Form S-1

(Address, including zip code and telephone number, including area code, of registrant’s principal executive offices)

(Name, address, including zip code and telephone number, including area code, of agent for service)

Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: As soon as practicable after the effective date of this Registration Statement.

If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, check the following box. ¨

If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, please check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ¨

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ¨

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering. ¨

Indicate by check mark whether Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment that specifically states that this Registration Statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or until the Registration Statement shall become effective on such date as the Securities and Exchange Commission, acting pursuant to such Section 8(a), may determine.

The information in this preliminary prospectus is not complete and may be changed. These securities may not be sold until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission is effective. This preliminary prospectus is not an offer to sell nor does it seek an offer to buy these securities in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted.

This is an initial public offering of shares of common stock of GlassHouse Technologies, Inc. All of the shares of common stock are being sold by the company.

Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for the common stock. It is currently estimated that the initial public offering price per share will be between $ and $ . We intend to apply to have our common stock listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “GLAS.”

Please see the section titled “Risk Factors” beginning on page 10 to read about factors you should consider before buying shares of the common stock.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any other regulatory body has approved or disapproved of these securities or passed upon the accuracy or adequacy of this prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

To the extent that the underwriters sell more than shares of common stock, the underwriters have the option to purchase up to an additional shares from GlassHouse at the initial public offering price less the underwriting discount.

The underwriters expect to deliver the shares against payment in New York, New York on , 2010.

Through and including , 2010 (the 25th day after the date of this prospectus), all dealers effecting transactions in these securities, whether or not participating in this offering, may be required to deliver a prospectus. This obligation is in addition to a dealer’s obligation to deliver a prospectus when acting as an underwriter and with respect to an unsold allotment or subscription.

No dealer, salesperson or other person is authorized to give any information or to represent anything not contained in this prospectus. You must not rely on any unauthorized information or representations. This prospectus is an offer to sell only the shares offered hereby, but only under circumstances and in jurisdictions where it is lawful to do so. The information contained in this prospectus is current only as of its date.

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

This summary highlights the most important features of this offering and the information contained elsewhere in this prospectus. This summary is not complete and does not contain all of the information that you should consider before investing in our common stock. You should read the entire prospectus carefully, especially the risks of investing in our common stock discussed under the heading “Risk Factors” and our consolidated financial statements and related notes included in this prospectus.

Summary

We are a leading, global provider of data center consulting, technology integration and managed services. Our vendor independent services are focused predominantly on helping our clients address inefficiencies in their data center environment and thereby reduce costs, minimize risk and improve control and visibility in their data centers. We deliver information technology (IT) services through Transom, our unique business model consisting of software tools, methodologies and domain expertise, each developed over the course of thousands of client engagements. Transom allows us to standardize our global offerings into high quality services that can be delivered in a consistent manner to our clients.

Our Services

We offer our clients three categories of services and provide them across six primary domain competencies.

Strategic Infrastructure Services

Infrastructure Optimization Services

Infrastructure Operations Services

Our infrastructure operations services provide clients visibility into their IT infrastructure through reporting and monitoring services, as well as on-site operations management.

We provide three types of infrastructure operations services:

Optics: These services are delivered through a suite of monitoring and reporting tools for storage, backup, database, virtual servers and certain security domains offered in a software-as-a-service delivery model.

Managed Services: These services provide operational management of a client’s storage, backup, database, virtual server and certain security domains. Governed by a set of service level agreements, we assume all operational responsibilities on behalf of our clients for day-to-day tasks for the given domains.

Customer Support Services: These services include global remote technical support, field service, logistics and distribution on a 24 hours per day, seven days per week, 365 days per year basis, and global product implementation for original equipment manufacturers.

The six domains in which we provide our data center consulting, technology integration and managed services are growing markets.

Data Center Migrations/Consolidations: According to Bloor Research, the data center migration/consolidation market is expected to grow at a 9.9% compound annual growth rate (CAGR), from $6.1 billion in 2009 to $8.1 billion by 2012. We believe that the continued spending in data center migrations will result in increased demand for our services as we help clients plan and execute these projects.

Cloud Computing/IT Services Management: According to Gartner Inc. (Gartner), cloud infrastructure services are expected to grow at a 32.5% CAGR from $2.6 billion in 2008 to $10.6 billion by 2013. IT services management provides clients with tools and processes to improve visibility in their IT environment and prepare to move to a cloud-based infrastructure. We believe that the expected growth in cloud services reflects a shift in business computing that will result in clients utilizing our consulting services as they seek to adopt this new technology.

Virtual Environments: The virtualization services market combines server virtualization infrastructure, server virtualization management and hosted virtual desktop market, and, according to Gartner, is expected to grow at a 33.6% CAGR from $1.9 billion in 2008 to $8.1 billion by 2013. We believe that this growth in the overall virtualization market will result in increased spending for our services as clients seek external expertise and support as they migrate to virtualized data center environments.

Storage/Backup & Recovery: According to Gartner, the storage services market, which includes consulting and managed services as well as storage capacity services for backup and recovery operations, is expected to grow at a 3% CAGR from $15.7 billion in 2008 to $17.9 billion by 2013. Although we do not currently provide storage capacity as part of our service offerings, we believe the growth in the overall storage services market will lead to increased demand for our consulting, integration and managed services offerings.

Security: The security services market was valued at $20.1 billion in 2007, based on services revenue, and is expected to increase at a CAGR of 17% to reach $44.1 billion by 2012 according to IDC. We believe that this growth will result in increased demand for our services, as we help clients plan and execute projects to improve their IT security.

Disaster Recovery: The disaster recovery market crosses several domains, including storage, backup, virtualization and security. According to Gartner, 56% of worldwide organizations include disaster recovery in their security budgets.

Market Overview

The convergence of new technologies and increased demands on IT infrastructure is creating significant, inter-related challenges for IT executives, including:

Optimizing IT Infrastructure and Deploying New Technologies: To improve efficiency and agility, as well as to manage costs, IT executives are looking to optimize their existing assets

The Gartner Reports described herein (the Gartner Reports) represent data, research, opinions or viewpoints published, as part of a syndicated subscription service available only to clients, by Gartner, and are not representations of fact. We have been advised by Gartner that each Gartner Report speaks as of its original publication date (and not as of the date of this prospectus) and the opinions expressed in the Gartner Reports are subject to change without notice. Please see the section titled “Industry and Market Data” for more information about the industry and market data and other statistical information used by us throughout this prospectus.

and integrate new technologies. We believe these initiatives have inherent challenges and are leading enterprises to augment their internal IT teams with third-party consulting and managed services to ensure best practices are implemented and service levels are met.

Minimizing Costs Within Constrained IT Budgets: Business and technology leaders are expected to address an increasing scope and complexity of IT challenges with fewer resources and usually under rigorous time constraints. These budgetary and time constraints are complex and interrelated, and we believe that IT executives will seek third-party assistance to reduce operational expenses and understand asset utilization and total cost of ownership, in an effort to justify current spending and potential expenses.

Managing Risk Efficiently and Cost Effectively: IT executives must address both external and internal threats in order to manage risk. External threats include catastrophic weather events and terrorist attacks that are beyond an IT executive’s control, but still must be addressed through contingency plans. External threats also include computer and network viruses and hackers. Internal risks are associated with complex, multi-vendor IT environments. As new and emerging technologies are introduced into the data center, there is an increasing opportunity for integration error. Assets may be improperly configured or staff members may not know how to manage the new technology, which could result in enterprises facing interruptions in daily business operations or the loss of data critical to business functions.

Responding to Market Dynamics and Emerging Trends: Data center infrastructure is in a constant state of change as recently evidenced by the ongoing adoption of virtualization technologies. In order to remain competitive on a cost and time-to-market basis, IT executives must ensure that they are adapting to new paradigms of efficiency, speed and application delivery. We believe that IT executives recognize that their in-house teams are more focused on managing day-to-day operations and will therefore turn to third-party consulting firms to help identify and incorporate new and emerging technologies.

Benefits of Our Services

We believe our services provide compelling benefits to our clients, including:

access to leading-edge data center strategies and practices;

demonstrable return on investment;

minimized project execution risk;

decreased risk of data loss; and

enhanced visibility into the IT environment.

Our Growth Strategy

Our objective is to enhance our industry position, while continuing to grow our revenues and profitability. Our strategy to achieve these objectives includes the following elements:

Deepen and Expand Relationships with Our Current Client Base: We have historically generated a significant amount of our revenues from new projects with existing clients. Because many of our clients are in the early stages of evolving their IT infrastructures, we expect to continue to sell services to these clients as their needs grow and evolve.

Engage with New Clients: We participate in industry events and direct marketing activities to drive broad awareness of our services to prospective clients. In 2009, we established an inside sales function in the United States and the United Kingdom to pursue and develop these prospects into new clients. Our direct sales team also pursues a target prospect list of Fortune 2500 companies to establish new client relationships.

Leverage Indirect Sales Channels: Our indirect sales channel relationships provide us with access to additional enterprise clients to whom we can ultimately cross-sell a broad range of consulting, technology integration and managed services. This cross-selling may lead to the creation of new service offerings. We plan to continue expanding our indirect sales channels relationships.

Broaden Our Managed Services Offerings: We provide a wide range of managed services to remotely monitor, report, analyze and actively manage our clients’ IT infrastructure environments. We intend to expand our managed services offerings to provide additional services within our current domain areas.

Acquire Complementary Businesses and Technology: We believe that in many cases, the best approach to meeting client demand and adding new skills and services to our service offerings is to acquire resources and expertise that specifically address emerging issues. We evaluate all potential acquisitions using our Transom business model as a filter. We assess potential acquisition targets for software tools, methodologies and domain expertise with the potential to be complementary to our business.

Clients

We have developed relationships with Fortune 1000 companies, including approximately half of the Fortune 100 companies, as well as smaller organizations. We market and provide our services primarily to companies in North America, Europe and the Middle East. We believe that our regular, direct interaction with our clients, the breadth of our client relationships and our reputation among these clients as an independent advisor differentiate us from our competitors.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009, we had no direct client that represented 10% or more of our total revenues. For the nine months ended September 30, 2008, we had no indirect client that represented 10% or more of our total revenues. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009, one of our indirect channel partners accounted for 15% of our total revenues.

Our revenues consist of services and product revenues. Our focus is on growing services revenues. Our services revenues have grown from $35.2 million in 2006 to $83.0 million in 2008, reflecting a total compounded annual growth rate of 54%, including acquisitions. Our services revenues have grown from $61.3 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to $64.8 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2009. For fiscal years 2006, 2007 and 2008, and the nine month periods ended September 30, 2008 and 2009 we had net losses to common stockholders of $(13.1) million, $(18.2) million, $(28.1) million, $(22.9) million and $(8.7) million. At September 30, 2009, we had an accumulated deficit of $110.9 million.

Risks That We Face

You should carefully consider the risks described under the section titled “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this prospectus. These risks could materially and adversely impact our business, financial condition operating results and cash flow, which could cause the trading price of our common stock to decline and could result in a partial or total loss of your investment.

Our Corporate Information

We were incorporated in Delaware in 2001. Our principal executive offices are located at 200 Crossing Boulevard, Framingham, Massachusetts 01702 and our telephone number is (508) 879-5729. Our Web site address is www.glasshouse.com. The information on, or that can be accessed through, our Web site is not part of this prospectus.

Transom^SM is our service mark.

THE OFFERING

Total common stock offered by us

Option to purchase additional shares offered to underwriters by us

Total common stock to be outstanding after this offering

Use of proceeds

We expect to use the net proceeds of this offering for working capital and general corporate purposes, and we intend to use a portion of the net proceeds to repay, from time to time, acquisition-related loans. Please see the section titled “Use of Proceeds.”

Risk factors

You should read the “Risk Factors” section of this prospectus for a discussion of factors that you should consider carefully before deciding to invest in shares of our common stock.

Proposed New York Stock Exchange symbol

GLAS

The number of shares of our common stock to be outstanding after the offering is based on 65,964,891 shares of common stock issued as of September 30, 2009, of which 63,510,377 were outstanding, including the assumed conversion of 50,517,175 shares of preferred stock issued on September 30, 2009 (including 237,789 shares of preferred stock held in treasury) into 50,517,175 shares of common stock in connection with the closing of this offering. Except where stated otherwise herein, the number of shares of common stock to be outstanding after this offering does not take into account:

8,922,019 shares of our common stock issuable upon exercise of options outstanding as of September 30, 2009 at a weighted average exercise price of $0.79 per share;

1,196,645 shares of our common stock reserved as of September 30, 2009 for future issuance under our stock-based compensation plans;

4,264,420 shares of our common stock issuable upon the exercise of outstanding warrants at a weighted average exercise price of $2.31 per share;

988,133 unvested restricted shares of our common stock issued in conjunction with our acquisitions;

shares of our common stock issuable to a syndicate of lenders led by BayStar Capital III Investment Fund, L.P. (BayStar) upon conversion of convertible promissory notes payable in the aggregate principal amount of $5.1 million, plus accrued but unpaid interest thereon;

shares of our common stock issuable to Dell upon conversion of a $25.0 million note payable, plus accrued but unpaid interest thereon, to Dell;

shares of our common stock issuable to Dell upon the exercise by Dell of a warrant to purchase shares of our common stock or preferred stock which is exercisable in connection with a qualifying financing or sale of our company and which expires upon the consummation of a qualifying public offering; and

shares of our common stock issuable to Dell upon exercise of an option to purchase 5% of our fully diluted common stock as early as ten months after our initial public offering.

Please see the subsections titled “Borrowings” and “Warrants and Other Equity Rights Issued in Conjunction with Borrowings” in the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for more information regarding the convertible note, option and warrant issued to Dell.

Unless otherwise indicated, the information we present in this prospectus assumes and reflects the following:

the automatic conversion of all outstanding shares of our preferred stock into shares of common stock upon the closing of this offering;

the filing of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and the adoption of our amended and restated bylaws to be effective upon the closing of this offering;

no exercise by the underwriters of their option to purchase additional shares; and

a 1-for- reverse split of our common stock to be effected prior to this offering.

SUMMARY HISTORICAL AND UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA

The tables below summarize our consolidated financial data. The following summary financial data should be read together with our consolidated financial statements and related notes, “Selected Consolidated Financial Data” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this prospectus.


	Year Ended December 31,									Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2006			2007			2008			2008			2009
										(unaudited)
	(In thousands, except per share data)
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
Revenues	$	37,808		$	61,241		$	85,058		$	63,070		$	65,672
Cost of revenues		29,279			45,140			65,346			49,807			47,943

Gross profit		8,529			16,101			19,712			13,263			17,729
Research and development expenses		—			146			1,050			860			449
Selling and marketing expenses		10,906			15,313			19,056			14,781			10,238
General and administrative expenses		7,058			9,421			15,419			12,676			7,099
Amortization of intangible assets		1,165			2,260			2,771			2,108			1,844

Loss from operations		(10,600)			(11,039	)		(18,584	)		(17,162	)		(1,901	)
Interest and other income (expense), net		393			(3,298	)		(4,481	)		(2,064	)		(2,809	)

Loss before income taxes and cumulative effect of change in accounting principle		(10,207)			(14,337	)		(23,065	)		(19,226	)		(4,710	)
Provision (benefit) for income taxes		—			(485	)		240			193			9

Loss before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle		(10,207)			(13,852	)		(23,305	)		(19,419	)		(4,719	)
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle		558			—			—			—			—

Net loss		(9,649)			(13,852	)		(23,305	)		(19,419	)		(4,719	)

Dividends and accretion on preferred stock		(3,482)			(4,310	)		(4,821	)		(3,505	)		(4,006	)

Net loss to common stockholders	$	(13,131	)	$	(18,162	)	$	(28,126	)	$	(22,924	)	$	(8,725	)

Net loss per share, basic and diluted	$	(2.21	)	$	(1.79	)	$	(2.13	)	$	(1.72	)	$	(0.66	)

Other unaudited financial data: EBITDA⁽²⁾	$	(8,126	)	$	(7,043	)	$	(16,395	)	$	(13,840	)	$	1,741


	As of September 30, 2009
	Actual			Pro Forma, As Adjusted(1)
	(unaudited)
	(in thousands)
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	10,904		$	—
Total assets		76,121			—
Total long term debt, including current portion		36,029			—
Redeemable convertible preferred stock warrant liability		3,623			—
Total redeemable convertible preferred stock		93,094			—
Total stockholders’ deficit		(96,455	)		—

(1) The Pro Forma, As Adjusted column in the balance sheet data table above reflects the automatic conversion of all outstanding shares of our preferred stock into an aggregate of 50,517,175 shares of common stock upon completion of this offering and our sale of shares of common stock in this offering, at an assumed initial public offering price of $ per share (the mid-point of the price range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus) and after deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses payable by us.

(2) EBITDA represents net loss before deductions for interest expense, income taxes, depreciation and amortization of tangible and intangible assets, and adjustments for non-cash changes in fair value of warrant liability. EBITDA is a supplemental financial measure, which is not based on United States generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), used by management and industry analysts to evaluate operations.

The following is a reconciliation of net loss to EBITDA (in thousands, unaudited):


	Year Ended December 31,									Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2006			2007			2008			2008			2009
EBITDA Calculation:
Net loss	$	(9,649	)	$	(13,852	)	$	(23,305	)	$	(19,419	)	$	(4,719	)
Depreciation		728			698			495			372			447
Interest expense		643			2,124			4,693			3,584			4,042
Non-cash change in fair value of warrant liability		(1,013	)		2,107			(1,607	)		(927	)		(83	)
Income taxes		—			(485	)		240			193			9
Amortization of intangible assets (including amounts in cost of revenues)		1,165			2,365			3,089			2,357			2,045

EBITDA	$	(8,126	)	$	(7,070	)	$	(16,395	)	$	(13,840	)	$	1,741

In addition to providing financial measurements based on GAAP, we present additional historical financial metrics that are not prepared in accordance with GAAP (non-GAAP). We believe that the inclusion of this non-GAAP financial measure, together with our GAAP financial measures, helps investors to gain a meaningful understanding of our past performance and future results. This approach is consistent with how management measures and forecasts our performance, especially when comparing such results to previous periods or forecasts. Our management uses this non-GAAP measure, in addition to GAAP financial measures, as the basis for measuring our core operating performance and comparing such performance to that of prior periods and to the performance of our competitors. This non-GAAP measure is also used by management in its financial, operational and strategic decision-making and in developing incentive compensation plans.

We consider EBITDA to be an important indicator of our operational strength and performance of our core business and a valuable measure of our historical operating trends.

There are limitations associated with reliance on EBITDA because it is specific to our operations and financial performance, which makes comparisons with other companies’ financial results imprecise. It does not include interest expense, which is a necessary and ongoing part of our cost structure resulting from debt incurred to acquire businesses and expand operations. EBITDA also excludes depreciation, amortization expenses, gains and losses on non-cash changes in fair value of warrant liability. The exclusion of these items, in light of their recurring nature, is a material limitation of EBITDA. To manage these limitations, we have policies and procedures in place to identify expenses that qualify as interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization to approve and segregate these expenses from other expenses to ensure that our EBITDA is consistently reflected from period to period.

EBITDA excludes some items that affect net loss and may vary among companies. The EBITDA we present may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. EBITDA does not give effect to the cash that we must use to service our debt or pay income taxes and thus does not reflect the funds generated from operations or actually available for capital investments. By providing both GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures, we believe that investors are able to compare our GAAP results to those of other companies while also gaining a better understanding of our operating performance as evaluated by management.

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Before investing in our common stock, you should carefully consider each of the following risk factors and all of the other information set forth in this prospectus (including our financial statements and the related notes appearing at the end of this prospectus). If any of the events contemplated by the following discussion of risks should occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects would likely be materially and adversely affected. As a result, the market price of our common stock could decline, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

We have a history of losses and we may not achieve or sustain profitability in the future.

We have not yet achieved profitability for any fiscal year. We had a net loss to common shareholders of $8.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and as of September 30, 2009 our accumulated deficit was $110.9 million. We expect to continue to incur losses, and we may not become profitable in the foreseeable future, if ever. We expect to make significant expenditures to further develop our business. In addition, as a public company, we will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. We will have to generate and sustain increased revenues to achieve profitability. Our revenue growth trends in prior periods may not be sustainable, and we may not generate sufficient revenues to achieve or maintain profitability. We may incur significant losses in the future for a number of reasons, including those discussed in other risk factors and factors that we cannot foresee.

We operate in a rapidly evolving industry, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict.

Since the founding of our company in May 2001, we have operated in an industry characterized by rapid technological innovation, changing client needs, evolving industry standards and frequent introductions of new products and services. Our success depends on our ability to implement data center consulting, technology integration and managed services that anticipate and respond to rapid and continuing changes in technology, industry developments and client needs. As we encounter new client requirements and increasing competitive pressures, we will likely be required to modify, enhance, reposition or introduce new solutions and service offerings. We may not be successful in doing so in a timely, cost-effective and appropriately responsive manner, or at all. All of these factors make it difficult to predict our future operating results, which may impair our ability to manage our business and our investors’ ability to assess our prospects.

We may experience quarterly fluctuations in our operating results due to a number of factors, which makes our future results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below expectations or our guidance.

Our operating results may fluctuate due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. You should not rely on our past results as an indication of our future performance. If our revenues or operating results fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, or below any guidance we may provide to the market, the price of our common stock could decline substantially.

In addition to other risk factors listed in this “Risk Factors” section, factors that may affect our quarterly operating results include:

The amount of our outstanding debt may prevent us from taking actions we would otherwise consider in our best interest.

We had approximately $42.8 million in outstanding principal, accrued interest and final balloon payments under existing debt obligations as of September 30, 2009. Of this amount, approximately $34.1 million represented convertible debt. We believe that the lenders holding convertible debt intend to convert such debt into shares of our equity securities immediately prior to this offering, but there can be no assurances that they will do so. In the event any convertible debt is not converted into shares of equity securities immediately prior to this offering, cash required to repay such debt may limit our ability to use the proceeds from this offering to make necessary and desirable capital investments in our business and to take advantage of significant business opportunities, including acquisitions. In the event any convertible debt is converted into shares of our common stock following this offering, the holders of shares of our common stock, including investors purchasing shares of our common stock in this offering, will incur immediate and substantial dilution as of the date of the debt conversion.

Debt that remains outstanding following this offering and the limitations contained in the loan agreements governing the terms of such debt (the Loan Agreements) could have material consequences on our business, including:

Our failure to promptly satisfy our obligations under the Loan Agreements may limit our ability to implement our business plan which may have an immediate, severe and adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity. In the event that we cannot satisfy our obligations under the Loan Agreements, we would be forced to drastically curtail operations, dispose of assets or cease operations altogether. Please see the subsections titled “Borrowings” and “Warrants and Other Equity Rights Issued in Conjunction with Borrowings” in the section titled

“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for more information regarding our outstanding debt and equity rights granted to our lenders in connection with the incurrence of such debt.

Our business could be materially and adversely affected as a result of the risks associated with our acquisitions.

As part of our business strategy, we have acquired and will continue seeking to acquire businesses that provide us with additional intellectual property, client relationships, geographic coverage and domain expertise. We can provide no assurances that we will be able to find and identify desirable acquisition targets in the future or that we will be successful in entering into a definitive agreement with any one target. In addition, even if we reach a definitive agreement with a target with respect to an acquisition, there can be no assurance that we will consummate such acquisition.

Our acquisitions have been and will be accompanied by risks commonly encountered in the acquisition of a business, which include, among other risks:

If one or more of the above risks is realized, our business, results of operations or financial condition could be materially adversely affected. To the extent that we issue shares of our common stock or other rights to purchase our common stock or other equity securities in connection with any future acquisition, existing shareholders may experience dilution and our earnings per share may decrease.

In addition to the risks commonly encountered in the acquisition of a business, we may also experience risks relating to the challenges and costs of closing an acquisition transaction. These risks may be exacerbated as a result of managing multiple acquisitions at the same time.

We rely on indirect sales channels to refer clients to us and disruptions to, or our failure to establish new and maintain existing relationships with companies in, our indirect sales channels would harm our business.

Our future success is dependent upon establishing and maintaining successful relationships in our indirect sales channels. A significant portion of our revenues is generated by sales through our indirect sales channels and we expect indirect sales to continue to make up a significant portion of our total revenues in the future. In the nine months ended September 30, 2009, approximately 44% of our revenues were generated by sales through our indirect sales channels. Accordingly, our revenues depend in large part on the referral and effective sales and lead generation activities of these indirect sales channels.

Establishing and maintaining our indirect sales channels and providing training in our service offerings and solutions to companies in our indirect sales channels requires significant time and resources. In order to develop and expand our indirect sales channels, we must continue to scale and improve our processes and procedures that support these channels, including investment in systems and training. Those processes and procedures may become increasingly complex and difficult to manage as we grow our organization. Our indirect sales channels contracts do not typically prohibit the offering of products or services that compete with ours. Our competitors may provide incentives to companies in our indirect sales channels that favor our competitors’ services and solutions or that prevent or reduce sales of our services and solutions. Companies in our indirect sales channels may choose not to offer our services and solutions exclusively or at all. Establishing relationships with companies in our indirect sales channels that have a history of selling our competitors’ services and solutions may also prove to be difficult. In addition, some companies in our indirect sales channels are also competitors. Our failure to establish and maintain successful relationships within our indirect sales channels would seriously harm our business and operating results.

We depend on a limited number of clients for a substantial portion of our revenues in any fiscal period and the loss of, or a significant shortfall in demand from, these clients could significantly harm our results of operations.

During any given fiscal period, a relatively small number of clients typically accounts for a significant percentage of our revenues. For example, for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, revenues generated by sales to our top 20 clients accounted for approximately 59% of our total revenues and sales to one company in our indirect sales channels accounted for approximately 15% of our total revenues. In the past, the clients that comprised our top 20 clients have continually changed and we also have experienced significant fluctuations in individual clients’ usage of our services. In addition, our operating costs are relatively fixed in the near term. As a consequence, we may not be able to adjust our expenses in the short term to address the unanticipated loss of a large client during any particular period. As such, we may experience significant, unanticipated fluctuations in our operating results which may cause us to not meet our expectations or those of stock market analysts, which could cause our stock price to decline.

Our clients have unexpectedly terminated and in the future could unexpectedly terminate their contracts for our services.

