Quarterlytics / Healthcare / Biotechnology / Nektar Therapeutics

Nektar Therapeutics

nktr · NASDAQ Healthcare
Claim this profile
Ticker nktr
Exchange NASDAQ
Sector Healthcare
Industry Biotechnology
Employees 61
← All annual reports
FY2005 Annual Report · Nektar Therapeutics
Sign in to download
Loading PDF…
h_1665_cvrs.qxd  4/18/06  4:50 PM  Page c1

Breakthrough

2005 Annual Report

h_1665_cvrs.qxd  4/18/06  4:50 PM  Page c2

At Nektar, our mission is to develop
breakthrough therapeutics that make
a difference in patients’ lives. 

Exubera,,® the  world’s  first  approved  inhaled  insulin

product,  is  a  medical  breakthrough  for  diabetes

patients. It was pioneered by Nektar and developed in

partnership with Pfizer Inc.

The world’s leading pharmaceutical and biotechnology

companies have turned to Nektar for over 10 years to 

tap into our drug delivery expertise. Our technology and

know-how have enabled nine approved products for our

partners, several reaching blockbuster status for them.

Now we are using that technology and know-how for our-

selves. We are in the early stages of developing our own

portfolio of proprietary products that have the potential to

be medical breakthroughs in their own right — for life-

threatening conditions such as serious lung infections.

We believe the elements we have in place today will give

Nektar the ability to break through to the next phase of

our growth as a biopharmaceutical company.

We’re addressing critical unmet medical needs using our strengths in drug delivery.

1.5million

newly diagnosed diabetes
patients in the U.S. in 2005
(above 20 years old)(1)

300million

people worldwide expected 
to have diabetes by the year
2025 according to WHO(2)

$2.5billion

in U.S. hospital costs 
are caused by ventilator-
associated pneumonia(3)

Over 50%

Mortality rate in severely
immunosuppressed patients
with documented fungal lung
infections(4)

Sources (from left to right): (1) American Diabetes Association, National Diabetes Fact Sheet, 2005   (2) World Health Organization, 2000 

(3) Rello et al. Chest 2002; 122 (6): 215-21; AMR 2004   (4) Lin et al., Aspergillosis Case-Fatality Rate: Systematic Review of the Literature. Clinical Infectious Disease, 32: 358-366

h_1665_narr_041306.qxd  4/18/06  4:59 PM  Page 1

We are at a unique 
juncture with the key 
elements in place 
to grow Nektar into 
a sustainable and 
profitable company.

To Our Fellow Stockholders:

This is truly an exciting time for our company. In January 2006,

Exubera® (insulin human [rDNA origin]) Inhalation Powder, a

medical breakthrough for diabetes patients, was approved 

in both the U.S. and the European Union in a two-day period.

Exubera® is a result of a successful 10-year partnership between

Nektar and Pfizer, the world’s largest pharmaceutical company.

With Exubera®, there are now nine products approved that

leverage Nektar’s leading drug delivery technologies.

I am proud of our achievements in the past year, but what excites me most is

what lies ahead for Nektar. We are at a unique juncture with the key elements

in place to grow Nektar into a sustainable, profitable company:

■ Exubera® is soon to be launched by our partner Pfizer, and it has the potential

to provide us with a substantial revenue stream;

■ We have proven technologies that have enabled approved products, several

of which reached blockbuster status for our partners;

■ We’re in the early stages of developing our own proprietary products that

have the potential to unlock the value of our technologies and human capital

for ourselves; and 

■ Our financial position is strong, and we believe that we can achieve profitability

without additional financing.

We intend to capitalize on this unique position to break through to the next

stage of our evolution as a biopharmaceutical company.

The Exubera® opportunity  As the world's first approved inhaled insulin,

Exubera® is  an  important  advancement  in  the  treatment  of  diabetes  that

could help adult patients manage their disease. Pfizer has announced its

intent to launch Exubera® by mid-2006. We will receive revenues from com-

mercialization of Exubera® from two sources – first, on manufacturing of

Inhalers and processing of insulin powder and second, with royalties on

Exubera® sales by Pfizer. Exubera® will be the key driver of our revenue growth

and our ability to achieve profitability. 

To support our manufacturing role in the commercialization of Exubera,® we

have built a state-of-the-art powder processing facility at our headquarters in

San Carlos, California, and we have two leading contract manufacturers in

place to produce the Inhalers. 

Diabetes is a growing worldwide epidemic. The World Health Organization

predicts that over 300 million people are expected to have diabetes by the

year 2025. This number is staggering. A sad fact is that even though there

are many therapies available, millions of patients don't achieve or maintain

acceptable blood sugar levels, which can lead to fatal complications from 

the disease. The human and economic cost of the disease is enormous.

Exubera® is an innovative therapy that provides an alternative for the control

of high blood sugar levels and can help to improve management of the disease.

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

1

1665_corx_p2_3_6_041306.qxd  4/18/06  5:02 PM  Page 2

14.6million

diagnosed diabetes patients
in the U.S., 2001-2003*

57% Oral medication only

16% Insulin only

15% Neither

12% Insulin and oral medication

*Treatment with insulin or oral medications among adults with
diagnosed diabetes — (ADA National Diabetes Fact Sheet, 2005)

Developing our own portfolio of proprietary products  Our

period of exclusive marketing for the designated indication. 

strategy to develop our own portfolio of proprietary products will

Inhaled antibiotics, our second proprietary program, is under

allow us the opportunity to capture increased value from our

development for treatment of serious hospital pneumonias in

technologies. Partnering and licensing technologies is an excel-

ventilated patients. Hospital-acquired pneumonias caused by

lent way to build strong technology platforms. This strategy has

multi-drug  resistant  bacteria  have  a  high  mortality  rate  of 

also provided Nektar with considerable revenue opportunities

25-50 percent. They are also a major cause of higher treatment

while creating successful products for our partners. However,

costs and longer hospital stays for patients in intensive care

we believe we can capture even more economic value from our

units. Current IV treatments are often ineffective because of the

technologies by advancing our own products through clinical

inability of the drug to pass from the bloodstream to the lung

development. Combining established medicines with our tech-

in  sufficient  concentrations  to  treat  the  infection.  They  can 

nologies to create innovative therapies gives us the opportunity

also have dose-limiting systemic side effects. With our proprietary

to  develop  products  less  expensively  and  with  a  potentially

liquid aerosol delivery system, our goal is to deliver an effective

higher success rate than is typical for new chemical entities. 

dose of antibiotics to the infection directly without systemic side

Our first two proprietary programs are focused on treating

effects. The Inhaled antibiotics program is in Phase II trials.

and  preventing  lung  infections  and  leverage  our  pulmonary

In addition to our two anti-infective programs, we also have

technologies and expertise. These two products represent

additional proprietary programs that are in preclinical stages.

future potential breakthroughs in their own right to meet medical

One is in the pain-related area and the other is in oncology; 

needs. They are also both hospital-based products that could

both use our PEGylation technology. Our objective in 2006 is

be commercialized with a small specialty sales force. This gives

to advance at least one of these programs into the clinic.

us the option to evaluate whether the economics are right for

Nektar to potentially commercialize these products ourselves or

seek co-development or promotion partners for the products.  

