues 88.8 % 80.9 % 80.5 % 79.1 % 84.3 % 

Service revenues 11.2 19.1 19.5 20.9 15.7 

Total 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 100.0 % 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (64 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 63 of 149
424B1

During the period from 2003 to 2005, we increased the percentage of our service revenues compared to 

product revenues both as a result of the increase in the installed base of our NetEnforcer and NetReality 

systems and also as a result of increased efforts to drive service contract renewals among end-customers. 

However, for the nine months ended September 30, 2006, the percentage of our service revenues was lower 

than in the nine months ended September 30, 2005, primarily as a result of product sales to a system 

integrator in the United Kingdom, as part of the deployment of our systems by NTL. In addition, such 

decrease in the 

34 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (65 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 64 of 149
424B1

percentage of our service revenues was also due in part to the decrease in sales of maintenance and support 

services relating to the NetReality products. We are targeting our service revenues to remain at 

approximately the percentage levels of 2004 and 2005. Our service gross margins have historically been 

slightly higher than our product gross margins and we believe that our service activities can be scaled to 

address a larger installed basis without a proportionate increase in cost of services. 

Size of end-customers and sales cycles. We believe that our growth can be accelerated by increasing sales to 

large service providers and have hired additional sales and marketing personnel in recent years in order to 

achieve this goal. The deployment of our products by small and midsize enterprises and service providers 

can be completed relatively quickly with a limited number of NetEnforcer systems compared to the number 

required by large service providers. Design wins with large service providers, including carriers, are more 

likely to result in sustained demand for additional NetEnforcer systems as they deploy our products 

throughout their networks and as their networks grow. The increased deployment of our products in carriers’ 

networks also enhances our reputation and name recognition in the market. We, therefore, expect that 

significant customer wins in the carrier market will positively impact future performance. However, our 

performance is also influenced by sales cycles for our products, which typically fluctuate based upon the size 

and needs of end-customers that purchase our products. Generally, large service providers take longer to plan 

the integration of DPI solutions into their existing networks and to set goals for the implementation of the 

technology. The varying length of our sales cycles creates unpredictability regarding the timing of our sales 

and may cause our quarterly operating results to fluctuate if a significant customer defers an order from one 

quarter to another. Furthermore, longer sales cycles may result in delays from the time we increase our 

operating expenses and make investments in inventory, until the time that we generate revenue from related 

product sales. 

Average selling prices. Our performance is affected by the selling price of our products. We price our 

products based on several factors, including manufacturing costs, the stage of the product’s life cycle, 

competition, technical complexity of the product, discounts given to channel partners in certain territories, 

customization and other special considerations in connection with larger projects. We typically are able to 

charge the highest price for a product when it is first introduced to the market. We expect that the average 

selling prices for our products will decrease over the product’s life cycle as our competitors introduce new 

products and DPI technology becomes more standardized. In order to maintain or increase our current price, 

we expect that we will need to enhance the functionality of our products by offering higher system speeds, 

and additional features, such as additional security functions, supporting additional applications and 

enhanced reporting tools. For example, we sell additional software packages as part of the NetXplorer 

management application suite, and optional upgrade application suites to the NetEnforcer network traffic 

management system. We also from time to time introduce higher end models that typically increase our 

average selling price. To further offset such declines, we sell maintenance and support programs on our 

products, and as our customer base and number of field installations grows our related service revenues are 

expected to increase. 

Cost of revenues and cost reductions. We strive to control our cost of revenues in order to maintain and 

increase our gross margins. Our cost of revenues as a percentage of total revenues was 24.3% for 2003, 

25.6% for 2004, 23.6% for 2005 and 22.0% for the nine months ended September 30, 2006. Our products 

use off-the-shelf components and typically the prices of such components decline over time. In addition, we 

make an effort to identify cheaper components of comparable performance and quality, as well as making 

engineering improvements in our products that will reduce costs. Since our cost of revenues also include 

royalties paid to the Office of the Chief Scientist, our cost of sales may be impacted positively or negatively 

by actions of the Israeli government changing the royalty rate. In addition, we may in the future incorporate 

features into our products that require payment of royalties to third parties. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (66 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 65 of 149
424B1

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles 

requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, 

liabilities, revenues and expenses and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial 

statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. These estimates 

and 

35 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (67 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 66 of 149
424B1

judgments are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty and actual results may differ. Our significant 

accounting policies are more fully described in Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements included 

elsewhere in this prospectus. Certain of our accounting policies are particularly important to the portrayal of 

our financial position and results of operations. In applying these critical accounting policies, our 

management uses its judgment to determine the appropriate assumptions to be used in making certain 

estimates. Those estimates are based on our historical experience, the terms of existing contracts, our 

observance of trends in our industry, information provided by our customers and information available from 

other outside sources, as appropriate. With respect to our policies on revenue recognition and warranty costs, 

our historical experience is based principally on our operations since we commenced selling our products in 

1998. Our estimates are guided by observing the following critical accounting policies: 

Revenue recognition. We recognize revenues from sales of our products in accordance with the American 

Institute of Certified Public Accountants’ Statement of Position, or SOP, 97-2, “Software Revenue 

Recognition”, as modified by SOP 98-9, “Modification of SOP 97-2, Software Revenue Recognition, with 

Respect to Certain Transactions”. When an arrangement does not require significant production, 

modification or customization of software or does not contain services considered to be essential to the 

functionality of the software, revenue is recognized when the following four criteria are met: 

• Persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists. We require evidence of a purchase order with a 

customer specifying the terms and conditions of the products or services to be delivered typically in the 

form of a signed contract or statement of work accompanied by a purchase order. 

• Delivery has occurred. For products that include a software license delivered with a hardware 

appliance, delivery takes place when shipment occurs. For software licenses that are not bundled with a 

hardware appliance, delivery takes place when the software programs and applicable activation key are 

sent or released via the internet. For services, delivery takes place as the services are provided. 

• The fee is fixed and determinable. Fees are fixed and determinable if they are not subject to a refund or 

cancellation and do not have payment terms that exceed our standard payment terms. Typical payment 

terms are between net 30 days to net 90 days. 

• Collection is probable. We generally perform a credit review of customers with significant 

transactions to determine whether collection is probable. 

We exercise judgment and use estimates in connection with the determination of the amount of product 

software license and services revenues to be recognized in each accounting period. If collection is not 

considered probable, revenue is recognized when the fee is collected. We record provisions against revenue 

for estimated sales returns, sales incentives and warranty allowances on product and service-related sales in 

the same period as the related revenue is recorded. We also record a provision to operating expenses for bad 

debts resulting from customers’ inability to pay for the products or services they have received. These 

estimates are based on historical sales returns, sale incentives, warranty related expenses, and bad debt 

expense, analyses of credit memo data, and other known factors, such as bankruptcy. If the historical data we 

use to calculate these estimates do not accurately reflect actual or future returns, sales incentives, warranty 

related expenses or bad debts, adjustments to these reserves may be required that would increase or decrease 

revenue or net income. 

Many of our product sales include multiple elements. Such elements typically include several or all of the 

following: hardware appliance, software licenses, hardware and software maintenance, technical support and 

training services. For multiple-element arrangements that do not involve significant modification or 

customization of the software and do not involve services that are considered essential to the functionality of 

the software, we allocate value to each element based on its relative fair value, if sufficient specific objective 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (68 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 67 of 149
424B1

evidence of fair value exists for each element of the arrangement. Specific objective evidence of fair value is 

determined based on the price charged when each element is sold separately. If sufficient specific objective 

evidence exists for all undelivered elements, but does not exist for the delivered element, typically the 

hardware appliance and software license, then the residual method is used to allocate value to each element. 

Under the residual method, each undelivered element is allocated value based on customer specific objective 

evidence of fair value for that element, as described above, and the remainder of the total arrangement fee is 

36 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (69 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 68 of 149
424B1

allocated to the delivered element(s). If sufficient customer specific objective evidence does not exist for all 

undelivered elements and the arrangement involves rights to unspecified additional software products, all 

revenue is recognized ratably over the term of the arrangement. If the arrangement does not involve rights to 

unspecified additional software products, all revenue is initially deferred until typically the only remaining 

undelivered element is software maintenance or technical support, at which time the entire fee is recognized 

ratably over the remaining maintenance or support term. 

Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. Through December 31, 2005, we elected to follow the intrinsic 

value-based method prescribed by APB 25 and related interpretations in accounting for employee stock 

options rather than adopting the alternative fair value accounting provided under Statement of Financial 

Accounting Standards No. 123, or SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for Stock Based Compensation.” Therefore, 

we have not recorded any compensation expense for stock options we granted to our employees where the 

exercise price equals the fair market value of the stock on the date of grant and the exercise price, number of 

shares eligible for issuance under the options and vesting period are fixed. However, where the exercise price 

is less than the fair market value of the stock on the date of grant, compensation expense was recognized. 

Deferred compensation is amortized to compensation expense over the vesting period of the options, which 

is generally four years, on a straight-line method. 

We comply with the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 123 and Statement of Financial Accounting 

Standards No. 148 “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation — Transition and Disclosure”, or 

SFAS No. 148, which require that we disclose our pro forma net income or loss and net income or loss per 

ordinary share as if we had expensed the fair value of the options. In calculating such fair value, there are 

certain assumptions that we use, as disclosed in Note 2 of our consolidated financial statements included 

elsewhere in this prospectus. For purposes of this pro forma disclosure, we estimate the fair value of stock 

options issued to employees using the minimum value valuation model through December 31, 2005. Option 

valuation models require the input of highly subjective assumptions, including the expected life of options 

and our expected stock price volatility. Therefore, the estimated fair value of our employee stock options 

may vary significantly as a result of changes in the assumptions used. 

In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued SFAS 123(R), which 

requires companies to expense the fair value of employee stock options and other forms of share-based 

compensation. SFAS 123(R) requires nonpublic companies that used the Minimum Value method in 

SFAS 123 for either recognition or pro forma disclosures to apply SFAS 123(R) using the prospectivetransition method. As such, we will continue to apply APB 25 in future periods to equity awards outstanding 

at the date of SFAS 123(R)adoption that were measured using the Minimum Value method. 

We adopted SFAS 123(R) using the prospective transition method for grants that were measured for pro 

forma purposes using the Minimum Value Method. Under SFAS 123(R), we are required to determine the 

appropriate fair value model to be used for valuing share-based payments, the amortization method for 

compensation cost and the transition method to be used at date of adoption. We use the Minimum Value 

valuation model to value options for pro forma financial statement disclosure purposes. The use of a different 

model to value options may have resulted in a different fair value. We adopted SFAS 123(R) commencing 

January 1, 2006 and recognized a compensation expense of $682,000 in the nine months ended 

September 30, 2006. The fair value of stock-based awards, granted after January 1, 2006, was estimated 

using the Binominal model. 

With respect to each option grant date, we determine the deemed fair value of our ordinary shares. As there 

is no public market for our ordinary shares, this determination was necessarily subjective. In making this 

determination, we considered a number of factors, including: 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (70 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 69 of 149
424B1

• the issuance price of our series of preferred shares to third parties; 

• the liquidation preference and other rights of the preferred shares; 

37 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (71 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 70 of 149
424B1

• significant events in our history including the securing of design wins as well as our overall financial 

performance; and 

• trends in the market for public companies involved in similar lines of business. 

We have reviewed the methodologies used in making these determinations in light of the AICPA’s Practice 

Aid Valuation of Privately-Held-Company Equity Securities Issued as Compensation, which we refer to as 

the practice aid. We took into consideration the market and income approaches to valuation as set forth in the 

practice aid. We believe that the valuation methodologies that we have used are consistent with the practice 

aid. 

In connection with the preparation of our financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 

2005, and the nine months ended September 30, 2006, we assessed the valuations of our ordinary shares as 

of the applicable grant dates and engaged an independent valuation firm, BDO Ziv Haft Consulting & 

Management Ltd. 

We also assessed our estimate of the fair value for financial reporting purposes of our ordinary shares based 

on the subjective factors mentioned above, the various approaches to valuation set forth in the practice aid, 

the independent valuation studies and an assessment of market considerations, including the overall 

economic marketplace, factors affecting our industry as well as the likelihood of an initial public offering, 

the uncertainties inherent in an initial public offering and the enterprise value of our company. 

The valuation methodologies employed in connection with our 2004, 2005 and 2006 independent valuation 

studies were based upon various generally accepted valuation methods but relied primarily on the discounted 

cash flow and market approach models. Determining the fair value of our ordinary shares involves complex 

and subjective judgments involving estimates of revenues, earnings, assumed market growth rates and 

estimated costs, as well as appropriate discount rates. At the time of each valuation, the significant estimates 

used in the income approach included estimates of revenues for 2006 and revenues growth rates for the 

following years. 

Inventories. We value our inventories at the lower of cost or estimated market value, cost being determined 

on the basis of the average cost method for raw materials, manufacturing costs and indirect allocable costs. 

We estimate market value based on our current pricing, market conditions and specific customer 

information. We write off inventory for slow-moving items or technological obsolescence. We also assess 

our inventories for obsolescence based upon assumptions about future demand and market conditions. Once 

inventory is written off, a new cost basis for these assets is established for future periods. Inventory write 

offs totaled $0.2 million in 2003, $0.4 million in 2004 and $0.2 million in 2005. 

38 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (72 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 71 of 149
424B1

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth our statements of operations as a percentage of revenues for the periods 

indicated: 

 

 Nine Months Ended 

 Year Ended December 31, September 30, 

 2003 2004 2005 2005 2006 

 (unaudited) 

Revenues 

Products 88.8 % 80.9 % 80.5 % 79.1 % 84.3 % 

Services 11.2 19.1 19.5 20.9 15.7 

Total revenues 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 

Cost of revenues: 

Products 21.8 21.8 19.5 20.4 18.6 

Services 2.5 3.8 4.1 4.4 3.4 

Total cost of revenues 24.3 25.6 23.6 24.8 22.0 

Gross profit 75.7 74.4 76.4 75.2 78.0 

Operating expenses: 

Research and development, net 20.0 21.9 25.8 27.6 23.0 

Sales and marketing 55.3 55.9 51.7 55.4 44.1 

General and administrative 12.4 11.5 10.4 10.8 9.2 

Impairment of intangible assets — 2.0 — — — 

Total operating expenses 87.7 91.3 87.9 93.7 76.3 

Operating income (loss) (12.0 ) (16.9 ) (11.5 ) (18.4 ) 1.7 

Financing and other income (expenses), net (3.4 ) (1.3 ) 0.2 0.2 0.9 

Income (loss) before income tax benefit 

(expense) (15.4 ) (18.2 ) (11.3 ) (18.2 ) 2.6 

Income tax benefit (expense) — — 1.0 1.1 (0.3 ) 

Net income (loss) (15.4 ) (18.2 ) (10.3 ) (17.1 ) 2.3 

Nine Months Ended September 30, 2006 Compared to Nine Months Ended September 30, 2005

Revenues

Products. Product revenues increased by $8.1 million, or 65%, to $20.7 million in the nine months ended 

September 30, 2006 from $12.6 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. The majority of our 

product revenues in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 were derived from sales of the 

NetEnforcer AC-1000. We continued to increase our concentration in the service provider market during this 

period. Product revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2006 also include $6.8 million of sales of 

our products to a single system integrator for our products in the United Kingdom relating primarily to 

deployment of our systems by NTL compared to $2.5 million of sales to the same system integrator in 

relation to the same project for in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. 

Services. Service revenues increased by $0.6 million, or 16%, to $3.9 million in the nine months ended 

September 30, 2006 from $3.3 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. The increase in service 

revenues resulted primarily from a larger product base covered by maintenance and support contracts. The 

increase in service revenues was partially offset by a decrease of sales of maintenance and support programs 

related to NetReality’s legacy products in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 compared to the nine 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (73 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 72 of 149
424B1

months ended September 30, 2005. Service revenues as a percentage of sales decreased in part due to sales to 

NTL, which, as of September 30, 2006, had not included maintenance and support contracts typically 

associated with our product sales. 

Cost of revenues and gross margin

Products. Cost of product revenues increased by $1.4 million, or 41%, to $4.6 million in the nine months 

ended September 30, 2006, from $3.2 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. This 

39 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (74 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 73 of 149
424B1

increase resulted primarily from increased expenditure of $0.6 million on materials due to an increased 

number of units sold, and an increase of $0.3 million in royalty expense accrued or paid to the Office of the 

Chief Scientist. Product gross margin was 78.0% in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 compared to 

74.3% in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. This increase resulted from higher priced modules 

accounting for a greater proportion of total sales and, to a lesser degree, cost reduction efforts. 

Services. Service cost of revenues increased by $0.1 million, or 21%, to $0.8 million in the nine months 

ended September 30, 2006 from $0.7 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. This increase 

resulted primarily from post-sales support expenses as a result of salary increases. Services gross margin was 

78.1% in the nine months ended September 2006 compared to 78.9% in the nine months ended 

September 30, 2005. 

Total gross margin was 78.0% in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 compared to 75.2% in the nine 

months ended September 30, 2005. 

Operating expenses

Research and development. Gross research and development expenses increased by $1.7 million, or 36%, to 

$6.7 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 from $5.0 million in the nine months ended 

September 30, 2005. This increase resulted from an increase of $1.5 million due primarily to the hiring of 

additional research and development staff in connection with development of our ATCA-based 10G 

platform, as well as salary increases. 

Research and development expenses as a percentage of revenues decreased to 27% in the nine months ended 

September 30, 2006 from 31% in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. 

