Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2011

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Policies) [Abstract]

The accompanying interim consolidated financial statements of Gen-Probe Incorporated (“Gen-Probe” or the “Company”) at June 30, 2011, and for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, are unaudited and have been prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) for interim financial information. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. GAAP for complete financial statements. In management’s opinion, the unaudited interim consolidated financial statements include all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring accruals, necessary to state fairly the financial information therein in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Interim results are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be reported for any other interim period or for the year ending December 31, 2011.

These unaudited interim consolidated financial statements and related footnotes should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related footnotes contained in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.

In accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 855, Subsequent Events, the Company evaluated subsequent events after the balance sheet date of June 30, 2011 and through the date and time its consolidated financial statements were issued on August 3, 2011.

Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. Such reclassifications did not affect total revenues, income from operations, or net income.

Principles of Consolidation

These unaudited interim consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Gen-Probe as well as its wholly owned subsidiaries. All material intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation. The Company has not identified any interests in variable interest entities that require consolidation.

In December 2010, the Company acquired Genetic Testing Institute, Inc. (“GTI Diagnostics”), a privately held Wisconsin corporation now known as Gen-Probe GTI Diagnostics, Inc. GTI Diagnostics has broadened and strengthened the Company’s transplant diagnostics business, and has also provided the Company with access to new products in the specialty coagulation and transfusion-related blood bank markets. GTI Diagnostics’ results of operations have been included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements beginning in December 2010.

In October 2009, the Company acquired Prodesse, Inc. (“Prodesse”), a privately held Wisconsin corporation now known as Gen-Probe Prodesse, Inc. Prodesse develops molecular diagnostic products for a variety of infectious disease applications. Prodesse’s results of operations have been included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements beginning in October 2009.

In April 2009, the Company acquired Tepnel Life Sciences plc (“Tepnel”), a United Kingdom (“UK”) based international life sciences products and services company, now known as Gen-Probe Life Sciences Ltd. Tepnel’s results of operations have been included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements beginning in April 2009.

The Company translates the financial statements of its non-U.S. operations using the end-of-period exchange rates for assets and liabilities and the average exchange rates for each reporting period for results of operations. Net gains and losses resulting from the translation of foreign financial statements and the effect of exchange rates on intercompany receivables and payables of a long-term investment nature are recorded as a separate component of stockholders’ equity under the caption “Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income.” These adjustments will affect net income upon the sale or liquidation of the underlying investment.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements. These estimates include assessing the collectability of accounts receivable, recognition of revenues, and the valuation of the following: stock-based compensation; marketable securities; equity investments in publicly and privately held companies; income tax; liabilities associated with employee benefit costs; inventories; and goodwill and long-lived assets, including patent costs, capitalized software, purchased intangibles and licenses and manufacturing access fees. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Segment Information

The Company currently operates in one business segment: the development, manufacturing, marketing, sales and support of molecular diagnostic products primarily to diagnose human diseases, screen donated human blood and ensure transplant compatibility. Although the Company’s products comprise distinct product lines to serve different end markets within molecular diagnostics, the Company does not operate its business in operating segments. The Company is managed by a single functionally-based management team that manages all aspects of the Company’s business and reports directly to the Chief Executive Officer. For all periods presented, the Company operated in a single business segment. Revenue by product line is presented in Note 11.

Revenue Recognition

The Company records shipments of its clinical diagnostic products as product sales when the product is shipped, title and risk of loss have passed to the customer, the consideration is fixed and determinable, and collection of the resulting receivable is reasonably assured.

The Company manufactures blood screening products according to demand schedules provided by its collaboration partner, Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Inc. (“Novartis”). Upon shipment to Novartis, the Company recognizes blood screening product sales at an agreed upon transfer price and records the related cost of products sold. Based on the terms of the Company’s collaboration agreement with Novartis, the Company’s ultimate share of the net revenue from sales to the end user is not known until reported to the Company by Novartis. The Company then adjusts blood screening product sales upon receipt of customer revenue reports and a net payment from Novartis of amounts reflecting the Company’s ultimate share of net sales by Novartis for these products, less the transfer price revenues previously recognized.