Our first product under development, amphotericin B inhala-

tion powder, is designed to address a serious fungal lung infection

that can occur in patients who are severely immunosuppressed

during treatment for acute leukemias and organ or bone marrow

transplants.  This  infection,  known  as  aspergillosis,  typically

begins in the lungs but it can spread quickly causing organ fail-

ure and potentially death. Amphotericin B is the gold standard

for treatment today, but in its current form as an intravenous

therapy it has dose-limiting systemic toxicities, which may limit

its effectiveness. The need for more effective and well-tolerated

therapies gives us an opportunity to address a major medical

need using Nektar pulmonary delivery. By delivering targeted

doses of medicine to the lung directly, we could potentially pre-

vent these fatal infections and not expose patients to typical

systemic toxicities seen with intravenous therapies.

Inhaled amphotericin B has demonstrated promising early

results in Phase I trials. The product has U.S. orphan drug des-

ignation which has the potential of providing us a seven-year

Our partner pipeline continues to advance  We believe the

rest of our partner pipeline beyond Exubera® could provide us,

collectively, with a considerable revenue stream in the future. We

have two late-stage partner products expected to be filed for

FDA approval within the next 18 months – Roche’s CERA for

renal anemia and Chiron’s Tobramycin inhalation powder for

lung infections in cystic fibrosis patients. Cimzia™, a product that

uses  our  PEGylation  technology,  was  recently  filed  for 

marketing approval with the FDA by our partner UCB for the

treatment of Crohn’s Disease. If approved, Cimzia would be the

first-ever  biologic  utilizing  subcutaneous  injection  to  treat

Crohn’s. This molecule is also in UCB clinical trials to evaluate it

as a treatment for rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis.

In the future, even as we advance development of our own

proprietary programs, partnering will continue to be important

for us. However, the nature of new collaborations will change for

Nektar – we will still seek to partner our technologies when we

can generate significant future economic value for the company,

and  we  also  could  enter  into  strategic  partnerships  to  co-

develop or promote products in our proprietary pipeline.

2

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

1665_corx_p2_3_6_041306.qxd  4/18/06  5:02 PM  Page 3

Key events of 2005 and early 2006

2005 

January Nektar and Bayer sign collaboration to develop inhaled

Ciprofloxacin for infections in cystic fibrosis patients

Macugen® (pegaptanib sodium), a product to treat age-
related macular degeneration enabled by Nektar
PEGylation technology, launches in the U.S.

Nektar and Zelos sign collaboration to develop inhaled
parathyroid hormone therapy for osteoporosis

March New Drug Application (NDA) for Exubera® (insulin human
[rDNA origin]) Inhalation Powder is accepted for filing by
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

June Results from three two-year studies presented by Pfizer
at 65th Annual Scientific Sessions of the American
Diabetes Association (ADA) show that Exubera® provided
effective, sustained glycemic control and was well toler-
ated over a two-year period in adults with type 2 diabetes

August Nektar announces agreement to acquire Aerogen

(closes in October 2005)

September FDA Advisory Committee recommends approval 

In Summary  Nektar is in an extremely attractive position today –

a potential blockbuster product we pioneered is approved and

near launch; we have a broad pipeline of proprietary and partner

products enabled by our leading edge technology platforms; we

ended the year with $566 million in cash; and we have a strong

team in place and are continuing to strengthen our organization

of Exubera®

in the areas of clinical development and regulatory. 

In short, we are in a good position to grow Nektar into a sus-

tainable, profitable company and deliver increased stockholder

value. Our challenge as we grow will be to balance our revenue

stream with investment in clinical development of our own prod-

ucts while reaching sustainable profitability.

Nektar sells $315 million aggregate principal amount 
of 3.25% convertible subordinated notes due 2012

Baxter and Nektar sign collaboration to develop
PEGylated therapeutic forms of blood clotting 
proteins for patients with hemophilia

Nektar announces two inhaled proprietary products
under development that target lung infections 

In March, I expanded my Executive Chairman role and took

October Chiron and Nektar announce the start of a Phase III 

over as President and CEO when Ajit Gill retired. I am privileged

to lead the company during this exciting time in our history. I

would like to thank Ajit for his 14 years of contributions to Nektar

and for the leadership he provided in broadening the technology

base of Nektar, moving us into proprietary products, and gaining

approval of Exubera.® As part of my Acting CEO role, one of my

key objectives is to identify a new CEO for Nektar who has the

experience, leadership skills and vision to advance us to the

next stage as a biopharmaceutical company. I am confident that

we are in a great position to attract an outstanding person to

lead us forward.

I  would  like  to  thank  the  many  employees  of  Nektar  who

demonstrate their commitment every day to delivering on our

mission  to  develop  breakthrough  products  that  improve  the

quality of patients’ lives. It is their hard work and perseverance

that created the strong company we have in place today. Their

contributions will continue to make an enormous difference for

people around the world. 

Thank you also to our partners and our stockholders for con-

tinued commitment to Nektar and its future.

Robert B. Chess

Acting President and Chief Executive Officer, 

Chairman of the Board

April 14, 2006

clinical program to evaluate Tobramycin inhalation
powder (TIP) for lung infections in cystic fibrosis patients

Exubera® receives positive opinion from Committee 
for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) in
European Union for treatment of adults with type 1 
and type 2 diabetes

December Nektar presents pre-clinical data demonstrating 
improved survival of immunosuppressed animals 
protected against pulmonary fungal infections by
amphotericin B inhalation powder at the 45th Annual
Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and
Chemotherapy (ICAAC) in Washington, D.C.; Nektar
begins enrolling final multi-dose pre-pivotal clinical study
of amphotericin B inhalation powder

2006

January Pfizer announces intent to acquire sanofi-aventis world-
wide rights to Exubera® (closes March 2006)

New SVP, Finance & CFO, Louis Drapeau, joins Nektar

European Commission approves Exubera® for treatment
of adult type 1 and type 2 diabetes

FDA approves Exubera,® the first inhalable form of insulin,
for adult type 1 and type 2 diabetes

February Nektar CEO retires; Rob Chess, Executive Chairman,

named Acting President and CEO

Nektar announces that FDA grants U.S. orphan drug
designation to amphotericin B inhalation powder, a
Nektar proprietary product under development to 
prevent life-threatening pulmonary fungal infections 

Phase II trials under way for Nektar inhaled antibiotics
product for the treatment of pneumonia in mechanically-
ventilated patients

Nektar presents results from Phase I clinical study of
amphotericin B inhalation powder at the 2nd Advances
Against Aspergillosis conference in Athens, Greece

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

3

h_1665_narr_041306.qxd  4/18/06  4:59 PM  Page 4

$132 billion

Annual healthcare costs in the
U.S. associated with diabetes
and its complications(1)

“Exubera® is a major, first-of-its-kind, medical break-
through that marks another critical step forward in 
the treatment of diabetes, a disease that has taken 
an enormous human and economic toll worldwide.”

(1) American Diabetes Association

— Hank McKinnell, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Pfizer Inc

h_1665_narr_041306.qxd  4/18/06  4:59 PM  Page 5

A new era in 
diabetes treatment

Nektar developed
the inhaler and 
the powder insulin
formulation for
Exubera.® Our
partner, Pfizer, will
be responsible for
marketing and pro-
moting Exubera®
worldwide.