Research and development expenses, net of received and accrued royalty-bearing grants from the Office of 

the Chief Scientist increased by $1.2 million, or 29%, to $5.6 million in the nine months ended 

September 30, 2006 from $4.4 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. Grants received and 

accrued increased by $0.5 million, or 88%, to $1.1 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 

from $0.6 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2005, due to a larger grant approved by the Office 

of the Chief Scientist. 

Sales and marketing. Sales and marketing expenses increased by $2.1 million, or 23%, to $10.9 million in 

the nine months ended September 30, 2006 from $8.8 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. 

This increase resulted from an increase of $1.3 million due primarily to the hiring of additional sales, 

marketing and engineering personnel to provide broader geographical coverage and increased focus on the 

service provider and carrier markets, an increase of $0.3 million in expenses relating to resellers and endcustomers events and an increase of $0.2 million in rental costs related to our offices. Sales and marketing 

expenses as a percentage of revenues decreased to 44% in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 from 

55% in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. 

General and administrative. General and administrative expenses increased by $0.6 million, or 32%, to 

$2.3 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 from $1.7 million in the nine months ended 

September 30, 2005. This increase resulted from an increase of $0.3 million due primarily to the hiring of 

additional personnel, as well as salary increases and increased stock-based-compensation costs, and an 

increase of $0.1 million in professional services rendered. General and administrative expenses as a 

percentage of revenues decreased to 9% in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 from 11% in the nine 

months ended September 30, 2005. 

Financial and other income (expenses), net

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (75 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 74 of 149
424B1

Financial and other income was $229,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 compared to 

financial and other income of $36,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. The increase in 

financial income resulted from interest received on cash balances and decrease of amortization of discount 

on bank credit line. 

40 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (76 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 75 of 149
424B1

Income tax benefit (expense)

Income tax expense was $75,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 compared to income tax 

benefit of $178,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2005. The income tax benefit in the nine 

months ended September 30, 2005 was attributable to deferred income tax asset recorded by our U.

S. subsidiary. 

Year Ended December 31, 2005 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2004

Revenues

Products. Product revenues increased by $3.9 million, or 26%, to $18.5 million in 2005 from $14.6 million 

in 2004. The majority of our product revenues in 2005 was derived from sales of the NetEnforcer AC-1000, 

which is targeted primarily at service providers, and the balance from sales of the NetEnforcer AC-400 

and AC-800. While we experienced growth in sales from all NetEnforcer models, the rate of growth of the 

NetEnforcer AC-400 and AC-800 was slower than in previous years as we shifted our focus to the service 

provider market. Products revenues for 2005 also include $3.7 million of sales to a single system integrator 

compared to $0.6 million of sales to the same system integrator in 2004. 

The increase in NetEnforcer sales was partially offset by a decrease of sales of NetReality’s legacy products 

which accounted for sales of $1.0 million in 2004 compared to $0.1 million of sales in 2005. At the end of 

2004, we decided to cease selling NetReality’s product line, although we continue selling maintenance and 

support programs relating to the NetReality products. 

Services. Service revenues increased by $1.1 million, or 30%, to $4.5 million in 2005 from $3.4 million in 

2004. The increase in service revenues resulted primarily from a larger product base covered by maintenance 

and support contracts. The increase in service revenues was partially offset by a decrease of sales of 

maintenance and support programs related to NetReality’s legacy products in 2004 compared to 2005. 

Cost of revenues and gross margin

Products. Cost of product revenues increased by $0.5 million, or 14%, to $4.5 million in 2005 from 

$4.0 million in 2004. This increase resulted primarily from increased expenditure of $0.5 million on 

materials which was partially offset by a write off of $0.2 million primarily related to NetReality inventories, 

and an increase of $0.2 million in royalties paid to the Office of the Chief Scientist. Product gross margin 

was 75.8% in 2005 compared to 73.1% in 2004. This increase resulted from higher priced modules 

accounting for a greater proportion of total sales, as well as lower relative fixed costs and decreased 

inventory write-offs compared to 2004. 

Services. Service cost of revenues increased by $0.2 million, or 38%, to $0.9 million in 2005 from 

$0.7 million in 2004. This increase resulted from an increase of $0.2 million in post-sales support expenses 

as a result of employing additional post-sale support engineers and salary increases. Services gross margin 

was 79.0% in 2005 compared to 80.3% in 2004. 

Total gross margin was 76.4% in 2005 compared to 74.4% in 2004. 

Operating expenses

Research and development. Gross research and development expenses increased by $1.8 million, or 37%, to 

$6.7 million in 2005 from $4.9 million in 2004. This increase resulted from an increase of $1.4 million due 

primarily to the hiring of additional research and development staff as well as increased salaries, an increase 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (77 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 76 of 149
424B1

of $0.2 million due to additional materials consumed and an increase of $0.1 million due to additional 

subcontractor work. These increases were driven by the development of new products, such as our 

NetXplorer management application suite and the initial development of our new ATCA-based 10G 

platform. 

Research and development expenses, net of received and accrued grants from the Office of the Chief 

Scientist, increased by $1.9 million, or 50%, to $5.9 million in 2005 from $4.0 million in 2004. Grants 

totaled $0.7 million in 2005 compared to $0.9 million in 2004. The decrease in the size of grants received 

and accrued in 2005 compared to 2004 was primarily due to unfavorable changes in the currency exchange 

rates 

41 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (78 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 77 of 149
424B1

between the shekel and the U.S. dollar as well as an adjustment in 2005 of the grant allowance for 2004. 

Research and development expenses as a percentage of revenues increased to 26% in 2005 from 22% in 

2004. 

Sales and marketing. Sales and marketing expenses increased by $1.8 million in 2005, or 18%, to 

$11.9 million in 2005 from $10.1 million in 2004. This increase resulted from an increase of $1.1 million 

due primarily to the hiring of additional sales, marketing and engineering personnel to provide broader 

geographical coverage and increased focus on the service provider market, an increase of $0.2 million in 

commissions paid to third parties, an increase of $0.2 million in amortization of stock-based compensation 

and an increase of $0.1 million in expenses relating to cooperative advertising expenses, public relations and 

advertising. Sales and marketing expenses as a percentage of revenues decreased to 52% in 2005 from 56% 

in 2004. 

General and administrative. General and administrative expenses increased by $0.3 million, or 14%, to 

$2.4 million in 2005 from $2.1 million in 2004. This increase resulted from an increase of $0.1 million due 

primarily to the hiring of additional personnel as well as salary increases and an increase of $0.1 million in 

expenses related to professional services. General and administrative expenses as a percentage of revenues 

decreased to 10% in 2005 from 12% in 2004. 

Impairment of intangible assets

Impairment of intangible assets was $0.4 million in 2004 and zero in 2005. This decrease resulted from the 

impairment at the end 2004 of most of the intangible assets acquired in connection with our acquisition of 

the assets of NetReality in 2002. 

Financial and other income (expenses), net

Financial and other income, net was $45,000 in 2005 compared to financial and other expenses, net of 

$241,000 in 2004. The increase in financial and other income resulted from an increase of $0.1 million 

related to interest received on cash balances and decrease of $0.3 million related to amortization of discount 

on bank credit-lines. 

Income tax benefit (expense)

Income tax benefit was $218,000 in 2005 compared to income tax expense of $3,000 in 2004. The income 

tax benefit in 2005 was attributable to deferred income tax asset recognized by our U.S. subsidiary. 

Year Ended December 31, 2004 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2003

Revenues

Products. Product revenues increased by $1.5 million, or 12%, to $14.6 million in 2004 from $13.1 million 

in 2003. The increase in product revenues resulted primarily from an increase in sales of our NetEnforcer 

product, partially offset by a decrease of $1.8 million in sales of our NetReality legacy products. At the end 

of 2004, we decided to cease selling NetReality’s product line, although we continue selling maintenance 

and support programs relating to the NetReality products. 

Services. Revenues increased by $1.7 million, or 109%, to $3.4 million in 2004 from $1.7 million in 2003. 

The increase in service revenues resulted from an increased emphasis on selling maintenance and support 

programs. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (79 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 78 of 149
424B1

Cost of revenues and gross margin

Products. Cost of product revenues increased by $0.7 million, or 22%, to $3.9 million in 2004 from 

$3.2 million in 2003. This increase resulted from a write off of $0.4 million primarily related to NetReality 

inventories and from increased product sales. Products gross margin was 73.1% in 2004 compared to 75.4% 

in 2003. 

42 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (80 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 79 of 149
424B1

Services. Cost of service revenues increase by $317,000, or 88%, to $679,000 in 2004 from $362,000 in 

2003. Services gross margin was 80.3% in 2004 compared to 78.1% in 2003. This increase resulted from 

employing additional post-sales support engineers. 

Total gross margin was 74.4% in 2004 compared to 75.7% in 2003. 

Operating expenses

Research and development. Gross research and development expenses increased by $0.8 million, or 20%, to 

$4.9 million in 2004 from $4.1 million in 2003. This increase resulted from an increase of $0.7 million due 

primarily to the hiring of additional research and development staff for the development of new products. 

Research and development expenses as a percentage of revenues were 27% in both 2004 and 2003. 

Research and development expenses, net of received and accrued grants from the Office of the Chief 

Scientist, increased by $1.0 million, or 34%, to $4.0 million in 2004 from $3.0 million in 2003. Grants 

totaled $0.9 million in 2004 compared to $1.1 million in 2003. The decrease in the size of grants received 

and accrued in 2004 compared to 2003 was primarily due to budget constraints imposed by the Israeli 

government that led to a reduction in participation rates from 50% to 40%, as well as unfavorable changes in 

the currency exchange rates between the shekel and the U.S. dollar. 

Sales and marketing. Sales and marketing expenses increased by $1.9 million in 2004, or 24%, to 

$10.1 million in 2004 from $8.2 million in 2003. This increase resulted from an increase of $1.3 million due 

primarily to the hiring of additional sales and marketing personnel in our sales, support and marketing 

departments and expansion to new territories, an increase of $0.4 million in travel expenses and an increase 

of $0.2 million related to conventions and exhibitions. Sales and marketing expenses as a percentage of 

revenues increased to 56% in 2004 from 55% in 2003. 

General and administrative. General and administrative expenses increased by $0.3 million, or 11%, to 

$2.1 million in 2004 from $1.8 million in 2003. This increase resulted primarily from an increase of 

$0.2 million in expenses related to professional services and $0.1 million due primarily to the hiring of 

additional personnel as well as salary increases. General and administrative expenses as a percentage of 

revenues decreased to 11.5% in 2004 from 12.4% in 2003. 

Impairment of intangible assets

Impairment of intangible assets was $0.4 million in 2004 and zero in 2003. This increase resulted from the 

impairment at the end 2004 of most of the intangible assets acquired in connection with our acquisition of 

the assets of NetReality in 2002. 

Financial and other income (expenses), net

Financial and other income (expenses), net decreased to $0.2 million in 2004 from $0.5 million in 2003. This 

decrease was primarily a result of higher interest expenses in 2003 relating to bank loans and foreign 

exchange gains from and increased interest income on cash balances in 2004. 

Income tax benefit (expense)

Income tax expense was $3,000 in 2004 compared to $2,000 in 2003. 

Quarterly Results of Operations

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (81 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 80 of 149
424B1

The table below sets forth unaudited consolidated statements of operations data in dollars for each of the 

seven consecutive quarters ended September 30, 2006. In management’s opinion, the unaudited consolidated 

financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as our audited consolidated financial statements 

contained elsewhere in this prospectus and include all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring 

adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of such financial information. This information should be read 

in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto appearing elsewhere in 

this prospectus. 

43 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (82 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 81 of 149
424B1

 

 Three Months Ended 

 March 31, June 30, Sept. 30, Dec. 31, March 31, June 30, Sept. 30, 

 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006 

 (unaudited) 

 (in thousands) 

Statements of operations data: 

Total revenues $ 4,437 $ 5,428 $ 6,028 $ 7,079 $ 7,571 $ 8,152 $ 8,854 

Total cost of revenues 1,108 1,308 1,520 1,483 1,700 1,746 1,961 

Gross profit 3,329 4,120 4,508 5,596 5,871 6,406 6,893 

Operating expenses: 

Research and development, 

net 1,436 1,441 1,505 1,543 1,882 1,953 1,807 

Sales and marketing 2,811 3,176 2,810 3,090 3,493 3,749 3,617 

General and administrative 578 586 545 671 609 710 941 

Total operating expenses 4,825 5,203 4,860 5,304 5,984 6,412 6,365 

Operating income (loss) (1,496 ) (1,083 ) (352 ) 292 (113 ) (6 ) 528 

Financial and other income 

(expenses), net (32 ) 39 29 9 121 62 46 

Income (loss) before tax (1,528 ) (1,044 ) (323 ) 301 8 56 574 

Tax income (expense) 101 42 35 40 (3 ) (3 ) (69 ) 

Net income (loss) $ (1,427 ) $ (1,002 ) $ (288 ) $ 341 $ 5 $ 53 $ 505 

Our quarterly revenues and results of operations have varied in the past and can be expected to vary in the 

future due to numerous factors. We believe that period-to-period comparisons of our results of operations are 

not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied upon as indications of future performance. Generally, 

our revenues are lowest in the first quarter and our fourth quarter has tended to exhibit stronger results than 

other quarters, which we believe may result from the budgeting processes of many of our customers which 

are based on a calendar fiscal year. 

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

Market risk is the risk of loss related to changes in market prices, including interest rates and foreign 

exchange rates, of financial instruments that may adversely impact our consolidated financial position, 

results of operations or cash flows. 

Risk of Interest Rate Fluctuation

We do not have any long-term borrowings. Our investments consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents 

and interest bearing, investment-grade investments in marketable securities with maturities of up to three 

years. These marketable securities currently consist of corporate debt securities, governmental debt securities 

and money market funds, and may in the future include commercial paper and non-governmental debt 

securities. The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve principal while maximizing the 

income that we receive from our investments without significantly increasing risk and loss. Our investments 

are exposed to market risk due to fluctuation in interest rates, which may affect our interest income and the 

fair market value of our investments. We manage this exposure by performing ongoing evaluations of our 

investments. Due to the short and medium-term maturities of our investments to date, their carrying value 

approximates the fair value. We generally hold investments to maturity in order to limit our exposure to 

interest rate fluctuations. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (83 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 82 of 149
424B1

Foreign Currency Exchange Risk

Our foreign currency exposures give rise to market risk associated with exchange rate movements of the U.

S. dollar, our functional and reporting currency, mainly against the shekel and the euro. We are exposed to 

the risk of fluctuation in the U.S. dollar/shekel exchange rate. In 2005, we derived our revenues principally 

in U.S. dollars and to a lesser extent in euros and shekels. Although a majority of our expenses were 

denominated in U.S. dollars, a significant portion of our expenses were denominated in shekels and to a 

lesser extent in euros and yen. Our shekel-denominated expenses consist principally of salaries and related 

personnel expenses. 

44 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (84 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 83 of 149
424B1

We anticipate that a material portion of our expenses will continue to be denominated in shekels. If the U.

S. dollar weakens against the shekel, there will be a negative impact on our profit margins. We currently do 

not hedge our currency exposure through financial instruments. In the future, we may undertake hedging or 

other similar transactions or invest in market risk sensitive instruments if we determine that it is advisable to 

offset these risks. 

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Since inception, we have financed our operations primarily through private placements of our equity 

securities and, to a lesser extent, through borrowings from financial institutions. Through September 30, 

2006, sales of our equity securities resulted in net proceeds to us of approximately $42.2 million, net of 

issuance expenses. As of September 30, 2006, we had $4.5 million in cash and cash equivalents and 

$8.9 million in marketable securities. As of September 30, 2006, our working capital, which we calculate by 

subtracting our current liabilities from our current assets, was $5.0 million. 

By subcontracting our manufacturing and component supply chain activities to a third party subcontractor, 

we minimize our working capital requirements. Based on our current business plan, we believe that the net 

proceeds from this offering, together with our existing cash balances and cash generated from operations, 

will be sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for working capital and capital expenditures for at least 

the next 12 months. If our estimates of revenues, expenses or capital or liquidity requirements change or are 

inaccurate or if cash generated from operations is insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements, we may 

seek to sell additional equity or arrange additional debt financing. In addition, we may seek to sell additional 

equity or arrange debt financing to give us financial flexibility to pursue attractive acquisition or investment 

opportunities that may arise in the future, although we currently do not have any acquisitions or investments 

planned. 

Operating activities. Net cash provided by operating activities in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 

was $1.2 million and was generated primarily from our net income of $0.6 million adjusted for non-cash 

expenses of $1.3 million and by an increase in trade and other accounts payable of $0.8 million and an 

increase of $0.9 million in deferred revenues, partially offset by an increase of $0.6 million in trade 

receivables, an increase of $1.0 million in inventories, and by an increase of $1.6 million in other receivables 

and prepaid expenses and other assets, primarily due to prepaid payments for lease of our new leased offices 

in Hod-Hasharon, Israel, and prepaid expenses of $0.5 million for our offering costs. Net cash used in 

operating activities in the nine months ended September 30, 2005 was $1.2 million and resulted primarily 

from our net loss of $2.7 million adjusted for non-cash expenses of $0.7 million, partially offset by an 

increase of $0.9 million in deferred income. 

Net cash provided by operating activities in 2005 was $0.2 million and was generated primarily by an 

increase of $1.3 million in deferred revenues and an increase in trade and other accounts payable of 

$1.1 million, partially offset by our net loss of $2.4 million adjusted for non-cash expenses of $0.9 million. 