Some of our client contracts have been, and in the future could be, cancelled by the client with limited advance notice and without significant monetary penalty. A client’s unexpected termination of a contract for our services could result in a loss of expected revenues and additional expenses for staff that were allocated to that client’s project. We could be required to maintain underutilized employees who were assigned to the terminated contract, thereby reducing the overall utilization rate of our professionals. The unexpected cancellation or significant reduction in the scope of any of our large projects, or client termination of one or more recurring revenues contracts, could have a material adverse effect on our overall profitability, business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our financial results would suffer if the market for IT services and solutions does not continue to grow.

Our services and solutions are designed to address the growing markets for (i) data center consulting (including migrations, consolidations and disaster recovery), (ii) technology integration services (including storage and data protection services and the implementation of virtualization solutions) and (iii) managed services (including operational support and client support). These markets are still evolving. A reduction in the demand for our services and solutions could be caused by, among other things, lack of client acceptance, weakening economic conditions, competing technologies and services or decreases in corporate spending. Our future financial results would suffer if the market for our IT services and solutions does not continue to grow.

Our financial results may be adversely impacted if we are unable to maintain favorable pricing and utilization rates and control our costs.

Our gross profit margin, and therefore our profitability, is dependent on the rates we are able to recover for our services. If we are not able to maintain favorable pricing for our services, our gross profit margin and profitability may suffer. The rates we are able to recover for our services are affected by a number of factors, including:

If we are not able to maintain an appropriate utilization rate for our professionals, our profit margin and profitability may suffer. Our utilization rates are affected by a number of factors, including:

We expect our costs to increase as a public company, based in part on an increase in legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. In addition, we expect our costs to increase as we expand our sales and marketing activities. These increased costs, considered

independently or in the context of any failure to maintain our pricing and utilization rates with respect to the services we provide, could have a material adverse effect on our overall profitability, business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may lose money if we do not accurately estimate costs of fixed-price engagements.

Most of our projects are based on fixed-price, fixed-time contracts, rather than contracts in which payment to us is determined on a time and materials basis. Our pricing on these projects is highly dependent on our internal forecasts and predictions about the projects and the marketplace, which might be based on limited data and could be inaccurate. There is a risk that we will underprice our contracts or fail to estimate accurately the costs of performing the work. Our failure to estimate accurately the resources and schedule required for a project, or our failure to complete our contractual obligations in a manner consistent with the project plan upon which our fixed-price, fixed-time contract was based, could make these projects less profitable or unprofitable and could have a material adverse effect on our overall profitability, business, financial condition and results of operations. We are increasingly entering into contracts for large projects that magnify this risk. We have been required to commit unanticipated additional resources to complete projects in the past, which has resulted in reduced project margins. We will likely experience similar situations in the future.

If we are unable to further penetrate our existing markets, our business prospects may be limited.

We expect that our future success will depend, in part, upon our ability to further penetrate the existing markets for data center consulting, technology integration and managed services. To date, we have penetrated these markets in varying degrees. Part of our strategy for expanding our share of each market involves “cross-selling” our services in one market to our existing clients and partners in a different market. Our sales strategies may not be effective in further penetrating our existing markets and such failure could limit our business prospects and results of operations.

Our international sales and operations subject us to additional risks that may adversely affect our operating results.

For the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009, approximately 58% and 51% of our revenues, respectively, were generated by our subsidiaries located outside the United States. We have facilities and sales personnel located in the United Kingdom (U.K.), Israel and Turkey. We expect to continue to add personnel in additional countries. Our international operations subject us to a variety of risks, including:

As we continue to expand our business internationally, our success will depend, in part, on our ability to anticipate and effectively manage these and other risks associated with our international operations. Our failure to manage any of these risks successfully could harm our international operations, reduce our international sales and negatively impact our results of operations.

If we are unable to manage our growth effectively, our revenues and profits could be adversely affected.

We have expanded our operations significantly over the past several years, increasing our total number of employees from approximately 204 at September 30, 2006 to 501 at September 30, 2009, and acquiring eight companies in diverse geographic areas over that same time period. We anticipate that further significant increases in employee headcount and geographic expansion will be required as we continue to grow our business. Our future operating results depend to a large extent on our ability to manage this expansion and growth successfully. Sustaining our growth will place significant demands on our management as well as on our administrative, operational and financial resources. For us to continue to manage our growth, we must continue to improve our operational, financial and management information systems and expand, motivate and manage our workforce as well as successfully integrate our acquisitions. If we are unable to manage our growth successfully without compromising our quality of service and our profit margins, or if new systems that we implement to assist in managing our growth do not produce the expected benefits, our revenues and profits could be adversely affected. Risks that we face in undertaking future expansion include:

A failure to manage our growth effectively could materially adversely affect our ability to market and sell our services and solutions.

We may not be able to respond to rapid technological changes with new solutions and service offerings, which could have a material adverse effect on our sales and profitability.

The markets for our services and solutions are characterized by rapid technological changes, evolving client needs, frequent new service, software and product introductions and changing industry standards. The introduction of services and solutions by competitors embodying new technologies and the emergence of new industry standards could make our existing and future services and solutions obsolete and unmarketable. As a result, we may not be able to accurately predict the lifecycle of our services and solutions, and our offerings may become obsolete before we receive the amount of revenues that we anticipate from them. If any of the foregoing events occurs, our ability to retain or increase our position in the relevant markets could be adversely affected.

To be successful, we need to develop and introduce new services and solutions on a timely and cost-effective basis that keep pace with technological developments and emerging industry standards and address the increasingly sophisticated needs of our clients. We may experience difficulties that could delay or prevent the successful development, introduction and marketing of services and solutions that respond to technological changes or evolving industry standards, or fail to develop services and solutions that adequately meet the requirements of the marketplace or achieve market acceptance. Our failure to develop and market such services and solutions on a timely basis, or at all, could have a material adverse effect on our sales and profitability.

We partner with third parties on certain complex engagements in which our performance depends upon, and may be adversely impacted by, the performance of such third parties.

Our partners frequently engage us to perform discrete IT infrastructure services within the context of broader, sophisticated projects. If our partners fail to perform their portions of the projects in a timely or satisfactory manner, the relevant client may elect to terminate the project. A termination of this type would result in our recognition of lower-than-expected future revenues, but would not impact revenues recognized to date. Additionally, we may realize lower profits if we incur additional costs due to delays or because we must assign additional personnel to complete the project and are unable to charge these additional costs to our partner. Furthermore, our relationships with our clients and our reputation generally may suffer as a result of our partners’ unsatisfactory performance.

If we do not attract and retain qualified professional staff, we may be unable to adequately perform our client projects and could be limited in accepting new client engagements.

Our business is labor intensive and our success depends on our ability to attract, retain, train and motivate highly skilled employees, including employees that become part of our organization in connection with our acquisitions. The increase in demand for data center consulting, technology integration and managed services has further increased the need for employees with specialized skills or significant experience in these areas. Our ability to expand our operations will be highly dependent on our ability to attract a sufficient number of highly skilled employees and to retain our employees and the employees of companies that we have acquired. We may not be successful in attracting and retaining enough employees to achieve our desired expansion or staffing plans. Furthermore, the industry turnover rates for these types of employees are high and we may not be successful in retaining, training or motivating our employees. Any inability to attract, retain, train and motivate employees could impair our ability to adequately manage and complete existing projects and to accept new client engagements. Such inability may also force us to increase our hiring of independent contractors, which may increase our costs and reduce our profitability on client engagements. We must also devote substantial managerial and financial resources to monitoring and managing our workforce. Our future success will depend on our ability to manage the levels and related costs of our workforce.

If we fail to meet our service level obligations under our service level agreements, we would be subject to penalties and could lose clients.

We have service level agreements with many of our clients under which we guarantee specified levels of service availability. These arrangements involve the risk that we may not have adequately estimated the level of service we will in fact be able to provide. If we fail to meet our service level obligations under these agreements, we would be subject to penalties, which could result in higher than expected costs, decreased revenues and decreased gross and operating margins. We could also lose clients by failing to meet our service level obligations under these agreements and our reputation generally may suffer as a result.

If we fail to offer high quality client support and services, our business would suffer.

Once our solutions and methodologies are deployed within our clients’ IT infrastructure environments, our clients rely on our support services to resolve any related issues. A high level of client support and service is important for the successful marketing and sale of our services and solutions. High quality client support and service will be of increasing importance. If we do not help our clients quickly resolve post-deployment issues and provide effective ongoing support, our ability to sell our solutions and methodologies to existing clients would suffer and our reputation with potential clients would be harmed. As we expand our sales, we will be required to hire and train additional support personnel. In addition, as we expand our operations internationally, our support organization will face additional challenges, including those associated with delivering support, training and documentation in

languages other than English. If we fail to maintain high quality client support or grow our support organization to match any future sales growth, our business will suffer.

Our executive officers and senior management are important to our client relationships and the loss of one or more senior managers could have a negative impact on our business.

We believe that our success depends in part on the continued contributions of our president and chief executive officer, Mark Shirman, and other executive officers and members of our senior management. We rely on our executive officers and senior management to generate business and execute our strategies successfully. In addition, the relationships and reputation that members of our management team have established and maintain with our clients contribute to our ability to operate a robust business. The loss of Mr. Shirman or any other executive officer or member of senior management could impair our ability to identify and secure new clients, new engagements from existing clients and otherwise manage our business.

Economic conditions, including prolonged economic downturns, could materially harm our business.

Negative trends in the general economy could cause a decrease in corporate spending on IT services and solutions in general and negatively affect the rate of growth of our business. Any reduction in corporate confidence or corporate spending in general may adversely affect demand for our services and solutions.

We face intense competition that could prevent us from increasing our revenues or could reduce our gross profit margin.

The data center consulting, technology integration and managed services markets are competitive, and, due in part to the forecasted growth rates in each market, we expect competition in all markets to intensify in the future. Other companies may introduce new services and solutions in the same markets we have entered or intend to enter. This competition could result in increased pricing pressure, reduced gross profit margins, increased sales and marketing expenses and stagnant or reduced market share.

Many of our current or potential competitors have longer operating histories, greater name recognition, larger client bases and significantly greater financial, technical, sales, marketing and other resources than we have. In addition, our competitors may be able to bundle services that we do not offer together with other products or services at a combined price that is more attractive than the prices we charge for our services alone. As competitive services are introduced or new competitors enter our markets, we expect increased pricing pressure, which could have a negative impact on our revenues and on the gross margins for our services and solutions.

As our markets continue to develop and expand, we expect increased competition from both established and emerging companies, including offshore companies that benefit from lower labor costs. We also expect that some of our competitors may make acquisitions or enter into partnerships or other strategic relationships with one another in order to offer more comprehensive product and service offerings than they are able to offer individually. We believe these types of transactions will continue to occur in the future as companies attempt to strengthen or maintain their market positions in an evolving industry. The companies resulting from these transactions could significantly change the competitive landscape and adversely affect our ability to compete effectively and maintain indirect sales channels.

Our sales cycles can be long and unpredictable, and our sales efforts require considerable time and expense. As a result, our sales are difficult to predict and may vary substantially from quarter to quarter, which may cause our operating results to fluctuate significantly.

The timing of our revenues is difficult to predict. Our sales efforts involve educating our clients about the use and benefit of our services and solutions, including their technical capabilities and

potential cost savings to an organization. Clients typically undertake a significant evaluation process that has in the past resulted in a lengthy sales cycle, which typically lasts several months, and may last a year or longer. We spend substantial time, effort and money on our sales efforts without any assurance that our efforts will produce any sales. In addition, client purchases of our services and solutions are frequently subject to budget constraints, multiple approvals, and unplanned administrative, processing and other delays. If sales expected from a specific client for a particular quarter are not realized in that quarter or at all, our results could fall short of public expectations and our business, operating results and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

If we are unable to expand our sales capabilities, we may not be able to generate increased revenues.

We must expand our sales force to generate increased revenues from clients. As of September 30, 2009 we had a team of 43 dedicated sales professionals. Our services and solutions require a sophisticated sales effort targeted at the senior management of our prospective clients. New hires require training and will take time to achieve full productivity. We cannot be certain that new hires will become as productive as necessary or that we will be able to hire enough qualified individuals in the future. Failure to hire qualified sales personnel will preclude us from expanding our business and growing our revenues.

Our services and solutions involve storing and replicating mission-critical data for our clients and are highly technical in nature. If client data is lost or corrupted, our reputation and business could be harmed.

Our data center consulting and technology integration services involve storing and replicating mission-critical data for our clients within their data centers. The process of storing and replicating that data within their data centers is highly technical and complex. If any data is lost or corrupted in connection with the use of our services and solutions, our reputation could be seriously harmed and market acceptance of our solutions and services could suffer. In addition, our solutions have contained, and may in the future contain, undetected errors, defects or security vulnerabilities. Some errors in our solutions may only be discovered after a solution has been in use by clients. Any errors, defects or security vulnerabilities discovered in our solutions after commercial release could result in loss of revenues, loss of clients, increased service and warranty cost and diversion of attention of our management and technical personnel, any of which could significantly harm our business. In addition, we could face claims for product liability, tort or breach of warranty. Defending a lawsuit, regardless of its merit, is costly and may divert management’s attention and adversely affect the market’s perception of us and our service offerings.

Failures or interruptions of our services could materially harm our revenues, impair our ability to conduct our operations and damage relationships with our clients.

Our success depends in part on our ability to provide reliable data center consulting, technology integration and managed services to our clients. Our network operations are currently located in Cary, North Carolina and Weybridge, England, and are susceptible to damage or interruption from human error, fire, flood, power loss, telecommunications failure, terrorist attacks and similar events. We could also experience failures or interruptions of our systems and services, or other problems in connection with our operations, as a result of:

In addition, our business interruption insurance may be insufficient to compensate us for losses that may occur. Any interruptions in our systems or services could damage our reputation and substantially harm our business and results of operations.

We identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting relating to one of our 2007 acquisitions, which resulted in the restatement of our 2007 and 2008 audited financial statements.

In connection with our review of our financial statements for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, we identified a material weakness in the design and operation of our internal controls relating to the purchase accounting of one of our 2007 acquisitions. A material weakness is defined as a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of a company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis by the company’s internal controls. Specifically, we determined that we had insufficient communication of final deal terms between our internal departments. As a result of the identified deficiency, we misstated non-cash compensation expense, goodwill, additional paid in capital and common stock attributable to the acquisition. See note 9 of our consolidated financial statements for the impact of our restatement to individual years. This misstatement required a restatement of our audited financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008.

Subsequent to the 2007 acquisition, we implemented procedures and controls designed to improve communication with respect to acquisition transactions between our internal departments. Although we believe we have addressed the material weakness, the measures we have taken may not be effective, and we may not be able to implement and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting in the future. If we have material weaknesses in the future, it could affect the financial results that we report or create a perception that those financial results do not fairly state our financial condition or results of operations. Either of those events could have an adverse effect on the value of our common stock.

We may need additional capital in the future and it may not be available on acceptable terms.

We have historically relied on outside financing and cash flow from operations to fund our operations, capital expenditures and expansion. However, we may require additional capital in the future to fund our operations and acquisitions, finance investments in equipment or personnel, or respond to competitive pressures. We cannot assure you that additional financing will be available on terms acceptable to us. In addition, the terms of available financing may place limits on our financial and operational flexibility. If we are unable to obtain sufficient capital in the future, we may not be able to continue to meet client demand for service quality, availability and competitive pricing. We also may be forced to reduce our operations or may not be able to expand or acquire complementary businesses or be able to develop new services or otherwise respond to changing business conditions or competitive pressures.

Present economic conditions and the recent economic downturn have made the business climate more volatile and more costly. If economic conditions deteriorate further, or do not improve, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more difficult or costly to obtain, and more dilutive to our stockholders. While we believe we have adequate capital resources and cash flows from operations to meet current working capital and capital expenditure requirements, a further economic downturn or

significant increase in our expenses could require additional financing on less than attractive rates or on terms that are excessively dilutive to existing stockholders. Failure to secure any necessary financing in a timely manner and on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on our stock price and our future operating results.

We have a large amount of goodwill as a result of our acquisitions. Our earnings will be harmed if we suffer an impairment of our goodwill.

As of September 30, 2009, we had goodwill of $19.3 million. Goodwill represents the excess of the amount we paid in our various acquisitions over the fair value of their net assets at the date of the acquisition. We do not amortize acquired goodwill but instead we test it for impairment on an annual basis based upon a fair value approach. Testing for impairment of goodwill involves an estimation of the fair value of our net assets and involves a high degree of judgment and subjectivity. If we have an impairment to our goodwill, the amount of any impairment could be significant and could have a material adverse effect on our reported financial results for the period in which the charge is taken and could result in a decrease in the market price of our common stock.

We will incur significant increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management will be required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives.

As a public company, we will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules subsequently implemented by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), have imposed various new requirements on public companies, including requiring establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and changes in corporate governance practices. Our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to these new compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time consuming and costly. We expect these rules and regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to incur substantial costs to maintain the same or similar coverage.

We could be adversely affected by violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws.

The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to non-U.S. officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. As a global services company, we conduct business in North America, Europe and the Middle East, including with governments and government agencies in these regions. Prior to the completion of this offering, we will adopt policies and procedures designed to enforce compliance with these regulations. However, we cannot assure you that we will not be subject to liability under anti-bribery laws for acts committed by our employees or agents. Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could lead to civil and criminal penalties or other sanctions that could have a material adverse effect on our overall profitability, business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we fail to establish and maintain proper and effective internal control over financial reporting, our operating results and our ability to operate our business could be harmed.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective internal controls for financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. In particular, we will be required to perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal controls over financial reporting to

allow management and our independent registered public accounting firm to report, commencing in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2011, on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting. Our testing, or the subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses. Our compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act will require that we incur substantial accounting expenses and expend significant management efforts. We currently do not have an internal audit group, and we will need to hire additional accounting and financial staff. Moreover, if we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 in a timely manner or if we or our independent registered public accounting firm identify deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the NYSE, the Securities and Exchange Commission or other regulatory authorities, which would require additional financial and management resources.

Our investment portfolio may become impaired by further deterioration of the capital markets.

Our investments are intended to preserve principal while providing liquidity adequate to meet projected cash requirements. Risks of principal loss are intended to be minimized through investing primarily in money market funds, but these investments are not, in every case, guaranteed or fully insured. In light of recent changes in the credit market, some high quality short-term investment securities, similar to the types of securities that we invest in, have suffered investment losses. From time to time, we may suffer losses on our investments, which could have a material adverse impact on our operations.

The recent disruptions in the credit and financial markets have negatively affected investments generally, including money market funds. The recent global economic crisis may have a negative impact on the market values of the investments in our investment portfolio. We cannot predict future market conditions or market liquidity and there can be no assurance that the markets for these securities will not deteriorate or that the institutions that these investments are with will be able to meet their debt obligations at the time we may need to liquidate such investments or until such time as the investments mature.

Our methodologies and software solutions may infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties and may create liability for us as well as harm our reputation and client relationships.

The methodologies and software solutions we offer to clients may infringe upon the intellectual property rights of third parties and result in legal claims against our clients and us. These claims may damage our reputation, adversely impact our client relationships and create liability for us. Moreover, we generally agree in our client contracts to indemnify clients for expenses or liabilities they incur as a result of third party intellectual property infringement claims associated with our services and the resolution of these claims, irrespective of whether a court determines that our methodologies and software solutions infringed another party’s intellectual property rights, may be time-consuming, disruptive to our business and extraordinarily costly. Finally, in connection with an intellectual property infringement dispute, we may be required to cease using or developing certain intellectual property that we offer to our clients. These circumstances could adversely affect our ability to generate revenues as well as require us to incur significant expenses to develop alternative or modified services for our clients.

If we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights, our competitive position could be harmed or we could be required to incur significant expenses to enforce our rights.

Our success depends to a significant degree upon the protection of our proprietary technology rights, particularly the proprietary tools associated with our Transom business model. We rely on trade

secret, copyright and trademark laws and confidentiality agreements with employees and third parties, all of which offer only limited protection. The steps we have taken to protect our intellectual property may not prevent misappropriation of our proprietary rights or the reverse engineering of our solutions. Additionally, our business often involves the development of services and solutions for specific client engagements. While we generally retain ownership of these service methodologies and solutions, issues relating to the ownership of and rights to intellectual property developed in client engagements can be complicated and there can be no assurance that disputes will not arise that affect our ability to continue to engage in the commercial use of such intellectual property. Legal standards relating to the validity, enforceability and scope of protection of intellectual property rights in other countries are uncertain and may afford little or no effective protection of our services, software, methodology and other proprietary rights. Consequently, we may be unable to prevent our services, software, methodologies and other proprietary rights from being exploited abroad and efforts to prevent such exploitation could be costly. Policing the unauthorized use of our services, software, methodologies and other proprietary rights is expensive, difficult and, in some cases, impossible. Litigation may be necessary in the future to enforce or defend our intellectual property rights, protect our trade secrets or determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others. Such litigation could result in substantial costs and diversion of management resources, either of which could harm our business. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating our intellectual property.

In connection with our strategic relationships with our technology partners Dell, Cisco and Bull SAS, we have granted each such partner a perpetual license to certain of our intellectual property. Such licenses do not restrict our partners from exploiting our intellectual property in a way that is competitive with our business, products and/or services. While we believe that our personnel and experience in the industry are essential to commercial exploitation of our intellectual property, we cannot guarantee that such partners will not create competitive services offerings that leverage our intellectual property. Further, Dell and Cisco are permitted to sublicense the rights granted to our intellectual property to other companies that might compete with our business, products and/or services. Our ability to control the use of and protect our intellectual property may be affected by any sublicenses granted by Dell and/or Cisco.

Furthermore, many of our current and potential competitors have the ability to dedicate substantially greater resources to developing and protecting their technology or intellectual property rights than we do. In addition, our attempts to protect our proprietary technology and intellectual property rights may be further limited due to the fact that our employees are attractive to other market participants and may leave our company with significant knowledge of our proprietary information. Consequently, others may develop services and methodologies that are similar or superior to our services and methodologies or design around our intellectual property.

Our use of open source software could impose limitations on our ability to commercialize our solutions.

We incorporate open source software into certain of our solutions. Although we monitor our use of open source closely, the terms of many open source licenses have not been interpreted by U.S. courts, and there is a risk that such licenses could be construed in a manner that could impose unanticipated conditions or restrictions on our ability to commercialize our products. In such event, we could be required to seek licenses from third parties in order to continue offering our products, to re-engineer our products or to discontinue the sale of our products in the event re-engineering cannot be accomplished on a timely basis, any of which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

Our existing stockholders will have the ability to control the outcome of matters submitted for stockholder approval and may have interests that differ from those of our other stockholders.

After this offering, our existing stockholders, which will include certain executive officers, key employees and directors and their affiliates, will beneficially own approximately % of our outstanding common stock (approximately % if the underwriters’ option to purchase additional shares is exercised in full) and will have the ability to control all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors. As a result, our existing stockholders would have the power to prevent a change of control in our company. The interests of our existing stockholders may differ from the interests of our stockholders who purchased their shares of our common stock in this offering, and this concentration of voting power may have the affect of delaying or impeding actions that could be beneficial to you, including actions that may be supported by our board of directors. As part of the purchase agreement we executed with Dell, we granted Dell an option to purchase 5% of our common stock calculated on a fully-diluted basis (the Dell Option) which may be exercised by Dell as soon as ten months following this offering. We also issued Dell a warrant (the Dell Warrant) to purchase shares of our common stock or preferred stock which is exercisable in connection with a qualifying financing or a sale of our company and which expires upon the consummation of a qualifying public offering. If Dell exercises its rights under the Dell Option or Dell Warrant, voting power will be further concentrated among existing stockholders. Further, two of our existing stockholders, have rights of first refusal with respect to certain issuances of our new securities and notice and information rights with respect to a proposed sale of our company. Please see the section titled “Principal Stockholders” for additional information regarding the ownership of our outstanding stock by our executive officers, directors and their affiliates and the subsections titled “Borrowings” and “Warrants and Other Equity Rights Issued in Conjunction with Borrowings” in the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for additional information related to the Dell Purchase Agreement, Dell Option and Dell Warrant.

Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our common stock. Although we anticipate that our common stock will be approved for listing on the NYSE, an active trading market for our shares may never develop or be sustained following this offering. If the market does not develop or is not sustained, it may be difficult for you to sell your shares of common stock at a price that is attractive to you or at all. In addition, an inactive market may impair our ability to raise capital by selling shares and may impair our ability to acquire other companies or technologies by using our shares as consideration, which, in turn, could materially adversely affect our business.

The price of our common stock may be volatile and fluctuate substantially, which could result in substantial losses for investors purchasing shares in this offering.

The initial public offering price for the shares of our common stock sold in this offering will be determined by negotiation between the representatives of the underwriters and us. This price may not reflect the market price of our common stock following this offering. In addition, the market price of our common stock is likely to be highly volatile and may fluctuate substantially due to the following factors (in addition to the other risk factors described in this section):

In addition, the stock markets in general have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of the particular companies affected. These broad market and industry factors may materially harm the market price of our common stock irrespective of our operating performance. As a result of these factors, you might be unable to resell your shares at or above the initial public offering price after this offering. In addition, in the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against the affected company. This type of litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

We currently do not intend to pay dividends on our common stock and, consequently, your only opportunity to achieve a return on your investment is if the price of our common stock appreciates.

Following the completion of this offering, we do not anticipate that we will pay any cash dividends on shares of our common stock for the foreseeable future. Any determination to pay dividends in the future will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on results of operations, financial condition, contractual restrictions, restrictions imposed by applicable law and other factors our board of directors deems relevant. Accordingly, if you purchase shares in this offering, realization of a gain on your investment will depend on the appreciation of the price of our common stock, which may never occur. Investors seeking cash dividends in the foreseeable future should not purchase our common stock. Please see the section titled “Dividend Policy” for additional information.

Upon expiration of lock-up agreements between the underwriters and our officers, directors and holders of substantially all of our common stock, a substantial number of shares of our common stock could be sold into the public market shortly after this offering, which could depress our stock price.