Exubera® (insulin human [rDNA origin])
Inhalation Powder is approved in 
the U.S. and the EU for adults with
type 1 and type 2 diabetes.(1)

Exubera® is  a  rapid-acting,  dry  powder  human  insulin  that  is

In Pfizer studies, patients preferred Exubera® to insulin

inhaled through the mouth into the lungs prior to eating, using

injections or diabetes pills  The efficacy and safety profile of

the handheld Exubera® Inhaler. The Exubera® Inhaler weighs four

Exubera® was studied by Pfizer Inc in more than 2,500 adults

ounces and, when closed, is about the size of an eyeglass case.

with type 1 or type 2 diabetes for an average duration of 20

The unique Exubera® Inhaler produces a cloud of insulin powder

months. Exubera® was found in clinical trials to be as effective

in a clear chamber visible to the patient. This insulin powder is

as short-acting insulin injections, and to significantly improve

designed to pass rapidly into the bloodstream to regulate the

blood sugar control when added to diabetes pills. In clinical tri-

body’s blood sugar levels. 

Exubera® is  a  result  of  an  innovative  partnership  between

Nektar Therapeutics and Pfizer Inc. We pioneered the product
and developed the core technologies used for Exubera,® includ-

ing  the  formulation  and  particle  engineering  for  the  insulin 

powder,  the  filling  and  packaging  techniques  for  the  insulin 

blister, and the Exubera® Inhaler with its components. Pfizer

manufactures and sells Exubera.® Nektar supports manufactur-

ing including powder processing for Exubera® insulin, and man-

ufactures the Exubera® Inhalers. 

As part of our agreement with Pfizer, Nektar receives royalties

on sales of Exubera® by Pfizer and revenue for the manufacture

of the insulin powder and the Exubera® Inhalers. 

als, many patients using Exubera® reported greater treatment

satisfaction than patients taking insulin by injection. Significantly
more patients who used both Exubera® and insulin injections or

diabetes pills reported an overall preference for Exubera.®

The burden of diabetes in the U.S. and Europe  Nearly 21
million Americans and 48 million Europeans have diabetes.(2)

Despite existing therapies for diabetes, millions of patients 

don’t  achieve  or  maintain  acceptable  blood  sugar  levels.

Complications  from  uncontrolled  or  poorly  controlled  blood

sugar levels in diabetes patients can include heart disease,

amputation, blindness and kidney failure. 

In type 2 diabetes, which represents 95 percent of patients,

the body does not make or use insulin well enough to manage

blood sugar levels. Type 2 diabetes progresses over time, and

eventually  most  patients  will  need  to  administer  insulin  to

achieve blood sugar control. In type 1 diabetes, the body does

not make insulin at all. These patients must take insulin to survive.

(1) Exubera® is a registered trademark of Pfizer Inc
(2) American Diabetes Association, World Health Organization

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

5

1665_corx_p2_3_6_041306.qxd  4/18/06  5:02 PM  Page 6

Focusing on 
life-threatening
lung infections

We are working on innovative 
inhaled medicines designed 
to target disease directly at the 
site of infection to save lives.

We are in the early stages of development of two proprietary

inhaled anti-infective products designed to prevent and treat

fatal lung infections by overcoming the challenge of effective

and  safe  delivery  of  established  anti-infectives.  One  of  the

Nektar has built expertise in the
area of inhaled anti-infectives 
with our partnered programs. 
For example, we are currently 
partnered with Chiron to develop 
a new inhaled antibiotic therapy, 
tobramycin inhalation powder 
(TIP), for lung infections in cystic 
fibrosis (CF) patients (pictured 
at right). The investigational drug-
device combination may signifi-
cantly reduce the treatment 
burden for CF patients by offering
full portability and a short drug
administration time. TIP entered
Phase III trials in October 2005.

manner that the fungal spores are deposited, and so it could 

represent  a  potential  breakthrough  in  prevention  of  deadly

aspergillosis infections. In February 2006, we announced the

therapy was granted U.S. orphan drug designation. The Orphan

Drug Act provides a seven-year period of exclusive marketing to

the first sponsor who obtains marketing approval for a product

in a designated indication. The program has completed preclini-

cal and Phase I safety trials in humans. One trial is ongoing to

prepare the product for pivotal trials.

biggest limitations to current standards of care for lung infec-

Targeting hospital pneumonias in patients on ventilators 

tions is the inability to get a sufficient concentration of medicine

Patients  with  hospital-acquired  pneumonia  (HAP)  that  need

to the lungs when administering it intravenously or orally. Since

mechanical ventilation or patients on ventilators who contract

the systemic side effects of these medicines are considered

ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) have high morbidity and

toxic, the method of delivery itself is dose-limiting; this can

mortality rates, in spite of available broad spectrum intravenous

reduce the effectiveness of these medicines.

antibiotics to treat these infections. It is estimated that 3.5 mil-

Focusing on fatal fungal infections in immunosuppressed

patients  Immunosuppressed patients that receive organ or

stem cell transplants or chemotherapy or radiation therapy for

hematologic malignancies often develop a fatal fungal infection

that begins in the lungs and then spreads throughout the body.

This infection, known as aspergillosis, is caused by the inhala-

tion of fungal spores found in the air. We estimate that more

than 150,000 patients in the U.S. and Europe are at risk annually

of developing these fungal infections, which have high mortality

rates and costs of treatment. For cancer or leukemia patients, a

secondary diagnosis of aspergillosis resulted, on average, in a

26-day longer hospital stay, $115,262 more in total costs (in 1996
health care dollars) and more than four times the mortality rate.(1)

Nektar’s amphotericin B inhalation powder uses our small

proprietary inhaler to deliver our dry powder formulation of the

broad spectrum, “gold-standard” antifungal drug, amphotericin B.

Nektar’s  unique  delivery  mode  was  designed  to  encourage

long-term compliance and to deliver a cost-effective product to

prevent fungal lung infections in immunosuppressed patients.

Our approach delivers amphotericin B directly to the potentially

lion  patients  in  U.S.  hospitals  each  year  are  diagnosed  with

pneumonia; of these cases, up to 250,000 are on mechanical 
ventilators.(2) Our Inhaled antibiotics program is designed to treat

pneumonias in this difficult-to-treat ventilated patient population.

Initially, our first antibiotic product will focus on adjunctive 

treatment of gram negative pneumonias in patients on and off

mechanical ventilation. Gram negative bacilli account for greater

than 60 percent of all hospital-acquired pneumonias and can
have a mortality rate of 25-50 percent.(3) Our new proprietary

delivery system from the acquisition of Aerogen in late 2005, is

designed to deliver a highly-efficient dose of aerosolized antibi-

otics  into  a  ventilator  system.  A  Phase II trial for the Inhaled

antibiotics program is in progress.

Our  proprietary  products  strategy  leverages  Nektar  tech-

nologies and know-how to develop products that offer better 

efficacy,  safety  and/or  ease-of-use.  We  are  also  working  on 

two  additional  products  that  are  in  preclinical  testing  using

Nektar PEGylation technology in the disease settings of pain

and oncology.