Net cash used in operating activities in 2004 was $1.7 million and resulted primarily from our net loss of 

$3.3 million adjusted for non-cash expenses of $1.1 million and an increase of $0.6 million in trade 

receivables, partially offset by an increase of $0.8 million in deferred revenues. Net cash provided by 

operating activities in 2003 was $0.6 million and was generated primarily from $2.1 million in deferred 

revenues, partially offset by our net loss of $2.3 million adjusted for non-cash expenses of $0.9 million and 

by an increase of $0.3 million in trade receivables. 

Investing activities. Net cash used in investing activities in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 was 

$5.8 million, primarily due to investments in available-for-sale marketable securities in the amount of 

$4.3 million and $1.5 million of capital investments primarily in research and development equipment and in 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (85 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 84 of 149
424B1

leasehold improvement of our new leased offices in Hod-Hasharon, Israel. Net cash used in investing 

activities in the nine months ended September 30, 2005 was $0.7 million and consisted primarily of 

$0.5 million of capital investments primarily in research and development equipment. 

Net cash used in investing activities in 2005 was $0.4 million and consisted primarily of $0.7 million of 

capital investments primarily in research and development equipment partially offset by net proceeds from 

sale 

45 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (86 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 85 of 149
424B1

of marketable securities. Net cash used in investing activities in 2004 was $5.5 million and consisted 

primarily of $4.9 million invested in marketable securities and $0.6 million of capital investments primarily 

in research and development equipment. Net cash provided by investing activities in 2003 was $1.3 million 

and consisted primarily of $1.5 million received from receipt of short-term bank deposits partially offset by 

$0.2 million of capital investments primarily in research and development equipment. 

We expect that our capital expenditures will total approximately $2.0 million in 2006 and approximately 

$1.5 million in 2007. We anticipate that these capital expenditures will be primarily related to further 

investments in research and development equipment and in leasehold improvements. 

Financing activities. Net cash provided by financing activities in the nine months ended September 30, 2006 

was $5.5 million and was generated by the issuance of share capital. Net cash used in financing activities in 

the nine months ended September 30, 2005 was $0.2 million and consisted primarily repayment of bank 

credit line. 

Net cash used in financing activities in 2005 was $0.1 million resulting primarily from the repayment of 

$0.2 million of indebtedness partially offset by funds received from option exercises. Net cash provided by 

financing activities in 2004 was $7.7 million generated by the issuance of share capital of $7.9 million 

partially offset by repayment of $0.2 million of indebtedness. Net cash used in financing activities in 2003 

was $1.0 million resulting primarily from the repayment net of $1.0 million of indebtedness. 

Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

We are not a party to any material off-balance sheet arrangements. In addition, we have no unconsolidated 

special purpose financing or partnership entities that are likely to create material contingent obligations. 

Contractual and Other Commitments

The following table of our material contractual and other obligations known to us as of September 30, 2006, 

summarizes the aggregate effect that these obligations are expected to have on our cash flows in the periods 

indicated: 

 

Contractual and 

Other 

Obligations Total 2006 2007 2008 2009 

After 

2009 

 (in thousands) 

Operating leases — offices(1) $ 3,303 $ 99 $ 586 $ 527 $ 480 $ 1,611 

Operating leases — vehicles 1,505 188 590 474 253 — 

Total $ 4,808 $ 287 $ 1,176 $ 1,001 $ 733 $ 1,611 

(1) Consists primarily of an operating lease for our facilities in Hod-Hasharon, Israel, as well as operating 

leases for facilities leased by our subsidiaries.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2005, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 154, or SFAS No. 154, 

“Accounting Changes and Error Corrections”, a replacement of APB No. 20, “Accounting Changes” and 

SFAS No. 3, “Reporting Accounting Changes in Interim Financial Statements”. SFAS No. 154 provides 

guidance on the accounting for and reporting of accounting changes and error corrections. APB No. 20 

previously required that most voluntary changes in accounting principles be recognized by including in net 

income for the period of change the cumulative effect of changing to the new accounting principle. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (87 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 86 of 149
424B1

SFAS No. 154 requires retroactive application to prior periods’ financial statements of a voluntary change in 

accounting principles unless it is impracticable. SFAS No. 154 is effective for accounting changes and 

corrections of errors made in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. 

In November 2005, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) FAS 115-1. The FSP addresses the 

determination as to when an investment is considered impaired, whether that impairment is other than 

temporary, and the measurement of an impairment loss. The FSP also includes accounting considerations 

46 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (88 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 87 of 149
424B1

subsequent to the recognition of other-than-temporary impairment and requires certain disclosures about 

unrealized losses that have not been recognized as other-than-temporary impairments. The guidance in this 

FSP amends SFAS No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity”. The FSP replaces the 

impairment evaluation guidance of EITF Issue No. 03-1, “The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary 

Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments,” with references to the existing other-than-temporary 

impairment guidance. The FSP clarifies that an investor should recognize an impairment loss no later than 

when the impairment is deemed other-than-temporary, even if a decision to sell an impaired security has not 

been made. The guidance in this FSP is to be applied to reporting periods beginning after December 15, 

2005. We do not expect that the adoption of FSP FAS 115-1 will have a material impact on our financial 

position or results of operations. 

47 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (89 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 88 of 149
424B1

BUSINESS

Overview

We are a leading designer and developer of broadband service optimization solutions using advanced deep 

packet inspection, or DPI, technology. Our solutions provide broadband service providers and enterprises 

with real-time, highly granular visibility into network traffic, and enable them to efficiently and effectively 

manage and optimize their networks. End-customers use our solutions to create sophisticated policies to 

monitor network applications, enforce quality of service policies that guarantee mission-critical application 

performance, mitigate security risks and leverage network infrastructure investments. Our carrier-class 

products are used by service providers to offer subscriber-based and application-based tiered services that 

enable them to optimize their service offerings, reduce churn rates and increase average revenue per user, or 

ARPU. Our goal is to be the leading provider of network inspection and management solutions used by 

service providers and enterprises to transform generic access broadband networks into intelligent broadband 

networks. 

The rapid growth of broadband networks and the proliferation in the number and complexity of broadband 

applications have led broadband service providers to demand new ways to manage their networks. 

Broadband applications, such as peer-to-peer, or P2P, VoIP, Internet video and online video gaming increase 

network congestion and require real time voice, video and data communications. New and innovative 

applications that pose significant challenges are continuously being introduced. Costly infrastructure 

upgrades to increase network bandwidth capacity neither address service providers’ need for network 

visibility nor prioritize revenue-generating applications. Furthermore, service providers have generally been 

unsuccessful in capturing the significant new revenue opportunities available from providing differentiated, 

premium broadband services that command higher prices. By capitalizing on new revenue opportunities and 

maximizing the capacity of existing network infrastructure, our DPI technology enables service providers to 

optimize returns on their investments and enhance the quality of the services they provide. 

Our products consist of our NetEnforcer traffic management systems and NetXplorer application 

management suite. NetEnforcer employs advanced DPI technology, which identifies applications at high 

speeds by examining data packets and searching for application patterns and behaviors. NetEnforcer is 

available in several models addressing a wide range of network needs, architectures and cost criteria. 

NetXplorer enables the implementation of customized and automated traffic management policies, as well as 

tailored and detailed reports on network usage. This fully integrated network traffic management solution 

allows service providers and enterprises to gain real time, highly granular visibility into their networks and to 

enhance network efficiency and security by managing and prioritizing different applications. Our DPI 

systems are independent of and not embedded in the underlying network infrastructure and are therefore 

quicker to deploy in any existing network. 

We predominantly focus our resources on the development and advancement of our network traffic 

management products. In order to minimize our costs and leverage our core strengths, we have partnered 

with a third party to manufacture our NetEnforcer devices. We also leverage our sales and marketing 

investments by distributing products through an extensive global network of more than 300 distributors, 

resellers, OEMs and system integrators. End-customers of our products include carriers, cable operators, 

wireless and wireline Internet service providers, educational institutions, governments and enterprises. 

We commenced operations in 1997 and shipped our first product in 1998. We generated revenues of 

$23.0 million in 2005, representing a 27% increase over the prior year, and generated revenues of 

$24.6 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2006, representing a 55% increase over the same 

period in the prior year. We had 232 employees as of September 30, 2006. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (90 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 89 of 149
424B1

Industry Background

The rapid proliferation of broadband networks in recent years has been largely driven by demand from users 

for faster and more reliable access to the Internet and by the proliferation in the number and complexity of 

broadband applications. According to a May 2006 report by International Data Corporation, or IDC, a 

provider of information about the telecommunications market, there were 206 million broadband subscribers 

48 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (91 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 90 of 149
424B1

globally in 2005, representing an increase of 35% over 2004 levels. The same report projects that the number 

of broadband subscribers will reach 396 million by 2010, representing a compound annual growth rate of 

14%. 

Rising Network Operational Costs Due to the Rapid Adoption of Broadband Applications

The increasing adoption of broadband access has enabled significant advances in the sophistication of 

applications delivered over broadband networks. In contrast to traditional applications, such as e-mail and 

web-browsing, many new applications require large amounts of bandwidth and are highly sensitive to 

network delays. In response to these challenges, service providers have been forced to invest heavily in 

network infrastructure upgrades and customer support services in order to maintain the quality of experience 

for subscribers. Examples of network applications that are particularly popular and demanding on network 

resources include: 

• P2P. P2P file-sharing applications, such as eDonkey or BitTorrent, enable users to share content 

directly with each other. Increasingly, subscribers are using P2P applications to distribute multimedia 

content, such as audio and video files, which are extremely large and require significant network 

bandwidth. Unlike applications using the traditional client-server model where a well-known source 

provides content “downstream” to requesting clients, P2P applications create heavy upstream traffic 

because all users’ computers accept data requests. Heavy upstream traffic places a significant burden 

on asymmetric networks, such as digital subscriber line, or DSL, and cable networks, that were 

originally designed to handle only heavy downstream traffic. In addition, P2P applications are 

frequently left unattended for long periods of time while files upload and/or download, resulting in 

increased congestion during hours of peak network usage. According to an August 2005 article from 

GigaOM.com, a news and weblog for hi-tech consumers and professionals, on average 80% of 

upstream broadband capacity is consumed by P2P traffic. As a result, users of P2P applications dilute 

bandwidth for all users on the network, despite the fact that these users do not pay incremental amounts 

for increased bandwidth consumption. At the same time, P2P applications, which are not particularly 

sensitive to network delays, result in a diminished performance for latency-sensitive applications, such 

as VoIP, Internet video and online video gaming. 

• VoIP. VoIP enables voice communications to be transmitted over IP networks thereby replacing 

traditional telephone services. According to Infonetics Research, the number of worldwide VoIP 

subscribers is expected to almost double from 2005 to 2006, when it is projected to exceed 47 million. 

IDC also expects revenue from consumer VoIP services in the United States to increase from $2 billion 

in 2005 to nearly $14 billion in 2010, at a compound annual growth rate of 45.9%. As the quality of 

voice communications is particularly sensitive to network delays, VoIP traffic is heavily dependent on 

highly efficient network management to sustain a quality level equivalent to traditional telephone 

services. 

• Internet video. Internet video includes the viewing of standard television content and “on-demand” 

movies and video clips transmitted over broadband networks. Network delays significantly diminish 

users’ quality of experience from video applications and adversely impact their willingness to pay for 

these applications. Internet video applications consume significant bandwidth which further increases 

network congestion. A 2005 report by In-Stat, a high-tech market research firm, projects that non-adult 

video content delivered through subscription or pay-per-download over the Internet will have a 

worldwide retail value of $2.6 billion by 2009 compared to $745 million in 2005. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (92 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 91 of 149
424B1

• Online video gaming. Online video gaming has grown rapidly in recent years. These applications 

require immediate responses from a gamer’s counterparts and therefore the quality of a gamer’s online 

experience is highly sensitive to network delays. According to a March 2006 report from IDC, more 

than 4 million people paid for online personal computer gaming subscriptions in the United States in 

2005, and the number is expected to increase to over 10.7 million by 2010. 

• Online content sites. Online content sites, such as E-commerce sites, search engines, blogs, and sites 

that provide public storage for users’ files, attract a large number of visitors and traffic to these sites 

49 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (93 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 92 of 149
424B1

consumes significant bandwidth and network resources. The operators of these sites generate 

significant revenues from Internet traffic, however do not own, and make no investment in, network 

infrastructure. As a result, carriers may seek to generate revenues from such sites by applying network 

policies that prioritize traffic to content sites, in return for fees paid by the content site’s operators or 

subscribers. 

Service Providers Demand for the Ability to Offer Premium and Differentiated Services

Most service providers offer flat-fee broadband access, regardless of the type of applications and data used 

by subscribers. These operators provide the same level of service to all subscribers and do not guarantee 

access quality, regardless of a subscriber’s willingness to pay for premium services and network 

performance. In addition, competition among service providers has increased because of multiple broadband 

delivery options, such as cable, DSL and wireless. As a result of these factors, broadband access has become 

a commodity, contributing to downward price pressure and high churn rates. 

To address these issues and increase ARPU, service providers have begun to offer premium, differentiated 

applications, such as VoIP, video and new online content services. However, these service providers have as 

yet been unable to offer guaranteed service levels for these applications on an individual subscriber basis. By 

offering such tiered services and charging subscribers according to the value of these services, service 

providers can capitalize on the revenue enhancement opportunities enabled by broadband applications. To 

offer premium services such as VoIP, video and online content services, and to guarantee service levels for 

those services, service providers need enhanced visibility into network traffic, including visibility into the 

type of applications used on the network and levels of traffic generated by different subscribers. 

Increasing Enterprise Demand for Visibility and Delivery of Mission-Critical Applications

The proliferation of network applications also presents significant challenges for enterprises operating widearea networks. Applications such as e-mail, customer relationship management, or CRM, enterprise resource 

planning, or ERP, and other online transactional and business applications are critical to enterprises’ ability 

to operate efficiently. Enterprises have also become increasingly dependent on broadband Internet and 

Intranet access, as content distribution between partners and customers, employee remote access, and even 

VoIP, have become more common. At the same time, the openness of the Internet allows employees to use a 

wide variety of recreational and non-business applications on enterprise networks, resulting in network 

congestion and negatively impacting employee productivity. As a result, enterprises have experienced 

diminished performance of their mission-critical applications. 

Network Security Threats and Content Control

As reliance on the Internet has grown, service providers and subscribers have become increasingly 

vulnerable to a wide range of security threats, including denial of service attacks such as worms, viruses and 

spam. The attacks hinder the ability of service providers to provide high quality broadband access to 

subscribers, prevent enterprises from using mission-critical applications and compromise network and data 

integrity. We believe that users increasingly expect service providers to protect them from these threats. 

Therefore, it has become imperative for service providers and enterprises to identify and block malicious 

traffic at very early stages. 

The Challenge of Implementing Intelligent Networks

Service providers are seeking to transform generic access broadband networks into intelligent broadband 

networks. The ability to identify, distinguish and prioritize different network applications plays a major role 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (94 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 93 of 149
424B1

in intelligent network management, allowing service providers to optimize bandwidth usage and reduce 

operational costs, while maintaining high quality of service. Application designers are employing 

increasingly sophisticated methods to avoid detection by network operators who desire to manage network 

use. For example, applications can disguise themselves as permitted applications and also use sophisticated 

encryption techniques to avoid detection. Traditional network infrastructure devices, such as routers and 

switches, do not generally have sufficient computing resources or the required algorithms to distinguish 

between different and 

50 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (95 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 94 of 149
424B1

rapidly evolving applications. The dilemma of implementing intelligent networks is further complicated by today’s 

higher speed broadband networks which carry tremendous amounts of data and serve millions of customers. Unlike 

traditional network infrastructure devices, such as switches and routers, which can perform only a very limited 

examination of packets, DPI solutions offer active control over each application and subscriber in the network 

requiring significant processing power and speed, greater memory and special algorithms. 

The Allot Solution

Our solutions employ advanced DPI, which identifies applications by examining the content encapsulated in packets, 

including header and application information. By correlating data from multiple packets and flows, searching for 

application signatures and recognizing application behavior, our solutions identify each subscriber and application in 

the network and provide in-depth, real time information about their behavior. Once an application has been identified, 

it can be managed using predetermined policies that determine the level of network resources allocated for that 

application based on the business strategy of the service provider or enterprise. For example, an application can be 

granted a guaranteed bandwidth allocation, or can be rate limited, redirected, marked/tagged, blocked or reported to a 

network administrator. We have developed market-leading DPI technology that accurately identifies hundreds of 

application protocols at higher speeds and creates customized detailed usage analyses and reports. 

The illustration below demonstrates our solution’s integration of application control with subscriber management. 

Our solutions enable our end-customers to accomplish the following objectives: 

Network Visibility

Our NetEnforcer system and NetXplorer application suite enable our end users to generate detailed real time and 

historical reports on subscriber behavior and application usage. Our systems also offer enterprises visibility into the 

types of applications being used on their networks and threats to the efficient delivery of mission-critical applications. 

Our intelligent network solutions identify: 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (96 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 95 of 149
424B1

• bandwidth usage by application; 

• subscriber usage patterns; 

51 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (97 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 96 of 149
424B1

• real-time network performance; 

• long- and short-term usage trends; and 

• abnormal events, such as malicious traffic, including denial-of-service attacks and worms. 