Our officers, directors and the holders of substantially all of our common stock have entered into lock-up agreements with our underwriters which prohibit the disposal or pledge of, or the hedging against, any of their common stock or securities convertible into or exchangeable for shares of common stock for a period through the date 180 days after the date of this prospectus. The market price of our common stock could decline as a result of sales by our existing stockholders in the market after this offering and after the expiration of the lock-up period, or the perception that these sales could occur. Once a trading market develops for our common stock, and after the lock-up period expires, many of our stockholders will have an opportunity to sell their stock for the first time. These factors could also make it difficult for us to raise additional capital by selling stock. Please see the section titled “Shares Eligible for Future Sale” for additional information regarding these factors.

As a new investor, you will incur immediate and substantial dilution as a result of this offering.

The initial public offering price of our common stock will be substantially higher than the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share of our outstanding common stock. Accordingly, if you purchase shares of our common stock at the assumed initial public offering price (the midpoint of the range set forth on the cover page of this prospectus), you will incur immediate and substantial dilution of $ per share. If the holders of outstanding options or warrants exercise those options or warrants, you will suffer further dilution. Please see the section titled “Dilution” for additional information.

Our management will have broad discretion over the use of the proceeds we receive in this offering and might not apply the proceeds in ways that increase the value of your investment.

Our management will have broad discretion to use the net proceeds from this offering, and you will be relying on the judgment of our management regarding the application of these proceeds. They might not apply the net proceeds of this offering in ways that increase the value of your investment. We expect to use the net proceeds from this offering for general corporate purposes, including working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions and further development of our services and solutions, and for debt repayment from time to time. We have not allocated these net proceeds for any specific purposes. Our management might not be able to yield any return on the investment and use of these net proceeds. You will not have the opportunity to influence our decisions on how to use the proceeds.

Anti-takeover provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and in Delaware law could prevent or delay a change in control of our company.

We are a Delaware corporation and the anti-takeover provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control by prohibiting us from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder for a period of three years after the person becomes an interested stockholder, even if a change of control would be beneficial to our existing stockholders. For more information, please see the section titled “Description of Capital Stock—Anti-Takeover Effects of Our Certificate of Incorporation, Bylaws and Delaware Law.” In addition, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a change in our management or control over us that stockholders may consider favorable. Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws, which will be in effect as of the closing of this offering:

For information regarding these and other provisions, please see the section titled “Description of Capital Stock.”

We have contractual obligations that could prevent or delay a change in control of our company.

In November 2008, we entered into a securities purchase agreement with Dell and Cisco and an amendment to the Dell Purchase Agreement which together contain provisions requiring us to notify Cisco and Dell in the event that we receive a bona fide proposal for a merger, sale of substantially all of our assets, sale or redemption of our shares or similar transaction that results in a change of control of our company. For a period of ten days following receipt of our notification, each of Cisco and Dell has the right to submit a proposal to acquire us or to enter into a similar change of control transaction and, if requested, we are required to provide them with information regarding the proposed change of control transaction. Until the expiration of the ten day period, we are required to refrain from entering into any action or arrangement which would limit or restrict our ability to provide information to, negotiate with, receive, accept or approve a proposal from, or otherwise complete an acquisition or change of control transaction with Cisco or Dell. By limiting our ability to negotiate and complete transactions with potential acquirers or purchasers other than Cisco or Dell, these restrictions may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports or publish unfavorable research or reports about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us, our business, our market or our competitors. We do not currently have and may never obtain research coverage by securities and industry analysts. If no securities or industry analysts commence coverage of our company, the trading price for our stock could be negatively impacted. In the event we obtain securities or industry analyst coverage, if one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our stock, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases to cover us or fails to regularly publish reports on us, interest in our stock could decrease, which could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

Completion of this offering may limit our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards.

As of September 30, 2009, we had substantial federal and state net operating loss carryforwards along with certain foreign net operating loss carryforwards. Under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, substantial changes in our ownership may limit the amount of our net operating loss carryforwards that can be utilized annually in the future to offset taxable income. We believe that, as a result of this offering, it is possible that a change in our ownership might be deemed to have occurred. If such a change in our ownership occurs, our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards in any fiscal year will be significantly limited under these provisions.

This prospectus contains forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this prospectus, including statements regarding our future results of operations and financial position, business strategy and plans and objectives of management for future operations, are forward-looking statements. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.

In some cases, we identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “may,” “will,” “likely,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “could,” “intends,” “target,” “projects,” “would,” “contemplates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions. The forward-looking statements in this prospectus are only predictions. We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this prospectus and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions described in the “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this prospectus. Because forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted or quantified, you should not rely on these forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. The events and circumstances reflected in our forward-looking statements may not occur and actual results could differ materially from those projected in our forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation, and specifically decline any obligation, to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

The industry and market data and other statistical information used throughout this prospectus are based on independent industry publications. While we believe that each of these publications is reliable, we have not independently verified market data and other statistical information from third-party sources. Some data are also based on our good faith estimates, which are derived from our review of internal surveys, as well as independent industry publications, government publications, reports by market research firms or other published independent sources. None of the independent industry publications referred to in this prospectus were prepared on our behalf or at our expense. Some of the independent industry publications referred to in this prospectus are copyrighted and, in such circumstances, we have obtained permission from the copyright owners to refer to such information in this prospectus.

In particular, the reports (the Gartner Reports) issued by Gartner Inc. (Gartner) described in this prospectus represent data, research, opinions or viewpoints published, as part of a syndicated subscription service available only to clients, by Gartner, and are not representations of fact. We have been advised by Gartner that each Gartner Report speaks as of its original publication date (and not as of the date of this prospectus) and the opinions expressed in the Gartner Reports are subject to change without notice.

The discussion above does not, in any manner, disclaim our responsibilities with respect to the disclosures contained in this prospectus.

Please see the endnotes set forth in the section titled “Business” for a reference to the sources for the industry and market data and other statistical information used throughout this prospectus.

We estimate that the net proceeds to us of the sale of the common stock that we are offering will be approximately $ million, assuming an initial public offering price of $ per share, which is the midpoint of the range listed on the cover page of this prospectus, and after deducting estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses that we must pay. A $1.00 increase or decrease in the assumed initial public offering price of $ per share would increase or decrease the net proceeds to us from this offering by approximately $ million, assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the cover page of the prospectus, remains the same and after deducting the underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us.

We intend to use these net proceeds for working capital and other general corporate purposes, including the expansion of our current business through acquisitions of complementary or strategic businesses, products or technologies, the enhancement of our existing services and solutions and the hiring of additional personnel to increase our development, sales and marketing activities. The amount and timing of the use of the net proceeds for the enumerated purposes will depend on market conditions and opportunities. We also intend to use approximately $29.0 million of the net proceeds from this offering to repay our loan from Dell Products L.P. (Dell) along with related accrued interest. The Dell loan does not require or permit accelerated payments prior to maturity. A description of the Dell loan is included in Note 9 to our Consolidated Financial Statements. The Dell loan has the following terms:

The amount and timing of our debt repayment will depend on numerous factors, including the cash used or generated in our operations and the cash on hand or used for acquisitions. As a result, except as described above, we cannot estimate the amount of the net proceeds that will be used for debt repayment and we have not otherwise allocated any minimum portion or specific amount of the proceeds to possible debt repayment.

Pending use of proceeds from this offering, we intend to invest the proceeds in a variety of capital preservation investments, including short and medium-term, investment-grade, interest-bearing instruments.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on capital stock. We currently intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings for use in financing the growth of our business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends after the offering and for the foreseeable future. Any future determination relating to dividend policy will be made at the discretion of our board of directors, subject to compliance with certain covenants under our loans, which restrict or limit our ability to declare or pay dividends, and will depend on our future earnings, financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements, general business conditions, future prospects, applicable Delaware law, which provides that dividends are only payable out of surplus or current net profits, and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant.

Please see the section titled “Management—Employee Benefit Plans,” and Note 12 to our consolidated financial statements for a description of our equity plans.

Our pro forma net tangible book value as of September 30, 2009 was approximately $(31.4) million, or approximately $(0.49) per share. Pro forma net tangible book value per share represents the amount of total tangible assets minus our total liabilities, divided by 63,510,377 shares of common stock issued, excluding shares in treasury stock, after giving effect to the conversion, upon completion of this offering, of all issued preferred stock, excluding shares in treasury stock, into common stock and all outstanding warrants to purchase preferred stock into warrants to purchase common stock.

Net tangible book value dilution per share to new investors represents the difference between the amount per share paid by purchasers of shares of common stock in this offering and the net tangible book value per share of common stock immediately after completion of this offering. After giving effect to our sale of shares of common stock in this offering at an assumed initial public offering price of $ per share, and after deducting the underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses, the pro forma net tangible book value as of September 30, 2009 would have been approximately $ million or approximately $ per share. This represents an immediate increase in net tangible book value of $ per share to existing stockholders and an immediate dilution in net tangible book value of $ per share to purchasers of common stock in the offering, as illustrated in the following table:

If the underwriters exercise their option to purchase additional shares of our common stock in full in this offering, the pro forma net tangible book value per share after the offering would be approximately $ per share, the increase in pro forma net tangible book value per share to existing stockholders would be approximately $ per share and the dilution to new investors purchasing shares in this offering would be approximately $ per share.

The table below presents on a pro forma basis as of September 30, 2009, after giving effect to the conversion of all outstanding shares of preferred stock into common stock upon completion of this offering and all outstanding warrants to purchase preferred stock into warrants to purchase common stock the differences between the existing stockholders and the purchasers of shares in the offering with respect to the number of shares purchased from us, the total consideration paid and the average price paid per share:

As of September 30, 2009, there were options outstanding to purchase a total of 8,922,019 shares of our common stock at a weighted average exercise price of $0.79 per share. In addition, as of September 30, 2009, there were warrants outstanding to purchase 1,678,876 shares of common stock at a weighted average exercise price of $2.47 per share, and warrants outstanding to purchase 2,585,544 shares of preferred stock at a weighted average exercise price of $2.21 per share which will convert into the right to purchase 2,585,544 shares of common stock upon the completion of the offering. The number of shares subject to outstanding warrants and the average warrant exercise price do not include the Dell Warrant. To the extent outstanding options or warrants are exercised, there will be further dilution to new investors. For a description of our equity plans, please see “Management—Employee Benefit Plans” and Note 12 of the notes to the consolidated financial statements.

The following consolidated statements of operations data for the years 2006, 2007 and 2008, and the consolidated balance sheet data for the years 2007 and 2008 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this prospectus. The consolidated statements of operations data for the years 2004 and 2005, and the consolidated balance sheet data for the years 2004 and 2005 and 2006 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes not included in this prospectus. The consolidated statements of operations data for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009 and the consolidated balance sheet data as of September 30, 2009 have been derived from our unaudited financial statements and related notes which are included elsewhere in this prospectus. In the opinion of management, the unaudited interim consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as the audited financial statements and include all adjustments necessary for the fair presentation of our financial position and results of operations for these periods. The following selected financial data should be read together with our financial statements and related notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this prospectus.

The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations should be read in conjunction with “Selected Consolidated Financial Data” and our consolidated financial statements and related notes appearing elsewhere in this prospectus. In addition to historical information, this discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors. We discuss factors that we believe could cause or contribute to these differences below and elsewhere in this prospectus, including those set forth under “Risk Factors” and “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

We deliver a differentiated and comprehensive set of information technology (IT) services through Transom, our unique business model consisting of software tools, methodologies and domain expertise, each developed over the course of thousands of client engagements. Transom allows us to standardize our global offerings into high quality services that can be delivered in a consistent manner to our clients.

Founded in 2001, we initially focused on storage and data protection consulting services. In response to client demand, we expanded our breadth of services to include managed services and added expertise and services in cloud enablement, virtual environments, disaster recovery and security. From our inception through 2005, we have made four key acquisitions. These acquisitions accelerated our expansion into international markets, our tool development and our entrance into the managed services arena.

In 2007, 2008, and the first nine months of 2009 we grew our revenues, capabilities, service offerings and international presence through additional strategic acquisitions and partnerships. These acquisitions have added data center consolidation and migration expertise, virtualization technology skills and supplementary managed services to our capabilities. New partnerships have expanded our market opportunities in existing and new geographies. In addition, both acquisitions and partnerships have expanded our presence in Europe and the United States, as well as facilitated expansion into Israel and Turkey to serve the Middle East markets.

We have identified several key trends in our business that have contributed to our revenues and margin growth:

In connection with our review of our financial statements for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, we identified a material weakness in the design and operation of our internal controls relating to the purchase accounting of one of our 2007 acquisitions. A material weakness is defined as a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis by the company’s internal controls. See note 9 of our consolidated financial statements for the impact of our restatement to individual years. This misstatement required a restatement of our audited financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2008, the exchange rate between our foreign subsidiaries’ functional currencies and the U.S. Dollar fluctuated significantly as compared to the same period in 2009. The change in exchange rates had a significant impact on our financial results for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 as compared to the same period in 2009. For the purpose of comparability between these two periods, we have included a Constant Currency Method analysis for which we translate our results for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 at the average exchange rate for the same period in 2009. The Constant Currency Method is not meant to replace or supersede the comparison of results translated at the actual exchange rates.

We have not provided a Constant Currency Method analysis for other periods discussed herein because the exchange rate fluctuations in those periods did not have a material impact on our financial results.

We derive revenues from consulting services, managed services contracts, product sales and multi-element sales. We are primarily focused on generating services revenues. Product sales consist of the resale of third party software and/or hardware. Product sales are not a part of our U.S. or our United Kingdom (U.K.) businesses. Vendor independence is one of our key business differentiators. After we make an acquisition, part of our integration plan is to transition product sales out to a partner. Product sales in 2007, 2008 and first nine months of 2009 were a result of revenues generated from

our Israeli acquisition. As a result of becoming part of our organization, our Israeli subsidiary has seen an increase in services work performed without a product component. The vast majority of our revenues is generated either through fixed fee engagements or managed services contracts. Included in our revenues are travel and entertainment expenses that are billable to our clients.

From the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to the same period in 2009, services revenues increased $3.5 million or 6%. During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, as compared to the same period in 2008, the change in exchange rates materially impacted our services revenues. Using the Constant Currency Method, our services revenues increased 17% for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 as compared to the same period in 2008. Our growth increased due to an expansion of our services sold within our client base, an increase in our average deal size and growth in our indirect channel relationships. Although we had no direct client that represented more than 10% of our total revenues, one indirect channel partner represented 15% of total revenues in this period.

Product revenues decreased by 50% for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 as compared to the same period in 2008. Using the Constant Currency Method, our product revenues decreased 43% from the nine months ended September 30, 2008 as compared to the same period in 2009. The decrease in product revenues reflects our strategy of focusing on service revenues and transitioning acquisitions away from product sales after the first year after acquisition.

Services revenues increased by 37% from 2007 to 2008 due to an expansion of services sold within our client base, an increase in our average deal size and growth in our indirect channel relationships. In 2008, we did not have any client that represented more than 10% of our total revenues.

Product revenues increased by 156% from 2007 to 2008. The increase is a result of our 2007 acquisitions in Israel and Turkey. We did not have product sales in the U.S. or the U.K. In 2009, we started transitioning our Israeli and Turkey entities away from product sales.

Services revenues increased by 72% from 2006 to 2007. Of this increase, 43% is attributable to our 2007 acquisitions. Our service revenues also increased, in part, due to broader acceptance of our services within our client base, an increase in our average deal size and growth in our indirect channel relationships. Although we had no direct client that represented more than 10% of our total revenues, one indirect channel partner represented 10% of total revenues in this period and that same partner accounted for 14% of our total revenues in 2006.

Product revenues decreased by 69% from 2006 to 2007 during this period reflecting our planned shift away from our product business in the U.K. in 2006 offset by product sales in our 2007 acquired entities, specifically in Israel and Turkey.

Cost of revenues includes all costs related to the delivery of our services and consists primarily of salaries and benefits of our consultants, billable and non-billable travel and entertainment, third party contractors, third party products and services and facility related expenses. Our managed services business is performed onsite and offsite, but using client-owned assets. Our investments in this area are primarily staff, our software tools and basic monitoring equipment.

Our service margins have improved since 2006. This is a result of several key factors:

From the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to the same period in 2009, total gross profit increased 34% and increased as a percentage of sales from 21% to 27%. Services gross profit increased 37% and increased as a percentage of sales from 21% to 27% during this period. During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, as compared to the same period in 2008, the change in exchange rates materially impacted gross profit. Using the Constant Currency Method, for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 as compared to the same period in 2009, total gross profit increased 49% and services gross profit increased 52%. The increase in our services margin is a result of increased utilization of our managed services operations center (SOC) combined with the realization of cost efficiencies of our new staffing pyramid and consolidation of our two SOC’s to one in the U.S.

From 2007 to 2008, total gross profit increased 22% and decreased as a percentage of sales from 26% to 23%. Services gross profit increased 23% and decreased as a percentage of sales from 26% to 23%. The decrease in our organic services margin is a result of our investment in our managed services delivery. In 2008 we invested in our managed services organization by creating a larger SOC for future growth. The nature of this investment creates unutilized capacity to allow for future growth.

From 2006 to 2007, total gross profit increased 89% and increased as a percentage of sales from 23% to 26%. Services gross profit increased 102% and increased as a percentage of sales from 22% to 26%, respectively during this period. Twenty-seven percent of this increase is attributable to our 2007 acquisitions. The increase in our services margin is, in part, the result of our increased services revenues levels, which allowed us to increase utilization of our delivery staff.

Research and development expenses are attributable to our 2007 acquisition of Integrity Systems Ltd. and starting in 2008, to a newly formed research and development group in our U.K. subsidiary. The research and development efforts relate to the integration of newly acquired tools into our standard services offerings and continued development of the software and proprietary methodologies used in the delivery of our consulting and managed services. These expenses consist primarily of salaries and benefits of our development personnel, third party consultants and third party software and equipment.

From the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to the same period in 2009, research and development expenses decreased $411,000 or 48%, and remained flat at approximately 1% of revenues. This decrease is due to the consolidation of our research and development functions resulting from the completion of the initial integration and upgrade of acquired tools and IP. The decrease consists of a $232,000 decrease in salaries, bonuses, benefits and stock-based compensation expenses, a $99,000 decrease in subcontractors expenses, a $63,000 decrease in facilities expenses, a $13,000 decrease in travel and entertainment expenses and a $4,000 decrease in miscellaneous expenses. During the nine months ended September 30, 2008 as compared to the same period in 2009, the change in exchange rates materially impacted research and development expenses. Using the Constant Currency Method, for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 as compared to the same period in 2009, research and development decreased $312,000 or 36%, and remained flat at 1% of revenues.

From 2007 to 2008, research and development expenses increased $908,000 or 646%, and increased as a percentage of revenues from 0% to 1%. The increase is related to the addition of our U.K. research and development group. The increase consists of a $488,000 increase related to salaries, bonuses, benefits and stock-based compensation expenses, a $265,000 increase in subcontractors expenses, a $79,000 increase in facility expenses, a $40,000 increase in software and IT costs and a $36,000 increase in miscellaneous expenses.

Selling and marketing expenses consist primarily of salaries with related benefits, commissions and marketing expenses such as advertising, product literature and trade show costs.

Sales commissions are paid regardless of whether the opportunity is closed directly or through a channel partner. As our offerings have become more robust and project sizes have grown, sales representatives have become more productive with respect to the revenues they can produce.

From the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to the same period in 2009, selling and marketing expenses decreased $4.5 million or 31% and decreased as a percentage of revenues from 23% to 16%. This decrease consists of a $2.5 million decrease in salaries, bonuses, and benefits, a $671,000 decrease in commission expenses, a $458,000 decrease in stock-based compensation expenses, a $444,000 decrease in marketing events and collateral expenses, a $364,000 decrease in travel and entertainment expenses, a $209,000 decrease in facility charges and a $140,000 decrease in recruiting expenses offset by a $216,000 increase in miscellaneous expenses. Using the Constant Currency Method, for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 as compared to the same period in 2009, selling and marketing expenses decreased $3.6 million or 25% and decreased as a percentage of revenues from 23% to 17%. The change in marketing expenses for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 as compared to the same period in 2008 is attributed to a restructuring of the sales teams. Due to our acquisitions made in 2007 and 2008, we had an ‘overlay’ of sales management responsible for training and supporting our sales force in the new services and capabilities of our acquisitions. As our sales teams’ understanding of the services improved and their reliance on the overlay sales managers decreased, the overlay roles were eliminated, thus reducing the number of senior managers across the sales teams.

From 2007 to 2008, selling and marketing expenses increased $3.7 million or 24%, but decreased as a percentage of revenues from 25% to 22%. This increase consists of a $1.6 million increase in salaries, bonuses and benefits expenses, a $980,000 increase in stock-based compensation expenses, a $492,000 increase in commission expenses, a $347,000 increase in marketing events and collateral expenses, a $156,000 increase in recruiting expenses, a $118,000 increase in travel and entertainment expenses and an $81,000 increase in facility expenses offset by a decrease of $80,000 in miscellaneous expenses. The continued decrease of selling and marketing expenses as a percentage of revenues is a result of efficiencies of an experienced sales force, increased quotas, performance management and being able to attract higher quality, experienced sales representatives.

From 2006 to 2007, selling and marketing expenses increased $4.4 million or 40%, but decreased as a percentage of revenues from 29% to 25%. Of this amount, $2.8 million relates to our 2007 acquisitions and the remainder consists of a $1.1 million increase in salaries, bonuses and benefits, a $505,000 increase in travel and entertainment expenses, a $190,000 increase in marketing events and collateral and a $134,000 increase in facilities and building expenses offset by a $305,000 decrease in commission expenses. The decrease of selling and marketing expenses as a percentage of revenues is a result of efficiencies of an experienced sales force, increased quotas, performance management and being able to attract higher quality, experienced sales representatives.

General and administrative (G&A) expenses include the costs of financial, human resources, IT and administrative personnel, professional services and corporate overhead.

From the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to the same period in 2009, general and administrative expenses decreased $5.6 million or 44%. As a percentage of revenues, general and administrative expenses decreased from 20% to 11%. The decrease reflects the write-off of $4.0 million of deferred initial public offering costs in 2008, a $867,000 decrease in salaries, bonuses and benefits expenses, a $780,000 decrease in stock-based compensation expenses, a $197,000 decrease in travel and entertainment expenses, a $129,000 decrease in recruiting expenses, a $55,000 decrease in IT expenses offset by a $198,000 increase in facility expenses, a $78,000 increase in outside accounting and legal costs, a $45,000 increase in depreciation expense and a $186,000 increase in miscellaneous expenses. Using the Constant Currency Method, for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, general and administrative expenses decreased $5.0 million or 40%. As a percentage of revenues, general and administrative expenses decreased 8 percentage points from 20% to 12%.

From 2007 to 2008, general and administrative expenses increased $6.0 million or 64%. As a percentage of revenues, general and administrative expenses increased from 15% to 18%. The increase consists of $4.0 million of expenses related to the write-off of deferred initial public offering costs in 2008, a $1.5 million increase in salaries, bonuses and benefits expenses, a $980,000 increase stock-based compensation expenses, a $715,000 increase in outside accounting and legal costs, a $196,000 increase in IT costs, a $150,000 increase in recruiting costs, offset by a $910,000 decrease in leasehold improvement write-off expense, a $241,000 decrease in depreciation expense, a $47,000 decrease in facilities costs and a $278,000 decrease in miscellaneous expenses.

From 2006 to 2007, general and administrative expenses increased $2.4 million or 33%. As a percentage of revenues, general and administrative expenses decreased from 19% to 15% during this period. Of this amount, $2.5 million relates to our 2007 acquisitions and the remainder consists of a $1.1 million decrease in salaries, bonus, and benefits expenses, an $837,000 reduction in overhead and facility related expenses offset by a $910,000 one time early lease termination fee related to exiting our U.K. leased facility, a $364,000 increase in IT costs, a $303,000 increase in outside consultants and accounting costs and a $258,000 increase in travel and entertainment.

We have purchased intangible assets as part of our acquisitions. We have amortized these intangible assets over the estimated useful life of each such asset.

From the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to the same period in 2009, amortization expense decreased $264,000, or 13%, reflecting the impact of the fully amortized intangible assets. Using the Constant Currency Method, for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, amortization expense decreased by $52,000, or 2%.

From 2007 to 2008, amortization expense increased $511,000, or 23% reflecting the impact of our 2008 acquisitions and a full year of amortization of our 2007 acquisitions.

From 2006 to 2007, amortization expense increased $1.1 million, or 94% reflecting the impact of acquisitions made in 2007.

From the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to the same period in 2009, interest expense increased $458,000, or 13%. The increase was due to the full period impact of 2008 debt financings. Using the Constant Currency Method, for the nine months ended September 30, 2009, interest expense increased by $550,000, or 15%.

From 2007 to 2008, interest expense increased $2.6 million, or 121%. The increase was due to the additional $25.0 million of senior subordinated debt, used to finance acquisitions made in 2008, finance operations and pay earnouts for 2007 acquisitions, combined with the full year impact of 2007 debt financings.

From 2006 to 2007, interest expense increased $1.5 million, or 230%. This increase was due to the additional $16.0 million of senior subordinated debt that was used to finance the acquisitions made in 2007.

Other income and expense consist of the impact of foreign currency exchange gains/losses, the net impact of changes in fair value of the preferred stock warrant liability, interest income and the receipts for services that are not considered to be our core business.

Other income and expense decreased from $1.5 million of income in the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to $1.3 million in the same period in 2009. The decrease was due to a $83,000 gain on the change in the fair value of the preferred stock warrants in the nine months ended September 30, 2008 compared to a $927,000 gain in the same period in 2009 and a $523,000 decrease in other income offset by a $826,000 foreign currency exchange gain in the nine months ended September 30, 2008 as compared to a $253,000 loss in the same period in 2009.

Other income and expense improved to $212,000 of income in 2008 from approximately $1.2 million of expense in 2007. The improvement is due to a $1.6 million gain on changes in fair value of the preferred stock warrant in 2008 compared to a $2.1 million expense in 2007 combined with a $2.4 million increase in foreign currency exchange loss in 2008 as compared to 2007.

Other income and expense decreased approximately $2.2 million in 2007 from approximately $1.0 million income in 2006. The decrease is due to a $2.5 million increase in the expense related to the changes in fair value of the preferred stock warrant liability offset by an approximately $300,000 increase in foreign currency exchange gains and interest income.

We have incurred losses since inception and therefore do not pay significant income taxes, except in certain foreign jurisdictions where we are profitable. We have net operating loss carryforwards that may be available to offset future taxable income. We have applied a full valuation allowance against the benefits of a majority of our deferred tax assets.