(1) Dasbach et al. 2000, Clin. Infect. Dis. 31:1524-8

(2) Arlington Medical Resources, Inc., The Hospital Antibiotic Market Guide, 2004

vulnerable  organ,  the  lungs,  through  inhalation,  in  the  same

(3) Gaynes et al. 2005, Health Care Epidemiology and Merck.com

6

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

h_1665_narr_041306.qxd  4/18/06  4:59 PM  Page 7

A proprietary pipeline focused on serious and life-threatening medical needs

Phase II
Phase I
Pre-clinical

Product

Indications

Inhaled Antibiotics

Treatment of pneumonia in ventilated patients

Amphotericin B inhalation powder

Prevention of pulmonary aspergillosis

Undisclosed (PEG)

Undisclosed (PEG)

Pain-related

Oncology

h_1665_narr_041306.qxd  4/18/06  4:59 PM  Page 8

20+

pharmaceutical and biotech-
nology companies have
turned to us to collaborate 
on new products

8

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

“Our collaboration with Nektar, the clear leader in PEGylation
technology…reflects our strategic approach to gaining access 
to leading technologies through targeted partnerships that can
expedite and enhance product development.” 

— Joy Amundson, President of Baxter BioScience

h_1665_narr_041306.qxd  4/18/06  4:59 PM  Page 9

Partnering to
deliver innovative
therapeutics

Nektar is collaborating with top-tier 
pharmaceutical companies to 
bring category-leading products 
to market.

In 2005, we entered into three collaborations with new partners.

In our new partnership with Bayer HealthCare, we are working

to  develop  an  inhalable  powder  formulation  of  a  novel  form 

of  Ciprofloxacin  to  treat  chronic  lung  infections  caused  by

Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cystic fibrosis patients. With Baxter

BioScience, we are collaborating to develop PEGylated thera-

peutic forms of blood clotting proteins for patients with hemo-

philia. Finally, in 2005, we also entered into an agreement with

Zelos Therapeutics to work on an inhaled parathyroid hormone

therapy for osteoporosis patients.

These new partnerships add to the deep partner pipeline that

Nektar has built with pharmaceutical and biotechnology compa-

nies to provide our pulmonary or PEGylation technologies for the

development of new products. Many of our partner programs

advanced  through  late-stage  clinical  milestones  in  2005  and

early 2006: Chiron’s TIP entered Phase III trials, UCB filed a U.S.

Biologics Licensing Application for Cimzia,TM a unique PEGylated
antibody fragment and Macugen® was approved in the European

Union for the treatment of age-related macular degeneration.

Select Nektar Partnered Programs

Product

Partner

Indications

Approved or Filed in the U.S. and/or EU

Exubera® (insulin human [rDNA origin]) Inhalation Powder

Pfizer Inc

Adult type 1 and type 2 diabetes

Neulasta® (pegfilgrastim)

Amgen Inc.

Neutropenia

PEGASYS® (peginterferon alfa-2a)

Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Hepatitis-C

Somavert® (pegvisomant)

Pfizer Inc

Acromegaly

PEG-INTRON® (peginterferon alfa-2b)

Schering-Plough Corporation

Hepatitis-C

Definity® (PEG) 

Bristol-Myers Squibb Company

Cardiac imaging

Macugen® (pegaptanib sodium injection)

OSI Pharmaceuticals (Eyetech)

Age-related macular degeneration

CimziaTM (certolizumab pegol, CDP870)

UCB Pharma

Crohn’s disease (filed in U.S.); 
rheumatoid arthritis (Phase III) 

Phase III

CERA (Continuous Erythropoiesis Receptor Activator)

Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Renal anemia

Tobramycin inhalation powder (TIP) 

Chiron Corporation

Lung infections in cystic fibrosis patients

Phase II

Macugen® (pegaptanib sodium injection)

OSI Pharmaceuticals (Eyetech)

Diabetic macular edema

Pulmonary dronabinol (dronabinol metered dose inhaler)

Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Migraine (with and without aura) 

CDP 791 (PEG-antibody fragment angiogenesis inhibitor)

UCB Pharma

Cancer

This pipeline does not include PEG-hydrogel product collaborations.

Status definitions are as follows:

Approved — regulatory approval to market and sell product obtained in the U.S. or EU

Phase III or Pivotal — product in large-scale clinical trials conducted to obtain regulatory approval to market and sell a drug 

Typically, these trials are initiated following encouraging Phase II trial results.

Phase II — product in clinical trials to establish dosing and efficacy in patients

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

9

h_1665_narr_041306.qxd  4/18/06  4:59 PM  Page 10

2005 Financial Review

Table of Contents 

11 Selected Consolidated Financial Information 

12 Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition

and Results of Operations 

28 Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

30 Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

31 Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets 

32 Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations 

33 Consolidated Statement of Stockholders’ Equity 

34 Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 

35 Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 

58 Corporate Information

59 Board of Directors and Management Team 

10 2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 11

Selected Consolidated Financial Information

The selected consolidated financial data set forth below should be read together with the consolidated financial statements and related
notes, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and the other information contained
herein. (In thousands, except per share information) 

Years ended December 31,

Statement of Operations Data:
Revenue: 

Contract research revenue 
Product sales 
Exubera commercialization readiness 

Total revenue 
Total operating costs and expenses 

Loss from operations(2)
Gain (Loss) on debt extinguishment 
Interest and other income (expense), net
Benefit (provision) for income taxes 

Net loss 

Basic and diluted net loss per share(1)
Shares used in computation of basic 
and diluted net loss per share(2)

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

$ 81,602
29,366
15,311

$ 89,185
25,085
—

$ 78,962 
27,295
—

$ 76,380
18,465
—

$ 68,899
8,569
—

126,279 
308,912

(182,633)
(303)
(2,312)
137

114,270
188,212

(73,942)
(9,258)
(18,849)
163

106,257
171,012

(64,755)
12,018
(12,984)
(169)

94,845
193,658

(98,813)
—
(8,655)
—

77,468
333,213

(255,745)
—
5,737
—

$ (185,111)

$ (101,886)

$ (65,890)

$ (107,468)

$ (250,008)

$

(2.15)

$

(1.30)

$

(1.18)

$

(1.94)

$

(4.71)

85,915

78,461

55,821

55,282

53,136

Years ended December 31, 

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Balance Sheet Data:
Cash, cash equivalents and investments 
Working capital 
Total assets 
Long-term debt (excluding current portion) 
Convertible subordinated notes and debentures 
Accumulated deficit 
Total stockholders’ equity 

$ 566,423
450,248
858,554
42,086
417,653
(902,232)
326,811 

$ 418,740
223,880
744,921
45,860
173,949
(717,121)
467,342 

$ 298,409
223,971
616,788
43,642
359,988
(615,235)
164,191 

$ 293,969
136,424
606,638
35,021
299,149
(549,345)
206,770 

$ 345,077 
180,547 
667,241 
37,130 
299,149 
(441,877)
270,313 

(1) Basic and diluted net loss per share is based upon the weighted average number of common shares outstanding. The shares shown above retroactively reflect a two-for-one split, 
effective August 22, 2000. 

(2) We changed our method of accounting for goodwill and other intangible assets on January 1, 2002 in connection with the adoption of SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets.

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

11

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 12

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

The  following  discussion  contains  forward-looking  statements
that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ
materially from those discussed here. Factors that could cause or
contribute  to  such  differences  include,  but  are  not  limited  to,
those discussed in this section as well as in Item 1A of Part I of
the  Annual  Report  on  Form  10-K  filed  with  the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission under the heading “Risk Factors.”