Application Management and Control

After achieving network visibility, service providers and enterprises apply our intelligent network application 

management technology to improve service quality by optimizing available bandwidth usage for different 

applications and prioritizing network traffic. For example, P2P applications that consume large amounts of 

network bandwidth can be de-prioritized to enhance the performance of applications that are more sensitive 

to delay such as VoIP or Internet video. Providers can also choose to limit the usage of P2P applications 

during peek hours of network traffic in order to optimize, prioritize and even guarantee the performance of 

other applications. Alternatively, service providers may elect to limit individual subscribers who use the 

network excessively, allocating resources more equitably among users. Intelligent application controls can 

ensure the delivery of mission-critical applications by prioritizing non-critical, bandwidth-intensive 

applications, discourage the use of non-business or recreational applications, and warn and protect against 

security threats. 

Subscriber and Service Management

Our offerings enable service providers to increase total revenue, ARPU and customer loyalty by offering 

tiered service plans and differentiated content offerings to better meet varying subscriber needs. Using our 

systems, service providers can: 

• tailor and price service plans differently for “light” subscribers, such as those who use the network 

primarily for e-mail, and “heavy” subscribers including those that use the network for broadbandintensive applications; 

• prioritize network traffic by application type and offer subscriber plans that guarantee performance of 

their intended application such as VoIP; 

• offer subscribers the ability to purchase additional bandwidth on demand for particular applications 

(such as extra bandwidth for downloading video on-demand or for large data transfers); and 

• offer guaranteed bandwidth to those content providers who require prioritized content delivery. The 

content provider and the service provider can then collaborate to provide a premium experience for the 

subscriber with both parties sharing the resulting revenue. 

Our Competitive Strengths

Our competitive strengths include the following: 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (98 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 97 of 149
424B1

• Market-leading DPI technology and analytical capabilities. Our market leading DPI technology 

enables our solutions to identify hundreds of network applications and protocols in real time. We 

continuously monitor the development of new applications and respond rapidly to requests from 

customers to address new applications. We believe that our continued focus on developing the most 

efficient means to search for application patterns and behaviors, including encrypted applications 

which are very difficult to identify, combined with our extensive database of algorithms that detect 

network applications and protocols, provide us with a significant competitive advantage. In addition, 

our NetXplorer management application suite has sophisticated data mining capabilities enabling it to 

collect, group and analyze data from multiple sources, and to provide users with detailed, customized 

and user-friendly information displays. We believe that our NetEnforcer AC-2500, is currently the 

only commercially deployed solution with its level of functionality capable of supporting 5 gigabits/

second performance and 2 million simultaneous connections. Several NetEnforcer AC-2500s can be 

grouped together to support higher performance networks of up to 10 gigabits per second and beyond. 

52 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (99 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 98 of 149
424B1

Furthermore, during the first half of 2007 we plan to add a 10 gigabits physical interface to our 

NetEnforcer AC-2500 system that will support end users in their transition to 10 gigabit networks. 

• Broad product portfolio. Our broad product portfolio enables us to compete in a wide range of markets 

and enables our channel partners to serve a wider range of markets. Our NetEnforcer AC-400 and 

NetEnforcer AC-800 systems address the specialized needs of small and midsize service providers and 

enterprises, while our NetEnforcer AC-1000 and NetEnforcer AC-2500 address the needs of large 

service providers and enterprises. We believe that this breadth of products has enabled us to 

successfully target profitable markets, such as smaller service providers and universities, while our 

larger competitors generally target only large service providers or enterprises. 

• Independence from underlying network infrastructure. Our DPI solutions are independent from and 

not embedded in the underlying network infrastructure. We believe that independent solutions are 

easier to deploy in existing networks and are less likely to compromise the reliability, performance and 

stability of networks, which is critical to service providers and enterprises, because they do not require 

changes or upgrades to the network infrastructure. Independent solutions can be upgraded easily to 

respond to rapid changes in application behavior and subscriber demands without impacting network 

performance. In addition, independent solutions provide service providers and enterprises more 

flexibility in choosing their infrastructure equipment manufacturer, thereby allowing them to choose 

best of breed products that suit their specific application requirements, as well as reducing their 

dependence on a single vendor. 

• Global sales and marketing channels. We have a global sales and marketing network of over 

300 distributors, resellers, OEMs and system integrators. We make substantially all of our sales 

through these channel partners, who are also responsible for installing our products and providing 

technical support. To date, we have deployed over 9,000 NetEnforcer systems in 118 countries. Our 

channel partners have enabled us to achieve a diverse revenue base and to target markets that we would 

not have been able to address without significant investment in an internal sales and marketing force. 

• Focus on service optimization solutions. We believe that our dedicated focus on DPI solutions 

differentiates the level of service and support that we provide to our channel partners and endcustomers, and has been critical to the advancement and deployment of our products. This includes our 

responsiveness to the introduction of new applications and effective integration of our products into 

our customers’ existing billing, customer care and other business systems. In addition, we offer 

technical support through our field offices and channel partners, both before and after sales, that we 

believe helps us win and retain end-customers. 

Our Strategy

Our goal is to be the leader in offering service providers and enterprises network inspection and management 

solutions to transform generic access broadband networks into intelligent broadband networks. Our strategy 

to achieve this goal includes the following: 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (100 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 99 of 149
424B1

• Further our technological advantage. We intend to continue investing in the development of our 

market leading broadband service optimization technologies. For example, our next generation 

solutions, which are designed to support multiple channels of 10 gigabits/second full performance 

throughput rates, will utilize the new Advanced Telecom Computing Architecture standards, or ATCA, 

since it better enables the integration of additional third-party services into our product offerings. We 

are also committed to developing new applications and services, such as subscriber management 

applications, voice and video quality analysis and additional security applications, in order to meet the 

evolving demands of our end-customers. 

• Continue to expand our sales and marketing channels. We intend to expand our world-wide sales and 

marketing channels to further address small and medium-sized service providers and enterprises, 

including in the government and education sectors. Through these channels, we have sold our products 

to a diverse range of end-customers and we intend to build on this success by continuously improving 

53 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (101 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 100 of 149
424B1

our channel relationships, creating mutual marketing campaigns and supporting their efforts to 

promote our products. We intend to seek channel partners in new geographical territories, as well as in 

vertical markets in countries where we have already established a presence. 

• Focus on larger service providers. We intend to target larger service providers, including carriers, and 

cable and mobile operators, in response to increased demand from them for the ability to differentiate 

their service offerings. We believe that targeting large service providers is important to our revenue 

growth because sales to these end-customers are more likely to result in sustained demand for our 

NetEnforcer systems as they deploy our products throughout their networks. We believe that we are 

well-positioned to continue to target these end-customers with our carrier-class products, together with 

our management solutions, operating experience and installed base. We intend to target these endcustomers by continuing to develop partnerships with system integrators and OEMs in order to 

leverage their existing relationships with larger service providers. We intend to supplement these 

efforts with direct business development and by tailoring our customer support capabilities to further 

enhance our ability to support system integrators and OEMs. 

• Selectively pursue strategic partnerships and acquisitions. We intend to selectively pursue 

partnerships and acquisitions that will provide us access to complementary technologies and accelerate 

our penetration into new markets, including mobile networks, security applications and subscriber 

management. For example, in 2002 we acquired the assets of NetReality, an Israeli manufacturer of 

traffic management solutions, which increased our customer base and enhanced our engineering 

capabilities and technology. We believe that our core DPI technology and intelligent network 

management expertise can be complemented with other technologies that enhance our service 

offerings, such as parental control, security and subscriber management. 

Our Products

NetEnforcer

Our NetEnforcer traffic management system inspects, monitors and controls network traffic by application 

and by user. NetEnforcer devices are positioned at multiple strategic network locations where the most 

traffic traverses and can be monitored and managed. These locations include network access points, or 

“peering points,” where the network connects to other networks and data centers. NetEnforcer includes its 

own management software and can also be managed by other vendor management applications through an 

interface that integrates with the end-customer’s operating environment. These applications include policy 

servers, provisioning systems, customer care and billing applications. 

54 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (102 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 101 of 149
424B1

NetEnforcer devices are available in several different models to address the needs of a wide range of service 

providers and enterprises: 

Series 

Target 

Market 

Operation 

Speeds 

Subscribers

(1) 

NetEnforcer AC-400 

Small to medium 

enterprise networks 

and service provider 

networks 

2, 10, 45 and 

100 Mbps Up to 4,000 

NetEnforcer AC-800 

Medium and large 

enterprise networks 

and medium service 

provider networks 

45, 100, 155 and 

310 Mbps Up to 28,000 

NetEnforcer AC-1000/ 

AC-2500 

Carrier-class solutions 

used by medium and 

large service provider 

networks 

155, 310, 400 and 

622 Mbps, and 1 Gbps 

and 5 Gbps Up to 80,000 

(1) Represents the maximum number of subscribers that a system can handle simultaneously. Typically, due 

to network topology, redundancy requirements and other constraints, such as total bandwidth available 

per subscriber, the actual number per NetEnforcer unit is lower.

Our NetEnforcer AC-1000 and AC-2500 are designed to meet NEBS (Network Equipment Building System) 

Level 3 certification requirements to ensure operation in extreme environmental conditions and are currently 

undergoing the certification process. 

NetEnforcer offers the following features: 

• DPI technology that identifies hundreds of applications and protocols, including web applications, 

multiple VoIP and video protocols, e-mail protocols, online video gaming, business applications, 

instant messaging, including the distinction between chat and voice, and a large number of different 

P2P applications; 

• carrier-class performance supporting multiple gigabit per second throughput servicing tens of 

thousands of subscribers and permitting a significant level of processing for each flow and packet; 

• hierarchical traffic management policies enabling the prioritization, redirection and blockage of traffic 

flow; 

• independence from network infrastructure resulting in easy and cost-effective deployment without risk 

to network integrity; 

• an open standards platform that allows our end-customers the flexibility to integrate a variety of other 

applications, such as billing and customer care software and to use existing infrastructure equipment; 

• carrier-class design supporting high availability and redundancy; 

• identification of individual user profiles to help dynamically shape traffic according to the policies set 

by the service provider or enterprise; and 

• the ability to identify and mitigate security threats and other abnormal events traversing the network. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (103 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 102 of 149
424B1

NetXplorer

Our NetXplorer management application suite, introduced in late 2005, provides enterprises and service 

providers a highly granular, real time view of all traffic on the network. This centralized management suite, 

which replaces our previous management applications, works in conjunction with our NetEnforcer products 

to provide network traffic intelligence and enable enterprises and service providers to effectively manage 

broadband services and set policies for the use of their networks. The data provided from multiple 

NetEnforcer 

55 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (104 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 103 of 149
424B1

systems are aggregated, analyzed and conveyed using our NetXplorer management application suite. 

NetXplorer offers the following features: 

• network-wide visibility for in-depth analysis, including identification of traffic trends and inspection 

down to the individual device, user or application level for real-time troubleshooting; 

• intuitive graphical interface that provides both a logical network-wide perspective together with the 

power to quickly navigate at the device, user or application level; 

• monitoring and analysis, including in-depth analysis at the single user sessions and single applications, 

real-time monitoring, short-term monitoring for the collection of highly granular information; 

• multiple technologies designed to cope with the inherent challenge of collecting large amounts of data 

from multiple sources and storing and aggregating the data into a central database; 

• insightful reporting of information in real-time and over time for evaluation of trends and accurate 

capacity planning, and for tracking usage for accounting or charge-back purposes using volume-based 

reports in hundreds of customizable formats; 

• ability to build policies to enable rapid deployment of services or service changes and automatic 

distribution of configurations and changes to all managed NetEnforcer units; 

• configuration and policy provisioning of managed NetEnforcers without logging into each device; 

• frontline security enabling easy detection of potential denial of service attacks or network-born security 

attacks, setting of thresholds, generation of alarms, and automatic execution of corrective actions; and 

• intelligent alarms about abnormal events and automatically invoke corrective actions before problems 

become costly. 

The addition of our Subscriber Management Platform to NetXplorer enables each of the above features on a 

per network and per subscriber basis. 

NetXplorer architecture consists of four elements: first, the client element is the NetXplorer graphical user 

interface application; second, the server element consisting of the actual NetXplorer application, including 

the database; third, the optional collector element, which assists in collecting large amounts of data from 

multiple NetEnforcers; and fourth, an agent element that is an add-on to the NetEnforcer that enables it to be 

managed by the NetXplorer and support all network management functions. 

Technology

Our expertise in sophisticated DPI-based solutions designed for service provider and enterprise environments 

is our core technological strength. We have invested significant resources in designing, planning and 

developing scalable integrated network traffic management solutions that provide a granular level of detail to 

monitor and control Internet traffic at the single application connection level. 

Our intelligent network products are the result of integrating multiple skill sets into a single solution. These 

skills include: 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (105 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 104 of 149
424B1

• Multiple application identification. Some application developers are creating new techniques designed 

to avoid detection and are introducing new versions that change their communication protocols 

frequently. Accordingly, we have invested heavily in our DPI technology in two principal areas: 

(1) developing efficient DPI methods, such as searching for signatures, detecting behavior patterns and 

tracking the progress of application session establishment over multiple packets and flows (“state-full 

session tracking”) that are used to identify applications, including those that use data encryption, and 

(2) research, including researching the thousands of applications used in network environments and 

finding the appropriate detection method for each. 

• High-rate classification and policy matching of IP flows. We have built an embedded system solution 

and technology that combines special packet processing applications and devices to provide high speed 

56 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (106 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 105 of 149
424B1

DPI and quality of service processing. The DPI methods we have developed require processing large 

sequences of packet data, which is more sophisticated than the methods employed by traditional 

network elements. Our products, and in particular the NetEnforcer AC-1000 and AC-2500, are 

designed to use network processor technology, which provides fast data packet processing, under very 

tight memory constraints, large code sizes and complex development environments. We have invested 

significant time developing, adapting and optimizing our network processor technology to support all 

necessary functions at the required level of performance. 

• Multiple actions quality-of-service enforcement. Our technology includes the ability to perform a 

number of quality of service enforcement actions using multiple parameters. Our products use our 

proprietary per flow queuing algorithm, which implements quality of service control per flow with up 

to 2 million concurrent sessions using queuing techniques and provides quality of service actions for 

bandwidth limitation or guarantee, connection block or re-direct or use relative priority in bandwidth 

allocation, as well combinations of multiple actions. 

• Real-time collection, aggregation, export of traffic statistics. NetEnforcer implements the collection of 

traffic statistics in real-time for the network traffic passing through the device by counting the bytevolume of traffic per connection, conversation or policy rule. A number of algorithms are implemented 

to filter and aggregate the collected statistics based on the end-user’s target information and the 

significance of the data. The implementation takes into account high-scale traffic volume of up to 5 

gigabits and 2 million concurrent connections and the fact that the NetEnforcer has to complete an 

export cycle of the collected statistics in 30-second intervals. 

• Presentation of traffic statistics. Our NetXplorer server collects statistics from multiple NetEnforcers 

over the network and aggregates the information into a consolidated database for retrieval by the 

operator. We have developed algorithms for efficient aggregation, storage and retrieval of information 

so that the server is able to complete a collection cycle with multiple NetEnforcers within the desired 

time and provides data mining capabilities to the operator with fast response time when producing a 

report. This includes an optimized collection process and aggregation process, an efficient database 

scheme and report execution. 

Customers

We have a global, diversified end-customer base consisting primarily of service providers and enterprises. 

Our direct customers are generally distributors, resellers, OEMs and system integrators, who we refer to as 

our channel partners. In 2005, we derived 50% of our revenues from Europe, the Middle East and Africa, 

32% from the Americas and 18% from Asia and Oceania. We generally only have direct contact with endcustomers in the case of larger projects since smaller projects are driven by our channel partners. A single 

system integrator located in the United Kingdom accounted for 16% of our revenues in 2005 and accounted 

for 27% of our revenues in the first nine months of 2006, primarily through product sales to NTL. Otherwise, 

no end-customer accounted for more than 10% of our revenues in 2005 and, other than NTL, no endcustomer accounted for more than 5% of our revenues in the first nine months of 2006. Our end-customers, 

who purchase products through our channel partners include: 

• Cablecom (United Kingdom) 

• China Unicom Beijing 

• China Telecom Guizhou 

• Eutelsat S.A. (Europe) 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (107 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 106 of 149
424B1

• Fastweb Spa (Italy) 

• Fuji TV (Japan) 

• Horizon Line Brasil Ltda-Group ISP Vivax 

• MetroCast Cablevision (United States) 

• MegaCable (Mexico) 

• NTL Telewest Networks (United Kingdom) 

• NTT Communications (Japan) 

• NZ Telecom (New Zealand) 

• Optus (Australia) 

• Perot Systems Inc. (United States) 

• PCCW (Hong Kong) 

• Samsung Security (Korea) 

• Seednet (Taiwan) 

• Schneider Electric 

57 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (108 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 107 of 149
424B1

• Shin Satellite Public Co. Ltd. (Asia) 

• Spacenet Inc. (United States) 

• Telecom (Colombia Telecomunicaiones S.A.) 