Our income tax expense (benefit) includes current income taxes in jurisdictions where we are profitable, non-cash deferred tax expense from amortization of goodwill for tax but not book purposes and other book-tax differences.

For the nine months ended September 30, 2008 as compared to the same period in 2009, our income tax provision decreased from $193,000 to $9,000 primarily due to the increase of deferred tax

benefits of $236,000 from net operating losses and timing differences recognized as offsets to existing deferred tax liabilities offset partially by an increase in current tax expense of $52,000 on operations in our profitable jurisdictions.

From 2007 to 2008, our income tax provision changed from income tax benefit of $485,000 to income tax expense of $240,000 primarily due to an increase in deferred tax expense of (i) $239,000 from goodwill amortization deductible for tax but not book purposes, and (ii) $468,000 from the reduction of the deferred tax benefit recognized from the offsetting of net operating losses and other timing differences against existing deferred tax liabilities. Current tax expense increased $18,000 from 2007 to 2008 due to an increase in taxable income in our profitable jurisdictions.

As of January 1, 2006, we adopted FASB issued guidance now codified within FASB ASC Topic No. 480, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity. Accordingly, freestanding warrants to purchase our redeemable convertible preferred stock are liabilities that must be recorded at fair value. We recorded income of $558,000 for the cumulative effect of the change in accounting principle to reflect the change in the estimated fair value of the warrants between their issuance date and January 1, 2006, the date we adopted the new accounting standard. We recorded a $455,000 gain, a $2.1 million loss, a $1.6 million gain and a $83,000 gain related to the change in fair value for the years ended 2006, 2007 and 2008 and the nine months ended September 30, 2009, respectively.

In addition to providing financial measurements based on GAAP, we present additional historical financial metrics that are not prepared in accordance with GAAP (non-GAAP). Legislative and regulatory changes discourage the use of and emphasis on non-GAAP financial metrics and require companies to explain why non-GAAP financial metrics are relevant to management and investors. We believe that the inclusion of these non-GAAP financial measures, together with our GAAP financial measures, helps investors to gain a meaningful understanding of our past performance and future results. This approach is consistent with how management measures and forecasts our performance, especially when comparing such results to previous periods or forecasts. Our management uses these non-GAAP measures, in addition to GAAP financial measures, as the basis for measuring our core operating performance and comparing such performance to that of prior periods and to the performance of our competitors. These measures are also used by management in its financial, operational and strategic decision-making and in developing incentive compensation plans.

Our non-GAAP financial measures consist of EBITDA. We define EBITDA as net income, before interest expense, income taxes, depreciation and amortization of tangible and intangible assets, adjustments for non-cash changes in fair value of warrant liability. We consider EBITDA to be an important indicator of our operational strength and performance of our core business and a valuable measure of our historical operating trends.

There are limitations associated with reliance on these non-GAAP financial metrics because they are specific to our operations and financial performance, which makes comparisons with other companies’ financial results imprecise. We recognize that the non-GAAP measure EBITDA does have certain limitations. It does not include interest expense, which is a necessary and ongoing part of our cost structure resulting from debt incurred to expand operations. EBITDA also excludes depreciation, amortization expense, adjustments for non-cash changes in fair value of warrant liability. The exclusion of these items, in light of their recurring nature, is a material limitation of EBITDA. To manage these limitations, we have policies and procedures in place to identify expenses that qualify as interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization to approve and segregate these expenses from other expenses to ensure that our EBITDA is consistently reflected from period to period.

EBITDA excludes some items that affect net income (loss) and may vary among companies. The EBITDA we present may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. EBITDA does not give effect to the cash that we must use to service its debt or pay income taxes and thus does not reflect the funds generated from operations or actually available for capital investments. By providing both GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures, we believe that investors are able to compare our GAAP results to those of other companies while also gaining an understanding of our operating performance as evaluated by management.

Since our inception in 2001, we have primarily funded our operations through the issuance of an aggregate of $76.0 million in preferred stock and $50.0 million in borrowings under our loan and security agreements described below. We used these proceeds to fund our operations, invest in property and equipment and acquire other companies.

The following table summarizes our cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2007 and 2008 and the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009:

Cash used in operating activities primarily consists of net losses adjusted for certain non-cash items including depreciation and amortization, non-cash interest expense, stock-based compensation expenses, the non-cash change in warrant liabilities and the effect of changes in working capital and other activities.

Cash provided by operating activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2009 was $3.0 million and consisted of a $4.7 million net loss offset by $5.9 million in non-cash items and $1.9 million in cash provided by working capital purposes and other activities. Non-cash items consisted primarily of $3.4 million of non-cash interest, $2.5 million of depreciation and amortization, $729,000 of stock-based compensation expenses and $220,000 of non-cash debt extinguishment charges partially offset by a $821,000 non-cash foreign currency gain on intercompany expenses and a $83,000 non-cash reduction in the fair value of warrant liability. Cash provided by working capital purposes and other activities consisted primarily of a $2.8 million decrease in accounts receivable, a $2.4 million increase in accrued expenses, $842,000 decrease in prepaids and other assets, a $577,000 decrease in other assets, and a $424,000 decrease in unbilled revenues partially offset by $2.6 million decrease in deferred revenues and a $2.5 million decrease in accounts payable.

Cash used in operating activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 was $11.8 million and consisted of a $19.4 million net loss offset by $7.3 million in non-cash items and $257,000 in cash provided by working capital purposes and other activities. Non-cash items consisted primarily of $3.0 million in non-cash interest, $2.7 million of depreciation and amortization, $2.1 million in stock-based compensation expenses and a $484,000 non-cash foreign currency loss on

intercompany expenses partially offset by a $927,000 non-cash reduction in the fair value of warrant liability. Cash provided by working capital purposes and other activities consisted primarily of a $4.2 million increase in deferred revenue, a $3.3 million decrease in other assets, and a $1.5 million decrease in unbilled revenue, partially offset by a $4.0 million decrease in accrued expenses, a $3.2 million decrease in accounts payable, a $1.3 million increase in prepaids and other current assets and a $422,000 increase in accounts receivable.

Cash used in operating activities for 2008 was $9.2 million and consisted of a $23.3 million net loss off-set by $11.3 million of non-cash items and $2.9 million in cash provided by working capital purposes and other activities. Non-cash items consisted primarily of $4.1 in non-cash interest, $3.6 million in depreciation and amortization, $2.7 million in stock-based compensation expense, and a $2.5 million non-cash foreign currency loss on intercompany expenses partially offset by a $1.6 million decrease in the fair value of warrants. Cash provided by working capital purposes and other activities consisted primarily of a $6.9 million increase in deferred revenue, a $1.5 million decrease in unbilled revenue, partially offset by a $3.0 million decrease in accrued expenses, a $1.8 million increase in accounts receivables, and a $1.3 million decrease in accounts payable.

Cash used in operating activities for 2007 was $8.9 million and consisted of a $13.8 million net loss and $792,000 of cash used by working capital purposes and other activities largely off-set by $5.7 million of non-cash items. Non-cash items consisted primarily of $3.1 million of depreciation and amortization, $2.1 million non-cash change in the warrant liability, $788,000 of non-cash interest expenses and $353,000 of stock-based compensation expenses partially offset by a $555,000 non-cash tax benefit. Cash used for working capital purposes and other activities consisted primarily of a $7.4 million increase in prepaids and other assets, a $2.4 million increase in accounts receivable and a $740,000 decrease in accounts payable offset by a $5.9 million decrease in deferred revenues and a $4.0 million increase in accrued expenses.

Cash used in operating activities for 2006 was $11.1 million and consisted of a $9.6 million net loss and $2.5 million of cash used for working capital purposes and other activities partially offset by $1.1 million in non-cash items. Non-cash items, consisted primarily of $1.9 million of depreciation and amortization, $1.0 non-cash change in the warrant liability, a $205,000 non-cash interest expenses and a $22,000 non-cash stock based compensation expenses. Cash used for working capital purposes and other activities, consisted primarily of an increase in accounts receivable of $1.6 million, a decrease in accounts payable of $1.3 million and an aggregate increase in unbilled revenues, accrued expenses and other assets of $417,000 offset by increases in deferred revenues $527,000 and a decrease in prepaid expenses and other current assets of $344,000.

Cash used in investing activities was $0.3 million, $19.1 million and $8.2 million for 2006, 2007 and 2008, respectively and $3.1 million and $1.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009, respectively. Our principal cash investments have related to acquisitions and the purchase of property and equipment.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, cash used in investing activities consisted primarily of $884,000 of earnouts paid related to prior acquisition and cash paid for acquisitions, net of cash acquired, $512,000 of purchases of property and equipment and a $266,000 increase in restricted cash.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2008, cash used in investing activities consisted primarily of $2.4 million for cash paid for acquisitions, net of cash acquired, $378,000 of purchases of property and equipment and $344,000 increase in restricted cash.

During 2008, cash used in investing activities consisted primarily of $5.0 million for cash paid for acquisitions, net of cash acquired, a $2.1 million increase in restricted cash and $1.1 million of purchases of property and equipment.

During 2007, cash used in investing activities consisted primarily of $18.8 million used for cash paid for acquisitions, net of cash acquired in the acquisitions, and $388,000 of purchases of property and equipment.

During 2006, cash used in investing activities primarily consisted of $310,000 of purchases of property and equipment to support our on-site consultants and infrastructure requirements offset by $102,000 of decreases in restricted cash required to support our outstanding obligations under our loan and security agreements.

Cash flows provided (used) by financing activities were $10.1 million, $30.3 million and $23.8 million for 2006, 2007 and 2008, respectively and $15.9 million and $(2.9) million for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009, respectively.

In June 2008, we purchased approximately 1,766,000 shares of our common stock and 238,000 shares of our series 1 convertible common stock for $4.0 million and $537,000, respectively, from certain of our officers and employees. The shares were purchased at a $2.26 per share, the fair market value at the time of the purchase.

We raised net proceeds of $9.0 million through the sale of additional Series D preferred stock during 2006. In April 2007, we raised net proceeds of $5.0 million through the sale of additional Series D preferred stock and in May and August of 2007 we raised approximately $11.4 million of net proceeds through the sale of Series E preferred stock. In November 2008, we raised net proceeds of approximately $9.6 million through the sale of Series F preferred stock.

As of September 30, 2009 we had outstanding debt in the amount of $42.6 million, which amount includes interest accrued as of that date, under loan agreements with our lenders. During 2006, 2007 and 2008, we made principal repayments of $2.1 million, $3.5 million and $6.3 million, respectively, and $4.6 million and $2.9 million for the nine month periods ended September 30, 2008 and 2009, respectively. Principal repayments exclude repayments of borrowings made under our Israeli subsidiary credit line.

Bank Leumi and Israel Discount Bank. Our Israeli subsidiary has overdraft and credit lines from Bank Leumi, and a term loan and an on-call loan from Israel Discount Bank. At September 30, 2009, the total credit line from Bank Leumi was 9 million new Israeli shekels (NIS) ($2.4 million), the total amount outstanding under the term loans was NIS 3.5 million ($928,000), and the total amount outstanding under the on-call loan was NIS 2.5 million ($663,000).

The interest paid to Bank Leumi through the nine months ended September 30, 2009 was NIS 202,000 ($54,000). Interest paid to Israel Discount Bank through the nine months ended September 30, 2009 was NIS 39,000 ($10,400). The interest rate on the term loans was equal to the rate of the Bank of Israel plus 1.5% (Rate). During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, the Rate ranged from 2.00% to 3.25%. The Rate at December 31, 2007, 2008 and September 30, 2009 was 5.75%, 4.0%, and 2.25%, respectively. The interest rate on the on-call loans was the Rate plus 2.3% as of September 30, 2009.

As of December 31, 2007, 2008 and September 30, 2009 there was $2.1 million, $2.0 million, and $1.7 million, respectively, outstanding under the loans which are included in the current portion of long-term debt. As of September 30, 2009, an additional amount of $124,000 was included in the long-term portion of debt.

The credit lines are secured by all of our Israeli subsidiary’s assets and a $2.0 million fully cash collateralized letter of credit. The lines have certain covenants, as defined, including minimum balance sheet ratios for the Israeli subsidiary. As of September 30, 2009, our Israeli subsidiary was in compliance with these covenants.

Lighthouse Capital Partners. In June 2004, we entered into a Loan and Security Agreement (the 2004 Loan Agreement) with Lighthouse Capital Partners (Lighthouse). Under the 2004 Loan Agreement, we were allowed to borrow up to $6.0 million before June 2005. The 2004 Loan Agreement is secured by substantially all of our assets. Borrowings under the 2004 Loan Agreement bore interest at a fixed rate of 7.00% per annum and required interest only payments until June 30, 2005, followed by 36 consecutive monthly payments of principal and interest, payable monthly in advance. Interest during the repayment period is 7.5% per annum. In addition, there was a final non-principal balloon payment of $450,000 due at loan maturity. The final non-principal balloon payment was amortized as interest expense through its maturity date of June 2008. For the years ended December 31, 2006, 2007 and 2008, we amortized $119,000, $119,000 and $59,000, respectively and for the nine months ended September 30, 2008, we amortized $59,000.

In July 2006, we amended the 2004 Loan Agreement (Amendment No. 2) to allow for an additional $3.0 million in borrowings before December 31, 2006. Borrowings under Amendment No. 2 bore interest at a fixed rate of 7.00% per annum and required interest only payments until October 31, 2007, followed by 36 consecutive monthly payments of principal and interest, payable monthly in advance. The per annum interest rate during the repayment period was equal to the prime rate at the beginning of the repayment period plus 1.75%. Prior to the restructuring in June 2009 as described below, this interest rate was 10% per annum. Subsequent to the restructuring the interest rate was fixed at 13.5% per annum. In addition, there was to be a final non-principal balloon payment of $233,000, due at loan maturity. At September 30, 2009 there was $1.3 million payable under Amendment No. 2, which includes $105,000 of interest and $344,000 of the non-principal balloon payment. The final non-principal balloon payment is being amortized as interest expense through its maturity date of July 2011, of which we amortized $26,000, $70,000 and $70,000 during the years ended December 31, 2006, 2007 and 2008, respectively and $52,000 and $53,000 in the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009, respectively.

In March 2007, we amended the 2004 Loan Agreement (Amendment No. 3) to allow for an additional $10.0 million in borrowings before August 31, 2007. Borrowings under Amendment No. 3 bore interest at a fixed rate of 10.00% per annum and required interest only payments until August 1, 2007 with 36 consecutive monthly payments of principal and interest, payable monthly in advance beginning September 1, 2007. In addition, there was to be a final non-principal balloon payment of $625,000 due at loan maturity. At September 30, 2009, there was $6.0 million payable under Amendment No. 3, which includes $577,000 of interest and $894,000 of final payment. The final non-principal balloon payment is being amortized as interest expense through its maturity date of July 2011, of which we amortized $137,000 and $183,000, in the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008 respectively and $137,000 and $156,000, in the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009, respectively.

In June 2009, we modified the terms of the 2004 Loan Agreement such that we will make interest-only payments during the period June 2009 through February 2010 at an annual interest rate of 13.5%. In March 2010, all amounts outstanding under the 2004 Loan Agreement, as amended, will be repaid based on a 15-month amortization schedule of principal and interest payment with a 10%

interest rate. In consideration for the restructuring of the 2004 Loan Agreement, we will pay an additional $380,000 of final non-principal balloon payments to the lender upon maturity of the 2004 Loan Agreement, as amended, in July 2011. The payment date of the $1.2 million of final non-principal balloon payments outstanding was modified such that they are now due July 2011.

The 2004 Loan Agreement, as amended, does not require us to meet financial ratios, but does have certain affirmative covenants (for example, good standing, maintenance of collateral) and certain negative covenants (for example, payments of cash, cash dividends, restructuring, prohibited transactions).

BayStar Capital III Investment Fund, L.P. and Syndicate. In August, 2007, we entered into a loan agreement and a series of related secured promissory notes (BayStar Notes) with a syndicate of new lenders led by BayStar Capital III Investment Fund, L.P. (BayStar). Under the agreement, we were able to borrow up to a maximum of $14.0 million in three separate loans totaling $6.0 million and two loans of $4.0 million each. The $6.0 million borrowing was drawn in August 2007 and the first and second $4.0 million borrowings expired, without being drawn upon, on December 31, 2007 and March 31, 2008, respectively. Prior to the restructuring in June 2009 as described below, borrowings under this agreement bore interest at 9.75% per annum, which accrued for the lesser of a period of one year or until the next equity financing event. Subsequent to the restructuring the interest rate was fixed at 14.5% per annum. The BayStar Notes call for principal and interest payments to commence on the first anniversary of the respective BayStar Notes. The payments are scheduled as if it were a 36-month repayment period. On the third anniversary of the BayStar Notes, all unpaid principal and interest are due and payable. The aggregate principal amount of the BayStar Notes issued pursuant to the loan agreement, and all accrued but unpaid interest thereunder, are convertible into our common stock at the option of the lender upon the earlier of (1) the consummation of our next equity financing, (2) the date that is 15 months after the date of the respective BayStar Note, or (3) the maturity date of the respective BayStar Note. There are no specific financial covenants related to the BayStar loan agreement. At September 30, 2009 there was $6.4 million in the aggregate due under the BayStar Notes, which includes $878,000 of interest and $360,000 of final payments. The conversion feature of this loan agreement does not give rise to an initial beneficial conversion feature because the discounted conversion rate is contingent upon a future financing, that is not certain. If we were to have a future financing, such that the conversion rate would be adjusted, the change in the value would result in a beneficial conversion feature and would be recognized as additional interest expense.

In June 2009, we modified the terms of the agreement such that we will make interest only payments during the period June 2009 through February 2010 at an annual interest rate of 14.5%. We will begin making principal and interest payments in March 2010. The payments are scheduled as if it were a 24-month repayment period with a 14.5% interest rate. In January 2011, all unpaid principal and interest are due and payable. In consideration for the modification of the agreement, we agreed to pay a $386,000 restructuring fee. Of this amount, $26,000 of the fee was paid at time of modification, $180,000 is due and payable January 2011 and $180,000 is due and payable upon a change in control of the Company or January 2012, whichever is earlier.

Dell Products L.P. In March 2008, we entered into a securities purchase agreement (the Dell Purchase Agreement) and related promissory note (the Dell Note) with Dell Products L.P. (Dell) whereby we borrowed $25.0 million, the maximum amount provided for under the Dell Note. Borrowings bear interest at 10% per annum. The Dell Note matures on March 6, 2011, and does not require or permit principal or interest payments until maturity.

At Dell’s option, the outstanding principal, plus all accrued but unpaid interest, under the Dell Note are convertible as follows: (1) at any time after March 6, 2009, into shares of the most recently issued series of our preferred stock at a conversion price equal to the conversion rate of such series of preferred stock as of the date of conversion; (2) at the closing of a Qualified Public Offering (as defined

below) after March 6, 2009, into shares of our common stock at a conversion price equal to 90% of the initial public offering price per share; (3) at the closing of a sale of our preferred stock that results in aggregate proceeds of at least $10,000,000 (a Qualified Financing), at a price per share equal to 90% of the lowest price per share at which such shares of preferred stock were issued and sold in the Qualified Financing; or (4) at the closing of a corporate transaction involving a change of control or a sale of our assets, into, at Dell’s option, either (a) shares of our preferred stock at a price per share equal to the conversion price of such series of preferred stock as of the date of conversion or (b) the number of shares of our common stock issuable upon conversion of our preferred stock issuable pursuant to clause (a). Pursuant to the terms of the Dell Purchase Agreement, a Qualified Public Offering means our first firm commitment underwritten offering to the public pursuant to an effective registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, provided that such registration statement covers the offer and sale of our common stock of which the aggregate net proceeds exceed $35,000,000, our common stock is listed for trading on the New York Stock Exchange, the Nasdaq Global Market or the Nasdaq Global Select Market and the per share public offering price (net of underwriter discounts and commissions) exceeds $4.8636 (as adjusted for stock splits, stock dividends, recapitalizations and the like).

Concurrent with the Dell Note, we entered into an agreement (the IP Agreement) to sell Dell Marketing USA L.P. (Dell USA) a perpetual irrevocable license to certain of our intellectual property (IP). The IP Agreement included a three-year support agreement whereby we are required to provide updates to our IP, when and if available, and provide a defined level of support (IP Support). Dell USA will pay us a total of $1.5 million over three years in equal installments of $500,000 in March 2008, 2009 and 2010. The March 2008 and 2009 payments were received in accordance with the payment schedule. We had not previously licensed our IP or related IP Support prior to the IP Agreement and at that time did not foresee the licensing of our IP and related IP Support being an ongoing or significant part of our business going forward. As such, we were unable to determine the fair value of the IP or the IP Support. As we could not determine the fair value of the IP nor the IP Support, we were unable to treat them as distinct and separate elements from the Dell Note and therefore treat the income from the IP and related IP Support as contra interest expense. We will record the receivable as it is invoiced. We have determined that we should record the amount due under the IP Support contract as we invoice the amounts instead of recording the entire amount due as a receivable upon the execution of the IP Agreement. Our determination was based on the following factors: (1) we earn the amount due over time; (2) we do not have the right or ability to invoice except for annually; (3) the amounts are not due to us upon signing of the IP Agreement; (4) the amount is not deemed to be collectable until invoiced; and (5) Dell USA can cancel the IP Support (under defined circumstances) and not pay for the portion of the IP Support cancelled.

The embedded conversion feature of the Dell Note is considered a beneficial conversion feature. The embedded conversion feature was evaluated under FASB issued guidance now codified within FASB ASC Topic No. 480, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity. The Dell Note has a mandatory repayment feature, and as such, is classified as a debt instrument with an embedded conversion feature, not subject to SFAS No. 150. As SFAS No. 150 does not apply, the embedded conversion feature was evaluated under FASB ASC Topic No. 815, Derivatives and Hedging. The embedded conversion feature meets the criteria of SFAS No. 133, Paragraph 12. As the conversion feature meets the criteria of SFAS No. 133, the embedded conversion feature is accounted for under EITF Issue 00-19, Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Company’s Own Stock. The embedded conversion feature met the criteria of EITF 00-19 and is required to be classified as equity. The embedded conversion feature was valued at $2.5 million and was recorded as additional paid in capital and a debt discount. The debt discount is shown net against the related Dell Note on the Consolidated Balance Sheet and is being amortized as additional interest expense over the life of the Dell Note. The Dell Warrant that was issued in conjunction with the Dell Note represents an additional beneficial conversion feature that is contingent upon the future vesting of the Dell Warrant. As the beneficial conversion feature is contingent, its value will be recorded only upon vesting of the Dell Warrant.

As part of the Dell Purchase Agreement, we granted Dell a warrant to purchase shares of our common stock or preferred stock (the Dell Warrant). Because the Dell Warrant is considered to be issued as part of the Dell Note, it was recorded at its fair value of $830,000 by recording a debt discount. The debt discount is shown net against the related Dell Note on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. As the Dell Warrant may be exercised for preferred stock and such underlying preferred stock would have a mandatory redemption feature, it is classified as a liability. The Dell Warrant is contingently exercisable and as such will be revalued and “marked to market” for each reporting period after these contingencies are removed. Also as part of the Dell Purchase Agreement, we granted Dell an option to purchase 5% of our common stock calculated on a fully-diluted basis (the Dell Option). Similar to the Dell Warrant, the Dell Option is considered to be issued as part of the Dell Note but is contingent upon an initial public offering. Once the initial public offering contingency is removed or met, we will record the fair value as additional debt discount and the offset will be recorded as a component of stockholders’ equity.

In connection with entering into the 2004 Loan Agreement along with the two additional amendments, we issued warrants to the lender to purchase 352,940 shares of our Series C preferred stock and 322,807 shares of our Series D preferred stock at exercise prices ranging from $0.85 to $2.4318 per share, subject to certain antidilution adjustments. The purchase rights represented by the warrants are exercisable immediately and have a term of seven years. The warrants have been collectively valued at $813,000 using an option valuation model. We recorded the fair value of the warrants as an original issue discount on the debt, which was amortized as interest expense through the loan maturity dates ranging from June 2008 to June 2011.

In connection with the BayStar loan agreement in August 2007, we issued warrants to the lenders to purchase common stock. Pursuant to these warrants, the purchase price will be equal to 80% of the per share price of the equity securities issued and sold by us in an equity financing in which we receive net proceeds of at least $10.0 million, including an initial public offering, and the number of shares available for purchase will be determined by dividing $450,000 by such purchase price. Because a qualifying equity financing did not take place within 15 months of the agreement, the purchase price was adjusted to $2.5594 per share and the number of shares issuable under the warrant was adjusted to 527,466 shares. The warrant expires six years from the date of issuance. The warrants were valued at $482,000 using an option valuation model, assuming a weighted-average risk free rate of return of 4.25%, an expected life of six years, 45% volatility, and no dividends. We recorded the fair value of the warrants as an original issue discount on the debt assuming 527,466 shares will be issuable, which was amortized as interest expense through the loan maturity date of June 2009.

As part of the Dell Purchase Agreement, we granted Dell the Dell Option. The Dell Option will become exercisable as early as ten months after the date of a Qualified Public Offering upon which the closing price of our common stock as reported by the market upon which our shares of common stock are publicly traded (the Primary Market) on each trading day during a period of 20 consecutive trading days is not more than 10% higher or lower than the closing price of our common stock as reported on the Primary Market on the first day of such 20-trading day period. The exercise price per share of our common stock subject to the Dell Option will be equal to the average closing price of one share of our common stock as reported on the Primary Market for the 20 consecutive trading days ending on the date that is one trading day immediately preceding the date of exercise of the Dell Option. Also as part of the Dell Purchase Agreement, we granted Dell the Dell Warrant. The Dell Warrant is exercisable in connection with a Qualified Financing or a sale of our company and expires upon the consummation of a Qualified Public Offering.

Our principal commitments consist of obligations under borrowings, leases for office space, computer equipment and furniture and fixtures. The following table summarizes our long-term contractual obligations as of December 31, 2008 (in thousands):

Debt consists of various debt facilities maintained with Dell, Lighthouse, BayStar, Velocity Financial Group, Inc. and Leader Lending, LLC. There have been no material changes in the information set forth in the above table during the nine months ended September 30, 2009.

Capital lease obligations consist primarily of tangible assets under non-cancelable capital leases.