In most cases, the Company provides its instrumentation to its clinical diagnostics customers without requiring them to purchase the equipment or enter into an equipment lease. Instead, the Company recovers the cost of providing the instrumentation in the amount it charges for its diagnostic assays. The depreciation costs associated with an instrument are charged to cost of product sales on a straight-line basis over the estimated life of the instrument. The costs to maintain these instruments in the field are charged to cost of product sales as incurred.

The Company sells its instruments to Novartis for use in blood screening and records these instrument sales upon delivery since Novartis is responsible for the placement, maintenance and repair of the units with its customers. The Company also sells instruments to its clinical diagnostics customers and generally records sales of these instruments upon delivery and receipt of customer acceptance. For certain customers with non-standard payment terms, instrument sales are recorded based upon expected cash collection. Prior to delivery, each instrument is tested to meet Gen-Probe’s specifications and the specifications of the United States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), and is shipped fully assembled. Customer acceptance of the Company’s clinical diagnostic instrument systems requires installation and training by the Company’s technical service personnel. Installation is a standard process consisting principally of uncrating, calibrating and testing the instrumentation.

The Company records revenue on its research products and services in the period during which the related costs are incurred or services are provided. This revenue consists of outsourcing services for the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and healthcare industries, including nucleic acid purification and analysis services, as well as the sale of monoclonal antibodies.

Revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables are evaluated for proper accounting treatment. In these arrangements, the Company records revenue as separate units of accounting if the delivered items have value to the customer on a stand-alone basis, and if the arrangement includes a general right of return relative to the delivered items, and delivery or performance of the undelivered items is considered probable and substantially within the Company’s control. For transactions entered into prior to 2011, consideration was generally allocated to each unit of accounting based on its relative fair value when objective and reliable evidence of fair value existed for all units of accounting in an arrangement. The fair value of an item was generally the price charged for the product, if the item was sold on a stand-alone basis. When the Company was unable to establish fair value for delivered items or when fair value of undelivered items had not been established, revenue was deferred until all elements were delivered and services had been performed or until fair value could be objectively determined for any undelivered elements. Beginning in 2011, arrangement consideration is allocated at the inception of the arrangement to all deliverables using the relative selling price method that is based on a three-tier hierarchy. The relative selling price method requires that the estimated selling price for each deliverable be based on vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) of fair value, which represents the price charged for each deliverable when it is sold separately or, for a deliverable not yet being sold separately, the price established by management. When VSOE of fair value is not available, third-party evidence (“TPE”) of fair value is acceptable, or a best estimate of selling price if neither VSOE nor TPE are available. A best estimate of selling price should be consistent with the objective of determining the price at which the Company would transact if the deliverable were sold regularly on a stand-alone basis and should also take into account market conditions and company-specific factors.

The Company recognizes collaborative research revenue over the term of various collaboration agreements, as negotiated monthly contracted amounts are earned or reimbursable costs are incurred related to those agreements. Negotiated monthly contracted amounts are earned in relative proportion to the performance required under the applicable contracts. Non-refundable license fees with stand-alone value are recognized at the time that the Company has satisfied all performance obligations. License fees without stand-alone value are recognized in combination with any undelivered performance obligations. Milestone consideration that is contingent upon achievement of a milestone in its entirety is recorded as revenue in the period in which the milestone is achieved only if the milestone meets all criteria to be considered substantive. These criteria include: (i) the consideration being earned should be commensurate with either the Company’s performance to achieve the milestone or the enhancement of the value of the item delivered as a result of a specific outcome resulting from the Company’s performance to achieve the milestone, (ii) the consideration being earned should relate solely to past performance, (iii) the consideration being earned should be reasonable relative to all deliverables and payment terms in the arrangement, and (iv) the milestone should be considered in its entirety and cannot be bifurcated into substantive and non-substantive components. Any amounts received prior to satisfying the Company’s revenue recognition criteria are recorded as deferred revenue on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets.