OVERVIEW

We  are  a  biopharmaceutical  company  developing  breakthrough
products  that  make  a  difference  in  patients’  lives.  We  create 
differentiated,  innovative  products  by  applying  our  drug  delivery
technologies to established or novel medicines. Our leading tech-
nologies are Nektar Pulmonary Technology and Nektar Advanced
PEGylation  Technology.  To  date,  there  have  been  nine  products
which have received regulatory approval in the U.S. or EU.

We  create  or  enable  breakthrough  products  in  two  ways. 
First,  we  develop  products  in  collaboration  with  pharmaceutical
and biotechnology companies that seek to improve and differen-
tiate their products. Second, we apply our technologies to estab-
lished  medicines  to  create  and  develop  our  own  differentiated,
proprietary  products.  Our  proprietary  products  are  designed  to
target serious diseases in novel ways. We believe our proprietary
products  have  the  potential  to  raise  the  standards  of  current
patient care by improving efficacy, safety, and/or ease-of-use. 

The  commercial  success  of  Exubera® will  be  the  key  driver 
of  our  business  in  the  next  several  years.  We  expect  our  future
revenues  to  come  increasingly  from  the  manufacture  and  sale 
of Exubera® Inhalers and powdered insulin, and royalties from end
product sales by Pfizer Inc. The commercial success of Exubera®
will  be  a  significant  factor  in  achieving  our  profitability  objective
and our ability to fund the key elements of our business strategy.
In  addition,  we  expect  to  receive  substantially  less  contract
research  and  commercialization  readiness  revenue  from  Pfizer 
Inc  as  Exubera® transitions  to  the  commercialization  phase  and
therefore revenues from commercialization sales of Exubera® will
be required to replace those revenue sources. Like any product in
the  pre-launch  phase,  there  are  a  number  of  uncertainties  that
remain, including the timing and success of the commercial launch
of  Exubera® by  Pfizer  Inc,  physician  and  patient  education  and
experiences,  third  party  payor  reimbursement,  country  specific
pricing  approvals,  manufacturing  and  supply  execution,  and 
other  risks  and  uncertainties  identified  in  the  annual  report  on
Form  10-K  filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission. 
In  addition,  we  plan  to  make  significant  investments  in  our 
proprietary  product  programs  which  will  comprise  a  substantial
portion  of  our  research  and  development  spending.  Historically
we have partnered with pharmaceutical and biotechnology com-
panies  in  the  early  development  phase  which  has  helped  fund
the investment of our product programs. Our strategy is to develop
a  portfolio  of  proprietary  products  that  are  intended  to  address
critical  unmet  medical  needs  by  exploiting  our  know-how  and
technology  in  combination  with  established  medicines.  Our
objective is to advance these products into clinical development
and  potentially  through  regulatory  marketing  approval  thereby
capturing significantly more economic value from these products.
12

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

This strategy requires us to make significant investments in early
stage products where there is still substantial uncertainty regarding
product  efficacy,  product  safety,  clinical  results,  regulatory
approvals,  competitive  landscape,  and  market  acceptance. 
Our  decision  as  to  when  or  whether  to  seek  partners  for  our 
proprietary  products  will  be  made  on  a  product-by-product 
basis  and  such  decisions  will  have  an  important  impact  on  our
revenues,  research  and  development  spending,  and  financial
position.  While  we  believe  this  strategy  may  result  in  improved
economics for any products ultimately developed and approved,
it  will  require  us  to  invest  significant  funds  in  developing  these
products without reimbursement from a collaborative partner. 

We  will  continue  to  seek  collaborative  arrangements  with 
pharmaceutical  and  biotechnology  companies.  Our  partnering
strategy  enables  us  to  develop  a  large  and  diversified  pipeline 
of drug products using our technologies. As we continue to shift
our focus towards our proprietary products programs, we expect
to engage in a fewer number of higher value partnerships in order
to optimize revenue potential, probability of success, and overall
return on investment. To date the revenues we have received from
the sales of our partner products have been insufficient to meet
our  operating  and  other  expenses.  Other  than  revenues  we
expect to generate from Exubera,® we do not anticipate receiving
sufficient  amounts  of  revenue  from  other  partner  product  sales 
or  royalties  in  the  near  future  to  meet  our  operating  expenses. 
To fund the expense related to our research and development
activities,  we  have  raised  significant  amounts  of  capital  through
the  sale  of  our  equity  and  convertible  debt  securities.  As  of
December  31,  2005,  we  had  approximately  $417.7  million  in
long-term  convertible  subordinated  notes,  $20.3  million  in 
non-current  capital  lease  obligations,  and  $21.8  million  in  other
long-term liabilities. Our ability to meet the repayment obligations
of  this  debt  is  dependent  upon  our  and  our  partners’  ability  to
develop, obtain regulatory approvals, and successfully commer-
cialize products. Even if we are successful in this regard, we will
likely require additional capital to repay our debt obligations. 

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS 

In  July  2005,  a  complaint  was  filed  by  The  Board  of  Trustees 
of the University of Alabama UAH against Nektar Therapeutics AL,
Corporation, and Nektar Therapeutics in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Alabama. The complaint alleges
patent infringement, breach of a contract royalty obligation, violation
of  the  Alabama  Trade  Secrets  Act,  and  unjust  enrichment.
In
August 2005, UAH amended its complaint to add J. Milton Harris,
a Nektar employee, as a party to the litigation, add certain addi-
tional claims, seek declaratory judgment on patents assigned to
the Company, and seek compensatory, treble and punitive dam-
ages, all in unspecified amounts. In December 2005, UAH filed its
second  amended  complaint  expanding  its  previously  asserted
claims  that  the  Company  and  Harris  had  infringed  patents  of
UAH,  misappropriated  and  taken  intellectual  property  rightfully
belonging to UAH, concealed intellectual property from UAH that
was rightfully the property of UAH, and converted these discoveries
for their own profit notwithstanding that the Company and Harris
were  fully  aware  that  the  inventions  rightfully  belonged  to  UAH.

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 13

UAH further claimed fraudulent concealment, conversion, detinue,
misrepresentation,  conspiracy,  and,  as  against  Harris,  breach  of
express  and  implied  contract  and  breach  of  an  assignment  of
application. UAH is seeking equitable relief including declaratory
judgment, the imposition of a constructive trust, specific perform-
ance,  injunction,  accounting  and  other  relief  on  the  theory  that
UAH should be the record holder of certain patent’s assigned to
the  Company.  We  have  filed  and  continue  to  assert  a  counter-
claim against UAH seeking full refund of all royalty payments erro-
neously  paid  to  UAH  under  the  patent  at  issue  in  the  original
complaint. The litigation is at too early a stage to make an assess-
ment about the probability of the outcome in the case. We intend
to vigorously defend ourselves in this litigation, however, there can
be no assurances that we will be successful in such defense.