Operating leases consist primarily of leases on facilities with arrangements that expire in various years through March 2012.

We believe our existing cash and cash equivalents of $10.9 million as of September 30, 2009 are adequate to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months. Our future working capital requirements will depend on many factors, including the rate of our revenues growth, our ability to integrate recent acquisitions and our expansion of sales and marketing and product development activities. To the extent that our cash and cash equivalents, cash flows from operating activities and net proceeds of this offering are insufficient to fund our future activities, we may need to raise additional funds through bank credit arrangements or public or private equity or debt financings. We also may need to raise additional funds in the event we decide to effect one or more acquisitions of technologies or products that may complement our existing operations. In the event additional funding is required, we may not be able to obtain bank credit arrangements or effect an equity or debt financing on terms acceptable to us or at all.

Our financial statements are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (GAAP). The preparation of these financial statements requires that we make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities 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. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. We evaluate our estimates and assumptions on an ongoing basis. Our actual results may differ significantly from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. There have been no material changes to these estimates for the periods presented in this prospectus.

We believe that of our significant accounting policies, which are described in Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements included in this prospectus, the following accounting policies involve a greater degree of judgment and complexity. Accordingly, these are the policies we believe are the most critical in fully understanding and evaluating our financial condition and results of operations.

We derive revenues from consulting services, managed services contracts, product sales and multi-element arrangements. Product sales consist of the resale of third-party software or hardware. Our contracts have different terms based on the scope, deliverables and complexity of the engagement, the terms of which frequently require us to make judgments and estimates in recognizing revenues. We have different types of contracts, including fixed-price contracts and time-and-materials contracts. Amounts are considered to be earned once evidence of an arrangement has been obtained, services are delivered, fees are fixed or determinable and collectibility is reasonably assured.

Revenues are recognized from fixed-price contracts using the proportional performance method pursuant to the SEC’s Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) 104. Proportional performance accounting is based on an efforts expended method, based on hours incurred during the reporting period compared with the total estimated hours to be provided over the duration of the contract. This method is followed where reasonably dependable estimates of revenues and effort can be made. In cases where reasonably dependable estimates cannot be made, the completed contract accounting is used for revenue recognition. As part of our revenue recognition process, we perform monthly reviews of our fixed fee contracts whereby we evaluate the total hours of effort that are expected to be expended under each specific fixed fee project. Such reviews may result in increases or decreases to revenues and income and are reflected in our consolidated statement of operations in the periods in which they are first identified. Historically any changes to total hours of effort expected to be expended under a fixed fee contract have not been significant and have not required a change in revenue recognized in prior periods. Due to the nature of the fixed fee contracts that we enter into and our experience in executing similar contracts in the past, we believe that our estimates are reliable and accurate. If estimates indicate that a contract loss will occur, a loss provision will be recorded in the period in which the loss first becomes probable and reasonably estimable. Contract losses are determined to be the amount by which the estimated direct and indirect costs of the contract exceed the estimated total revenues that will be generated by the contract and are included in cost of services and classified in other accrued liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets.

Revenues from time-and-materials contracts are recognized as services are provided. On occasion, we resell third-party hardware and software maintenance contracts as part of arrangements where we sell third-party hardware and software. Revenues generated from third-party maintenance contracts are recognized ratably over the term of the agreement on a gross basis, pursuant to FASB ASC Topic No. 605, Revenue Recognition, as we are the principal in the transaction and are not able to establish objective evidence to support the estimated fair value of the maintenance contracts. Revenues generated from the resale of hardware and software without related maintenance contracts are recognized upon delivery to the client assuming all provisions of SAB 104 have been met. Further, we recognize product revenues sold on a standalone basis with no other element to the arrangement on a gross basis, pursuant to FASB ASC Topic No. 605, as we are deemed to be the principal in the transaction.

Certain of our managed services agreements include specified service levels which if not achieved could result in penalties, including refunds for services provided for the period the service level was not met. We track and review service-level commitments on a monthly basis for these clients and through this process would identify any service level not met before the related revenues are recognized. If during a period a service level is not met, the amount of the credit due to the client would be accrued as a reduction of revenues in that period. We have not historically issued credits as we have met or exceeded contracted service-level agreements.

Our subsidiaries in Israel and Turkey also license third-party software under perpetual license agreements as part of contracts with multiple elements which could include consulting services, managed

services, third-party hardware and related maintenance, or any combination of the above. Revenues are recognized for these contracts under the provisions of FASB ASC Topic No. 985, Software. Under FASB ASC Topic No. 985, revenues can be allocated between the elements based on each element’s relative fair value, provided that each element meets specified criteria as a separate element. If the fair value of each element cannot be objectively determined by having vendor specific objective evidence of fair value, the total value of the arrangement is recognized ratably over the entire service period to the extent that all services were provided at the outset of the period. Under our multiple element arrangements where software products are sold in conjunction with managed services contracts, the fair value of each element has not been objectively determinable. Therefore, all revenues under these types of arrangements are recognized ratably over the estimated service period to the extent that all services have begun to be provided at the outset of the period. We incur certain direct costs from third parties in conjunction with their multiple element arrangements. These costs include third-party product costs and third-party, post-contract support costs. In accordance with SAB 104 and FASB ASC Topic No. 460, Guarantees, we defer the direct third-party costs associated with their multiple element arrangements and recognize the expenses on a straight-line basis over the service period of the arrangement. We report the revenues from multiple element arrangements as a component of service revenues in our consolidated statements of operations. Revenues from multiple element arrangements were $0.0 million, $2.9 million and $24.6 million for 2006, 2007 and 2008, respectively, and $18.2 million and $14.9 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009 respectively. At December 31, 2007 and 2008, and at September 30, 2009, we had $4.5 million, $7.0 million, and $6.2 million respectively, of deferred third-party costs recorded on our consolidated balance sheets. At December 31, 2007 and 2008 and September 30, 2009, respectively, we recorded $2.0 million, $4.8 million and $4.8 million as deferred third-party costs in current assets, with the remainder of $2.5 million, $2.2 million and $1.4 million in long-term assets.

Revenues recognized in excess of billings are recorded as unbilled revenues. Billings in excess of revenues recognized are recorded as deferred revenues until revenue recognition criteria are met. Client prepayments (even if non-refundable) are deferred (i.e., classified as a liability) and recognized over future periods as services are delivered or performed.

We also incur out-of-pocket expenses, which are generally reimbursed by the client. These reimbursements are classified as service revenues and cost of services in our consolidated statements of operations, and amounted to $1.8 million, $1.6 million and $1.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2007 and 2008, respectively, and $1.3 million and $0.8 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009, respectively.

The allowance for doubtful accounts is our best estimate of the amount of probable credit losses in our existing accounts receivable. We review our allowance for doubtful accounts on a regular basis, and all past due balances are reviewed individually for collectibility. Account balances deemed to be uncollectible are either recorded as a reduction of revenues or charged against the allowance after all means of collection have been exhausted and the potential for recovery is considered remote. Provisions for allowance for doubtful accounts are recorded in general and administrative expenses. To date, we have not incurred any significant write-offs of accounts receivable. As of September 30, 2009, the allowance for doubtful accounts was $209,000.

Property and equipment and intangible assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Indefinite-lived intangible assets are reviewed for impairment at least annually and whenever events or

changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the asset may not be recoverable. Intangible assets with determinable lives are amortized over their estimated useful lives, based upon the pattern in which the expected benefits will be realized, or on a straight-line basis, whichever is greater. We use estimates in determining the value of intangible assets, including estimates of useful lives, discounted future cash flows and fair values of the related operations. To date, we have not recorded any impairment charges on these long-lived assets.

Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price in a business combination over the fair value of net tangible and intangible assets acquired in a business combination. In accordance with FASB ASC Topic No. 350, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other, we evaluate goodwill for impairment annually, as well as whenever events or changes in circumstances suggest that the carrying amount may not be recoverable from estimated discounted future cash flows.

When accounting for acquisitions occurring prior to January 1, 2009 with earn-outs or when additional consideration can be earned based on future performance, we did not initially record the additional consideration as part of purchase accounting. Instead, these amounts were recorded as additional purchase consideration when it was deemed probable that the additional consideration would be earned. For acquisitions occurring on or after January 1, 2009, we will record the estimated fair value of any contingent consideration on acquisition date and subsequent changes in the estimated fair value will be recorded in current earnings.

Through December 31, 2005, we accounted for our stock-based awards to employees using the intrinsic value method prescribed in Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related interpretations. Under the intrinsic value method, stock-based compensation expenses are measured on the date of the grant as the difference between the deemed fair value of our common stock and the exercise price multiplied by the number of stock options or restricted stock awards granted.

Through December 31, 2005, we accounted for stock-based compensation expenses for non-employees using the fair value method prescribed by FASB ASC Topic No. 718 and the Black-Scholes option-pricing model, and recorded the fair value, for financial reporting purposes, of non-employee stock options as an expense over either the vesting term of the option or the service period.

In December 2004, the FASB issued guidance now codified within FASB ASC Topic No. 718, that requires companies to expense the fair value of employee stock options and other forms of stock-based compensation. We adopted FASB ASC Topic No. 718 effective January 1, 2006. FASB ASC Topic No. 718 requires nonpublic companies that used the minimum value method in FASB ASC Topic No. 718 for either recognition or pro forma disclosures to apply FASB ASC Topic No. 718 using the prospective-transition method. As such, we will continue to apply APB Opinion No. 25 in future periods to equity awards outstanding on the date we adopted FASB ASC Topic No. 718 that were measured using the minimum value method. In accordance with FASB ASC Topic No. 718, we will recognize the compensation cost of stock-based awards on a straight-line basis over the vesting period of the award. Effective with our adoption of FASB ASC Topic No. 718, we have elected to use the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the weighted-average fair value of stock options granted on and after the date of adoption.

As there was no public market for our common stock prior to this offering, we have determined the volatility for options granted in 2006, 2007, 2008 and the nine months ended September 30, 2009

based on an analysis of reported data for a peer group of companies that issued options with substantially similar terms. The expected volatility of options granted has been determined using an average of the historical volatility measures of this peer group of companies. The expected volatility for options granted during 2006, 2007, 2008 and the nine months ended September 30, 2009 was 50%, 43%, 42% and 41%, respectively. The expected life of options granted in 2006 and 2007 was determined to be 6.25 years by utilizing the “simplified” method as prescribed by SAB No. 107, Share-Based Payment. The weighted average expected life of options granted in 2008 and the nine months ended September 30, 2009 was 5.92 and 5.19 years, respectively. For 2006, 2007, 2008 and the nine months ended September 30, 2009, the weighted-average risk free interest rate used was 4.82%, 4.61%, 3.02%, and 2.17%, respectively. The risk-free interest rate is based on a treasury instrument whose term is consistent with the expected life of the stock options. We have not paid and do not anticipate paying cash dividends on our shares of common stock; therefore, the expected dividend yield is assumed to be zero. We applied an estimated forfeiture rate of 5.57% in 2006, 2007 and 2008 in determining the expenses recorded in our consolidated statements of operations. We used a forfeiture rate of 6.35% for the nine months ended September 30, 2009.

In connection with our issuance of stock options, our board of directors, with input from management, determined the fair market value of our common stock. Our board of directors exercised judgment in determining the estimated fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant based on several factors, including the liquidation preferences, dividend rights and voting control attributable to our then-outstanding preferred stock and the likelihood of achieving a liquidity event such as an initial public offering or sale of our company. We believe the methodology used was reasonable.

In connection with the preparation of our financial statements for the year ended 2006, 2007, 2008 and the nine months ended September 30, 2009 and in preparing for the initial public offering of our common stock, we examined the valuations of our common stock during those periods, in light of the Practice Aid of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants entitled Valuation of Privately-Held-Company Equity Securities Issued as Compensation, or the Valuation Practice Aid.

Since inception through September 30, 2009, we have granted stock options awards to employees to purchase a total of 22,622,543 shares of common stock at exercise prices ranging from $0.02 to $2.31 per share. On September 2, 2009, our board of directors approved a repricing of outstanding options such that all options for employees who were employed at August 31, 2009 with an exercise price per share above $1.38 would be repriced to have an exercise price per share equal to $1.38.

During 2001, we granted stock options to purchase shares of our common stock at exercise prices ranging from $0.02 to $0.08. Stock options granted to employees were granted with an exercise price equal to the estimated fair market value of our common stock on the date of issuance. Stock options were granted to non-employees at an exercise price greater than the estimated fair value of the common stock. Our board of directors had determined that the estimated fair market value of the common stock was $0.02 per share for all periods during 2001. This estimated fair market value was determined by our board of directors using the market approach, taking into consideration the sale price and associated liquidation preferences and rights of our Series A preferred stock, as well as the high degree of uncertainty surrounding our future prospects and markets. Our board of directors also took into consideration that 2001 was our first year of operations and we had $60,000 of revenues, a net loss of $800,000 and cash usage by operations of $700,000. The price of our Series A preferred stock on July 10, 2001 was $0.4464 per share. Each share of the Series A preferred stock is convertible into one share of our common stock and has a liquidation preference of $0.4464. Given the amount of the liquidation preference, the values assigned to stock-based awards at the time of grant time were deemed by our board of directors to be fair value.

In June and July of 2002 we completed two rounds of financing in which we sold Series B preferred stock at a price of $0.652 per share. During 2002, we granted stock options to purchase shares of our common stock at exercise prices ranging from $0.02 to $0.07 per share. Stock options granted to employees were granted with an exercise price equal to the estimated fair market value of our common stock on the date of issuance. Stock options were granted to non-employees at an exercise price greater than the estimated fair market value of the common stock. Our board of directors raised the estimated fair market value of our common stock in May 2002 to $0.04 per share, then to $0.07 per share in July 2002. The estimated fair market value of our common stock was determined by our board of directors using the market approach, taking into consideration the sale price of the Series B preferred stock and associated liquidation preferences and rights of our Series A and Series B preferred stock, as well as the high degree of uncertainty surrounding our future prospects and markets, and the sustainability of our increased revenues levels. Each share of Series B preferred stock is convertible into one share of our common stock and has a liquidation preference of $0.652. In 2002, our first full year of operations, we had $1.4 million of revenues, a net loss of $2.4 million and cash usage by operations of $2.5 million. In 2002, a fully vested option to purchase 150,000 shares of common stock was granted to an employee with an erroneous exercise price of $0.02 per share, instead of the then estimated fair market value of our common stock of $0.04 per share. The grant resulted in a stock-based compensation expenses of $3,000. Given the amount of the combined liquidation preferences of our Series A and Series B preferred stock, the values assigned to all other stock-based awards at the time of grant time were deemed by our board of directors to be fair value.

In September 2003, we completed a round of financing in which we sold Series C preferred stock at a price of $0.850 per share. During 2003, we granted stock options to purchase shares of our common stock at exercise prices ranging from $0.07 to $0.08 per share. Stock options granted to employees and consultants were granted with an exercise price equal to the estimated fair market value of our common stock on the date of issuance. Our board of directors increased the estimated fair market value of our common stock in September 2003 to $0.08 per share. The estimated fair market value of our common stock was determined by our board of directors using the market approach, taking into consideration the sale price of the Series C preferred stock and associated liquidation preferences and rights of our Series A, Series B and Series C preferred stock, as well as the high degree of uncertainty surrounding our future prospects and markets, and the sustainability of our increased revenues levels. Each share of Series C preferred stock is convertible into one share of our common stock and has a liquidation preference of $0.850. In 2003, our revenues increased 421% to $7.3 million, our net loss increased 50% to $3.6 million and cash used by operations increased 36% to $3.4 million. Given the amount of the combined liquidation preferences of our Series A, Series B and Series C preferred stock, the values assigned to the stock-based awards at the time of grant time were deemed by our board of directors to be fair market value.

In December 2004, we completed a round of financing in which we sold Series D preferred stock at a price of $2.432 per share. During 2004, we granted stock options to purchase shares of our common stock at exercise prices ranging from $0.08 to $0.24 per share. Stock options granted to employees and consultants were granted with an exercise price equal to the estimated fair market value of our common stock on the date of issuance. Our board of directors increased the estimated fair market value of our common stock in December 2004 to $0.24 per share from the previous estimate of $0.08 per share. The estimated fair market value of our common stock was determined by our board of directors using the market approach, taking into consideration the sale price of the Series D preferred stock and associated liquidation preferences and rights of our Series A, Series B, Series C, and Series D preferred stock, as well as the high degree of uncertainty surrounding our future prospects and markets, and the sustainability of our increased revenues levels. Each share of Series D preferred stock is convertible into one share of our common stock and has a liquidation preference of $2.432. In 2004, our revenues increased 301% to $29.3 million of revenues, our net loss increased 34% to $9.8 million and cash usage by operations increased 203% to $10.3 million. Given the amount of the combined liquidation

preferences of our Series A, Series B, Series C and Series D preferred stock, the values assigned to the stock-based awards at the time of grant were deemed by our board of directors to be fair market value.

In September 2005 we completed another round of financing in which we sold Series D preferred stock at a price of $2.432 per share. During 2005, we granted stock options to purchase shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $0.24 per share. Stock options granted to employees and consultants were granted with an exercise price equal to the estimated fair market value of our common stock on the date of issuance. In 2005, our revenues increased 56% to $45.7 million, mainly due to our 2004 acquisition, our net loss increased 119% to $21.5 million and our cash usage from operations increased 75% to $18.0 million. Based on our 2005 financial performance and taking into consideration the sale price of the Series D preferred stock and associated liquidation preferences and rights of our Series A, Series B, Series C and Series D preferred stock, as well as the high degree of uncertainty surrounding our future prospects and markets, our board of directors determined that the estimated fair market value of our common stock remained at $0.24 per share for all of 2005. Given the amount of the combined liquidation preferences of our Series A, Series B, Series C and Series D preferred stock, the values assigned to the stock-based awards at the time of grant time were deemed by our board of directors to be fair market value.

The following table details our stock-based awards, consisting of stock options, including exercise price and valuation of our stock at date of grant:

In periods prior to January 1, 2006, we believe that the estimated fair market value of our common stock, as determined by our board of directors, was reasonable based on several factors, including the book value per share of our outstanding stock, the liquidation preferences, dividend rights, voting control and other preferential rights attributable to our outstanding preferred stock, and our uncertain prospects. Our board of directors also based its determinations on developments in our business, such as the status of our sales efforts and revenues growth. In addition, our board of directors took into account the illiquid nature of our common stock and the likelihood of achieving a liquidity event, such as an initial public offering or sale of the company.

In 2006, our valuation methodology became increasingly complex as a result of our increased liquidation preference levels as well as the increased likelihood of achieving a liquidity event. Although our board of directors was consistent in its methodology in calculating the fair market value of our common stock for all periods, we believe that in the periods after December 31, 2005, the retrospective valuation of our common stock fair market value is more representative of the fair market value of our common stock as it was performed in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid. As a result, we have used the retrospective valuation of the fair market value of our common stock in our calculation of our FAS 123(R) expenses in 2006 and 2007.

In January and October 2006 we completed additional rounds of financing in which we sold Series D preferred stock at a price of $2.432 per share. During 2006, we granted stock options to purchase shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $0.24 per share. Stock options granted to employees and consultants were granted with an exercise price equal to the estimated fair value of our common stock, as determined by our board of directors. In 2006, our revenues decreased 17.2% to $37.8 million, our net loss decreased 55% to $9.6 million and our cash usage from operations decreased to $11.1 million. The estimated fair value of our common stock was determined by our board of directors using the market approach, taking into consideration the sale price of the Series D preferred stock and associated liquidation preferences and rights of our Series A, Series B, Series C and Series D preferred stock, as well as the high degree of uncertainty surrounding our future prospects and markets, and the sustainability of our increased revenues levels.

The fair value of our common stock was retrospectively calculated and was determined to be $0.19 per share as of January 1, 2006. The appraisal of our common stock was performed using the probability weighted-expected return method consistent with the Valuation Practice Aid. For future liquidity events, liquidity dates in December 2008 based on forecasted fiscal year 2009 results were assumed. The most likely liquidity event was determined to be a strategic sale and was assigned a weighted probability of 65%. Continuation as a private company, liquidation and initial public offering were assigned weighted probabilities of 15%, 15% and 5%, respectively. In determining the fair value of our common stock, we applied a 15% discount for lack of marketability to reflect the fact that there is no established trading market for our stock. In determining the discount for lack of marketability, we took into account the following factors: the prospects and timeframe for an initial public offering of our stock or a sale of our company; existing contractual restrictions on the transferability of our common stock; the perceived risk of the enterprise; the concentration of ownership of our stock among our venture capital investors; the difficulty of valuing the enterprise and our common stock; and an absence of dividend payments on our common stock. We used a discount rate applied by an investor to achieve a required rate of return for an investment in a business like ours of 14%.

The retrospective appraisal of the fair value of our common stock at January 1, 2006 of $0.19 per share was below the previously estimated fair value of our common stock of $0.24 per share made by our board of directors. We believe the retrospectively calculated fair value is a better indicator of the fair value of our common stock than the fair value determined by our board of directors for the same period as it was performed in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid.

The fair value of our common stock was retrospectively calculated and determined to be $0.15 per share, $0.16 per share, $0.16 per share and $0.15 per share as of February 28, 2006, April 30, 2006, June 30, 2006 and August 30, 2006, respectively. We held all assumptions for these valuation appraisals constant with the January 1, 2006 appraisal. The changes in the per share value of our common stock were a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations combined with closing our September 2005 sale of Series D preferred stock. The closing of this sale of our Series D preferred stock had the impact of diluting the common shares and reducing the value attributable to common stock due to the increase in the preferred stock liquidation preference. The retrospective appraisal of the fair value of our common stock for these dates was below the previously estimated fair value of our common stock made by our board of directors. We believe the retrospectively calculated fair value is a better indicator of the fair value of our common stock than the fair value determined by our board of directors for the same period as it was performed in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid.

The fair value of our common stock was retrospectively calculated and determined to be $0.11 per share and $0.12 per share as of October 31, 2006 and December 31, 2006, respectively. The changes in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations, the change in weighted event probabilities and our closing of the October 2006 sale of Series D preferred stock. The closing of this sale of our Series D preferred stock had the impact of further diluting the common shares and reducing the value attributable to common stock due to the increase in the preferred stock liquidation preference. Based on our increased financial performance in the first nine months of 2006 and the improvement in the capital markets, we increased the liquidity event probability to 10% for an initial public offering and decreased the liquidation event probability to 10% for liquidation. The liquidity event probabilities of a strategic sale or continuation as a private company were held constant at 65% and 15%, respectively. All other assumptions for October 31, 2006 valuation appraisal were held constant with the January 1, 2006 through August 30, 2006 appraisals. The retrospective appraisal of the fair value of our common stock for these dates was below the previously estimated fair value of our common stock made by our board of directors. We believe the retrospectively calculated fair value is a better indicator of the fair value of our common stock than the fair value determined by our board of directors for the same period as it was performed in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid.

In April 2007, we completed an additional round of financing in which we sold Series D preferred stock at a price of $2.432 per share. In May 2007 and August 2007, we completed rounds of financing in which we sold Series E preferred stock at a price of $2.5594 per share. During 2007, we granted stock options to purchase shares of our common stock at exercise prices ranging from $0.24 to $2.05 per share. Stock options granted to employees and consultants were granted with an exercise price equal to the estimated fair value of our common stock, as determined by our board of directors. The estimated fair value of our common stock was determined by our board of directors using the market approach, taking into consideration the sale price of the Series E preferred stock and associated liquidation preferences and rights of our Series A, Series B, Series C, Series D and Series E preferred stock, as well as the high degree of uncertainty surrounding our future prospects and markets, and the sustainability of our increased revenues levels.

The fair value of our common stock was retrospectively calculated and determined to be $0.75 per share as of February 28, 2007. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations, the change in weighted event probabilities and our closing of the October 2006 round of financing in which we sold Series D preferred stock. Based on our increased financial performance in 2006 and the improvement in the capital markets, we increased the liquidity event probability to 30% for an initial public offering and decreased the liquidation event

probability for liquidation and strategic sale to 5% and 50%, respectively. The liquidity event probabilities of continuation as a private company was held constant at 15%. All other assumptions for the February 28, 2007 valuation appraisal were held constant with the December 31, 2006 appraisal. The closing of the October 2006 round of financing in which we sold our Series D preferred stock had the impact of further diluting the common shares and reducing the value attributable to common stock due to the increase in the preferred stock liquidation preference. The retrospective appraisal of the fair value of our common stock for this date was below the previously estimated fair value of our common stock made by our board of directors. We believe the retrospectively calculated fair value is a better indicator of the fair value of our common stock than the fair value determined by our board of directors for the same period as it was performed in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid.

The fair value of our common stock was retrospectively calculated and determined to be $1.10 per share as of April 30, 2007. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations and the change in weighted event probabilities. Based on our increased financial performance in the first three months of 2007 and the preliminary discussions regarding our initial public offering, the valuation specialists increased the liquidity event probability to 45% for an initial public offering and decreased the liquidation event probabilities of strategic sale and continuation as a private company to 40% and 10%, respectively. The liquidity event probability of a liquidation was held constant at 5%. All other assumptions for April 30, 2007 valuation appraisal were held constant with the February 28, 2007 appraisal. The retrospective appraisal of the fair value of our common stock for this date was below the previously estimated fair value of our common stock made by our board of directors. We believe the retrospectively calculated fair value is a better indicator of the fair value of our common stock than the fair value determined by our board of directors for the same period as it was performed in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid.

The fair value of our common stock was retrospectively calculated and determined to be $1.92 per share as of June 30, 2007. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations, the change in weighted event probabilities and our closing of the May 2007 round of financing in which we sold Series E preferred stock. Based on our increased financial performance in the first six months of 2007 and the engagement of investment bankers to discuss our initial public offering, we increased the liquidity event probability to 50% for an initial public offering and decreased the liquidation event probability of continuation as a private company to 5%. The liquidity event probabilities of a strategic sale or liquidation were held constant at 40% and 5%, respectively. As a result of the increased probability of an initial public offering or strategic sale, we decreased the discount for lack of marketability from 15% to 0% for the June 30, 2007 valuation. All other assumptions for June 30, 2007 valuation appraisal were held constant with the April 30, 2007 appraisal. The closing of the May 2007 sale of Series E preferred stock had the impact of further diluting the common shares and reducing the value attributable to common stock due to the increase in the preferred stock liquidation preference. The retrospective appraisal of the fair value of our common stock for this date was below the previously estimated fair value of our common stock made by our board of directors. We believe the retrospectively calculated fair value is a better indicator of the fair value of our common stock than the fair value determined by our board of directors for the same period as it was performed in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid.

The fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid and determined to be $2.05 per share as of September 30, 2007. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale, initial public offering liquidity event valuations, the change in weighted event probabilities and our closing of the August 2007 sale of Series E preferred stock. Based on our increased financial performance in the first nine months of 2007 and the beginning of our initial public

offering process, we increased the liquidity event probability to 68% for an initial public offering and decreased the liquidation event probability of a strategic sale to 22%. The liquidity event probabilities of a continuation as a private company or liquidation were held constant at 5% and 5%, respectively. All other assumptions for September 30, 2007 valuation appraisal were held constant with the June 30, 2007 appraisal.

The fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, and determined to be $2.26 per share as of December 31, 2007. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations combined with the change in weighted event probabilities and the impact of the Series. Based on our increased financial performance in 2007 and the filing of the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part, we increased the liquidity event probability to 75% for an initial public offering and decreased the liquidation event probability of a strategic sale to 23%. The liquidity event probabilities of a continuation as a private company or liquidation were lowered to 1% and 1%, respectively. All other assumptions for December 31, 2007 valuation appraisal were held constant with the September 30, 2007 appraisal.

In November 2008, we completed a round of financing in which we sold Series F preferred stock at a price of $2.72 per share. During 2008, we granted stock options to purchase shares of our common stock at exercise prices ranging from $1.45 to $2.31 per share. Stock options granted to employees and consultants were granted with an exercise price equal to the estimated fair value of our common stock, as determined by our board of directors. The estimated fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, taking into consideration our current and forecasted financial performance, the probability of different liquidation events, and our enterprise value driven by public market comparables.

The fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, and determined to be $2.30 per share as of March 6, 2008. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations combined with the dilutive effects of convertible debt issued in March 2008. All other assumptions for March 6, 2008 valuation appraisal were held constant with the December 31, 2007 appraisal.

The fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, and determined to be $2.31 per share as of March 31, 2008. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations combined with the change in weighted event probabilities. All other assumptions for March 31, 2008 valuation appraisal were held constant with the March 6, 2008 appraisal.

The fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, and determined to be $1.42 per share as of June 30, 2008. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations combined with the change in weighted event probabilities. Based on market uncertainty and a weakening market for initial public offerings, we decreased the liquidity event probability to 49% for an initial public offering and increased the liquidation event probability of a strategic sale to 49%. All other assumptions for June 30, 2008 valuation appraisal were held constant with the March 31, 2008 appraisal.

The fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, and determined to be $1.45 per share as of September 30, 2008. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes

impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations combined with the change in weighted event probabilities. All other assumptions for June 30, 2008 valuation appraisal were held constant with the March 31, 2008 appraisal.

The fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, and determined to be $1.22 per share as of December 31, 2008. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations. The closing of the November 2008 round of financing in which we sold our Series F preferred stock had the impact of further diluting the common shares and reducing the value attributable to common stock due to the increase in the preferred stock liquidation preference. All other assumptions for December 31, 2008 valuation appraisal were held constant with the September 30, 2008 appraisal.

During 2009, we granted stock options to purchase shares of our common stock at exercise prices ranging from $1.22 to $1.43 per share. Stock options granted to employees and consultants were granted with an exercise price equal to the estimated fair value of our common stock, as determined by our board of directors. The estimated fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, taking into consideration our current and forecasted financial performance, the probability of different liquidation events, and our enterprise value driven by public market comparables.

The fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, and determined to be $1.26 per share as of March 31, 2009. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations. All other assumptions for March 31, 2009 valuation appraisal were held constant with the December 31, 2008 appraisal.

The fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, and determined to be $1.43 per share as of June 30, 2009. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations. All other assumptions for June 30, 2009 valuation appraisal were held constant with the March 31, 2009 appraisal.

The fair value of our common stock was calculated in compliance with the Valuation Practice Aid, and determined to be $1.38 per share as of August 31, 2009. The change in the per share value of our common stock was a result of the change in our enterprise value driven by public market changes impacting the strategic sale and initial public offering liquidity event valuations. All other assumptions for August 31, 2009 valuation appraisal were held constant with the June 30, 2009 appraisal.

In reliance on the fair value calculation as of August 31, 2009, our board of directors determined on September 2, 2009, that outstanding options with an exercise price above $1.38 per share would have such strike price reduced to $1.38 per share.

Accounting for Freestanding Warrants and Other Similar Instruments on Shares that are Redeemable

We account for our preferred stock warrants in accordance with FASB issued guidance now codified within FASB Topic No. 480, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity, which requires that warrants be recorded as liabilities and carried at their fair value. Our adoption of FASB ASC Topic No. 480 in 2006, resulted in a cumulative effect of change in accounting principle of $558,000 and $455,000 of other income. In the year ended December 31, 2007, the change in the fair value of our preferred warrants resulted in $2.1 million of other expenses. In the year ended December 31, 2008, the change in the fair value of our preferred warrants resulted in $1.6 million of other income. For the nine months

ended September 30, 2009, the change in the fair value of our preferred warrants resulted in $83,000 of other income. For warrants issued in conjunction with our debt financings, we record the fair value of the warrants as debt discount on our consolidated balance sheet and amortize as non-cash interest expenses. The debt discount is not subject to future fair value adjustments. In the year ended December 31, 2007, we recorded $1.6 million in debt discounts related to the issuance of warrants in conjunction with our debt financings.

We have incurred net losses since our inception. We account for income taxes in accordance with FASB guidance now codified within FASB ASC Topic No. 740, Income Taxes, which requires companies to recognize deferred income tax assets and liabilities for temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of recorded assets and liabilities and the expected benefits of net operating loss and credit carryforwards. FASB ASC Topic No. 740 requires that deferred income tax assets be reduced by a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred income tax assets will not be realized. We evaluate the realizability of our deferred income tax assets, primarily resulting from net operating loss and credit carryforwards, and adjust our valuation allowance, if necessary.

A significant portion of our operations are based in the U.S. and, accordingly, these transactions are denominated in U.S. dollars. However, we have foreign-based operations in the U.K., Israel and Turkey, where transactions are denominated in foreign currencies and are subject to market risk with respect to fluctuations in the relative value of foreign currencies. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009, approximately 51% of our consolidated revenues were derived from our international subsidiaries. We believe that we mitigate currency exchange rate risk by invoicing clients in the same currency as the related costs. Our primary foreign currency exposures relate to our short-term intercompany balances with our foreign subsidiaries. Our primary foreign subsidiaries have functional currencies denominated in the British pound and New Israel shekel, Turkish lira, and foreign denominated assets and liabilities are remeasured each reporting period with any exchange gains and losses recorded in our consolidated statements of operations. Based on currency exposures existing at September 30, 2009, a 10% movement in foreign exchange rates would not expose us to significant gains or losses in earnings or cash flows. We do not use derivative instruments for managing any of our foreign currency exposure.

Inflation generally affects us by increasing our cost of labor and equipment. We do not believe that inflation has had any material effect on our results of operations during 2006, 2007, 2008 and the first nine months of 2009.

In June 2006, the FASB published guidance now codified within FASB ASC Topic No. 740, Income Taxes, which clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements in accordance with FASB ASC Topic No. 740. This interpretation prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of tax position taken, or expected to be taken, in a tax return. This interpretation also provides guidance on recognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure, and transition. This Interpretation was effective beginning January 1, 2007. The adoption had no impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

In September 2006, the FASB issued guidance now codified within FASB ASC Topic No. 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures. ASC Topic No. 820 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurement), then priority to quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active and model-based valuation techniques for which all significant assumptions are observable in the market (Level 2 measurement), and then the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurement). In February 2008, the FASB issued guidance now codified within FASB ASC Topic No. 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, which delayed for one year the effective date of FASB ASC Topic No. 820 for non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities, except for items that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis (at least annually). We adopted FASB ASC Topic No. 820 for its financial assets and liabilities as of January 1, 2008. The adoption had no impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

In December 2007, the FASB issued guidance now codified within FASB ASC Topic No. 805, Business Combinations. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2008, and applies to all business combinations. FASB ASC Topic No. 805 provides that, upon initially obtaining control, an acquirer shall recognize 100% of the fair values of acquired assets, including goodwill, and assumed liabilities, with only limited exceptions, even if the acquirer has not acquired 100% of its target. As a consequence, the current step acquisition model will be eliminated. Additionally, FASB ASC Topic No. 805 changes current practice, in part, as follows: (1) contingent consideration arrangements will be fair valued at the acquisition date and included on that basis in the purchase price consideration; (2) transaction costs will be expensed as incurred, rather than capitalized as part of the purchase price; (3) pre-acquisition contingencies, such as legal issues, will generally have to be accounted for in purchase accounting at fair value; (4) in order to accrue for a restructuring plan in purchase accounting, the requirements in FASB ASC Topic No. 420, Exit or Disposal Cost Obligations, would have to be met at the acquisition date; and (5) In-process research and development charges will no longer be recorded. The adoption of FASB ASC Topic No. 805 on January 1, 2009 did not impact our financial statements, however could materially change the accounting for business combinations consummated subsequent to that date.

In April 2008, the FASB issued guidance now codified within FASB ASC Topic No. 350, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other. FASB ASC Topic No. 350 amends the factors that should be considered in developing renewal or extension assumptions used to determine the useful life of a recognized intangible asset under FASB ASC Topic No. 350. FASB ASC Topic No. 350 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. Early adoption is prohibited. We adopted this statement as of January 1, 2009. The adoption of FASB ASC Topic No. 350 had no impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

In November 2008, the FASB issued guidance now codified within FASB ASC No. Topic 260 Earnings Per Share, (ASC 260). ASC 260 clarifies that incentive distribution rights as participating securities and provides guidance on how to allocate undistributed earnings to the participating securities and compute basic EPS using the two-class method. This amendment is effective retrospectively January 1, 2009 and interim periods within fiscal year 2009 with early application not permitted. The adoption had no impact on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

In April 2009, the FASB issued guidance now codified within FASB ASC Topic No. 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosure (ASC 820). ASC 820 removes leasing transactions and related guidance from its scope. These amendments delay the effective date for nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities, except for items recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements

on a recurring basis (at least annually), to fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008, or January 1, 2009 for the Company. The Company adopted these amendments on January 1, 2009. The adoption had no impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. In addition, ASC 820 provides further guidance for estimating fair value when the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability have significantly decreased and for identifying circumstances that indicate a transaction is not orderly. ASC 820 includes disclosure in interim and annual reporting periods of the inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value and a discussion of changes in valuation techniques and related inputs. These amendments are effective for interim reporting periods ending after June 15, 2009, or June 30, 2009 for the Company, and shall be applied prospectively, with early adoption permitted. We adopted these amendments in our interim reporting for the period ended June 30, 2009. The adoption had no impact on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

In May 2009, the FASB issued guidance now codified within ASC Topic No. 855, Subsequent Events (ASC 855). ASC 855 establishes standards for accounting and disclosing subsequent events (events which occur after the balance sheet date but before financial statements are issued or are available to be issued). ASC 855 requires an entity to disclose the date subsequent events were evaluated and whether that evaluation took place on the date financial statements were issued or were available to be issued. We adopted these amendments within our interim reporting for the period ended June 30, 2009. The adoption of ASC 855 had no impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

In June 2009, the FASB issued guidance now codified within ASC Topic No. 105, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (ASC 105). ASC 105 establishes the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (the Codification) as the single source of authoritative non-governmental U.S. GAAP. ASC 105 does not change current U.S. GAAP, but is intended to simplify user access to all authoritative U.S. GAAP by providing all authoritative literature related to a particular topic in one place. Rules and interpretative releases of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under authority of federal securities laws are also sources of authoritative U.S. GAAP for SEC registrants. All guidance contained in the Codification carries an equal level of authority. The Codification superseded all existing non-SEC accounting and reporting standards, and all other non-grandfathered, non-SEC accounting literature not included in the Codification became non-authoritative. The provisions of ASC 105 are effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending after September 15, 2009. The adoption of ASC 105 is for disclosure purposes only and had no impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

In October 2009, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2009-13, Multiple-Delivery Revenue Arrangements (ASU 2009-13). ASU 2009-13 establishes the accounting and reporting guidance for arrangements including multiple revenue-generating activities, and provides amendments to the criteria for separating deliverables, measuring and allocating arrangement consideration to one or more units of accounting. The amendments of ASU 2009-13 also establish a selling price hierarchy for determining the selling price of a deliverable. Significantly enhanced disclosures are also required to provide information about a vendors’s multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements, including information about the nature and terms, significant deliverables, and its performance within arrangements. The amendments also require providing information about the significant judgments made and changes to those judgments and about how the application of the relative selling-price method affects the timing or amount of revenue recognition. The amendments in ASU 2009-13 are effective prospectively for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010. Early application is permitted. We are currently evaluating the potential effect, if any, the adoption of ASU 2009-13 will have on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU 2009-14, Software (Topic 985): Certain Revenue Arrangements That Include Software Elements. ASU 2009-14 removes tangible products from the scope of software revenue recognition guidance and also provides guidance on determining whether software deliverables in an arrangement that includes a tangible product are within the scope of the software revenue guidance. More specifically, if the software sold with or embedded within the tangible product is essential to the functionality of the tangible product, then this software, as well as undelivered software elements that relate to this software, are excluded from the scope of existing software revenue guidance. ASU No. 2009-14 is effective for fiscal years that begin on or after June 15, 2010. Early application is permitted. We are currently evaluating the potential effect, if any, the adoption will have on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

We had no off-balance sheet arrangements as of December 31, 2006, 2007, 2008 and September 30, 2009.

We are a leading, global provider of data center consulting, technology integration and managed services. Our vendor independent services are focused predominantly on helping our clients address inefficiencies in their data center environment and thereby reduce costs, minimize risk and improve control and visibility in their data centers. We deliver our information technology (IT) services through Transom, our unique business model consisting of software tools, methodologies and domain expertise, each developed over the course of thousands of client engagements. Transom allows us to standardize our global client offerings into high quality services that can be delivered in a consistent manner to our clients.

We believe our industry is at the beginning of a significant shift in the way IT services are delivered to clients. Historically, these shifts have occurred approximately every 15 years in connection with transitions in business computing, as the industry moved from mainframe computers in the 1960’s to distributed systems in the 1980’s to Web-enabled computing in the late 1990’s. In each case, technological change created a demand for services to help companies adopt, integrate and manage new capabilities. Today, we believe cloud computing, virtualization, green initiatives and an increasing number of government and industry regulations are driving another major shift in the architecture and services in IT infrastructure. We provide the consulting and services required to help clients fill the gap between their current capabilities and those needed to support these new and emerging data center architectures and technologies.

Our clients include companies of varying sizes, including approximately half of the Fortune 100 companies. We have clients in many industries, including financial services and insurance, energy, healthcare and medical, travel and entertainment. We also serve government agencies around the world.

As of September 30, 2009, we had 501 employees, including approximately 43 direct sales people. Our sales effort is further bolstered by our strategic relationships with technology partners such as Dell Products L.P. (Dell), International Business Machines Corp. (IBM), Cisco Systems, Inc. (Cisco), Unisys Corporation (Unisys) and Bull SAS (Bull).

Our revenues consist of services and product revenues. Our focus is on growing services revenues. Our services revenues have grown from $35.2 million in 2006 to $83.0 million in 2008, reflecting a total compounded annual growth rate of 54%, including acquisitions. Our services revenues have grown from $61.3 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2008 to $64.8 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2009. For fiscal years 2006, 2007 and 2008, and the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009 we had net losses to common stockholders of $(13.1) million, $(18.2) million, $(28.1) million, $(22.9) million and $(8.7) million. At September 30, 2009, we had an accumulated deficit of $110.9 million.

We offer our clients three categories of services and provide them across six primary domain competencies. Our strategic infrastructure services and infrastructure optimization services comprise our consulting and integration services offerings. Infrastructure operations services comprise our managed services offerings.

Our services support our clients through any stage of adopting, deploying or managing technology in their IT environments. In addition, they are highly complementary. For example, a strategic infrastructure services engagement may lead a client to hire us for infrastructure optimization services to execute the plans we developed and thereafter retain us for infrastructure operations services to manage the new environment. Clients may turn to us for any single service category, or work with us across all three categories of services.

Our strategic infrastructure services typically consist of customized, industry-specific consulting engagements through which we help our clients develop strategies, architectures and business cases. During these engagements, our consultants work with our client’s in-house IT team to understand the current state and the desired future state of their IT environment. With this information, we determine the appropriate operational processes, technology features and functionality, budget and timeline to reach that future state. Since these engagements are specific to the needs of each client’s particular environment, the project deliverables vary but often include a written executive summary, current state/future state and gap analysis, design and architecture of proposed IT environment and detailed business case with associated cost analysis. These projects can last from a few weeks to several months, depending on the scope of the project and the complexity of the client’s IT environment.

As an example, we worked with four related subsidiaries of a multinational corporation to determine the optimal solution for their six separate data centers in the U.S. We helped our client develop and evaluate a number of different design options, and ultimately demonstrated significant cost savings through a model consolidating the six data centers while maintaining internally-managed operations rather than outsourcing them.

Our infrastructure optimization services help clients with the technical deployment, modernization and integration of complex technologies in their data centers. Our services help clients integrate new technologies into their existing IT environments and create a more efficient infrastructure environment that fully utilizes assets, reduces costs and meets or exceeds target service levels agreements. In these engagements, our consultants work on-site with the client team to complete technology upgrades and technical deployments of hardware and software. These projects can last several weeks to several months, and the outcome is a more efficient environment.

For example, one of our clients is a leading global retail bank that initially engaged us for consulting and technology integration services in their backup environment. The original engagement was to help them migrate to new technology, which subsequently expanded into a larger data center discovery program across more than 5,000 servers and two petabytes of storage. We identified areas for stabilization and transformation that delivered cost savings and mitigated risk. The deliverables were a comprehensive report, business case and presentation defining the work required. A team of four GlassHouse consultants is now in the second year of working through the tasks identified in the program and has a clear project plan for the next 12 months.

We provide three types of infrastructure operations services, leveraging our 24 hours per day, seven days per week, 365 days per year (24x7x365) service operations center in Cary, North Carolina. Where appropriate, we also supplement these services with on-site staff at the client’s premises. Our infrastructure operations services include:

One of our infrastructure operations clients is a leading pharmaceutical company that initially engaged us for consulting and technology integration services in its storage and backup environments. This subsequently expanded into backup managed services, where our consultants are responsible for the day-to-day management of all backup operations. As part of this service, we provide regular reports and analysis of those reports to the client and resolve any issues affecting backup success rates. Over three years, we expanded our services within the client’s IT environment to include virtualization project work, security services and managed services for database and virtual environments.

Our clients engage us through either fixed fee or time and materials contracts, with the majority of our contracts being fixed fee with fixed deliverables. Typically, consulting projects are scoped around defined milestones and deliverables, and are delivered by teams of consultants over weeks or months. Often, our clients engage us to execute a full transformational program consisting of a series of related projects. By breaking the program down into phased projects, we can more efficiently meet each project milestone and deliverable on time and on budget. Managed services contracts are governed by a set of service level agreements that define responsibilities, thresholds and response requirements. These services are delivered by a team who supports multiple clients from our service operations center. Managed services contracts are typically in excess of one year in duration.

Transom is our unique business model that enables us to provide consistent, high-value services to our clients. Transom is composed of three elements: software tools, methodologies and domain expertise. Each of our client engagements incorporates some combination of these elements to provide clients with a customized and effective solution.

We use software tools to enhance predictability, efficiency and quality in the delivery of our services. Our suite of tools includes those we have developed internally, those we have acquired, and those based on third-party software which we have modified to fit our service delivery requirements. These tools support our services, automate processes and improve client service and satisfaction. While we have occasionally licensed our software tools to clients directly, software licensing is not part of our strategy and we have not derived material revenues from such licenses.

Reflector manages the process of data center migrations. Our consultants use Reflector to identify the interdependencies between applications and the hardware on which they reside, taking into account the fact that multiple applications are often housed on a single piece of hardware. Reflector helps our consultants build customized task lists to manage the migration process, aligning the required tasks within the requisite timeframe, then assigning those task lists to appropriate people responsible for completing them. Reflector can be used to re-model scenarios as the environment changes, thus minimizing the risk that a single action or issue can interrupt the entire migration process. Using this tool, our consultants can obtain a “single-pane” view across all the layers of the data center migration.

Fenestra is an automation tool used to gather data and schedule activities to support hosted virtual desktop infrastructure (“HVD”) deployments. Typically, a HVD deployment is time intensive, requiring interaction between the user of each desktop computer and the deployment team. By automatically gathering data at both the desktop device and user level, Fenestra streamlines the timing and execution of the HVD deployment. The tool provides flexibility for the individual user to manage the technology deployment on the user’s own schedule but still within the parameters of the overall project requirements. The project manager benefits from real-time reports against the overall project schedule. Fenestra is highly scalable from a single site deployment to multi-country, multi-site deployments.

vLab is a patent-pending tool that allows clients to model HVD deployments prior to investing in new technology. Clients can see the impact of deploying HVD in their environment in days rather than weeks or months. This saves clients time and resources by dynamically creating a “virtual data center” based on a client’s specific system configuration and customized inputs. vLab also shortens our sales cycle by eliminating the need for lengthy and costly “real world” proof of concept engagements, as well as lowers our costs by reducing the need to have our consultants travel to client locations.

Optics is a suite of tools for reporting and monitoring services, providing visibility into the performance of a particular aspect of a client’s IT environment. We provide a suite of managed services offerings, including Optics for Storage; Optics for Backup; Optics for Virtual Environments; Optics for Database; Optics for Vulnerability Management; and Optics for Security Information Management. Each is offered in a scalable software-as-a-service model, supported by both proprietary and third party software tools.

For example, Optics for Virtual Environments provides visibility into a client’s virtual infrastructure through reports, monitoring and analysis by our consultants. We monitor the virtual server environment 24x7 and generate performance and capacity reports. Our consultants analyze the reports and provide actionable recommendations for how to manage and optimize the environment for peak performance and cost savings. Optics for Virtual Environments is a subscription-based service.

Another important component of Transom is our proven methodologies to address process and planning inefficiencies within clients’ IT environments. While each methodology is specific to a particular domain in IT infrastructure or a particular sets of challenges, the purpose of each is to increase efficiency, reduce risk and improve service levels. These methodologies were developed through our experience in working on thousands of client engagements and are shared throughout our company for the benefit of all of our clients. These methodologies include:

We help our clients improve the process of data center migration from an ad hoc project plan to a streamlined “assembly line,” significantly reducing the time required to complete the migration and minimize the associated business risk. While the majority of individual tasks performed in a data center migration are standard IT operations, a successful migration requires the careful synchronization of these tasks so they are executed in the correct order and with all associated details addressed. Link, supported by our proprietary Reflector tool, reduces the complexity associated with managing multiple interdependent streams of work while continuing to support business processes without interruption.

Accelerate is a four-phase (Design, Plan, Deploy and Transition) methodology that helps enterprises move rapidly from a decision to invest in a new technology or capability to its deployment and adoption. Because the success of Accelerate hinges on driving broad stakeholder agreement in the initial Design phase, we start with a two-day facilitated session, bringing together disparate stakeholders to detail the future state of the new IT environment. In a scripted process, our consultants facilitate a discussion of the new technology and the goals of each stakeholder, while planning for architecture updates and deployment. Conducting this process upfront with the broad group of stakeholders helps manage any issues and misunderstandings prior to actual deployment. At the end of the workshop, all stakeholders sign off on the design and the second phase, Plan, begins. Here we develop a detailed plan for execution and a full architecture, taking into account the unique characteristics of the client’s environment, then define the total level of effort required and develop an economic return on investment model and business case for the deployment. In the Deploy phase, we assemble a team to complement the client’s existing resources, integrate the technology according to the plan, then quickly move to the Transition phase, where we help the in-house team understand how to manage and support their new environment.

Script is a three-phase (Plan, Deploy and Go Live) approach, typically implemented in four to six weeks, to bring a client on to our managed services platform with minimal disruption to daily business activities. We implement standard service activities across the client’s environment while allowing flexibility for unique client requirements and integration with existing systems and processes. Key to Script is the early development of a mutually-agreed terms of reference document, which contains the detailed processes and procedures that govern each party’s responsibilities and define the detailed service levels of the managed service.

We have developed significant domain expertise from hands-on experience in thousands of client engagements. Our consultants have deep expertise in multi-vendor environments and focus on

providing solutions that meet the client’s business requirements irrespective of the technology in that environment. Our clients, who engage with us repeatedly to help drive and support their businesses, validate our expertise.

Our consultants have an average of approximately 15 years of experience and make presentations at global industry events, write columns for industry publications, and author whitepapers and bylined articles about industry issues. We average 50 bylined articles per year and our consultants speak regularly at the industry’s largest events, including VMWorld, IP Expo and Interop.

We believe our industry is at the beginning of a significant shift in the way IT services are delivered to clients. Historically, these shifts have occurred approximately every 15 years in connection with transitions in business computing, as the industry has moved from mainframe computers in the 1960’s to distributed systems in the 1980’s to Web-enabled computing in the late 1990’s. In each case, technological change created a demand for services to help companies adopt, integrate and manage new capabilities. Today, we believe cloud computing, virtualization, green initiatives and an increasing number of government and industry regulations are driving another major shift in the architecture and services in IT infrastructure. We provide the consulting and services required to help clients fill the gap between their current capabilities and those needed to support new and emerging data center architectures and technologies.

The convergence of new technologies and increased demands on IT infrastructure is creating significant, inter-related challenges for IT executives, including:

To improve efficiency and agility, as well as to manage costs, IT executives are looking to optimize their existing assets and integrate new technologies. We believe these initiatives have inherent challenges and are leading enterprises to augment their internal IT teams with third-party consulting and managed services to ensure best practices are implemented and service levels are met. The challenges businesses are facing include:

Business and technology leaders are expected to address an increasing scope and complexity of IT challenges with fewer resources and usually under rigorous time constraints. There is an interrelated set of budget issues that IT departments must balance, such as:

IT executives must address both external and internal threats in order to manage risk. External threats include catastrophic weather events and terrorist attacks that are beyond an IT executive’s control, but still must be addressed through contingency plans. External threats also include computer and network viruses and hackers. In response to these external threats, there has been a significant increase in regulatory mandates created to protect data and consumer privacy. Businesses that do not comply with these regulations face legal sanctions and regulatory violations that may result in significant fines and impact their ability to conduct business. In addition, the negative impact of not implementing adequate threat defenses or contingency plans goes far beyond data loss and can also include loss of revenues and loss of client confidence.