• TNM, PT Telecom (Portugal) 

• True Internet Co. Ltd. (Thailand) 

• Unwired Australia 

• Wakwak (Japan) 

• Verizon Avenue (United States) 

• NYC Department of Education (United States) 

• ZID-Zentrum fur Informations (Germany) 

Channel Partners

We market and sell our products to end-customers through our channel partners, which include distributors, 

resellers, OEMs and system integrators. Our channel partners generally purchase our products from us upon 

receiving orders from end-customers and are responsible for installing and providing initial customer support 

for our products. As of September 30, 2006, we had approximately 300 channel partners. Our channel 

partners are located around the world and address most major markets. Our channel partners target a range of 

end-users, including carriers, alternative carriers, cable operators, private networks, data centers and 

enterprises in a wide range of industries, including government, financial institutions and education. Our 

agreements with channel partners that are distributors or resellers are generally for an initial term of one year 

and automatically renew for successive one-year terms unless terminated. After the first year, such 

agreements may be terminated by either party upon 90 days prior notice. These agreements are generally nonexclusive and generally contain minimum purchase requirements and we are permitted to terminate the 

agreement in the event of a failure to meet such targets. 

We offer extensive support to all of our channel partners. This support includes the generation of leads 

through marketing events, seminars and web-based leads and incentive programs as well as technical and 

sales training. 

Our sales staff’s direct contact with end-customers consists mainly of developing leads for our channel 

partners. Substantially all of our sales occur through our channel partners. 

Sales and Marketing

The sales and deployment cycle for our products varies based upon the intended use by the end-customer. 

The sales cycle for initial network deployment may last between one and three years for large and medium 

service providers, six to twelve months for small service providers, and one to six months for enterprises. 

Follow-on orders and additional deployment of our products usually require shorter cycles. Large and 

medium service providers generally take longer to plan the integration of DPI solutions into their existing 

networks and to set goals for the implementation of the technology. 

We focus our marketing efforts on product positioning, increasing brand awareness, communicating product 

advantages and generating qualified leads for our sales organization. We rely on a variety of marketing 

communications channels, including our website, trade shows, industry research and professional 

publications, the press and special events to gain wider market exposure. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (109 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 108 of 149
424B1

We have organized our worldwide sales efforts into the following three territories: North and South America, 

Europe the Middle East and Africa, and Asia and Oceania. We have regional offices in the U.S, Israel, 

France, Spain, United Kingdom, Singapore, Japan and China, and a dedicated regional sales presence in 

Germany, Italy, Denmark and Australia. We also maintain a regional sales presence in Mexico and Brazil. 

As of September 30, 2006, our sales and marketing staff consisted of 96 employees, including 39 sales and 

support engineers that support the end-customers in pre- and post-sales activities. 

Service and Technical Support

We believe our technical support and professional services capabilities are a key element of our sales 

strategy. Our technical staff assists in presales activities and advises channel partners on the integration of 

our solutions into end-user networks. Our basic warranty extended to end-customers through our channel 

partners is three months for software and 12 months for hardware. End-customers are also offered, through 

our channel 

58 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (110 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 109 of 149
424B1

partners, a choice of one year or three-year customer support programs when they purchase our products. 

These warranties can be renewed at the end of their terms. Our end-customer support plans offer the 

following features: 

• expedited replacement units in the event of a warranty claim; and 

• software updates and upgrades offering new features and addressing new network applications. 

Our channel partner support plans are designed to maximize network up-time and minimize operating costs. 

Our channel partners and their end-customers are entitled to take advantage of our around-the-clock 

technical support which we provide through our four help desks, located in France, Israel, Singapore and the 

United States. We also offer our channel partners 24-hour access to an external web-based technical 

knowledge base, which provides technical support information and enables them to support their customers 

independently and obtain follow up and support from us. We manage our channel partner and customer 

support efforts through a single database which enables us to track seamlessly any response provided to a 

channel partner or end-customer from a different office and to escalate automatically any customer inquiry 

after a predetermined period of time. 

Research and Development

Our research and development activities take place in Israel. As of September 30, 2006, 95 of our employees 

were engaged primarily in research and development. We devote a significant amount of our resources 

towards research and development to introduce and continuously enhance products to support our growth 

strategy. We have assembled a core team of experienced engineers, many of whom are leaders in their 

particular field or discipline and have technical degrees from top universities and experience working for 

leading Israeli networking companies. These engineers are involved in advancing our core technologies, as 

well as in applying these core technologies to our product development activities. Our research and 

development efforts have benefited from royalty-bearing grants from the Office of the Chief Scientist. The 

State of Israel does not own any proprietary rights in technology developed with the Office of the Chief 

Scientist funding and there is no restriction related to the Office of the Chief Scientist on the export of 

products manufactured using technology developed with Office of the Chief Scientist funding. For a 

description of restrictions on the transfer of the technology and with respect to manufacturing rights, please 

see “Risk Factors — The government grants we have received for research and development expenditures 

restrict our ability to manufacture products and transfer technologies outside of Israel and require us to 

satisfy specified conditions. If we fail to comply with such restrictions or these conditions, we may be 

required to refund grants previously received together with interest and penalties, and may be subject to 

criminal charges.” 

Manufacturing

We subcontract the manufacture and repair of our NetEnforcer products to R.H. Electronics, an Israeli 

manufacturer. This strategy enables us to reduce our fixed costs, focus on our core research and development 

competencies and provide flexibility in meeting market demand. R.H. Electronics is contractually obligated 

to use commercially reasonable efforts to provide us with manufacturing services based on agreed 

specifications, including manufacturing, assembling, testing, packaging and procuring the raw materials for 

our NetEnforcer devices. We submit advance forecasts of our projected requirements and R.H. Electronics is 

required to maintain an inventory of components sufficient to support the manufacture of an agreed number 

of our units beyond these projections. We are not required to provide any minimum orders. Our agreement 

with R.H. Electronics is automatically renewed annually for additional one-year terms, unless we or R.

H. Electronics elect not to renew by giving at least 90 days prior notice to the expiration of any such term. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (111 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 110 of 149
424B1

Furthermore, either we or R.H. Electronics may terminate the agreement at any time upon prior notice of 

120 days. We retain the right to procure independently any of the components used in our products. R.H. 

Electronics has a U.S. subsidiary to which it can, with the prior consent of the Office of the Chief Scientist, 

transfer manufacturing of our products if necessary, in which event we may be required to pay increased 

royalties to the Office of the Chief Scientist. We expect that it would take approximately six months to 

transition 

59 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (112 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 111 of 149
424B1

manufacturing of our products to an alternate manufacturer. We are, however, negotiating with candidates 

for an additional third-party manufacturer. 

We design and develop internally a number of the key components for our products, including printed circuit 

boards and software. Some of the components used in NetEnforcer are obtained from single or limited 

sources. Since our products have been designed to incorporate these specific components, any change in 

these components due to an interruption in supply or our inability to obtain such components on a timely 

basis would require engineering changes to our products before we could incorporate substitute components. 

In particular, we purchase the central processing unit for our NetEnforcer AC-400 and our NetEnforcer AC800 from Intel Corporation and we have agreed to purchase the network processor for our NetEnforcer AC1000 and our NetEnforcer AC-2500 from Hifn Inc. We carry approximately three to six months of inventory 

of key components. We also work closely with our suppliers to monitor the end-of-life of the product cycle 

for integral components, and believe that in the event that they announce end of life, we will be able to 

increase our inventory to allow enough time for replacing the products. We have been informed by Hifn that 

it is their general policy to provide their customers with a 6-month last-time-buy option and 12 months to 

take delivery of the product in the event that Hifn decides to discontinue production of the network 

processor. Product testing and quality assurance is performed by our contract manufacturer using tests and 

automated testing equipment and according to controlled test documentation we specify. We also use 

inspection testing and statistical process controls to assure the quality and reliability of our products. 

Competition

Our principal competitors are Cisco Systems (through its acquisition of P-Cube), Sandvine and Ellacoya 

Networks in the service provider market, and Packeteer in the enterprise market. We also compete in 

particular geographic areas with a number of smaller local competitors. We also face competition from 

companies that offer partial solutions addressing only one aspect of the challenges facing broadband 

providers, such as network monitoring or security. We compete on the basis of product performance, such as 

speed and number of applications identified, ease of use and installation, and customer support. Price is also 

an important, although not the principal, basis on which we compete. See “Risk Factors — We may be 

unable to compete effectively with other companies in our market who offer, or may in the future offer, 

competing technologies.” 

Intellectual Property

Our intellectual property rights are very important to our business. We believe that the complexity of our 

products and the know-how incorporated in them makes it difficult to copy them or replicate their features. 

We rely on a combination of confidentiality and other protective clauses in our agreements, copyright and 

trademarks to protect our know-how. We also restrict access to our servers physically and through closed 

networks since our product designs and software are stored electronically and thus are highly portable. 

We customarily require our employees, distributors, resellers, software testers and contractors to execute 

confidentiality agreements or agree to confidentiality undertakings when their relationship with us begins. 

Typically, our employment contracts also include the following clauses: assignment of intellectual property 

rights for all inventions developed by employees, non-disclosure of all confidential information, and noncompete clauses for six months following termination of employment. The enforceability of non-compete 

clauses in Israel is limited. Because our product designs and software are stored electronically and thus are 

highly portable, we attempt to reduce the portability of our designs and software by physically protecting our 

servers through the use of closed networks, which prevent external access to our servers. 

The communications equipment industry is characterized by constant product changes resulting from new 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (113 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 112 of 149
424B1

technological developments, performance improvements and lower hardware costs. We believe that our 

future growth depends to a large extent on our ability to be an innovator in the development and application 

of hardware and software technology. As we develop the next generation products, we intend to pursue 

patent protection for our core technologies in the telecommunications segment. We plan to seek patent 

protection in our largest markets and our competitors’ markets, for example in the United States and Europe. 

As we continue to move into markets, such as Japan, Korea and China, we will evaluate how best to protect 

our 

60 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (114 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 113 of 149
424B1

technologies in those markets. We intend to vigorously prosecute and defend the rights of our intellectual 

property. 

As of September 30, 2006, we had two U.S. patents and four pending patent applications in the United 

States. We also have one pending counterpart application outside of the United States, filed pursuant to the 

Patent Cooperation Treaty. We expect to formalize our evaluation process for determining which inventions 

to protect by patents or other means. We cannot be certain that patents will be issued as a result of the patent 

applications we have filed. 

We have obtained U.S. trademark registrations for certain of our key marks that we use to identify our 

products or services, including “NetEnforcer” and “Allot Communications.” 

Corporate Organization

We conduct our global operations through five wholly-owned subsidiaries: (1) Allot Communications, Inc., 

headquartered in Eden Prairie, Minnesota; (2) Allot Communication Europe SARL, headquartered in Sophia, 

France; (3) Allot Communications Japan K.K., headquartered in Tokyo, Japan; (4) Allot Communications 

(UK) Limited, headquartered in Bedford, England; and (5) Allot Communications (Asia Pacific) Pte. Ltd., 

headquartered in Singapore. Our U.S. subsidiary commenced operations in 1997 and engages in the sale, 

marketing and technical support services in the United States of products manufactured by and imported 

from our company. Our French, U.K., Japanese and Singapore subsidiaries engage in marketing and 

technical support services of our products in Europe, Japan and Asia Pacific, respectively. 

Employees

As of September 30, 2006, we had 232 employees of whom 170 were based in Israel, 29 in the United States 

and the remainder in Asia and Europe. The breakdown of our employees by department is as follows: 

 

 December 31, September 30, 

Department 2003 2004 2005 2006 

Manufacturing and operations 10 14 14 22 

Research and development 44 64 75 95 

Sales, marketing, service and support 57 74 80 96 

Management and administration 9 11 15 19 

Total 120 163 184 232 

Under applicable Israeli law, we and our employees are subject to protective labor provisions such as 

restrictions on working hours, minimum wages, minimum vacation, sick pay, severance pay and advance 

notice of termination of employment as well as equal opportunity and anti-discrimination laws. Orders issued 

by the Israeli Ministry of Industry, Trade and Labor make certain industry-wide collective bargaining 

agreements applicable to us. These agreements affect matters such as cost of living adjustments to salaries, 

length of working hours and week, recuperation, travel expenses, and pension rights. Our employees are not 

represented by a labor union. We provide our employees with benefits and working conditions which we 

believe are competitive with benefits and working conditions provided by similar companies in Israel. We 

have never experienced labor-related work stoppages and believe that our relations with our employees are 

good. 

Facilities

Our principal administrative and research and development activities are located in a 39,245 square foot 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (115 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 114 of 149
424B1

(3,646 square meter) facility in Hod-Hasharon, Israel. The lease for this facility commenced in August 2006 

and will expire in August 2013. We believe that this facility will be adequate to meet our needs in Israel for 

at least the next 12 months. 

We also lease a 5,812 square foot (539 square meter) facility in Eden Prairie, MN, for the purposes of our U.

S. sales and marketing operations pursuant to a lease that expires in August 2008. We lease other 

61 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (116 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 115 of 149
424B1

smaller facilities for the purpose of our sales and marketing activities in France, the United Kingdom, 

Singapore, Spain, China and Japan. 

Legal Proceedings

We are not a party to any material litigation or proceeding and are not aware of any material litigation or 

proceeding, pending or threatened, to which we may become a party. 

62 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (117 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 116 of 149
424B1

MANAGEMENT

Directors and Executive Officers

Our directors and executive officers, their ages and positions as of the date of this prospectus are as follows: 

Name Age Position 

Directors 

Yigal Jacoby 45 Chairman of the Board 

Rami Hadar 43 Director, Chief Executive Officer and President 

Yossi Sela(1) 54 Director 

Dr. Eyal Kishon(1)(2) 46 Director 

Shai Saul(1) 44 Director 

Erel Margalit(2) 45 Director 

Yosi Elihav(2) 52 Director 

Executive Officers 

Adi Sapir 36 Chief Financial Officer 

Amir Weinstein 

 

46 

 

Executive Vice President — Products and 

Technology 

Anat Shenig 37 Director of Human Resources 

Elazar (Azi) Ronen 45 Executive Vice President — Corporate Development 

Larry Schmidt 49 Vice President — The Americas 

Menashe Mukhtar 46 Vice President — International Sales 

Michael Shurman 

 

51 

 

Chief Technology Officer and Vice President — 

Product Management 

Pini Gvili 41 Vice President — Operations 

Ramy Moriah 

 

50 

 

Vice President — Customer Care and Information 

Technology 

Sharon Hess 52 Vice President — Marketing 

(1) Member of our compensation and nominating committee.

(2) Member of our audit committee.

Directors

Yigal Jacoby co-founded our company in 1996 and serves as Chairman of our board of directors. Prior to cofounding Allot, Mr. Jacoby served as General Manager of Bay Network’s Network Management Division in 

Santa Clara from 1996 to 1997. In 1992, he founded Armon Networking, a manufacturer of RMON-based 

network management solutions, which was sold to Bay Networks in 1996. He also held various engineering 

and marketing management positions at Tekelec, a manufacturer of Telecommunication monitoring and 

diagnostic equipment, including Director, OSI & LAN Products from 1989 to 1992 and Engineering 

Manager from 1987 to 1989. Mr. Jacoby has founded several startups in the communications field and 

served on their boards. Mr. Jacoby has a B.A., cum laude, in Computer Science from Technion — Israel 

Institute of Technology and an M.Sc. in Computer Science from University of Southern California. 

Rami Hadar has served as our Chief Executive Officer and President since 2006 and is a member of our 

board of directors. Prior to joining us, Mr. Hadar founded CTP Systems, a developer of cordless telephony 

systems in 1989 and served as Chief Executive Officer until its acquisition by DSP Communications in 1995. 

Mr. Hadar continued with DSP Communication’s executive management team for two years, and thereafter, 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (118 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 117 of 149
424B1

in 1999, the company was acquired by Intel. In 1997, Mr. Hadar co-founded Ensemble Communications, a 

pioneer in the broadband wireless space and the WiMax standard, where he served as Executive Vice 

President 

63 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (119 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 118 of 149
424B1

of Sales and Marketing until 2002. Mr. Hadar also served as Chief Executive Officer of Native Networks 

from 2002 to 2005. Mr. Hadar holds a B.Sc. in Electrical Engineering from Technion — Israel Institute of 

Technology. 

Yossi Sela has served as a director since 1998. Mr. Sela is the Managing Partner of Gemini Israel Funds, a 

leading Venture Capital fund, which invests primarily in seed and early stage Israeli technology companies. 

In this capacity, Mr. Sela sits on the board of a number of Gemini portfolio companies, including Adimos 

Inc., Saifun Semiconductors Ltd., and IXI Mobile, Ltd. Mr. Sela’s past board positions include CommTouch 

Software Ltd., Precise Software Solutions Ltd. and Envara Inc. In 1995, he served as the Chief Executive 

Officer of Ornet Data Communication Technologies Ltd., which was a Gemini portfolio company. Mr. Sela 

led that company until its acquisition by Siemens AG in September 1995. From 1990 to 1992, Mr. Sela 

served as Vice President of Marketing at DSP Group, an American-Israeli company specializing in 

proprietary Digital Signal Processing for consumer and telecommunication applications. He later served as 

VP Marketing at DSP Communications, Inc., a spin-off of DSP Group. From 1985 to 1989, Mr. Sela worked 

at Daisy Systems Inc. where he was Director for CAD Development and PCB Marketing Manager for 

Europe. From 1974 to 1984, he served in the Israel Defense Forces and was responsible for the definition 

and development of systems for communication applications. Mr. Sela holds a B.Sc. in Electrical 

Engineering from the Technion — Israel Institute of Technology and an M.B.A. from Tel Aviv University. 

Dr. Eyal Kishon has served as a director since 1998. In 1996, Dr. Kishon co-founded Genesis Partners, an 

Israeli technology-driven venture capital fund, and currently serves as Founder and Managing Partner. From 

1993 to 1996, Dr. Kishon served as the Associate Director of the Polaris Fund, now Pitango. Prior to that, 

Dr. Kishon served as Chief Technology Officer at Yozma Venture Capital from 1992 to 1993. From 1991 to 

1992, he worked at the IBM Research Center, and from 1989 to 1991 he worked at the AT&T Bell 

Laboratories’ Robotics Research Department. Dr. Kishon also serves as a director of AudioCodes Ltd. 