Royalty and license revenue is recognized related to the sale or use of the Company’s products or technologies under license agreements with third parties. For those arrangements where royalties are reasonably estimable, the Company recognizes revenue based on estimates of royalties earned during the applicable period and adjusts for differences between the estimated and actual royalties in the following period. Historically, these adjustments have not been material. For those arrangements where royalties are not reasonably estimable, the Company recognizes revenue upon receipt of royalty statements from the applicable licensee.

Stock-based Compensation

Stock-based compensation expense is recognized for restricted stock, deferred issuance restricted stock, performance stock awards, which include awards subject to performance conditions and/or market conditions, stock options, and shares purchasable under the Company’s Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”). Stock-based compensation expense for restricted stock, deferred issuance restricted stock, and performance condition stock awards is measured based on the closing fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. Stock-based compensation expense for market condition stock awards is measured based on the fair value of the award on the date of grant using a Monte Carlo simulation model. The Monte Carlo simulation model utilizes multiple point variables that determine the probability of satisfying the market condition stipulated in the grant and calculates the fair value of the award.

The Company uses the Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing model to value stock options granted. The determination of the fair value of stock option awards on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes-Merton model is affected by the Company’s stock price and the implied volatility on its traded options, as well as the input of other subjective assumptions. These assumptions include, but are not limited to, the expected term of stock options and the Company’s expected stock price volatility over the term of the awards.

Net Income Per Share

Diluted net income per share is reported based on the more dilutive of the treasury stock or the two-class method. Under the two-class method, net income is allocated to common stock and participating securities. The Company’s restricted stock, deferred issuance restricted stock and performance stock awards meet the definition of participating securities. Basic net income per share under the two-class method is computed by dividing net income adjusted for earnings allocated to unvested stockholders for the period by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net income per share under the two-class method is computed by dividing net income adjusted for earnings allocated to unvested stockholders for the period by the weighted average number of common and common equivalent shares outstanding during the period. The Company excludes stock options from the calculation of diluted net income per share when the combined exercise price, unrecognized stock-based compensation and assumed tax benefits upon exercise are greater than the average market price for the Company’s common stock because their effect is anti-dilutive. Potentially dilutive securities totaling approximately 975,000 and 4,455,000 shares for the three month periods ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and 765,000 and 4,290,000 shares for the six month periods ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively, were excluded from the calculations of diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) below because of their anti-dilutive effect.

Accounting Standards Update 2011-04

In May 2011, the FASB issued an Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) on fair value measurement. The ASU expands the disclosure requirements of ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurement (“ASC Topic 820”), for fair value measurements and makes other amendments. Specifically, the ASU clarifies the accounting guidance for highest-and-best-use and valuation-premise concepts for non-financial assets, application to financial assets and financial liabilities with offsetting positions in market risks or counterparty credit risk, premiums or discounts in fair value measurement, and fair value of an instrument classified in an entity’s stockholders’ equity. Additionally, the ASU expands the disclosure requirements under ASC Topic 820, particularly for Level 3 inputs. The ASU is effective for interim and annual reporting periods of the Company beginning January 1, 2012. Early adoption is not permitted. The Company is currently determining the effects, if any, the adoption of this guidance will have on its consolidated financial statements.

Accounting Standards Update 2011-05

In June 2011, the FASB issued an ASU on the presentation of comprehensive income. The ASU removes the presentation options in ASC Topic 220, Comprehensive Income, and requires entities to report components of comprehensive income in either (1) a continuous statement of comprehensive income or (2) two separate but consecutive statements. The ASU does not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income and does not require any incremental disclosures in addition to those already required under existing accounting guidance. The ASU is effective for interim and annual reporting periods of the Company beginning January 1, 2012. The guidance must be applied retrospectively for all periods presented in the financial statements. Early adoption is permitted. The Company intends to adopt this guidance beginning January 1, 2012. The adoption of this guidance will not have any effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

Accounting Standards Update 2010-06

In January 2010, the FASB amended ASC Topic 820 to require reporting entities to make new disclosures about recurring and non-recurring fair value measurements, including significant transfers into and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements and information about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis in the reconciliation of Level 3 fair value measurements. Except for the detailed Level 3 roll forward disclosures, the guidance was effective January 1, 2010. The new disclosure requirements for purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements in the roll forward activity for Level 3 fair value measurements were effective for the Company as of January 1, 2011. Upon adoption, the guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and is not expected to have a material impact on its future operating results.