Internal risks are the risks associated with complex, multi-vendor IT environments. As new and emerging technologies are introduced into the data center, there is an increasing opportunity for integration error. Assets may be improperly configured or staff members may not know how to manage the new technology, which could result in enterprises facing interruptions in daily business operations or the loss of data critical to business functions.

Data center infrastructure is in a constant state of change as recently evidenced by the ongoing adoption of virtualization technologies. In order to remain competitive on a cost and time-to-market basis, IT executives must ensure they are adapting to new paradigms of efficiency, speed and application delivery.

The latest emerging technology being examined in IT delivery is cloud computing. Cloud computing offers a “pay-as-you-go” model that impacts operational, not capital, budgets and removes the burden of owning and maintaining assets from the enterprise. This new model provides IT executives with an opportunity to restructure their infrastructure management. The combined requirements of higher efficiency, lower costs with improved scalability and fluidity to support growth are driving IT executives to explore the realm of cloud computing.

Given the ever-changing nature of the data center technologies and business requirements, it is very challenging for IT organizations to keep up with data center best practices. Our broad and deep experience in data center strategy, integration and management allows us to offer approaches that the client may not have considered without the engagement of an expert. This expertise can provide significant value to the overall engagement.

We have developed software tools and methodologies that demonstrate the value of our service offerings. Through this IP and domain expertise we are able to demonstrate significant value generated from our projects, such as optimizing the total cost of a client’s data infrastructure, decreasing the risk of unplanned downtime and data loss, improving service levels and improving control and management of the environment. Providing clear evidence of these benefits helps our clients validate their projects and advances the view of the IT organization’s strategic importance within their own companies.

Large IT projects are highly complex and often can lead to unplanned costs and slippage of target completion dates. Our well-established tools and methodologies mitigate this execution risk by quickly identifying potential roadblocks both prior to and during the execution of these complex projects. Our expertise in data centers allows us to identify and resolve many problems before they create setbacks to the overall project.

We work with our clients to develop and implement tailored disaster recovery, data protection and IT security solutions that safeguard against operational failures, catastrophic events and unauthorized activity. We provide vendor independent expertise and unique tools to provide visibility and remediation support to mitigate risk. By addressing these issues, we help our clients avoid the potential interruption of business activities, negative impact on business reputation and financial penalties related to regulatory noncompliance.

Our managed services provide clients with continuous monitoring of and reporting on their IT infrastructure. This visibility reduces the complexities of managing IT infrastructure and allows clients to focus on their core business.

Our objective is to enhance our industry position, while continuing to grow our revenues and enhance our profitability. Our strategy to achieve these objectives includes the following elements:

We have historically generated a significant amount of our revenues from new projects with existing clients. Because many of our clients are in the early stages of evolving their IT infrastructures,

we expect to continue to sell services to these clients as their needs grow and evolve. In addition, we believe there is a significant opportunity to expand the scope of our client relationships as we develop new service offerings and capabilities, and further establish relationships with senior executives with broader IT management oversight.

We participate in industry events and direct marketing activities to drive broad awareness of our services to prospective clients. These campaigns provide us with lists of qualified prospects. In 2009, we established an inside sales function in the U.S. and the United Kingdom (U.K.) to pursue and develop these prospects into new clients. Our direct sales team also pursues a target prospect list of Fortune 2500 companies to establish new client relationships.

We have developed relationships with technology vendors who engage us to leverage our IP and our consultants to deliver services to their clients. These indirect sales channels provide us with access to additional enterprise clients to whom we can ultimately cross-sell a broader range of consulting, technology integration and managed services. We plan to continue expanding our indirect sales channels relationships. The introductions that these partnerships produce allow us to acquire new clients, as well as to sell into higher levels of IT management within many client organizations.

We provide a wide range of managed services to remotely monitor, report, analyze and actively manage our clients’ IT infrastructure environments. We intend to expand our managed services offerings to provide additional services within our current domain areas. For example, in 2008 and 2009, we added virtualization, security and database managed services offerings. We are currently preparing to introduce networking and server managed services.

Due to the quickly evolving nature of IT infrastructure, new technologies and client requirements routinely emerge. We must continue to address these emerging trends in order to provide a comprehensive set of services to our clients. We believe that in many cases, the best approach to doing so is to acquire resources and expertise that specifically address emerging issues. While our business philosophy is to grow organically, we believe that acquisitions will continue to be an important part of our strategy and we have developed a disciplined approach to quickly integrate acquired companies and assets. We evaluate all potential acquisitions using Transom as a filter. We assess the potential acquisition target for the software tools, methodologies and domain expertise it would contribute to our business. We believe that our significant experience in integrating acquired companies allows us to more quickly address client needs and expand our addressable market opportunity.

Founded in 2001, we initially focused on the storage market. We had always intended to broaden our service offerings into the data center marketplace. As demand increased in adjacent markets we looked for ways to accelerate our growth into areas such as virtualization, security and data center optimization. While our primary focus is on organic growth, we continually evaluate opportunities to add capabilities that fit within our Transom delivery business model. We have invested in strategic acquisitions in the U.S., U.K. and Israel to gain complementary tools and methodologies as well as to hasten our growth in certain geographic markets. Many of our acquisitions have resulted in only a

minimal short-term financial impact, but have provided us with certain strategic elements to facilitate our continued organic growth. Additionally, the geographic diversity of our acquisitions has given us many opportunities to expand the relationships with our indirect channel partners who are looking for global coverage and support.

In 2004, our acquisition of two companies in the U.K. brought managed services expertise in storage and backup to our services portfolio and established our Europe, Middle East and Africa headquarters in the U.K. We expanded our presence in the Middle East and added database and server services to our portfolio with our acquisition of two Israel-based companies in 2007. Most recently, the acquisition of a Swiss services firm in 2009 broadened our footprint in continental Europe and added enhanced archiving technology to our portfolio. Since our inception, we have also completed ten other acquisitions that have helped to improve our services offerings and increase our global presence.

We primarily issue shares of our capital stock to purchase our acquisition targets. This approach helps to align the incentives of the newly acquired management, who frequently held a substantial interest in the target, with the rest of our employees. Additionally, we usually endeavor to integrate the new companies into our organization quickly, and provide broader career paths and enhanced responsibilities to the management team. A significant number of the employees from the acquired companies are still employed by us.

Our global sales, marketing and business development teams develop strong relationships with IT executives at prospective and existing clients. We use a hybrid approach in our sales efforts using both senior level consultants and sales professionals, with the intent of becoming a trusted advisor to our clients and partners.

As of September 30, 2009, we had approximately 43 direct sales professionals, including sales managers, sales representatives, account managers and inside sales personnel. We organize our sales teams by geographic regions. Our direct sales representatives are responsible for all aspects of the selling process. They are incented to both find new clients as well as develop existing relationships. Their compensation is the same whether they develop their own sales leads or work with one of our channel partners. Our direct sales representatives are assisted at times by our inside sales force, who set up new client meetings and provide market intelligence.

The sales process is tightly monitored from the initial meeting to an “opportunity assessment,” which is the process we use to assign sales and technical resources to a potential sales situation. We track all of the activity in SalesForce.com and we support the sales efforts with the use of Atlas, our internal information system that contains sample documentation, marketing materials and tools for estimation.

Approximately 40% of our current business is done through indirect sales channels. We anticipate continuing to grow channel sales so that it will be equal to or potentially surpass our direct sales activity in future years. Indirect channels provide us with additional new account access and allow us to expand our client base geographically. The indirect sales channels benefit from a relationship with us as we often become trusted advisors to our clients, which can provide further opportunities for the provision of services and sales of products.

Our indirect sales team is responsible for creating go-to-market offerings within our indirect sales channels. The programs are rolled out to the field with the support of our sales organization.

We have developed relationships with Fortune 1000 companies, including 50 of the Fortune 100 companies, as well as smaller organizations. We market and provide our services primarily to companies in North America, Europe and the Middle East. For additional discussion regarding geographic information, see Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements. We believe that our regular, direct interaction with our clients, the breadth of our client relationships and our reputation among these clients as an independent advisor differentiate us from our competitors.

We help clients define a program to transform their IT infrastructure from a technology-centric to a service-centric model. Most enterprises have built their data centers around the technology that is available at the time and deliver IT services based on that technology’s features and functionality. Our service-centric approach shifts the client’s perspective to create IT services designed to support business objectives and subsequently to make technology decisions that support the services needed. This type of program generally consists of several phases, and individual projects within each phase to achieve the client’s desired end state. For example, one of our clients contracted with us for storage and backup strategy projects in 2003. This was quickly followed by several related projects, such as data migrations, service catalog development and technology upgrades to help them achieve a program goal of a establishing a mature and reliable storage and backup environment. After the strategy and integration work, we were contracted to manage their storage and backup environments in the U.S. This successful relationship has led to additional data center consulting work in the client’s U.K. sites.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2009, we had no direct client that represented 10% or more of our total revenues. For the nine months ended September 30, 2008, we had no indirect client that represented 10% or more of our total revenue. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009, one of our indirect channels partners accounted for 15% of our total revenues.

The strength of our client relationships has resulted in significant recurring revenues from existing clients. During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, approximately 93.7% of our total revenues came from clients and from companies in our indirect sales channels that had generated revenues in the 12 months prior to this period.

The market in which we operate is fragmented, highly competitive, rapidly evolving and subject to shifting client needs and expectations. We rely on our deep expertise in our data center domain competencies—data center migration, cloud enablement/IT services management, virtual environments, disaster recovery, storage/backup & recovery and security—to be proactive and nimble in providing services to clients.

When evaluating IT consulting and services options, enterprises generally evaluate potential providers on:

Our competition occasionally includes consulting and systems integration firms such as Accenture Ltd., IBM and Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (DTT) and technology vendors such as EMC Corporation, Dell, Unisys and IBM. Many of the companies in this market space serve a broad range of markets and do not focus on the core areas that we serve. In fact, several of these companies are our partners.

We also compete from time to time with smaller regional infrastructure service providers based in the geographic areas where we offer services. We expect additional competition from offshore IT outsourcing firms in locations such as India, Eastern Europe, Latin America and China. Although offshore services may provide price-competitive solutions for some clients, we believe at this time that an onshore presence is required to be competitive from a client service perspective.

Few of our competitors provide infrastructure services as their core offering and most have product resale as a major part of their go-to-market business model. Traditionally, internal IT departments performed many of the services that we provide. Internal departments enjoy the inherent advantages of being closer to business operations and having the ability to influence decision makers and guide IT strategies on a day-to-day basis. However, they may lack specialized expertise or capacity to transform their IT infrastructures around new technologies and infrastructure. As part of our sales efforts, we believe we are able to demonstrate a meaningful return on investment and the benefits of our services in providing greater visibility into IT environments while minimizing risk. Furthermore, since our engagements generally provide training to internal professionals, we are able to provide our clients with the resources necessary to maintain an improved IT environment.

Based on the information we have collected from lost sales opportunities, we attribute only 9% of our opportunities in the first nine months of 2009 as lost to direct competition. The balance of our losses were due to clients’ budgetary issues or the decision to keep the project internal. In the first nine months of 2009, we won approximately 66% of the proposals presented to clients.

Our continued success depends on the skills of our employees and third-party consultants and their ability to continue to innovate and improve our intellectual property. We rely on a combination of, copyright, trademark, patent and design laws, trade secrets, confidentiality procedures and contractual provisions to protect our intellectual property rights and proprietary methodologies. We enter into

confidentiality agreements with our employees and consultants and we generally control access to and distribution of proprietary information. These agreements generally provide that any confidential information developed by us or on our behalf be kept confidential. Further, we require all employees to execute written agreements assigning to us all rights in all inventions, developments, technologies and other intellectual property created by such employees. We pursue the registration of certain of our trademarks and service marks in the United States and other countries. We registered the mark “Transom” in the United States. We have one patent pending for vLab.

Our business also involves the development of IT applications and other technology deliverables for our clients. Our clients often have the contractual right to own the intellectual property in the software applications we develop for them. We generally integrate safeguards designed to protect our clients’ intellectual property in accordance with their needs and specifications.

We seek to maintain a culture of innovation by aligning individual incentives with organization-wide goals. Our success depends upon our ability to attract, develop, motivate and retain highly-skilled and multi-dimensional employees. We compete aggressively for talent and we strive to hire the best employees. We believe that we benefit from a talented pool of employees who are encouraged to think individually and creatively when addressing complex technical challenges. Although not currently a material component of our people management strategy, we also retain subcontractors at all of our locations on an as-needed basis for specific client engagements.

As of September 30, 2009, we had 501 employees in offices worldwide. We have never experienced a work stoppage and believe our relationship with our employees is good.

Our principal corporate offices are located in Framingham, Massachusetts, where we lease approximately 12,000 square feet. We also have additional offices throughout the United States, the U.K., Israel, Switzerland, Germany and Turkey. Globally, we have a total of 12 leases and subleases totaling 74,261 square feet at this time. Our leases vary in duration and term, have varying renewable terms and have expiration dates ranging from 2011 to 2013. We believe that our existing and planned facilities are adequate to support our existing operations and that, as needed, we will be able to obtain suitable additional facilities on commercially reasonable terms.

From time to time, we may become involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. We are not presently a party to any pending litigation or other legal proceedings that are likely to have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results or financial condition.

Set forth below is a list of the sources for the industry and market data and other statistical information used throughout this prospectus.

Our executive officers and directors and their ages as of December 31, 2009 are as follows:

Mark Shirman has served as our President and Chief Executive Officer, as well as the Chairman of our board of directors, since co-founding our company in 2001. Before co-founding our company, from 1999 to 2001, Mr. Shirman served as Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer at Convergent Group Corp., a privately held company serving the eBusiness requirements of the utility and local government industries that effected a public offering in 2000. From 1985 to 1995, Mr. Shirman served as Chief Executive Officer of Innovative Information Systems Inc., an information technology (IT) consulting firm. Mr. Shirman received a B.A. in Economics from Brandeis University and an M.B.A. in Finance from American University.

Kenneth Hale has served as our Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer since August 2004. Before joining our company, from 2002 to 2004, Mr. Hale served as Chief Financial Officer at AptSoft Corporation, an enterprise software company focused on the alignment of existing systems with business processes. From 1997 to 2001, Mr. Hale served as Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of NaviSite Inc., a publicly traded company focused on providing Internet outsourcing solutions. From 1989 to 1996, Mr. Hale served as Chief Financial Officer for Media/Communications Partners, a venture capital firm focused on the communications and media industries. From 1980 to 1989, Mr. Hale was a senior manager at Ernst & Young. Mr. Hale is a Certified Public Accountant and a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Mr. Hale received a B.A. in Biology from Colgate University and an M.B.A. from Northeastern University.

Andrew Norman has served as our Chief Operating Officer since October 2008. He previously served as our Senior Vice President, Worldwide Sales, Senior Vice President, International Division and Managing Director for our U.K. offices. Prior to joining us in 2004, Mr. Norman established a new storage business unit at Xyratex Technology Limited, a former IBM facility, and then led a management buyout in 1997 to form Sagitta Performance Systems Limited, a privately held firm focused on storage networking products and storage consulting services. We acquired Sagitta in 2004. Mr. Norman received a B.S. and M.S. in engineering from Brunel University.

Richard Scannell co-founded our company in 2001. In his role as Senior Vice President of Corporate Strategy and Marketing, Mr. Scannell is responsible for our go-to-market strategy and worldwide marketing functions. Prior to co-founding our company, Mr. Scannell served as Chief Operating Officer of UpSource, a start-up company providing outsourced customer relationship management (CRM) services. Prior to working with UpSource, Mr. Scannell held a senior IT Infrastructure management role with Motorola. Mr. Scannell holds a B.S. in Computer Science from University College—Cork, Ireland.

Doron Rosenblum has served as the General Manager of all of our business operations in Israel and Turkey since March 2007. Mr. Rosenblum has more than 20 years of experience in the IT services field; he has held various managerial, operational and technical positions in enterprises, start-up companies, and IT service providers. Prior to joining our company in 2007, he served as General Manager of MBI Advanced Computer systems for five years. We acquired MBI-Israel in 2007. Mr. Rosenblum holds a B.A. in Economics and Business Administration from Tel Aviv University.

Robert Davoli has served as a member of our board of directors since July 2001. Since 1995, Mr. Davoli has been a Managing Director at Sigma Partners, a venture capital firm. Prior to joining Sigma, Mr. Davoli was President and Chief Executive Officer of Epoch Systems, a provider of data management software products that was sold to EMC in 1993. Before leading Epoch Systems, Mr. Davoli founded and served as President and Chief Executive Officer of SQL Solutions, a provider of tools and services in the relational database market that was later sold to Sybase. Mr. Davoli holds a B.A. from Ricker College.

Todd Gresham has been a member of our board of directors since July 2002. Since 2005, Mr. Gresham has been Executive Vice President of the Networked Storage Solutions Division at Xyratex Technology Limited. From 2004 to 2005, Mr. Gresham served as President and Chief Executive Officer of nStor Technologies, Inc. Prior to joining nStor, Mr. Gresham served as Vice President of Global OEM and Reseller Sales at EMC, and General Manager of Asia/Pacific Operations, as well as Vice President of Worldwide Sales, at CLARiiON. Mr. Gresham has over 25 years of executive management experience in both publicly traded and privately held companies. Mr. Gresham studied business at Texas Tech University.

Kenneth Minihan has been a member of our board of directors since December 2004. Mr. Minihan retired from the United States Air Force in 1999, after more than 33 years of active commissioned service to the nation, serving as the 14^th Director of the National Security Agency from 1996 to 1999. Prior to joining the National Security Agency, Mr. Minihan provided military service at the national level in varying capacities, primarily in assisting the military and government with operating and implementing leading edge technology solutions, services and products. Mr. Minihan is a managing director at Paladin Capital Group and sits on the board of directors for various private companies and the following publicly traded companies: BAE Systems, ManTech International Corporation and Lexis Nexis Special Services Inc. Mr. Minihan holds a B.A. from Florida State University, an M.A from the Naval Postgraduate School and has completed executive development programs at the University of Illinois and Harvard University.

Ryan Moore has been a member of our board of directors since September 2003. Mr. Moore co-founded GrandBanks Capital in 2000 and currently is a General Partner at GrandBanks. Prior to co-founding GrandBanks Capital, Mr. Moore worked at SOFTBANK Venture Capital (now known as Mobius Venture Capital) and SOFTBANK Capital Partners. Before joining SOFTBANK, Mr. Moore served as a Senior Associate focused on technology investment banking with Robertson Stephens. Mr. Moore holds a B.A. in Economics from Princeton University.

Glenn Osaka has been a member of our board of directors since July 2002. Mr. Osaka currently serves as Senior Vice President for Professional Services at Juniper Networks. Prior to joining Juniper in April 2009, Mr. Osaka served as Vice President, Strategy and Planning for Worldwide Operations at Cisco Systems, Inc. (Cisco). Prior to joining Cisco in 2007, Mr. Osaka was President and Chief Executive Officer of Reactivity, Inc., a provider of XML acceleration and security processing. Mr. Osaka previously served as the Silicon Valley Managing Director of the Redleaf Group, an early-stage focused technology investment company, and worked at Hewlett-Packard in a variety of positions. Mr. Osaka holds a B.A. in Psychology and an M.B.A. from University of California, Los Angeles.

Patrick Scannell has been a member of our board of directors since September 2007. Mr. Scannell has served as the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Netezza Corporation since 2003. Prior to joining Netezza, Mr. Scannell served as Chief Financial Officer of PhotonEX Corporation, a provider of optical systems, from 2000 to 2002. From 1998 to 2000, Mr. Scannell served as Chief Financial Officer of Silknet Software, Inc., a provider of CRM infrastructure software. Mr. Scannell holds a B.S. from Boston College and an M.B.A. from Babson College.

Louis Volpe has been a member of our board of directors since January 2009. Mr. Volpe leads Kodiak Venture Partner’s investment efforts in software and core technology areas with over 25 years of technology industry experience. He focuses on new and unique software products and technologies that provide quick return on investment to clients. Prior to joining Kodiak in 2000, Mr. Volpe was part of the executive management teams at ArrowPoint Communications, GeoTel Communications and Parametric Technology. Mr. Volpe has served as President, Chief Operating Officer and Senior Vice President of Sales and Marketing as well as a member of the board of directors at these companies. Mr. Volpe holds a B.A from Tufts University and an M.B.A. from Boston University.

Our officers are currently elected by our board of directors on an annual basis and serve until their successors are duly elected and qualified, or until their earlier resignation or removal. There are no family relationships among any of our officers or directors.

Selection Arrangements. Our current directors were elected pursuant to a stockholders agreement among certain holders of our preferred and common stock. This stockholders agreement will terminate upon the closing of this offering, and there will be no further contractual obligations regarding the election of our directors.

Classified Board. Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation that will become effective as of the closing of this offering provides for a classified board of directors consisting of three classes of directors, each serving a staggered three-year term. As a result, a portion of our board of directors will be elected each year from and after the closing of the offering. To implement the classified structure upon the consummation of the offering, three of the nominees to the board of directors will be elected to one-year terms, two of the nominees will be elected to two-year terms and three of the nominees will be elected to three-year terms. Thereafter, directors will be elected for three-year terms.

Ryan Moore, Louis Volpe and Patrick Scannell have been designated as Class I directors whose term will expire at the 2011 annual meeting of stockholders, assuming the completion of the proposed offering. Todd Gresham and Robert Davoli have been designated as Class II directors whose term will

expire at the 2012 annual meeting of stockholders, assuming completion of the proposed offering. Mark Shirman, Kenneth Minihan and Glenn Osaka have been designated as Class III directors whose term will expire at the 2013 annual meeting of stockholders, assuming completion of the proposed offering. Our amended and restated bylaws that will become effective as of the closing of the offering provide that the number of authorized directors may be changed only by a majority of directors then authorized (including any vacancies). Any additional directorships resulting from an increase in the number of authorized directors will be distributed among the three classes so that, as nearly as reasonably possible, each class will consist of one-third of the directors. The classification of the board of directors may have the effect of delaying or preventing changes in control of our company.

Independent Directors. Each of our directors, other than Mr. Shirman, qualifies as an independent director in accordance with the published listing requirements of the NYSE. The NYSE independence definition includes a series of objective tests, such as that the director is not also one of our employees and has not engaged in various types of business dealings with us. In addition, as further required by the NYSE rules, our board of directors has made a subjective determination as to each independent director that no relationships exist which, in the opinion of our board of directors, would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director. In making these determinations, our directors reviewed and discussed information provided by the directors and us with regard to each director’s business and personal activities as they may relate to us and our management.

Board Structure and Committees. Our board of directors has established an audit committee, a compensation committee and a nominating/corporate governance committee.

Our board of directors and its committees set schedules to meet throughout the year, and also can hold special meetings and act by written consent from time to time as appropriate. Our board of directors has delegated various responsibilities and authority to its committees as generally described below. The committees will regularly report on their activities and actions to the full board of directors. Each member of each committee of our board of directors qualifies as an independent director in accordance with the NYSE standards described above and SEC rules and regulations. Each committee of our board of directors has a written charter approved by our board of directors. Upon the effectiveness of the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part, copies of each charter will be posted on our Web site at www.glasshouse.com under the Investor Relations section. The inclusion of our Web site address in this prospectus does not include or incorporate by reference the information on our Web site into this prospectus.

Audit Committee. Our audit committee currently consists of Patrick Scannell, Kenneth Minihan and Glenn Osaka. Each member of our audit committee can read and has an understanding of fundamental financial statements. Mr. Scannell serves as chairman of the audit committee.

Mr. Scannell qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as that term is defined in the rules and regulations of the SEC. The designation of Mr. Scannell as an “audit committee financial expert” does not impose on him any duties, obligations or liability that are greater than those that are generally imposed on him as a member of our audit committee and our board of directors, and his designation as an “audit committee financial expert” pursuant to this SEC requirement does not affect the duties, obligations or liability of any other member of our audit committee or board of directors.

The audit committee monitors our corporate financial statements and reporting and our external audits, including, among other things, our internal controls and audit functions, the results and scope of the annual audit and other services provided by our independent registered public accounting firm and our compliance with legal matters that have a significant impact on our financial statements. Our audit committee also consults with our management and our independent registered public accounting firm

prior to the presentation of financial statements to stockholders and, as appropriate, initiates inquiries into aspects of our financial affairs. Our audit committee is responsible for establishing procedures for the receipt, retention and treatment of complaints regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters, and for the confidential, anonymous submission by our employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters, and has established such procedures to become effective upon the effectiveness of the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part. In addition, our audit committee is directly responsible for the appointment, retention, compensation and oversight of the work of our independent auditors, including approving services and fee arrangements. All related party transactions will be approved by our audit committee before we enter into them.

Both our independent registered public accounting firm and internal financial personnel regularly meet with, and have unrestricted access to, the audit committee.

Compensation Committee. Our compensation committee currently consists of Robert Davoli, Todd Gresham and Ryan Moore. Each member of this committee is a non-employee director, as defined pursuant to Rule 16b-3 promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and an outside director, as defined pursuant to Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Mr. Davoli serves as chairman of the compensation committee.

The compensation committee reviews, makes recommendations to our board of directors and approves our compensation policies and all forms of compensation to be provided to our executive officers and directors, including, among other things, annual salaries, bonuses, stock option and other incentive compensation arrangements. In addition, our compensation committee will administer our stock option plans, including reviewing and granting stock options with respect to our executive officers and directors, and may, from time to time, advise our board of directors with respect to stock option and compensation of our other employees.

Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee. Our nominating/corporate governance committee currently consists of Louis Volpe, Kenneth Minihan and Ryan Moore. Our nominating/corporate governance committee identifies, evaluates and recommends nominees to our board of directors and committees of our board of directors, conducts searches for appropriate directors and evaluates the performance of our board of directors and of individual directors. The nominating/corporate governance committee is also responsible for reviewing developments in corporate governance practices, evaluating the adequacy of our corporate governance practices and reporting and making recommendations to our board of directors concerning corporate governance matters. Mr. Volpe serves as chairman of the nominating/corporate governance committee.