(NASDAQ: AUDC) and Celtro Inc. He holds a Ph.D. in Computer Science and Robotics from the Courant 

Institute of Mathematical Sciences at New York University and a B.A. in Computer Science from the 

Technion — Israel Institute of Technology. Dr. Kishon has written a number of scientific publications and 

holds a patent for signature verification for interactive security systems. 

Shai Saul has served as a director since 2000. Mr. Saul is currently Managing General Partner of Tamir 

Fishman Ventures. During 2001, he acted as interim-CEO for CopperGate Communications. From 1994 to 

1999, Mr. Saul acted as Executive Vice President for Aladdin Knowledge Systems Ltd. (NASDAQ: ALDN), 

a leading provider of digital security solutions. From 1993 to 1994, he served as Chief Executive Officer of 

Ganot Ltd. Mr. Saul also serves as Chairman of the Board of CopperGate Communications. Mr. Saul holds 

an LL.B. from Tel Aviv University. 

Erel Margalit has served as a director since 2006. Mr. Margalit founded Jerusalem Venture Partners and has 

served as its Managing General Partner since 1997. He co-founded Jerusalem Pacific Ventures in 1993. 

From 1990 to 1993, Mr. Margalit was the Director of Business Development for the City of Jerusalem under 

its former Mayor, Teddy Kollek. He also serves as a director of several portfolio companies including 

Cogent Communications, Inc., Cyber-Ark Software, Ltd., CyOptics Inc., MagniFire, Native Networks, 

Bridgewave Communications, Sepaton and UP Tech. Mr. Margalit holds an M.A. in philosophy from 

Columbia University and an M.B.A. from Hebrew University. 

Yosi Elihav has served as a director since 1997. Mr. Elihav was retained by the high-tech RAD Group as a 

finance and capital markets activities consultant and tax consultant since the beginning of 1999. Also, since 

2001, he has served as director and manager in the RAD Ventures Limited Partners investment fund. 

From, 1986-1998, Mr. Elihav was a managing partner in the firm of Schwartz, Lerner, Duvshani & Co., 

Certified Public Accountants. Mr. Elihav is a qualified C.P.A. who holds a B.A. in Accounting and 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (120 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 119 of 149
424B1

Economics from Tel Aviv University. 

Executive Officers

Adi Sapir joined our company in 1998 and has served as our Chief Financial Officer since then. Prior to 

joining us, from 1996 to 1998, Mr. Sapir worked for Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (NASDAQ: TEVA), a 

64 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (121 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 120 of 149
424B1

global pharmaceutical company specializing in the development, production and marketing of generic and 

proprietary branded pharmaceuticals as well as active pharmaceutical ingredients, as a Controller for the 

Israel and International Divisions. Mr. Sapir is a certified public accountant in Israel and holds a B.A. in 

Accounting and a B.A. in Economics from Tel Aviv University. 

Amir Weinstein joined our company in 2005 and has served as our Executive Vice President — Products 

and Technology since then. Prior to that, in 1999, Mr. Weinstein co-founded Business Layers, now 

Netegrity, a provisioning company, providing workflow and IT provisioning solutions to enterprises, and 

held the position of General Manager until 2004. Mr. Weinstein has held several other senior management 

positions, including Vice President of Engineering at Nortel Networks, a phone and data communication 

company from 1996 to 1999. Amir holds a B.Sc. in Computer Science and Mathematics from Bar Ilan 

University and an M.Sc. in Computer Science from UCLA. 

Anat Shenig joined our company in 2000 and has served as our Director of Human Resources ever since. 

She is responsible for human resources recruiting, welfare policy and employees’ training. Prior to joining 

us, Ms. Shenig served as Human Resource Manager for Davidoff insurance company and as an 

organizational consultant for Aman Consulting. Ms. Shenig holds bachelor degrees in Psychology and 

Economics from Tel Aviv University and an M.B.A. in organizational behavior from Tel Aviv University. 

Elazar (Azi) Ronen has served as our Executive Vice President — Corporate Development since 2005 and 

served as Executive Vice President — Technology and Marketing from 1999 to 2005. Prior to joining us, 

from 1998 through 1999, Mr. Ronen was the Vice President of Marketing at VocalTec Communications, a 

vendor of VoIP networking equipment from 1998 to 1999. Previously, he was the Vice President of 

Research and Development at RADLINX, a member of the RAD group, a vendor of remote access servers 

and fax over IP networking equipment from 1990 to 1998. Mr. Ronen has a B.Sc., cum laude, in Computer 

Sciences from the Technion — Israel Institute of Technology. 

Larry Schmidt joined our company in June, 2004 as Vice President, U.S. Channels Sales and has served as 

our Vice President — The Americas, since May, 2005. From 1989 to 2004, Mr. Schmidt was employed by 

Norstan, Inc., a publicly held communications solutions and services company of 1,100 employees, now part 

of the Black Box network services company. Most recently he served as Norstan’s Executive Vice President 

of Direct Solutions. From 1986 to 1989, Mr. Schmidt was a Systems Consultant with Fujitsu. Mr. Schmidt 

holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Telecommunications from St. Mary’s University and is also a graduate 

of the Executive Development Program at the University of Minnesota’s Carlson School of Business. 

Menashe Mukhtar joined our company in 1999 and has served as our Vice President — International Sales 

since 2001. From 1993 to 1996, he was the Sales and Marketing Manager for the Far East and Japan at 

LANNET, now Avaya Technologies. Prior to LANNET, from 1991 to 1993, Mr. Mukhtar held the position 

of Customer Support Manager for the Far East at Orbotech Systems and was a developer and manufacturer 

of Automatic Optical Inspection (AOI) systems for the PCB and flat panel displays industries. Mr. Mukhtar 

holds a B.Sc. in Electronic Engineering from Tel Aviv University. 

Michael Shurman co-founded our company in 1996 and serves as our Chief Technology Officer and Vice 

President — Product Management. Mr. Shurman served as a member of our board of directors until October 

2006. Mr. Shurman has also served as our Vice President — Engineering and as an outside consultant. 

Before co-founding our company, from 1995 to 1996, Mr. Shurman was Director of Software Development 

at LANNET, the leading provider of Local Area Network Equipment, now Avaya Technologies. He also 

served as LANNET’s Director of Network Management from 1992-1995. He is named as the inventor on 

two issued U.S. patents in networking. Mr. Shurman holds a B.Sc. in Computer Science and Statistics from 

the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (122 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 121 of 149
424B1

Pini Gvili has served as our Vice President — Operations since 2006. Prior to joining us, from 2004 to 2006, 

he served as Vice President Operations for Celerica, a start-up company specializing in solutions for cellular 

network optimization. From 2001 to 2004, he was the Vice President — Operations and IT at Terayon 

Communication Systems, and from 1998 to 2000, held the position of Manager of Integration and Final 

Testing at Telegate. He was also a hardware/software engineer at Comverse/Efrat, a world leader of voice 

mail 

65 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (123 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 122 of 149
424B1

and digital recording systems, from 1994 to 1997. Mr. Gvili has a B.Sc. in computer science from Champlain 

University and was awarded a practical electronics degree from ORT Technical College. 

Ramy Moriah has served as our Vice President — Customer Care & IT since 2005. Prior to joining us, 

Mr. Moriah was a founding member of Daisy System’s Design Center in Israel, in 1984. From 1991 to 1994, 

he held the position of Manager of Software Development at Orbot Instruments, a world leader of Automatic 

Optical Inspection manufacturer for the VLSI Chip Industry. Mr. Moriah was also the acting General 

Manager at ACA, 3D CAD/solid modeling software for architecture from 1995 to 1997, and served there as 

Vice President — Research and Development from 1995 to 1997. Mr. Moriah holds a B.Sc., cum laude, in 

Computer Engineering from the Technion — Israel Institute of Technology and an M.Sc. in Management 

and Information Systems from the Tel Aviv University School of Business Administration. 

Sharon Hess has served as our Vice President of Marketing, since 2005. Prior to joining us, she served as 

Principal of the Hess MarkITing Company from 1999 to 2005. Prior to joining us, from 1997 to 1999, 

Ms. Hess served as Vice President of Corporate Marketing at Tadiran Telecommunications, one of the 

largest Israeli high tech firms for developing and manufacturing telecommunication equipment. Tadiran 

Telecom was acquired by ECI Telecom. From 1995 to 1997 Ms. Hess served as Marketing Director at 

Algorithmic Research, and from 1995 to 1996 she was a Director of Marketing Programs EMEA at Madge 

Networks after Madge had acquired LANNET. She also served as Director of Marketing Communications at 

LANNET, from 1992 to 1995, now Avaya Technologies. She is a project faculty member and mentor to the 

Wharton School of Management/Recanati Tel Aviv University M.B.A. program and holds a B.A. with 

honors in Communications Studies from Concordia University. 

Corporate Governance Practices

As a foreign private issuer, we are permitted to follow Israeli corporate governance practices instead of the 

Nasdaq Global Market requirements, provided we disclose which requirements we are not following and the 

equivalent Israeli requirement. We intend to rely on this “foreign private issuer exemption” only with respect 

to the quorum requirement for meetings of our shareholders. Under our articles of association to be effective 

following this offering, the quorum required for an ordinary meeting of shareholders will consist of at least 

two shareholders present in person, by proxy or by written ballot, who hold or represent between them at 

least 25% of the voting power of our shares, instead of 331/3% of the issued share capital provided by under 

the Nasdaq Global Market requirements. This quorum requirement is based on the default requirement set 

forth in the Israeli Companies law. We otherwise intend to comply with the Nasdaq Global Market rules 

requiring that listed companies have a majority of independent directors and maintain a compensation and 

nominating committee composed entirely of independent directors. In addition, following the closing of this 

offering, we intend to comply with Israeli corporate governance requirements applicable to companies 

incorporated in Israel whose securities are listed for trading on a stock exchange outside of Israel. 

Board of Directors and Officers

Our current board of directors consists of seven directors, each of whom was appointed by a certain group of 

shareholders pursuant to rights of appointment granted in our articles of association, except for Mr. Hadar, 

who serves on our board of directors by virtue of his position as Chief Executive Officer. Our articles of 

association to be effective upon the closing of this offering provide that we may have up to nine directors. 

See “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions — Rights of Appointment.” 

Under our articles of association to be effective upon the closing of this offering, our directors (other than the 

outside directors, whose appointment is required under the Companies Law; see “— Outside Directors”) are 

divided into three classes. Each class of directors consists, as nearly as possible, of one-third of the total 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (124 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 123 of 149
424B1

number of directors constituting the entire board of directors (other than the outside directors). At each 

annual general meeting of our shareholders, the election or re-election of directors following the expiration 

of the term of office of the directors of that class of directors, will be for a term of office that expires on the 

third annual general meeting following such election or re-election, such that from 2006 and after, each year 

the term of office of only one class of directors will expire. Class I directors, consisting of Yosi Elihav and 

Erel 

66 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (125 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 124 of 149
424B1

Margalit, will hold office until our annual meeting of shareholders to be held in 2007. Class II directors, 

consisting of Dr. Eyal Kishon, Yossi Sela and Shai Saul, will hold office until our annual meeting of 

shareholders to be held in 2008. Class III directors, consisting of Yigal Jacoby and Rami Hadar, will hold 

office until our annual meeting of shareholders to be held in 2009. The directors shall be elected by a vote of 

the holders of a majority of the voting power present and voting at that meeting. Each director, will hold 

office until the annual general meeting of our shareholders for the year in which his or her term expires and 

until his or her successor is elected and qualified, unless the tenure of such director expires earlier pursuant 

to the Companies Law. 

Under our articles of association to be effective upon the closing of this offering, the approval of a special 

majority of the holders of at least 75.0% of the voting rights present and voting at a general meeting is 

generally required to remove any of our directors from office. The holders of a majority of the voting power 

present and voting at a meeting may elect directors in their stead or fill any vacancy, however created, in our 

board of directors. In addition, vacancies on our board of directors, other than vacancies created by an 

outside director, may be filled by a vote of a simple majority of the directors then in office. A director so 

chosen or appointed will hold office until the next annual general meeting of our shareholders, unless earlier 

removed by the vote of a majority of the directors then in office prior to such annual meeting. See 

“— Outside Directors” for a description of the procedure for election of outside directors. 

Each of our executive officers serves at the discretion of the board of directors and holds office until his or 

her successor is elected or until his or her earlier resignation or removal. There are no family relationships 

among any of our directors or executive officers. 

Outside Directors

Qualifications of Outside Directors

Under the Israeli Companies Law, companies incorporated under the laws of the State of Israel that are 

“public companies,” which also includes companies with shares listed on the Nasdaq Global Market, are 

required to appoint at least two outside directors at a shareholders’ meeting to be held within three months 

after becoming a “public company.” 

A person may not serve as an outside director if at the date of the person’s appointment or within the prior 

two years, the person, the person’s relatives, entities under the person’s control, or the person’s partners or 

employer, have or had any affiliation with us or any entity controlled by or under common control with us 

during the prior two years, or which controls us at the time of such person’s appointment. 

The term affiliation includes: 

• an employment relationship; 

• a business or professional relationship maintained on a regular basis; 

• control; and 

• service as an office holder, excluding service as a director in a private company prior to the first 

offering of its shares to the public if such director was appointed as a director of the private company 

in order to serve as an outside director following the public offering. 

The term relative is defined as spouses, siblings, parents, grandparents, descendants, spouse’s descendants 

and the spouses of each of these persons. 

The term office holder is defined as a director, general manager, chief business manager, deputy general 

manager, vice general manager, executive vice president, vice president, other manager directly subordinate 

to the general manager or any other person assuming the responsibilities of any of the foregoing positions, 

without regard to such person’s title. Each person listed under “— Directors and Executive Officers” is an 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (126 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 125 of 149
424B1

office holder. 

No person can serve as an outside director if the person’s position or other business create, or may create, a 

conflict of interests with the person’s responsibilities as a director or may otherwise interfere with the 

person’s ability to serve as a director. If at the time an outside director is appointed all current members of 

the board of directors are of the same gender, then that outside director must be of the other gender. 

67 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (127 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 126 of 149
424B1

The Companies Law provides that each outside director must meet certain professional qualifications or have 

financial and accounting expertise, and that at least one outside director must have financial and accounting 

expertise. However, if at least one of our directors meets the independence requirements of the Securities 

Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the standards of the Nasdaq Global Market rules for membership on 

the audit committee and also has financial and accounting expertise as defined in the Companies Law and 

applicable regulations, then our outside directors are required to meet the professional qualifications only. 

Under applicable regulations, a director with financial and accounting expertise is a director who, by reason 

of his or her education, professional experience and skill, has a high level of proficiency in and 

understanding of business accounting matters and financial statements. He or she must be able to thoroughly 

comprehend the financial statements of the company and initiate debate regarding the manner in which 

financial information is presented. The regulations define a director with the requisite professional 

qualifications as a director who satisfies one of the following requirements: (1) the director holds an 

academic degree in either economics, business administration, accounting, law or public administration, 

(2) the director either holds an academic degree in any other field or has completed another form of higher 

education in the company’s primary field of business or in an area which is relevant to the office of an 

outside director, or (3) the director has at least five years of cumulative experience serving in one or more of 

the following capacities: (a) a senior business management position in a corporation with a substantial scope 

of business, (b) a senior position in the company’s primary field of business or (c) a senior position in public 

administration. 

Until the lapse of two years from termination of office, a company may not engage an outside director to 

serve as an office holder and cannot employ or receive professional services for payment from that person, 

either directly or indirectly, including through a corporation controlled by that person. 

Election of Outside Directors

Outside directors are elected by a majority vote at a shareholders’ meeting, provided that either: 

• the majority of shares voted at the meeting, including at least one-third of the shares of non-controlling 

shareholders voted at the meeting, excluding abstentions, vote in favor of the election of the outside 

director; or 

• the total number of shares voted against the election of the outside director does not exceed one percent 

of the aggregate voting rights in the company. 

The initial term of an outside director is three years and he or she may be reelected to additional terms of 

three years each by a majority vote at a shareholders’ meeting, subject to the conditions described above for 

election of outside directors. Reelection to each additional term beyond the first extension needs to comply 

with the following additional conditions: (1) the audit committee and, subsequently, the board of directors 

confirmed that the reelection for an additional term is for the benefit of the company, taking into account the 

outside director’s expertise and special contribution to the function of the board of directors and its 

committees, and (2) the general meeting of the company’s shareholders, prior to its approval of the reelection 

of the outside director, was informed of the term previously served by him or her and of the reasons of the 

board of directors and audit committee for the extension of the outside director’s term. Outside directors may 

only be removed by the same majority of shareholders as is required for their election, or by a court, as 

follow: (1) if the board of directors is made aware of a concern that an outside director has ceased to meet the 

statutory requirements for his or her appointment, or has violated his or her duty of loyalty to the company, 

then the board of directors is required to discuss the concern and determine whether it is justified, and if the 

board of directors determines that the concern is justified, to call a special general meeting of the company’s 

shareholders, the agenda of which includes the dismissal of the outside director, and (2) at the request of a 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (128 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 127 of 149
424B1

director or a shareholder of the company a court may remove an outside director from office if it determines 

that the outside director has ceased to meet the statutory requirements for his or her appointment, or has 

violated his or her duty of loyalty to the company, or (3) at the request of the company, a director, a 

shareholder or a creditor of the company, a court may remove an outside director from office if it determines 

that the outside director is unable to perform his or her duties on a regular basis, or is convicted of certain 

offenses set forth in the Companies Law. If the vacancy of an outside directorship causes the company to 

have 

68 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (129 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 128 of 149
424B1

fewer than two outside directors, a company’s board of directors is required under the Companies Law to 

call a special general meeting of the company’s shareholders immediately to appoint a new outside director. 

