XML 43 R15.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.8
Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)
 9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2013
Accounting Policies [Abstract]  
Basis of Presentation

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of Sangamo BioSciences, Inc. (“Sangamo” or the “Company”) have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring adjustments) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending December 31, 2013. The condensed consolidated balance sheet data at December 31, 2012 were derived from the audited consolidated financial statements included in Sangamo’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the SEC. These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and footnotes thereto for the year ended December 31, 2012, included in Sangamo’s Form 10-K, as filed with the SEC.
Use of Estimates and Classifications

Use of Estimates and Classifications

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and the accompanying notes. On an ongoing basis, management evaluates its estimates, including critical accounting policies or estimates related to revenue recognition, clinical trial accruals, and stock-based compensation. Estimates are based on historical experience and on various other market specific and other relevant assumptions that the Company believes to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Revenue Recognition

Revenue Recognition

Revenues from research activities made under strategic partnering agreements and collaborations are recognized as the services are provided when there is persuasive evidence that an arrangement exists, delivery has occurred, the price is fixed or determinable, and collectability is reasonably assured. Revenue generated from research and licensing agreements typically includes upfront signing or license fees, cost reimbursements, research services, minimum sublicense fees, milestone payments and royalties on future licensee’s product sales.

Multiple Element Arrangements prior to the adoption of ASU No. 2009-13, Revenue Recognition—Multiple Deliverable Revenue Arrangements (ASU 2009-13). For revenue arrangements entered into before January 1, 2011, that include multiple deliverables, the elements of such agreement were divided into separate units of accounting if the deliverables met certain criteria, including whether the fair value of the delivered items could be determined and whether there was evidence of fair value of the undelivered items. In addition, the consideration was allocated among the separate units of accounting based on their fair values, and the applicable revenue recognition criteria are considered separately for each of the separate units of accounting. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2009-13, the Company recognized nonrefundable signing, license or non-exclusive option fees as revenue when rights to use the intellectual property related to the license were delivered and over the period of performance obligations if the Company had continuing performance obligations. The Company estimated the performance period at the inception of the arrangement and reevaluated it each reporting period. Changes to these estimates were recorded on a prospective basis.

Multiple Element Arrangements after the adoption of ASU 2009-13. ASU 2009-13 amended the accounting standards for certain multiple element revenue arrangements to:

 

  •   provide updated guidance on whether multiple elements exist, how the elements in an arrangement should be separated, and how the arrangement consideration should be allocated to the separate elements;

 

  •   require an entity to allocate arrangement consideration to each element based on a selling price hierarchy where the selling price for an element is based on vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”), if available; third-party evidence (“TPE”), if available and VSOE is not available; or the best estimate of selling price (“ESP”), if neither VSOE nor TPE is available; and

 

  •   eliminate the use of the residual method and require an entity to allocate arrangement consideration using the relative selling price method.

 

For revenue agreements with multiple element arrangements, such as license and development agreements, entered into on or after January 1, 2011, the Company allocates revenue to each non-contingent element based on the relative selling price of each element. When applying the relative selling price method, the Company determines the selling price for each deliverable using VSOE of selling price or TPE of selling price. If neither exists the Company uses ESP for that deliverable. Revenue allocated is then recognized when the basic four revenue recognition criteria are met for each element. The collaboration and license agreement entered into with Shire AG (Shire) in January 2012 was evaluated under these amended accounting standards.

Additionally, the Company may be entitled to receive certain milestone payments which are contingent upon reaching specified objectives. These milestone payments are recognized as revenue in full upon achievement of the milestone if there is substantive uncertainty at the date the arrangement is entered into that objectives will be achieved and if the achievement is based on the Company’s performance.

Minimum annual sublicense fees are also recognized as revenue in the period in which such fees are due. Royalty revenues are generally recognized when earned and collectability of the related royalty payment is reasonably assured. The Company recognizes cost reimbursement revenue under collaborative agreements as the related research and development costs for services are rendered. Deferred revenue represents the portion of research or license payments received which have not been earned.

Sangamo’s research grants are typically multi-year agreements and provide for the reimbursement of qualified expenses for research and development as defined under the terms of the grant agreement. Revenue under grant agreements is recognized when the related qualified research expenses are incurred.
Recent Accounting Pronouncement

Recent Accounting Pronouncement

In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-02, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (ASU 2013-02). This newly issued accounting standard requires an entity to provide information about the amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by component. This ASU is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2012. We adopted this standard in the first quarter of 2013 and the adoption of this standard did not have an impact on our financial position or results of operations.
Investments

Investments

Sangamo classifies its marketable securities as available-for-sale and records its investments at fair value. Available-for-sale securities are carried at estimated fair value based on quoted market prices, with the unrealized holding gains and losses included in accumulated other comprehensive income. Marketable securities which have maturities beyond one year as of the end of the reporting period are classified as non-current. The Company’s investments are subject to a periodic impairment review and the Company recognizes an impairment charge when a decline in the fair value of its investments below the cost basis is judged to be other-than-temporary. The Company considers various factors in determining whether to recognize an impairment charge, including the length of time and extent to which the fair value has been less than the Company’s cost basis, the financial condition and near-term prospects of the investee, and the Company’s intent and ability to hold the investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in the market value.
Fair Value Measurement

Fair Value Measurement

The Company measures certain financial assets at fair value on a recurring basis, including cash equivalents and available-for sale-securities. The fair value of these assets was determined based on a three-tier hierarchy under the authoritative guidance for fair value measurements and disclosures that prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value as follows:

Level 1: Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities;

Level 2: Quoted prices in markets that are not active or inputs which are observable, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the asset or liability;

Level 3: Prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable (i.e., supported by little or no market activity).

The Company generally classifies its available-for-sale debt instruments as Level 2. Instruments can be classified as Level 2 when observable market prices for identical securities that are traded in less active markets are used. When observable market prices for identical securities are not available, such instruments are priced using benchmark curves, benchmarking of like securities, sector groupings, and matrix pricing as well as model processes. These models are proprietary to the pricing providers or brokers. These valuation models incorporate a number of inputs, including, listed in approximate order of priority: benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids, offers and reference data including market research publications. For certain security types, additional inputs may be used, or some of the standard inputs may not be applicable. Evaluators may prioritize inputs differently on any given day for any security based on market conditions, and not all inputs listed are available for use in the evaluation process for each security evaluation on any given day.
Net Loss per Share, policy

Basic net loss per share has been computed by dividing the net loss by the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted net loss per share is calculated by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of shares of common stock and potential dilutive securities outstanding during the period.