In  September  2005  we  announced  an  agreement  with  sub-
sidiaries of Baxter International Inc. to develop PEGylated thera-
peutic forms of blood clotting proteins for hemophilia A patients,
in  order  to  reduce  the  frequency  of  injections  required  to  treat
blood  clotting  disorders  in  such  as  hemophilia  A.  Baxter  will  be
responsible for the development and commercialization of prod-
ucts and we will be responsible for the technology development
used in the products including the provision of clinical and com-
mercial PEG reagents. Under the terms of the agreement, we will
receive milestone payments, funding of R&D, and manufacturing
revenues during research, clinical development, and commercial-
ization. In addition, we will receive royalties on end product sales. 
In September 2005, we announced that we are developing an
inhaled  Amphotericin  B  product  for  preventing  fatal  pulmonary
fungal  infections  in  immunosuppressed  patients  to  reduce  the
incidence,  morbidity,  mortality  and  high  cost  of  treating  these
infections.  We  have  conducted  two  Phase  I  trials  for  ABIP  and
have long-term toxicity studies underway to support pivotal trials
that we plan to initiate in 2007. 

In September 2005, we also announced that we are developing
inhaled ICU antibiotics for the prevention of ventilator-associated
pneumonia in the intensive care unit. Following the acquisition of
Aerogen in October 2005, we combined our Inhaled ICU antibiotics
program, which was in proof-of-concept for prevention of ventilator-
associated pneumonia, with Aerogen’s ongoing Phase II program
that uses aerosolized amikacin to treat hospital pneumonias. The
new  combined  program  will  focus  on  adjunctive  treatment  of
gram-negative pneumonias in patients on mechanical ventilation.
A  Phase  II  trial  for  our  Inhaled  antibiotics  program  is  underway. 
In October 2005, we announced the initiation of clinical testing
in the Phase III program evaluating TIP, an investigational inhaled
antibiotic  being  developed  in  collaboration  with  Chiron.  The  TIP
Phase III program includes two clinical trials and will evaluate the
efficacy  and  safety  of  TIP  in  the  treatment  of  lung  infections
caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa in patients living with cystic
fibrosis (CF). The first trial, called ASPIRE I, is currently underway. 
In October 2005, we completed the acquisition of Aerogen pur-
suant  to  a  definitive  agreement  and  plan  of  merger  dated
August 12, 2005. The total purchase price for the transaction was
approximately $34.5 million, including $32.1 million in cash consid-
eration, plus expenses associated with the transaction and liabili-
ties  incurred  by  us  resulting  from  the  transaction.  We  expensed

approximately $7.9 million of in process research and development
expenses which were allocated from the purchase price in the year
ended  December  31,  2005.  We  believe  that  the  acquisition  of
Aerogen  will  broaden  the  Nektar  Pulmonary  Technology  portfolio
and strengthen capabilities for treatment in the acute care setting. 
On January 19, 2006, we announced that Louis Drapeau was
appointed  as  our  Senior  Vice  President,  Finance  and  Chief
Financial Officer and concurrently therewith Ajay Bansal resigned
as  Chief  Financial  Officer,  and  Vice  President,  Finance  and
Administration. 

On January 26, 2006, Pfizer Inc announced that the European
Commission  approved  Exubera® (inhaled  human  insulin)  for  the
treatment of adults with Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. 

On January 27, 2006, Pfizer Inc and the FDA announced that
Exubera (insulin human [rDNA origin]) Inhalation Powder had been
approved by the FDA for the treatment of adults with Type 1 and
Type 2 diabetes. 

On February 7, 2006, we announced that Ajit S. Gill will be retir-
ing and resigning as CEO, President, and Director, effective as of
March  17,  2006.  On  February  24,  2006,  Robert  B.  Chess,  our
current Executive Chairman and former CEO, was appointed as
interim President and CEO, effective as of March 17, 2006. 

On  February  14,  2006,  we  announced  the  FDA  had  granted
orphan drug designation for our proprietary product ABIP. Orphan
products are developed to treat diseases or conditions that affect
fewer than 200,000 people in the U.S. The Orphan Drug Act pro-
vides a seven-year period of exclusive marketing to the first spon-
sor  who  obtains  marketing  approval  for  a  designated  indication
for the orphan drug. 

On  March  2,  2006,  UCB  announced  that  it  had  submitted  a
Biologics  Licensing  Application  to  the  FDA  for  the  approval  of
Cimzia™  (certolizumab  pegol,  CDP870)  for  the  treatment  of
patients with Crohn’s disease. 

During  2005,  we  announced  new  collaborative  agreements
separately  with  Bayer  HealthCare  LLC,  Baxter  International  Inc,
and Zelos Therapeutics Inc. These collaborations are for various
products that use our technologies and intellectual property and
are in early stages of development. 

RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS 

In  November  2005,  the  FASB  released  FASB  Staff  Position
(“FSP”) No. FAS 115-1 and FAS 124-1, “The Meaning of Other-
Than-Temporary  Impairment  and  Its  Application  to  Certain
Investments.” This FSP, effective January 1, 2006, provides account-
ing guidance regarding the determination of when an impairment
of  debt  and  equity  securities  should  be  considered  other-than-
temporary, as well as the subsequent accounting for these invest-
ments. The adoption of this FSP is not expected to have a material
impact on our financial position or results of operations. 

In  May  2005,  the  Financial  Accounting  Standards  Board
(“FASB”)  released  Statement  of  Financial  Accounting  Standard
(“SFAS”) No. 154, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections—
a replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No.
3, (“FAS 154”). FAS 154 requires retrospective application to prior
periods’ financial statements for any change in accounting principle,
unless  it  is  impracticable  to  determine  either  the  period-specific 
13

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 14

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (continued)

effects  or  the  cumulative  effect  of  the  change.  The  statement
defines retrospective application as the application of a different
accounting principle to prior accounting periods as if that princi-
ple  had  always  been  used  or  as  the  adjustment  of  previously
issued  financial  statements  to  reflect  a  change  in  the  reporting
entity. The statement also requires that a change in depreciation,
amortization,  or  depletion  method  for  long-lived,  non-financial
assets  be  accounted  for  as  a  change  in  accounting  estimate
affected by a change in accounting principle. The statement car-
ries forward without change the guidance contained in Opinion 20
for reporting the correction of an error in previously issued finan-
cial statements and a change in accounting estimate. We will be
required to adopt FAS 154 for any accounting changes or correc-
tions of errors on or after January 1, 2006. We do not expect the
adoption  of  FAS  154  to  have  a  material  impact  on  our  consoli-
dated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. 

In  March  2005,  the  SEC  released  Staff  Accounting  Bulletin
(SAB) 107, “Share Based Payment” which provides the SEC staff
position  regarding  the  application  of  SFAS  No. 123R.  SAB  107
contains interpretative guidance related to the interaction between
SFAS No. 123R and certain SEC rules and regulations, as well as
provides the Staff’s views regarding the valuation of share-based
payment arrangements for public companies. SAB 107 also high-
lights the importance of disclosures made related to the account-
ing  for  share-based  payment  transactions.  We  are  currently
reviewing the effect of SAB 107 on our condensed consolidated
financial statements as we prepare to adopt SFAS 123R. 