Each committee to which the company’s board delegates power is required to include at least one outside 

director and our audit committee is required to include all of the outside directors. 

An outside director is entitled to compensation as provided in regulations promulgated under the Companies 

Law and is otherwise prohibited from receiving any other compensation, directly or indirectly, in connection 

with services provided as an outside director. The regulations provide three alternatives for cash 

compensation to outside directors: (1) a fixed amount determined by the regulations, (2) an amount within a 

range contained in the regulations, or (3) an amount proportional to the amount paid to the other directors of 

the company, provided that such proportional amount (A) may not be lower than the compensation granted 

to directors of the company who are not controlling shareholders of the company and do not fill any other 

function in the company or in an entity that controls or is under common control with the company (“Other 

Directors”), and (B) may not exceed the average compensation granted to all Other Directors. An outside 

director is also entitled to reimbursement of expenses as set forth in the regulations. A company may also 

issue shares or options to an outside director, in addition to cash compensation, provided that: (A) such 

shares or options must be granted as part of a compensation plan for all directors, office holders and directors 

who are not outside directors, and (B) the amount of shares or options may not be lower than the amount of 

shares or options granted to any Other Director and may not exceed the average amount granted to all Other 

Directors. Compensation determined in any manner (other than cash compensation at the fixed amount 

determined by the regulations) requires the approval of a company’s shareholders. All outside directors must 

receive identical compensation. 

Nasdaq Requirements

Under the rules of the Nasdaq Global Market, a majority of directors must meet the definition of 

independence contained in those rules. Our board of directors has determined that all of our directors, other 

than Yigal Jacoby and Rami Hadar, meet the independence standards contained in the rules of the Nasdaq 

Global Market. We do not believe that any of these directors have a relationship that would preclude a 

finding of independence under these rules and, in reaching its determination, our board of directors 

determined that the other relationships that these directors have with us do not impair their independence. 

Audit Committee

Companies Law Requirements

Under the Companies Law, the board of directors of any public company must also appoint an audit 

committee comprised of at least three directors including all of the outside directors, but excluding the: 

• chairman of the board of directors; 

• controlling shareholder or a relative of a controlling shareholder; and 

• any director employed by the company or who provides services to the company on a regular basis. 

Nasdaq Requirements

Under the Nasdaq Global Market rules, we are required to maintain an audit committee consisting of at least 

three independent directors, all of whom are financially literate and one of whom has accounting or related 

financial management expertise. Our audit committee members are required to meet additional independence 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (130 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 129 of 149
424B1

standards, including minimum standards set forth in rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and 

adopted by the Nasdaq Global Market. 

Approval of Transactions with Office Holders and Controlling Shareholders

The approval of the audit committee is required to effect specified actions and transactions with office 

holders and controlling shareholders. The term controlling shareholder means a shareholder with the ability 

to 

69 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (131 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 130 of 149
424B1

direct the activities of the company, other than by virtue of being an office holder. A shareholder is presumed 

to be a controlling shareholder if the shareholder holds 50.0% or more of the voting rights in a company or 

has the right to appoint the majority of the directors of the company or its general manager. For the purpose 

of approving transactions with controlling shareholders, the term also includes any shareholder that holds 

25.0% or more of the voting rights of the company if the company has no shareholder that owns more than 

50.0% of its voting rights. For purposes of determining the holding percentage stated above, two or more 

shareholders who have a personal interest in a transaction that is brought for the company’s approval are 

deemed as joint holders. The audit committee may not approve an action or a transaction with a controlling 

shareholder or with an office holder unless at the time of approval two outside directors are serving as 

members of the audit committee and at least one of them was present at the meeting at which the approval 

was granted. 

Audit Committee Role

Our board of directors has adopted an audit committee charter setting forth the responsibilities of the audit 

committee consistent with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and The Nasdaq Global 

Market rules which include: 

• retaining and terminating the company’s independent auditors, subject to shareholder ratification; 

• pre-approval of audit and non-audit services provided by the independent auditors; and 

• approval of transactions with office holders and controlling shareholders, as described above, and other 

related-party transactions. 

Additionally, under the Companies Law, the role of the audit committee is to identify irregularities in the 

business management of the company in consultation with the internal auditor or the company’s independent 

auditors and suggest an appropriate course of action to the board of directors and to approve the yearly or 

periodic work plan proposed by the internal auditor to the extent required. The audit committee charter states 

that in fulfilling this role the committee is entitled to rely on interviews and consultations with our 

management, our internal auditor and our independent auditor, and is not obligated to conduct any 

independent investigation or verification. 

Our audit committee consists of our directors, Mr. Yosi Elihav, Dr. Eyal Kishon and Mr. Erel Margalit. The 

financial expert on the audit committee pursuant to the definition of the Securities and Exchange 

Commission is Mr. Elihav. Under the Companies Law, the outside directors that will be appointed within 

three months after our becoming a “public company” must be members of our audit committee. 

Compensation and Nominating Committee

We have established a compensation and nominating committee consisting of our directors, Mr. Yossi Sela, 

Dr. Eyal Kishon and Mr. Shai Saul. Under the Companies Law, at least one of the outside directors to be 

appointed within three months after our becoming a “public company” must be a member of our 

compensation and nominating committee. This committee will also oversee matters related to our corporate 

governance practices. Our board of directors has adopted a compensation, nominating and governance 

committee charter setting forth the responsibilities of the committee consistent with the Nasdaq Global 

Market rules which include: 

• determining the compensation of our Chief Executive Officer and other executive officers; 

• granting options to our employees and the employees of our subsidiaries; 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (132 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 131 of 149
424B1

• recommending candidates for nomination as members of our board of directors; and 

• developing and recommending to the board corporate governance guidelines and a code of business 

ethics and conduct in accordance with applicable laws. 

70 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (133 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 132 of 149
424B1

Internal Auditor

Under the Companies Law, the board of directors of a public company must appoint an internal auditor 

nominated by the audit committee. The role of the internal auditor is, among other things, to examine 

whether a company’s actions comply with applicable law and orderly business procedure. Under the 

Companies Law, the internal auditor may be an employee of the company but not an interested party or an 

office holder or a relative of an interested party or an office holder, nor may the internal auditor be the 

company’s independent auditor or the representative of the same. 

An interested party is defined in the Companies Law as a holder of 5.0% or more of the issued share capital 

or voting power in a company, any person or entity who has the right to designate one director or more or the 

chief executive officer of the company or any person who serves as a director or as a chief executive officer. 

We intend to appoint an internal auditor following the closing of this offering. 

Approval of Specified Related Party Transactions Under Israeli Law

Fiduciary Duties of Office Holders

The Companies Law imposes a duty of care and a duty of loyalty on all office holders of a company. 

The duty of care requires an office holder to act with the degree of care with which a reasonable office 

holder in the same position would have acted under the same circumstances. The duty of care includes a duty 

to use reasonable means to obtain: 

• information on the advisability of a given action brought for his or her approval or performed by virtue 

of his or her position; and 

• all other important information pertaining to these actions. 

The duty of loyalty requires an office holder to act in good faith and for the benefit of the company, and 

includes the duty to: 

• refrain from any conflict of interest between the performance of his or her duties in the company and 

his or her personal affairs; 

• refrain from any activity that is competitive with the company; 

• refrain from exploiting any business opportunity of the company for the purpose of gaining a personal 

advantage for himself or herself or others; and 

• disclose to the company any information or documents relating to a company’s affairs which the office 

holder received as a result of his or her position as an office holder. 

Disclosure of Personal Interests of an Office Holder

The Companies Law requires that an office holder promptly disclose to the company any personal interest 

that he or she may have and all related material information or documents in his or her possession relating to 

any existing or proposed transaction by the company. An interested office holder’s disclosure must be made 

no later than the first meeting of the board of directors at which the transaction is considered. An office 

holder is not obliged to disclose such information if the personal interest of the office holder derives solely of 

the personal interest of his or her relative in a transaction that is not extraordinary. 

“Personal interest” is defined under the Companies Law to include a personal interest of a person in an 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (134 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 133 of 149
424B1

action or in the business of a company, including the personal interest of such person’s relative or the interest 

of any corporation in which the person is an interested party. 

Under the Companies Law, an extraordinary transaction is a transaction: 

• other than in the ordinary course of business; 

71 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (135 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 134 of 149
424B1

• that is not on market terms; or 

• that may have a material impact on the company’s profitability, assets or liabilities. 

Under the Companies Law, once an office holder has complied with the above disclosure requirement, a 

company may approve a transaction between the company and the office holder or a third party in which the 

office holder has a personal interest, or approve an action by the office holder that would otherwise be 

deemed a breach of duty of loyalty. However, a company may not approve a transaction or action that is 

adverse to the company’s interest or that is not performed by the office holder in good faith. If the 

transaction is an extraordinary transaction, both the audit committee and the board of directors must approve 

the transaction. Under certain circumstances, shareholder approval may also be required. A director who has 

a personal interest in a matter which is considered at a meeting of the board of directors or the audit 

committee, may generally not be present at this meeting or vote on this matter unless a majority of the 

directors or members of the audit committee have a personal interest in the matter. If a majority of the 

directors have a personal interest in the matter, it also requires approval of the shareholders of the company. 

Under the Companies Law, all arrangements as to compensation of office holders who are not directors 

require approval by the board of directors. An undertaking to indemnify, insure or exculpate an office holder 

who is not a director requires both board and audit committee approval. In general, arrangements regarding 

the compensation, indemnification and insurance of directors require audit committee and shareholder 

approval in addition to board approval. 

Disclosure of Personal Interests of a Controlling Shareholder

Under the Companies Law, the disclosure requirements that apply to an office holder also apply to a 

controlling shareholder of a public company. Extraordinary transactions with a controlling shareholder or in 

which a controlling shareholder has a personal interest, and the terms of engagement of a controlling 

shareholder or a controlling shareholder’s relative, whether as an office holder or an employee, require the 

approval of the audit committee, the board of directors and a majority of the shares voted by the shareholders 

of the company participating and voting on the matter in a shareholders’ meeting. In addition, the 

shareholder approval must fulfill one of the following requirements: 

• at least one-third of the shares held by shareholders who have no personal interest in the transaction 

and are voting at the meeting must be voted in favor of approving the transaction, excluding 

abstentions; or 

• the shares voted by shareholders who have no personal interest in the transaction who vote against the 

transaction represent no more than 1.0% of the voting rights in the company. 

Under the Companies Law, a shareholder has a duty to refrain from abusing its power in the company and to 

act in good faith and in an acceptable manner in exercising its rights and performing its obligations to the 

company and other shareholders, including, among other things, voting at general meetings of shareholders 

on the following matters: 

• an amendment to the articles of association; 

• an increase in the company’s authorized share capital; 

• a merger; and 

• approval of related party transactions that require shareholder approval. 

A shareholder also has a general duty to refrain from acting to the detriment of other shareholders. 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (136 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 135 of 149
424B1

In addition, any controlling shareholder, any shareholder that knows that its vote can determine the outcome 

of a shareholder vote and any shareholder that, under the company’s articles of association, has the power to 

appoint or prevent the appointment of an office holder, or has another power with respect to the company, is 

under a duty to act with fairness towards the company. The Companies Law does not describe the substance 

of this duty except to state that the remedies generally available upon a breach of contract will also apply in 

the event of a breach of the duty to act with fairness, taking the shareholder’s position in the company into 

account. 

72 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (137 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 136 of 149
424B1

Exculpation, Insurance and Indemnification of Office Holders

Under the Companies Law, a company may not exculpate an office holder from liability for a breach of the 

duty of loyalty. However, the company may approve an act performed in breach of the duty of loyalty of an 

office holder provided that the office holder acted in good faith, the act or its approval does not harm the 

company, and the office holder discloses the nature of his or her personal interest in the act and all material 

facts and documents a reasonable time before discussion of the approval. An Israeli company may exculpate 

an office holder in advance from liability to the company, in whole or in part, for damages caused to the 

company as a result of a breach of duty of care but only if a provision authorizing such exculpation is 

inserted in its articles of association. Our articles of association include such a provision. An Israeli company 

may not exculpate a director for liability arising out of a prohibited dividend or distribution to shareholders. 

An Israeli company may indemnify an office holder in respect of certain liabilities either in advance of an 

event or following an event provided a provision authorizing such indemnification is inserted in its articles of 

association. Our articles of association contain such an authorization. An undertaking provided in advance by 

an Israeli company to indemnify an office holder with respect to a financial liability imposed on him or her 

in favor of another person pursuant to a judgment, settlement or arbitrator’s award approved by a court must 

be limited to events which in the opinion of the board of directors can be foreseen based on the company’s 

activities when the undertaking to indemnify is given, and to an amount or according to criteria determined 

by the board of directors as reasonable under the circumstances, and such undertaking shall detail the above 

mentioned events and amount or criteria. In addition, a company may undertake in advance to indemnify an 

office holder against the following liabilities incurred for acts performed as an office holder: 

• reasonable litigation expenses, including attorneys’ fees, incurred by the office holder as a result of an 

investigation or proceeding instituted against him or her by an authority authorized to conduct such 

investigation or proceeding, provided that (i) no indictment was filed against such office holder as a 

result of such investigation or proceeding; and (ii) no financial liability, such as a criminal penalty, was 

imposed upon him or her as a substitute for the criminal proceeding as a result of such investigation or 

proceeding or, if such financial liability was imposed, it was imposed with respect to an offense that 

does not require proof of criminal intent; and 

• reasonable litigation expenses, including attorneys’ fees, incurred by the office holder or imposed by a 

court in proceedings instituted against him or her by the company, on its behalf or by a third party or in 

connection with criminal proceedings in which the office holder was acquitted or as a result of a 

conviction for an offense that does not require proof of criminal intent. 

An Israeli company may insure an office holder against the following liabilities incurred for acts performed 

as an office holder if and to the extent provided in the company’s articles of association: 

• a breach of duty of loyalty to the company, to the extent that the office holder acted in good faith and 

had a reasonable basis to believe that the act would not prejudice the company; 

• a breach of duty of care to the company or to a third party, including a breach arising out of the 

negligent conduct of the office holder; and 

• a financial liability imposed on the office holder in favor of a third party. 

An Israeli company may not indemnify or insure an office holder against any of the following: 

• a breach of duty of loyalty, except to the extent that the office holder acted in good faith and had a 

reasonable basis to believe that the act would not prejudice the company; 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (138 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 137 of 149
424B1

• a breach of duty of care committed intentionally or recklessly, excluding a breach arising out of the 

negligent conduct of the office holder; 

73 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (139 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 138 of 149
424B1

• an act or omission committed with intent to derive illegal personal benefit; or 

• a fine or forfeit levied against the office holder. 

Under the Companies Law, exculpation, indemnification and insurance of office holders must be approved 

by our audit committee and our board of directors and, in respect of our directors, by our shareholders. 

Our articles of association allow us to indemnify and insure our office holders to the fullest extent permitted 

by the Companies Law. Our office holders are currently covered by a directors and officers’ liability 

insurance policy. As of the date of this offering, no claims for directors and officers’ liability insurance have 

been filed under this policy and we are not aware of any pending or threatened litigation or proceeding 

involving any of our directors or officers in which indemnification is sought. 

We have entered into agreements with each of our directors and office holders exculpating them, to the 

fullest extent permitted by law, from liability to us for damages caused to us as a result of a breach of duty of 

care, and undertaking to indemnify them to the fullest extent permitted by law, including with respect to 

liabilities resulting from this offering. This indemnification is limited to events determined as foreseeable by 

the board of directors based on our activities, and to an amount or according to criteria determined by the 

board of directors as reasonable under the circumstances, and the insurance is subject to our discretion 

depending on its availability, effectiveness and cost. The current maximum amount set forth in such 

agreements is the greater of (1) with respect to indemnification in connection with a public offering of our 

securities, the gross proceeds raised by us and/or any selling shareholder in such public offering, and (2) with 

respect to all permitted indemnification, including a public offering of our securities, an amount equal to 

50% of the our shareholders’ equity on a consolidated basis, based on our most recent financial statements 

made publicly available before the date on which the indemnity payment is made. 

In the opinion of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, however, indemnification of directors and 

office holders for liabilities arising under the Securities Act is against public policy and therefore 

unenforceable. 

Compensation of Office Holders

The aggregate compensation paid by us and our subsidiaries to our current office holders, including stock 

based compensation, for the year ended December 31, 2005 was $1.4 million. This amount includes 

approximately $0.2 million set aside or accrued to provide pension, severance, retirement or similar benefits 

or expenses, but does not include business travel, relocation, professional and business association due and 

expenses reimbursed to office holders, and other benefits commonly reimbursed or paid by companies in 

Israel. None of our directors has so far received any cash compensation for his or her services as a director 

other than reimbursement of expenses. Following the closing of this offering, we will pay an annual cash 

retainer and per meeting cash fee to each of our directors. 