Accounting Standards Update 2010-17

In March 2010, the FASB ratified the final consensus that offers an alternative method of revenue recognition for milestone payments. The guidance states that an entity can make an accounting policy election to recognize a payment that is contingent upon the achievement of a substantive milestone in its entirety in the period in which the milestone is achieved. The guidance has been effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning on or after June 15, 2010 with early adoption permitted, provided that the revised guidance is applied retrospectively to the beginning of the year of adoption. The Company elected to adopt this guidance prospectively, effective for the Company’s fiscal year beginning January 1, 2011. Upon adoption, the guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and is not expected to have a material impact on its future operating results.

Accounting Standards Update 2009-13

In September 2009, the FASB revised the authoritative guidance for revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables. The guidance addresses how to determine whether an arrangement involving multiple deliverables contains more than one unit of accounting and how the arrangement consideration should be allocated among the separate units of accounting. The guidance may be applied retrospectively or prospectively for new or materially modified arrangements. The Company elected to adopt this guidance prospectively, effective for the Company’s fiscal year beginning January 1, 2011. Upon adoption, the guidance did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and is not expected to have a material impact on its future operating results.

Fair Value of Financial Instruments Policy

The Company determines the fair value of its assets and liabilities based on the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants as of the measurement date. There is an established hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that the most observable inputs be used when available. Observable inputs are inputs market participants would use in valuing the asset or liability and are developed based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Company. Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect the Company’s assumptions about the factors market participants would use in valuing the asset or liability. Applicable accounting guidance under ASC Topic 820 establishes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value:

	•		Level 1 — Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets.

	•		Level 2 — Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs and significant value drivers are observable in active markets.

	•		Level 3 — Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable.

Assets and liabilities are classified based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The carrying amounts of financial instruments such as cash equivalents, accounts receivable, prepaid and other current assets, accounts payable and other current liabilities approximate the related fair values due to the short-term maturities of these instruments. The Company reviews the fair value hierarchy on a quarterly basis. Changes in the observations or valuation inputs may result in a reclassification of levels for certain securities within the fair value hierarchy.

The Company’s cash equivalents and marketable securities include equity securities, treasury securities, tax advantaged municipal securities, FDIC insured corporate bonds and money market funds. When available, the Company uses quoted market prices to determine fair value, and classifies such items as Level 1. If quoted market prices are not available, prices are determined using prices for recently traded financial instruments with similar underlying terms as well as directly or indirectly observable inputs, such as interest rates and yield curves that are observable at commonly quoted intervals. The Company classifies such items as Level 2.

Marketable Securities

The valuation of investments in non-public companies requires significant management judgment due to the absence of quoted market prices, inherent lack of liquidity and the long-term nature of such assets. The Company’s equity investments in private companies are initially valued based upon the transaction price under the cost method of accounting. Equity investments in non-public companies are classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.

The Company records impairment charges when an investment has experienced a decline that is deemed to be other-than-temporary. The determination that a decline is other-than-temporary is, in part, subjective and influenced by many factors. Future adverse changes in market conditions or poor operating results of investees could result in losses or an inability to recover the carrying value of the investments, thereby possibly requiring impairment charges in the future. When assessing investments in private companies for an other-than-temporary decline in value, the Company considers many factors, including, but not limited to, the following: the share price from the investee’s latest financing round; the performance of the investee in relation to its own operating targets and its business plan; the investee’s revenue and cost trends; the investee’s liquidity and cash position, including its cash burn rate; and market acceptance of the investee’s products and services. From time to time, the Company may consider third party evaluations or valuation reports. The Company also considers new products and/or services that the investee may have forthcoming, any significant news specific to the investee, the investee’s competitors and/or industry and the outlook of the overall industry in which the investee operates. In the event the Company’s judgments change as to other-than-temporary declines in value, the Company may record an impairment loss, which could have an adverse effect on its results of operations.