Code of Business Conduct. Our board of directors has adopted a code of business conduct that will become effective upon the effectiveness of the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part. This code of business conduct will apply to all of our employees, officers (including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions) and directors. Upon the effectiveness of the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part, the full text of our code of business conduct will be posted on our Web site at www.glasshouse.com under the Investor Relations section. We intend to disclose future amendments to certain provisions of our code of business conduct, or waivers of such provisions, applicable to our directors and executive officers (including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions) at the same location on our Web site identified above and also in a Current Report on Form 8-K within four business days following the date of such amendment or waiver. The inclusion of our Web site address in this prospectus does not include or incorporate by reference the information on our Web site into this prospectus.

The compensation committee of our board of directors currently consists of Robert Davoli, Todd Gresham and Ryan Moore.

Interlocks. None of our executive officers has ever served as a member of the board of directors or compensation committee of any other entity that has or has had one or more executive officers serving as a member of our board of directors or our compensation committee.

Participation. On October 26, 2006 and April 10, 2007, we sold shares of our Series D preferred stock at $2.4318 per share to investment funds affiliated with Robert Davoli and investment funds affiliated with Ryan Moore. On April 10, 2007, we also sold warrants to these entities at a nominal purchase price ($0.0001) with an exercise price equal to $2.4318 per share. As detailed below, the funds affiliated with Robert Davoli purchased 1,770,621 shares of Series D preferred stock for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $4,305,796. As detailed below, the funds affiliated with Ryan Moore purchased 888,596 shares of Series D preferred stock for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $2,160,888. The table below sets forth the number of Series D shares and/or warrants purchased at each closing:

On May 4, 2007, we sold shares of our Series E preferred stock at $2.5594 per share to investment funds affiliated with Ryan Moore. On May 4, 2007 and August 15, 2007, we sold shares of our Series E preferred stock at $2.5594 per share to investment funds affiliated with Robert Davoli. On August 15, 2007, we also sold warrants to these entities at a nominal purchase price ($0.0001) with an exercise price of $2.5594 per share. The funds affiliated with Ryan Moore purchased 475,696 shares of Series E preferred stock for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $1,217,496. The funds affiliated with Robert Davoli purchased 1,537,103 shares of Series E preferred stock for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $3,934,061. The table below sets forth the number of Series E shares and/or warrants purchased at each closing:

For more information regarding the shares held by the funds affiliated with Robert Davoli and the funds affiliated with Ryan Moore, please refer to the sections titled “Transactions with Related Persons, Promoters and Certain Control Persons” and “Principal Stockholders.”

For more information regarding the contractual arrangements that we entered into with the funds affiliated with Robert Davoli and the funds affiliated with Ryan Moore in connection with their purchases

of Series D preferred stock and Series E preferred stock, please see the subsections titled “Registration Rights Agreement” and “Stockholders Agreement” of the section titled “Transactions with Related Persons, Promoters and Certain Control Persons.”

We also performed services for an entity affiliated with compensation committee member Todd Gresham. Mr. Gresham serves as an Executive Vice President at Xyratex Technology Limited (Xyratex), a provider of enterprise class data storage subsystems and network technology. Our provision of services to Xyratex generated approximately $256,000 and $124,000 in revenues to us in 2007 and 2008, respectively, and $16,000 in revenues to us during the nine months ended September 30, 2009.

On January 12, 2010, our board of directors adopted a compensation program for non-employee directors, which includes a program of automatic options for non-employee directors to be granted under the 2010 Equity Incentive Plan. This program will become effective upon the effective date of the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part and will remain in place until our board of directors amends or terminates it, which it may do at any time in its discretion. Pursuant to this program, each member of our board of directors who is not our employee will receive a $10,000 annual retainer. Each non-employee director serving on our audit committee or compensation committee will receive an annual retainer of $5,000. The chairman of the audit committee or compensation committee will receive an additional annual retainer of $5,000.

Under the director compensation program, each non-employee director who first joins our board of directors after the date of this offering will receive on the date on which he or she joins our board of directors an option to purchase 60,000 shares. This option will vest over a two-year period, with 50% of each option grant vesting after one year and an additional 25% of the option shares for each subsequent six-month period thereafter.

Each non-employee director who is serving on our board of directors on the date of this offering will automatically be granted an option to purchase 30,000 shares of our common stock effective on his or her re-election to our board of directors at the annual meeting of our stockholders occurring in 2011. These options will have the same vesting schedule as described above.

For each year beginning in 2011, a non-employee director who continues serving as a director after an annual meeting of our stockholders will automatically be granted an additional option to purchase 20,000 shares of our common stock on the date of the annual meeting. A non-employee director who will serve as chairman of our audit committee or compensation committee after an annual meeting will automatically be granted an additional option to purchase 10,000 shares of our common stock on the date of the annual meeting, and a non-employee director who will serve as a member of our audit committee or compensation committee will automatically be granted an option to purchase 5,000 shares of our common stock on the date of the annual meeting (and will receive options to purchase a total of 10,000 shares if such director serves on both committees). However, a non-employee director who receives a 60,000-share or 30,000-share option described above will not also receive during the same calendar year any of the options described in this paragraph. Each of these options vests in equal monthly installments over the 12-month period commencing on the date of grant.

The exercise price of each non-employee director’s option will be equal to the fair market value of our common stock on the option grant date. A director may pay the exercise price by using cash, shares of common stock that the director already owns, or an immediate sale of the option shares through a broker designated by us. Each non-employee director’s options have a ten-year term, except

that they expire one year after the director leaves our board of directors. A non-employee director’s option granted under this program will become fully vested upon a change in control of our company and will become fully vested if the non-employee director’s service terminates due to death.

We currently have a policy to reimburse directors for travel, lodging and other reasonable expenses incurred in connection with their attendance at board and committee meetings.

The following table sets forth the total compensation earned in 2009 by each person who served as a member of our board of directors during 2009, other than a director who also served as an executive officer.

The following table describes the options that we granted to our non-employee directors and that were outstanding on September 30, 2009:

Our directors received no cash compensation during 2009 for their service on our board of directors or committees of our board of directors. We have a policy of reimbursing our directors for their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attending board and committee meetings.

In July 2009, we granted each of Mr. Gresham and Mr. Osaka options to purchase 75,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $1.38 per share. Each of these option grants vests over a

2-year period, with 50% of each option grant vesting after one year and an additional 25% of the option shares for each subsequent 6 month period thereafter.

Following this offering, our non-employee directors will be eligible for cash compensation and automatic stock option grants under our 2010 Equity Incentive Plan. Please see the section titled “Management—Director Compensation” above for more information.


Larger accelerated filer ¨		Accelerated filer ¨
Non-accelerated filer x	(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	Smaller reporting company ¨



Title of Each Class of Securities to be Registered	Proposed Maximum Aggregate Offering Price(1)(2)	Amount of Registration Fee
Common Stock, $0.001 par value	$75,000,000	$5,348(3)


	Per Share	Total
Initial public offering price	$	$
Underwriting discount	$	$
Proceeds, before expenses, to GlassHouse	$	$


Goldman, Sachs & Co.		Credit Suisse

Thomas Weisel Partners LLC	William Blair & Company	Oppenheimer & Co.


Ÿ Principal at September 30, 2009:		$25.0 million (due in full March 2011)

Ÿ Interest Rate:		10% per annum March 2008 – February 2011 (no payments until maturity) $3.9 million accrued interest at September 30, 2009

Ÿ Maturity Date:		March 2011


		Page
Prospectus Summary		1
The Offering		6
Summary Historical and Unaudited Pro Forma Consolidated Financial and Other Data		8
Risk Factors		10
Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements		28
Industry and Market Data		29
Use of Proceeds		30
Dividend Policy		31
Capitalization		32
Dilution		34
Selected Consolidated Financial Data		36
Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		38
Business		72
Management		89
Transactions with Related Persons, Promoters and Certain Control Persons		115
Principal Stockholders		118
Description of Capital Stock		121
Shares Eligible for Future Sale		125
Underwriting		128
Legal Matters		132
Experts		132
Where You Can Find More Information		133
Index to Financial Statements		F-1


	As of September 30, 2009
	Actual			Pro Forma			Pro Forma As Adjusted
(unaudited)	(in thousands, except share and par value data)
Preferred Stock Warrant liability	$	3,623		$	—		$
Long-term debt, including current portion		36,029			36,029

Series A Preferred Stock, $0.001 par value, 3,360,000 shares authorized, 3,360,000 shares issued and outstanding actual; 3,360,000 shares authorized, no shares outstanding pro forma and pro forma as adjusted		2,495			—

Series B Preferred Stock, $0.001 par value, 10,658,017 shares authorized, 10,623,403 shares issued and outstanding actual, 10,658,017 shares authorized, no shares outstanding pro forma and pro forma as adjusted		11,094			—

Series C Preferred Stock, $0.001 par value, 8,717,647 shares authorized, 8,364,707 shares issued and outstanding actual, 8,717,647 shares authorized, no shares outstanding pro forma and pro forma as adjusted		9,698			—

Series D Preferred Stock, $0.001 par value, 17,511,727 shares authorized, 15,626,305 shares issued and outstanding actual, 17,511,727 shares authorized, no shares outstanding pro forma and pro forma as adjusted		46,677			—

Series E Preferred Stock, $0.001 par value, 4,805,815 shares authorized, 4,493,245 shares issued and outstanding actual, 4,805,815 shares authorized, no shares outstanding pro forma and pro forma as adjusted		12,894			—

Series F Preferred Stock, $0.001 par value, 15,091,913 shares authorized, 3,602,940 shares issued and outstanding actual, 15,091,913 shares authorized, no shares outstanding pro forma and pro forma as adjusted		10,236			—

Total redeemable convertible preferred stock		93,094			—

Stockholders’ (deficit) equity:
Series 1 Convertible Preferred Stock, $0.001 par value, 6,000,000 shares authorized, 4,446,576 shares issued; 6,000,000 shares authorized, no shares outstanding pro forma and pro forma as adjusted		370			—
Common stock, $0.001 par value, 106,000,000 shares authorized, 15,447,716 shares issued; 106,000,000 shares authorized, 65,964,891 outstanding pro forma and shares outstanding pro forma as adjusted.		16			67
Additional paid-in capital		16,255			113,291
Contingent shares issuable		313			313
Treasury stock, at cost, 2,454,514 shares at September 30, 2009		(4,531	)		(4,531	)
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		2,029			2,029
Accumulated deficit		(110,907	)		(110,907	)

Total stockholders’ (deficit) equity		(96,455	)		262

Total capitalization	$	36,291		$	36,291


Assumed initial public offering price per share		$
Pro forma net tangible book value per share before this offering	$
Increase per share attributable to new investors	$

Pro forma net tangible book value per share after this offering		$

Dilution per share to new investors		$


	Shares Purchased			Total Consideration				Average Price Per Share
	Number	Percent		Amount		Percent		Average Price Per Share
Existing stockholders(1)	63,510,377		%	$	91,002,809		%	$	1.43
New stockholders
Totals			%			100.0	%


	Year Ended December 31,															Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2004			2005			2006			2007			2008			2008			2009
																(unaudited)
	(in thousands, except share and per share data)
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
Revenues	$	29,341		$	45,677		$	37,808		$	61,241		$	85,058		$	63,070		$	65,672
Cost of revenues		25,091			39,047			29,279			45,140			65,346			49,807			47,943

Gross profit		4,250			6,630			8,529			16,101			19,712			13,263			17,729
Research and development expenses		—			—			—			146			1,050			860			449
Selling and marketing expenses		9,128			15,682			10,906			15,313			19,056			14,781			10,238
General and administrative expenses		4,046			8,840			7,058			9,421			15,419			12,676			7,099
Amortization of intangible assets		703			1,351			1,165			2,260			2,771			2,108			1,844

Loss from operations		(9,627	)		(19,243	)		(10,600	)		(11,039	)		(18,584	)		(17,162	)		(1,901	)
Interest and other income (expense), net		(188	)		(2,248	)		393			(3,298	)		(4,481	)		(2,064	)		(2,809	)

Loss before income taxes and cumulative effect of change in accounting principle		(9,815	)		(21,491	)		(10,207	)		(14,337	)		(23,065	)		(19,226	)		(4,710	)
Provision for income taxes		—			—			—			(485	)		240			193			9

Loss before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle		(9,815	)		(21,491	)		(10,207	)		(13,852	)		(23,305	)		(19,419	)		(4,719	)
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle(1)		—			—			558			—			—			—			—

Net loss		(9,815	)		(21,491	)		(9,649	)		(13,852	)		(23,305	)		(19,419	)		(4,719	)

Dividends and accretion on preferred stock		(1,129	)		(2,420	)		(3,482	)		(4,310	)		(4,821	)		(3,505	)		(4,006	)

Net loss to common stockholders	$	(10,944	)	$	(23,911	)	$	(13,131	)	$	(18,162	)	$	(28,126	)	$	(22,924	)	$	(8,725	)

Net loss per share to common stockholders	$	(2.29	)	$	(4.62	)	$	(2.21	)	$	(1.79	)	$	(2.13	)	$	(1.72	)	$	(0.66	)

Weighted average number of shares outstanding (basic and diluted)		4,769			5,170			5,955			10,160			13,193			13,336			13,149


	2004			2005
Additional other income, net	$	28		$	503

Adjusted net loss per share to common stockholders*	$	(2.29	)	$	(4.53	)


	As of December 31,															As of September 30,
	2004			2005			2006			2007			2008			2008			2009
																(unaudited)			(unaudited)
	(in thousands)
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	20,783		$	4,948		$	3,735		$	5,948		$	12,509		$	6,970		$	10,904
Total assets		37,529			18,756			18,072			69,492			79,091			69,047			76,121
Total long term debt, including current portion		5,832			4,898			5,695			19,305			36,929			38,182			36,029
Redeemable convertible preferred stock warrant liability		—			—			993			4,483			3,706			4,387			3,623
Total redeemable convertible preferred stock		37,560			43,924			54,680			74,617			89,087			78,122			93,094
Total stockholders’ deficit		(18,425	)		(41,279	)		(54,523	)		(62,511	)		(88,765	)		(84,271	)		(96,455	)


	Year Ended December 31,						Year Ended December 31,						Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2006		2007		% Change		2007		2008		% Change		2008		2009		% Change
													(unaudited)		(unaudited)
	(dollars in thousands)
Revenues
Services	$	35,184	$	60,436	72	%	$	60,436	$	82,998	37	%	$	61,274	$	64,773	6	%
Product		2,624		805	(69	)%		805		2,060	156	%		1,796		899	(50	)%

Total revenues	$	37,808	$	61,241	62	%	$	61,241	$	85,058	39	%	$	63,070	$	65,672	4	%


	Quarter Ended in 2008												Quarter Ended in 2009
	March 31			June 30			September 30			December 31			March 31			June 30			September 30
	(in thousands, except per share data)
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
Revenues	$	21,214		$	21,444		$	20,412		$	21,988		$	22,156		$	21,649		$	21,867
Cost of revenues		17,008			17,105			15,694			15,539			16,470			16,037			15,436

Gross profit		4,206			4,339			4,718			6,449			5,686			5,612			6,431
Research and development expenses		299			339			222			190			132			118			199
Selling and marketing expenses		4,902			5,221			4,658			4,275			3,437			3,317			3,484
General and administrative expenses		2,573			7,465			2,638			2,743			2,226			2,164			2,709
Amortization of intangible assets		686			700			722			663			602			608			634

Loss from operations		(4,254	)		(9,386	)		(3,522	)		(1,422	)		(711	)		(595	)		(595	)
Interest and other income (expense), net		(703	)		350			(1,711	)		(2,417	)		(1,852	)		655			(1,612	)

Income (loss) before income taxes and cumulative effect of change in accounting principle		(4,957	)		(9,036	)		(5,233	)		(3,839	)		(2,563	)		60			(2,207	)
Provision (benefit) for income taxes		67			116			10			47			(228	)		102			135

Income (loss) before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle		(5,024	)		(9,152	)		(5,243	)		(3,886	)		(2,335	)		(42	)		(2,342	)

Net income (loss)		(5,024	)		(9,152	)		(5,243	)		(3,886	)		(2,335	)		(42	)		(2,342	)

Dividends and accretion on preferred stock		(1,174	)		(1,174	)		(1,157	)		(1,316	)		(1,321	)		(1,335	)		(1,350	)

Net income (loss) to common stockholders	$	(6,198	)	$	(10,326	)	$	(6,400	)	$	(5,202	)	$	(3,656	)	$	(1,377	)	$	(3,692	)

Net loss per share, basic and diluted	$	(0.47	)	$	(0.78	)	$	(0.52	)	$	(0.41	)	$	(0.28	)	$	(0.10	)	$	(0.28	)

Other unaudited financial data: EBITDA (1)	$	(2,928	)	$	(7,837	)	$	(3,074	)	$	(2,557	)	$	(308	)	$	1,950		$	171

Weighted average shares outstanding		13,255			13,293			12,389			12,769			13,044			13,174			13,225


Consolidated Statements of Operations Data:
Revenues		100.0	%		100.0	%		100.0	%		100.0	%		100.0	%		100.0	%		100.0	%
Cost of revenues		80.2	%		79.8	%		76.9	%		70.7	%		74.3	%		74.1	%		70.6	%

Gross profit		19.8	%		20.2	%		23.1	%		29.3	%		25.7	%		25.9	%		29.4	%
Research and development expenses		1.4	%		1.6	%		1.1	%		0.9	%		0.6	%		0.5	%		0.9	%
Selling and marketing expenses		23.1	%		24.3	%		22.8	%		19.4	%		15.5	%		15.3	%		15.9	%
General and administrative expenses		12.1	%		34.8	%		12.9	%		12.5	%		10.0	%		10.0	%		12.4	%
Amortization of intangible assets		3.2	%		3.3	%		3.5	%		3.0	%		2.7	%		2.8	%		2.9	%

Loss from operations		(20.1	)%		(43.8	)%		(17.3	)%		(6.5	)%		(3.2	)%		(2.7	)%		(2.7	)%
Interest and other income (expense), net		(3.3	)%		1.6	%		(8.4	)%		(11.0	)%		(8.4	)%		3.0	%		(7.4	)%

Loss before income taxes and cumulative effect of change in accounting principle		(23.4	)%		(42.1	)%		(25.6	)%		(17.5	)%		(11.6	)%		0.3	%		(10.1	)%
Provision for income taxes		0.3	%		0.5	%		0.0	%		0.2	%		(1.0	)%		0.5	%		0.6	%

Loss before cumulative effect of change in accounting principle		(23.7	)%		(42.7	)%		(25.7	)%		(17.7	)%		(10.5	)%		(0.2	)%		(10.7	)%
Cumulative effect of change in accounting principle		0.0	%		0.0	%		0.0	%		0.0	%		0.0	%		0.0	%		0.0	%

Net loss		(23.7	)%		(42.7	)%		(25.7	)%		(17.7	)%		(10.5	)%		(0.2	)%		(10.7	)%


	Payments Due by Period						4-5 years		More than 5 years
	Total		1 year		2-3 years		4-5 years		More than 5 years
Debt principal repayments	$	40,240	$	4,742	$	35,498	$	—	$	—
Capital lease obligations		22		22		—		—		—
Operating lease obligations		5,287		1,553		2,944		790		—

Total	$	45,549	$	6,317	$	38,442	$	790	$	—


Grants made during the period 1/1/06 through 9/30/09	Valuation Date(1)	Number of Option Granted	Exercise or Purchase Price(2)		Fair Value of Common Stock(3)
1/17/2006	1/1/2006	342,000	$	0.24	$	0.19
3/17/2006	2/28/2006	81,000	$	0.24	$	0.15
5/19/2006	4/30/2006	192,000	$	0.24	$	0.16
7/21/2006	6/30/2006	1,020,062	$	0.24	$	0.16
9/15/2006	8/30/2006	61,000	$	0.24	$	0.15
11/17/2006	10/31/2006	92,000	$	0.24	$	0.11
1/19/2007	12/31/2006	423,500	$	0.24	$	0.12
3/23/2007	2/28/2007	1,641,500	$	1.39	$	0.75
5/25/2007	4/30/2007	788,200	$	1.74	$	1.10
7/20/2007	6/30/2007	270,150	$	1.93	$	1.92
9/21/2007	9/21/2007	770,000	$	2.05	$	2.05
11/14/2007	9/21/2007	354,000	$	2.05	$	2.05
1/18/2008	12/31/2007	326,150	$	2.26	$	2.26
3/11/2008	3/06/2008	46,000	$	2.28	$	2.30
5/16/2008	3/31/2008	92,000	$	2.31	$	2.31
7/15/2008	6/30/2008	112,700	$	2.31	$	1.42
9/17/2008	6/30/2008	112,500	$	2.31	$	1.42
11/14/2008	9/30/2008	33,000	$	1.45	$	1.45
1/21/2009	12/31/2008	186,400	$	1.22	$	1.22
3/4/2009	3/6/2009	369,800	$	1.26	$	1.26
5/19/2009	3/31/2009	208,700	$	1.26	$	1.26
7/8/2009	6/30/2009	277,800	$	1.43	$	1.43
8/31/2009	8/31/2009	3,762,950	$	1.38	$	1.38
9/2/2009	8/31/2009	82,700	$	1.38	$	1.38


Domains	Description of Services	Market Size and Growth
Data Center Migrations/Consolidation	We help clients plan and execute data center consolidations and migrations, with a focus on risk management and cost efficiency.	The data center migration market is expected to grow at a 9.9% compound annual growth rate (CAGR), from $6.1 billion in 2009 to $8.1 billion by 2012. (Source: Bloor Research)¹ We believe that the continued spending in data center migrations will result in increased demand for our services as we help clients plan and execute these projects.
Cloud Computing/IT Service Management	We help clients implement best practices and tools, such as service management matrices and cost of capacity analyses, to take advantage of the benefits of both private and public cloud computing.	Cloud infrastructure services are expected to grow at a 32.5% CAGR from $2.6 billion in 2008 to $10.6 billion by 2013. (Source: Gartner, Inc. (Gartner))² IT services management provides clients with tools and processes to improve visibility in their IT environment and prepare to move to a cloud-based infrastructure. We believe that the expected growth in cloud services reflects a shift in business computing that will result in clients utilizing our consulting services as they seek to adopt this new technology.
Virtual Environments	We help clients design, integrate and manage their virtualized environments, encompassing servers, storage, desktop, databases and applications.	The virtualization market includes server virtualization infrastructure, server virtualization management and hosted virtual desktop market and is expected to grow at a 33.6% CAGR from $1.9 billion in 2008 to $8.1 billion by 2013. (Source: Gartner)³ We believe that this growth in the overall virtualization market will result in increased spending for our services as clients seek external expertise and support as they migrate to virtualized data center environments.
Storage/Backup & Recovery	We help clients design, integrate and manage their data storage and backup technologies.	The storage services market, which includes consulting and managed services as well as storage capacity, is expected to grow at a 3% CAGR from $15.7 billion in 2008 to $17.9 billion by 2013. (Source: Gartner)⁴ Although we do not currently provide storage capacity as part of our service offerings, we believe the growth in the overall storage services market will lead to increased demand for our consulting, integration and managed services offerings.
Security	We help clients design, optimize and manage their IT security environment according to their business requirements and risk tolerance profile.	The security services market was valued at $20.1 billion in 2007, based on services revenue, and is expected to increase at a CAGR of 17% to reach $44.1 billion by 2012. (Source: IDC)⁵ We believe that this growth will result in increased demand for our services, as we help clients plan and execute projects to improve their IT security.
Disaster Recovery	We help clients develop, implement and test disaster recovery plans to mitigate risk and ensure business resiliency.	The disaster recovery market is comprised of several domains, including storage, backup, virtualization and security. 56% of worldwide organizations include disaster recovery in their security budgets. (Source: Gartner)⁶


Name	Age	Position
Mark Shirman	51	Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer
Kenneth Hale	57	Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
Andrew Norman	46	Chief Operating Officer
Richard Scannell	41	Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategy and Marketing
Doron Rosenblum	46	General Manager, GlassHouse Technologies Limited
Robert Davoli(2)	61	Director
Todd Gresham(2)	48	Director
Kenneth Minihan(1),(3)	66	Director
Ryan Moore(2),(3)	36	Director
Glenn Osaka(1)	54	Director
Patrick Scannell(1)	56	Director
Louis Volpe(3)	60	Director


Closing Date	Investor Name	Series D Shares Purchased	Series D Warrants Purchased	Compensation Committee Member, Title
October 2006	Sigma Partners	773,011	0	Robert Davoli, Managing Partner of Sigma Partners
April 2007	Sigma Partners	997,610	199,522	Same as above
October 2006	GrandBanks Capital	387,940	0	Ryan Moore, General Partner of GrandBanks Capital
April 2007	GrandBanks Capital	500,656	100,130	Same as above


Closing Date	Investor Name	Series E Shares Purchased	Series E Warrants Purchased	Compensation Committee Member, Title
May 2007	Sigma Partners	947,874	0	Robert Davoli, Managing Partners of Sigma Partners
August 2007	Sigma Partners	589,229	117,844	Same as above
May 2007	GrandBanks Capital	475,696	0	Ryan Moore, General Partner of GrandBanks Capital


Name	Fees Earned or Paid in Cash ($)	Stock Awards ($)	Option Awards ($) (1)		Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($)	Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Earnings ($)	All Other Compensation ($)	Total ($)
Todd Gresham	0	0	44,436	(2)	0	0	0	44,436
Glenn Osaka	0	0	44,436	(2)	0	0	0	44,436


Name	Date of Grant	Number of Options Granted		Exercise Price per Share		Grant Date Fair Value(1)		Aggregate Number of Options Outstanding on 09/30/09
Todd Gresham	08/31/2009	75,000	(1)	$	1.38	$	261
Todd Gresham	08/31/2009	75,000	(2)	$	1.38	$	44,436	150,000
Glenn Osaka	08/31/2009	75,000	(1)	$	1.38	$	261
Glenn Osaka	08/31/2009	75,000	(2)	$	1.38	$	44,436	150,000
Patrick Scannell	08/31/2009	100,000	(1)	$	1.38	$	17,399	100,000