Employment and Consulting Agreements with Executive Officers

We have entered into written employment or consulting agreements with all of our executive officers. These 

agreements all contain provisions standard for a company in our industry regarding noncompetition, 

confidentiality of information and assignment of inventions. The enforceability of covenants not to compete 

in Israel is limited. See “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions — Agreements with Officers 

and Directors” for additional information. 

Share Options Plans

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (140 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 139 of 149
424B1

We have adopted four share option plans and, as of September 30, 2006, we had 4,217,644 ordinary shares 

reserved for issuance under these plans, with respect to which (i) options to purchase 3,470,318 ordinary 

shares at a weighted average exercise price of $2.26 per share were outstanding, and (ii) options to purchase 

674,122 ordinary shares were already exercised by certain of the grantees and such shares were issued by us. 

As of September 30, 2006, options to purchase 1,603,393 ordinary shares were vested and exercisable. 

74 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (141 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 140 of 149
424B1

2006 Incentive Compensation Plan

We have adopted the 2006 Incentive Compensation Plan, which will become effective prior to this offering. 

Following the approval of the 2006 plan by the Israeli tax authorities, which we expect will be within three 

months of the date of this prospectus, we will only grant options or other equity incentive awards under the 

2006 plan, although previously-granted options will continue to be governed by our other plans. The 2006 

plan is intended to further our success by increasing the ownership interest of certain of our and our 

subsidiaries’ employees, directors and consultants and to enhance our and our subsidiaries’ ability to attract 

and retain employees, directors and consultants. 

We may issue up to 89,732 ordinary shares remaining available for issuance and not subject to outstanding 

awards under our 2003 plan and 1997 plans on the date of this prospectus, upon the exercise or settlement of 

share options or other equity incentive awards granted under the 2006 plan. The number of ordinary shares 

that we may issue under the 2006 plan will increase on the first day of each fiscal year during the term of the 

2006 plan, in each case in an amount equal to the lesser of (i) 1,000,000 shares, (ii) 3.5% of our outstanding 

ordinary shares on the last day of the immediately preceding year, or (iii) an amount determined by our board 

of directors. The number of shares subject to the 2006 plan is also subject to adjustment if particular capital 

changes affect our share capital. Ordinary shares subject to outstanding awards under the 2006 plan or our 

2003 plan or 1997 plans that are subsequently forfeited or terminated for any other reason before being 

exercised will again be available for grant under the 2006 plan. As of the closing of this offering, no options 

or other awards will have been granted under the 2006 plan. 

A share option is the right to purchase a specified number of ordinary shares in the future at a specified 

exercise price and subject to the other terms and conditions specified in the option agreement and the 2006 

plan. The exercise price of each option granted under the 2006 plan will be determined by our compensation 

and nominating committee and for “incentive stock options” shall be equal to or greater than the fair market 

value of our ordinary shares at the time of grant (except for any options granted under the 2006 plan in 

substitution or exchange for options or awards of another company involved in a corporate transaction with 

us or a subsidiary, which will have an exercise price that is intended to preserve the economic value of the 

award that is replaced). The exercise price of any share options granted under the 2006 plan may be paid in 

cash, ordinary shares already owned by the option holder or any other method that may be approved by our 

compensation and nominating committee, such as a cashless broker-assisted exercise that complies with law. 

Our compensation and nominating committee may also grant, or recommend our board of directors to grant, 

other forms of equity incentive awards under the 2006 plan, such as restricted share awards, share 

appreciation rights, restricted share units and other forms of equity-based compensation. 

Israeli participants in the 2006 plan may be granted options subject to Section 102 of the Israeli Income Tax 

Ordinance. Section 102 of the Israeli Income Tax Ordinance, allows employees, directors and officers, who 

are not controlling shareholders and are considered Israeli residents to receive favorable tax treatment for 

compensation in the form of shares or options. Our non-employees service providers and controlling 

shareholders may only be granted options under another section of the Tax Ordinance, which does not 

provide for similar tax benefits. Section 102 includes two alternatives for tax treatment involving the 

issuance of options or shares to a trustee for the benefit of the grantees and also includes an additional 

alternative for the issuance of options or shares directly to the grantee. The most favorable tax treatment for 

the grantees is under Section 102(b)(2) of the Tax Ordinance, the issuance to a trustee under the “capital gain 

track.” However, under this track we are not allowed to deduct an expense with respect to the issuance of the 

options or shares. Any stock options granted under the 2006 plan to participants in the United States will be 

either “incentive stock options,” which may be eligible for special tax treatment under the Internal Revenue 

Code of 1986, or options other than incentive stock options (referred to as “nonqualified stock options”), as 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (142 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 141 of 149
424B1

determined by our compensation and nominating committee and stated in the option agreement. 

Our compensation and nominating committee will administer the 2006 plan. Our board of directors may, 

subject to any legal limitations, exercise any powers or duties of the compensation and nominating 

committee concerning the 2006 plan. The compensation and nominating committee will select which of our 

and our subsidiaries’ and affiliates’ eligible employees, directors and/or consultants shall receive options or 

other 

75 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (143 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 142 of 149
424B1

awards under the 2006 plan and will determine, or recommend to our board of directors, the number of 

ordinary shares covered by those options or other awards, the terms under which such options or other 

awards may be exercised (however, options generally may not be exercised later than 10 years from the grant 

date of an option) or may be settled or paid, and the other terms and conditions of such options and other 

awards under the 2006 plan in accordance with the provisions of the 2006 plan. Holders of options and other 

equity incentive awards may not transfer those awards, unless they die or, except in the case of incentive 

stock options, the compensation and nominating committee determines otherwise. 

If we undergo a change of control, as defined in the 2006 plan, subject to any contrary law or rule, or the 

terms of any award agreement in effect before the change of control, (a) the compensation and nominating 

committee may, in its discretion, accelerate the vesting, exercisability and payment, as applicable, of 

outstanding options and other awards; and (b) the compensation and nominating committee, in its discretion, 

may adjust outstanding awards by substituting ordinary shares or other securities of any successor or another 

party to the change of control transaction, or cash out outstanding options and other awards, in any such case, 

generally based on the consideration received by our shareholders in the transaction. 

Subject to particular limitations specified in the 2006 plan and under applicable law, our board of directors 

may amend or terminate the 2006 plan, and the compensation and nominating committee may amend awards 

outstanding under the 2006 plan. The 2006 plan will continue in effect until all ordinary shares available 

under the 2006 plan are delivered and all restrictions on those shares have lapsed, unless the 2006 plan is 

terminated earlier by our board of directors. No awards may be granted under the 2006 plan on or after the 

tenth anniversary of the date of adoption of the plan. 

Allot Communications Ltd. Key Employee Share Incentive Plan (2003)

Our 2003 share option plan provides for the grant of options to our and our affiliates’ employees, directors, 

officers, consultants, advisers and service providers. We have reserved 3,451,573 ordinary shares for 

issuance under the plan, including the unused reservation of our 1997 plans, as described below. This 

reservation may increase as a result of the expiration of unexercised options that were granted under our 

1997 plans. As of September 30, 2006, there were (i) 73,204 ordinary shares available for issuance under the 

plan, (ii) options to purchase 3,098,538 ordinary shares were outstanding, of which 1,231,622 were vested 

and exercisable and (iii) options to purchase 279,831 ordinary shares were already exercised. Any shares 

underlying any option that terminates without exercise, including those granted under our 1997 plans, 

become available for future issuance under this plan. There will be no additional options granted under this 

plan after the earlier of approval of the 2006 plan by the Israeli tax authorities or March 12, 2013. 

The terms of the plan are in compliance with Section 102 of the Israeli Income Tax Ordinance, which allows 

employees, directors and officers, who are not controlling shareholders and are considered Israeli residents to 

receive favorable tax treatment for compensation in the form of shares or options. Our non-employees 

service providers and controlling shareholders may only be granted options under another section of the Tax 

Ordinance, which does not provide for similar tax benefits. 

Section 102 includes two alternatives for tax treatment involving the issuance of options or shares to a trustee 

for the benefit of the grantees and also includes an additional alternative for the issuance of options or shares 

directly to the grantee. The most favorable tax treatment for the grantees is under Section 102(b)(2) of the 

Tax Ordinance, the issuance to a trustee under the “capital gain track.” However, under this track the 

company is not allowed to deduct an expense with respect to the issuance of the options or shares. We have 

elected to issue our options under the capital gain track and, accordingly, all options granted under this plan 

to Israeli residents have been granted under the capital gain track. Section 102 also provides for an income 

tax track, under which, among other things, the benefits to the employees would be taxed as ordinary 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (144 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 143 of 149
424B1

income, we would be allowed to recognize expenses for tax purposes and the minimum holding period for 

the trustee will be 12 months from the end of the calendar year in which such options are granted, and if 

granted after January 1, 2006, 12 months after the date of grant. We will be able to change our election with 

respect to future grants under the plan. In addition, we will be able to make a different election under a new 

plan. In order to comply with the terms of the capital gain track, all options, as well as the ordinary shares 

issued upon 

76 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (145 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 144 of 149
424B1

exercise of these options and other shares received subsequently following any realization of rights with 

respect to such options, such as stock dividends and stock splits are granted to a trustee and should be held 

by the trustee for the lesser of 30 months from the date of grant, or two years following the end of the tax 

year in which the options were granted and if granted after January 1, 2006 only two years after the date of 

grant. Under this plan, all options, whether or not granted pursuant to said Section 102, the ordinary shares 

issued upon their exercise and other shares received subsequently following any realization of rights are 

issued to a trustee. 

The plan is administered by our board of directors which has delegated certain responsibilities to our 

compensation committee which is empowered to directly issue options to our and our affiliates’ employees 

and to make recommendations to the board of directors for the issuance of options to non-employee service 

providers of us or our affiliates. The price per share covered by each option award is determined by the 

committee but may not be less than the par value of the shares. Options under the plan generally vest and 

become exercisable over a period of four years with 25% vesting on the first anniversary of the vesting 

commencement date and 6.25% vesting at the end of each subsequent three month period. More favorable 

vesting terms, including acceleration of vesting upon certain events, were granted to our management and 

certain key employees and consultants. Specifically, our standard form of option award agreement for 

management and certain key employees and consultants provides that all options will become fully vested 

immediately prior to (1) a merger with entities other than our current shareholders as a result of which we are 

not the surviving entity, (2) a sale of at least 80% of our share capital to entities other than our current 

shareholders, (3) a sale of all or substantially all of our assets or (4) a sale of more than 50% (and less than 

80%) of the our share capital to entities other than our current shareholders in which the successor company 

(or parent or subsidiary of the successor company) does not agree to assume or substitute the options. If the 

successor company (or parent or subsidiary of the successor company) agrees to assume or substitute the 

options in a transaction described in (4) in the preceding sentence and within one year of the closing of a 

such sale, the option holder’s employment with the successor company is terminated by the successor 

company without cause, or the option holder is not offered to continue to be employed by the successor 

company in a comparable or senior position and/or on comparable or favorable terms, then the options will 

become fully vested as of the date of such termination, or the date upon such change in position and/or terms 

would take effect, as applicable. 

Certain of the options granted to Odem Rotem Holdings Ltd., a company wholly-owned and controlled by 

Yigal Jacoby, will accelerate upon a firmly underwritten IPO. As a result, immediately following the closing 

of this offering and based on the number of unvested options beneficially held by Mr. Jacoby as of the date 

of this prospectus, options to purchase 240,897 ordinary shares beneficially owned by Mr. Jacoby that would 

otherwise not be vested will vest and become exercisable. Payment for shares under an option award must be 

effected in cash or by a cashier’s or certified check payable to us, or such other method acceptable to us. 

Option awards and shares purchasable under the plan and held by the trustee, whether or not fully paid, are 

not assignable nor transferable and may not be given as collateral by the grantee. 

Generally, the terms of our options grant letters provide that any option not exercised within 10 years of the 

grant date expires unless extended by our board of directors. If we terminate the employment or engagement 

of a grantee for cause, all of the grantee’s vested and unvested options expire, and we will also be entitled, at 

any time, to repurchase from such grantee all shares issued upon previous exercise of options granted to him 

or her under the plan at an exercise price determined by the compensation committee. However, the exercise 

price must not be lower than the exercise price paid for such shares. Under the plan, upon termination of 

engagement due to death, a grantee’s estate is entitled, for a period of four months following the grantee’s 

death, to exercise such rights the grantee could have exercised had he or she continued to be engaged with us 

during such four-month period. The plan provides that upon termination of engagement due to disability or 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (146 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 145 of 149
424B1

retirement, a grantee will continue to enjoy rights under the plan on such terms as the compensation 

committee in its discretion may determine. As a matter of practice, the terms of our grant letters provide that 

in the case of grantee’s disability, he or she may exercise the vested options for a period of four months 

following termination. Upon the termination of engagement for any other reason, a grantee may exercise his 

or her vested options within 30 days of the date of termination. Our senior management and 

77 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (147 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 146 of 149
424B1

certain key employees and consultants are entitled to extended periods of exercising their options in case of 

termination for any reason other than cause. 

In the event of our being acquired by means of merger with or into another entity, in which our outstanding 

shares are exchanged for securities or other consideration issued, or caused to be issued, by the acquiring 

company or its subsidiary, or in the event of the sale of all or substantially all of our assets, to the extent it 

has not been previously exercised, each vested or unvested option will terminate immediately prior to the 

consummation of such transaction. The plan further provides that, in the event of our consolidation or merger 

with or into another corporation, the compensation committee may, in its absolute discretion and without 

obligation, agree that instead of termination: (i) each unexercised option, if possible, will be assumed or an 

equivalent option will be substituted by our successor corporation or a parent or subsidiary of our successor 

corporation; or (ii) we will pay to the grantee an amount equivalent to the valuation of the grantee’s 

unexercised options on an as converted basis at that time. 

Pursuant to the voting rights of the shares issued upon the exercise of the options by the grantees, the plan 

provides that the trustee that holds such shares shall empower the board of directors with all such voting 

rights and may not exercise the voting rights himself or herself, until our shares are registered for trading on 

a recognized stock exchange. 

Allot Communications Ltd. Key Employees Share Incentive Plan and Key Employees of Subsidiaries 

and Consultants Share Incentive Plan (1997)

Our Key Employees Share Incentive Plan, adopted in 1997, provides for the grant of options to any of our 

directors, officers and employees, and our Key Employees of Subsidiaries and Consultants Share Incentive 

Plan, also adopted in 1997, provides for the grant of options to any of our or our subsidiaries’ directors, 

officers, employees, or consultants. The terms of both plans are identical, except that the grant of options 

under the first plan was made in compliance with the provisions of Section 102 of the Tax Ordinance, as was 

in effect in 1997 and prior to its amendments in 2003, which allows employees who are considered Israeli 

residents to receive favorable tax treatment. 

As of September 30, 2006, there were outstanding options to purchase 766,071 ordinary shares under the two 

plans, of which options to purchase 371,780 ordinary shares were vested and options to purchase 394,291 

ordinary shares were already exercised for ordinary shares. We no longer grant options under these plans, 

and ordinary shares underlying any option granted under these plans that terminates without exercise become 

available for future issuance under our 2003 plan or, following its approval by the Israeli tax authorities, our 

2006 plan. 

The plans are administered by our compensation committee. The options granted under the plans generally 

vest and become exercisable over a period of five years with 40% vesting on the second anniversary of the 

vesting commencement date and 5% vesting at the end of each subsequent three month period or over a 

period of four years with 50% vesting on the second anniversary of the vesting commencement date and 

6.25% vesting at the end of each subsequent three month period. Payment for shares under an option award 

must be effected in cash or by a cashier’s or certified check payable to us, or such other method acceptable to 

us. Option awards and shares purchasable under the plan are not transferable by the grantee. 

The plans provide that if an option has not been exercised or the shares issued following the exercise of an 

option have not been fully paid for before or on August 1, 2011, then the right to acquire such shares shall 

terminate and all interests and rights of the grantee in and to the same shall expire. The grant letters we 

issued provide that the options may be exercised within 10 years of the board of directors’ approval of the 

plans, which means that unexercised options will expire in 2007, unless they are extended by our board of 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (148 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 147 of 149
424B1

directors. 

The plans generally provide that if we terminate a grantee’s engagement for cause, all of the grantee’s vested 

and unvested options expire upon notice of such termination. Upon termination of engagement due to death, 

a grantee’s estate is entitled, for a period of three months following the grantee’s death, to exercise such 

rights the grantee could have exercised during or at the end of such three month period had he or she 

survived and continued his or her engagement with the company. According to the plans, in the event of 

disability or 

78 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (149 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 148 of 149
424B1

retirement, a grantee will continue to enjoy rights under the plans on terms determined by the compensation 

committee. Generally, if a grantee should otherwise cease working for us, all of his or her unexercised option 

awards will terminate two weeks after the notice of termination or resignation. In the event of a merger, 

consolidation, reorganization, recapitalization or similar transaction in which our ordinary shares are 

exchanged for other securities of the company or of another corporation, each grantee will be entitled to 

purchase the number of shares or other securities as were exchangeable for the number of our ordinary shares 

which the grantee would have been entitled to purchase except for the transaction. 

The plans provide that the voting rights vested in any share held by the trustee pursuant to the plans cannot 

be exercised by the trustee, except in cases when, at his discretion and after consulting with the 

compensation committee, the trustee believes that the rights should be exercised for the protection of the 

grantees as a minority among our shareholders. 

79 

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1365767/000095012306014245/y26033b1e424b1.htm (150 of 269)8/5/2008 10:06:15 AM

Case 1:07-cv-03455-RJH Document 39-4 Filed 08/08/2008 Page 149 of 149