In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(“FASB”) released a revision to Statement of Financial Accounting
Standard  (“SFAS”)  No. 123,  Accounting  for  Stock-Based
Compensation (“FAS 123R”). FAS 123R addresses the account-
ing for share-based payment transactions in which an enterprise
receives employee services in exchange for (a) equity instruments
of the enterprise or (b)
liabilities that are based on the fair value of
the enterprise’s equity instruments or that may be settled by the
issuance of such equity instruments. The statement would elimi-
nate the ability to account for share-based compensation trans-
actions using APB Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued
to  Employees,  and  generally  would  require  instead  that  such
transactions  be  accounted  for  using  a  fair-value-based  method.
We have adopted FAS 123R commencing on January 1, 2006,
and  we  expect  that  the  adoption  will  have  a  material  impact  on
our consolidated results of operations and loss per share in 2006.
We have elected to use the Black-Scholes Model for valuing our
share-based  payments.  We  have  also  elected  to  follow  the
prospective  adoption  method  when  adopting  SFAS  123R.  We
believe that the adoption of SFAS 123R will result in amounts that
are similar to the current pro forma disclosures under SFAS 123. 
In  December  2004,  the  FASB  issued  FASB  Staff  Position  No.
FAS 109-1, Application of FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting
for  Income  Taxes,  to  the  Tax  Deduction  on  Qualified  Production
Activities  Provided  by  the  American  Jobs  Creation  Act  of  2004.
Also in December 2004, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No.
FAS 109-2, Accounting and Disclosure Guidance for the Foreign
Earnings  Repatriation  Provision  within  the  American  Jobs
Creations Act of 2004. We do not expect the adoption of these

14

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

new tax accounting standards to have a material impact on our
consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
In  November  2004,  the  FASB  released  SFAS  No. 151,
Inventory  Costs—An  Amendment  to  ARB  No. 43. This
Statement  amends  the  guidance  in  ARB  No. 43,  Chapter  4,
“Inventory  Pricing,”  to  clarify  the  accounting  for  abnormal
amounts  of  idle  facility  expense,  freight,  handling  costs,  and
wasted material. This Statement requires that those items be rec-
ognized  as  current-period  charges  regardless  of  whether  they
meet the criterion of “so abnormal” as defined by ARB No. 43,
Chapter 4, Inventory Pricing. In addition, this Statement requires
that allocation of fixed production overheads to the costs of con-
version be based on the normal capacity of the production facili-
ties. We will be required to adopt SFAS No. 151 for the reporting
period ending March 31, 2006. We are currently in the process of
evaluating the effect of adopting SFAS No. 151. 

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES 

Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results
of operations are based on our consolidated financial statements,
which have been prepared in conformity with accounting princi-
ples  generally  accepted  in  the  U.S.  It  requires  management  to
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.  Actual  results  could  differ  from  those  estimates.
Management has discussed the development, selection, and dis-
closure of each of the following critical accounting estimates with
the audit committee. 

Stock Based Compensation

In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
released  a  revision  to  SFAS  No. 123,  Accounting  for  Stock-
Based  Compensation (“FAS  123R”).  FAS  123R  addresses  the
accounting  for  share-based  payment  transactions  in  which  an
enterprise receives employee services in exchange for (a) equity
instruments of the enterprise or (b)
liabilities that are based on the
fair value of the enterprise’s equity instruments or that may be set-
tled  by  the  issuance  of  such  equity  instruments.  The  statement
would eliminate the ability to account for share-based compensa-
tion  transactions  using  APB  Opinion  No. 25,  Accounting  for
Stock Issued to Employees, and instead would generally require
that such transactions be accounted for using a fair-value-based
method. We have adopted FAS 123R for all periods ending on or
after January 1, 2006. As a result of our adoption of FAS 123R,
we  will  have  to  recognize  substantially  more  compensation
expense. This will have a material adverse impact on our financial
position and results of operations. 

For  periods  ending  on  or  prior  to  December 31,  2005,  we
applied  the  recognition  and  measurement  principles  of  APB
Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and
related  interpretations  in  accounting  for  those  plans.  Under  this
opinion,  no  stock-based  employee  compensation  expense  was
charged  for  options  that  were  granted  at  an  exercise  price  that 

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 15

The  revised  reported  pro  forma  net  loss  for  the  years  ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003 has been decreased by $6.0 mil-
lion  and  $6.8 million,  respectively,  for  options  exchanged  under
stock option exchange programs and adjustments from compu-
tational corrections. 

Cash, Cash Equivalents and Investments 

We consider all highly liquid investments with a maturity at the
date of purchase of three months or less to be cash equivalents.
Cash  and  cash  equivalents  include  demand  deposits  held  in
banks, interest bearing money market funds, commercial paper,
federal  and  municipal  government  securities,  and  repurchase
agreements. 

Investments  consist  of:  1)  auction  rate  securities  with  varying
maturities,  and  2)  federal  and  municipal  government  securities,
corporate bonds, and commercial paper with A1, F1, or P1 short-
term  ratings  and  A  or  better  long-term  ratings  with  remaining
maturities  at  date  of  purchase  of  greater  than  90  days.
Investments with maturities greater than one year are classified as
long-term and represent investments of cash that are reasonably
expected  to  be  realized  in  cash  and  are  available  for  use,  if
needed, in current operations. 

At  December 31,  2005,  all  investments  are  designated  as
available-for-sale  and  are  carried  at  fair  value,  with  unrealized
gains and losses reported in stockholders’ equity as accumulated
other comprehensive income (loss). Investments are adjusted for
amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity.
Such  amortization  is  included  in  interest  income.  Realized  gains
and losses and declines in value judged to be other-than-tempo-
rary  on  available-for-sale  securities,  if  any,  are  included  in  other
income  (expense).  The  cost  of  securities  sold  is  based  on  the 
specific identification method. Interest and dividends on securities
classified as available-for-sale are included in interest income. 

At  December 31,  2005  and  2004,  we  had  letter  of  credit
arrangements with certain vendors including our landlord totaling
$2.6 million and $2.2 million, respectively, which are secured by
investments in similar amounts. 

was equal to the market value of the underlying common stock on
the  date  of  grant.  Stock  compensation  costs  were  immediately
recognized to the extent the exercise price is below the fair value
on the date of grant and no future vesting criteria exist. 

For stock awards issued below our market price on the date of
grant, we recorded deferred compensation representing the dif-
ference between the price per share of stock award issued and
the  fair  value  of  the  Company’s  common  stock  at  the  time  of
issuance or grant, and we amortized this amount over the related
vesting periods on a straight-line basis. 

Pro forma information regarding net income and earnings per
share required by SFAS 123, as amended by SFAS 148, regard-
ing the fair value for employee options and employee stock pur-
chase  plan  shares  was  estimated  at  the  date  of  grant  using  a
Black-Scholes  option  valuation  model  with  the  following
weighted-average assumptions: 

Risk-free interest rate
Dividend yield
Volatility factor
Weighted average expected life

2005

2004

2003

4.0%
0.0%

3.3%
0.0%

2.8%
0.0%

0.710
4.5 years

0.707
5 years

0.744
5 years 

The  Black-Scholes  option  valuation  model  was  developed  for
use in estimating the fair value of traded options, which have no
vesting  restrictions  and  are  fully  transferable.  In  addition,  option
valuation  models  require  the  input  of  highly  subjective  assump-
tions  including  the  expected  stock  price  volatility.  We  have  pre-
sented the pro forma net loss and pro forma basic and diluted net
loss per common share using the assumptions noted above. 

The following table illustrates the effect on net loss and net loss
per share if we had applied the fair value recognition provisions of
SFAS 123 to stock-based employee compensation (in thousands,
except per share information): 

Years ended December 31,

2005

Revised
2004

Revised
2003

Net loss, as reported
Add: stock-based employee 
compensation included 
in reported net loss

Deduct: total stock-based 
employee compensation 
expense determined 
under fair value methods 
for all awards

Net loss, pro forma

Net loss per share

$ (185,111)

$ (101,886)

$ (65,890)

1,854 

1,423 

878 

(21,986)

(25,183)

(27,468)

$ (205,243)

$ (125,646)

$ (92,480)

Basic and diluted, as reported
Basic and diluted, pro forma

$
$

(2.15)
(2.39)

$
$

(1.30)
(1.60)

$
$

(1.18)
(1.66)

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

15

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 16

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (continued)

Impairment of Goodwill, Intangible Assets, and Other 
Long-Lived Assets 

Goodwill  is  tested  for  impairment  at  least  annually  or  on 
an  interim  basis  if  an  event  occurs  or  circumstances  change 
that  would  more-likely-than-not  reduce  the  fair  value  below  our
carrying value. 

Goodwill is tested for impairment using a two-step approach.
The first step is to compare our fair value to our net asset value,
including goodwill. If the fair value of net assets is greater than our
book value of net assets, goodwill is not considered impaired and
the second step is not required. If the fair value is less than our net
asset value, the second step of the impairment test measures the
amount of the impairment loss, if any. The second step of the impair-
ment test is to compare the implied fair value of goodwill to its carry-
ing amount. If the carrying amount of goodwill exceeds its implied
fair value, an impairment loss is recognized equal to that excess.
The implied fair value of goodwill is calculated in the same man-
ner that goodwill is calculated in a business combination, whereby
the fair value is allocated to all of the assets and liabilities (includ-
ing any unrecognized intangible assets) as if they had been acquired
in  a  business  combination  and  the  fair  value  was  the  purchase
price. The excess “purchase price” over the amounts assigned to
assets  and  liabilities  would  be  the  implied  fair  value  of  goodwill. 
The  impairment  tests  for  goodwill  are  performed  at  the  busi-
ness  unit  level,  which  we  have  identified  as  our  pulmonary  and
proprietary  business  unit,  our  advanced  pegylation  technology
business unit and our super critical fluids business unit. 

We  performed  our  annual  impairment  test  for  goodwill  in
October 2005 and determined at that time that the undiscounted
cash flow from our long-range forecast for each respective busi-
ness unit exceeded the carrying amount of the respective good-
will.  In  mid-December  2005  we  were  apprised  of  unfavorable
results of clinical data related to programs from our super critical
fluids  business  unit  located  in  Bradford,  England,  (Nektar  UK),
which provided an indication that the fair value of the respective
business units goodwill was below the carrying value. Therefore,
in connection with our year end close process, we re-performed
the impairment analysis of goodwill and other long lived assets for
Nektar  UK.  We  determined  the  fair  value  of  the  intangibles  and
other  assets  of  Nektar  UK  based  on  a  discounted  cash  flow
model to be less than the carrying amount of goodwill and certain
long  lived  assets.  Based  on  management’s  assessment  of  the
results of clinical data that became available in December 2005,
and results of the discounted cash flow valuation as of December
31,  2005,  we  recorded  an  impairment  charge  to  goodwill  and
long  lived  assets  in  the  year  ended  December 31,  2005  in  the
amount of $59.6 million and $5.7 million, respectively. The remaining
carrying value of goodwill, on a consolidated basis, at December 31,
2005 and 2004, is $78.4 million and $130.1 million, respectively.

In accordance with SFAS No. 144 Accounting for the Impair-
ment  or  Disposal  of  Long-Lived  Assets, we  perform  a  test  for
recoverability of our intangible and other long-lived assets whenever
events  or  changes  in  circumstances  indicate  that  the  carrying
value of the assets may not be recoverable. An impairment loss
would be recognized only if the carrying amount of an intangible
or  long-lived  asset  exceeds  the  sum  of  the  undiscounted  cash
flows  expected  to  result  from  the  use  and  eventual  disposal  of 
the asset. Other than those long lived assets identified at Nektar
UK,  to  date,  there  have  been  no  events  or  changes  in  circum-
stances that would indicate that the carrying value of such assets in
our  other business  units  may  not  be  recoverable,  and  therefore 
we have determined that there are no other impairments on our
intangible and other long-lived assets, including capitalized assets
related to Exubera.®

In assessing the recoverability of our intangibles and long-lived
assets, we have concluded that there are no impairments in the
carrying value of the remaining assets as of December 31, 2005.
If this assessment changes in the future, we may be required to
record impairment charges for these assets. The carrying value of
our purchased intangibles as of December 31, 2005 and 2004 is
$13.5 million and $6.5 million, respectively. These assets are sched-
uled to be fully amortized by December 2012. The carrying value
of  our  other  long-lived  assets  as  of  December 31,  2005  and
2004 is $156.6 million and $153.8 million, respectively. 

Judgments Impacting Fixed Asset Capitalization for Exubera®
In  accordance  with  SFAS  2,  Accounting  for  Research  and
Development Costs, we have expensed certain amounts paid for
plant  design, engineering, and validation costs for the automated
assembly line equipment that will be used in connection with the
manufacture  of  the  inhaler  device  for  Exubera® because  such
costs have no alternative future use. The net credit of $0.2 million
recorded in the year ended December 31, 2005 was the result of
$0.5  million of  expenses  incurred,  offset  by  a  $0.7  million  credit
received  from  our contract  manufacturer.  The  total  amount
expensed was $1.7 million, and $6.6 million, for the years ended
December 31, 2004, and 2003, respectively. As of December 31,
2005, the capitalized net book value of the automated assembly
line equipment located at our contract manufactures’ sites totals
$22.8 million. These assets are intended to be used in connection
with the manufacture of the inhaler device for Exubera.® The total
amount capitalized was nil, $0.2 million, and $1.4 million for the
years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.
These amounts have been capitalized based upon our determina-
tion that the related assets have alternative future use and therefore
have  separate  economic  or  realizable  value.  The  depreciation
expense related to these assets was $1.0 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005. 

16

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 17

Inventory Reserves 

We perform quality control reviews of our raw materials and fin-
ished goods. We record inventory reserves based upon specific
identification  of  potentially  defective  raw  material  and  finished
goods  batches.  In  addition,  we  record  an  inspection  reserve
based on a historical estimate of finished goods that ultimately fail
quality  control.  We  generally  do  not  maintain  inventory  reserves
based on obsolescence or risk of competition because the shelf
life of our products is long. However, if our current assumptions
about demand or obsolescence were to change, additional inven-
tory reserves may be needed, which could negatively impact our
product gross margins. Our inventory reserves were $3.1 million
and $3.2 million as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
This represented approximately 14% and 23% of gross inventory
as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. 

Revenue Recognition 

We  recognize  revenue  in  accordance  with  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  Staff  Accounting  Bulletin  No. 104,
“Revenue  Recognition  in  Financial  Statements”  (“SAB  104”).
Effective  July 1,  2003,  we  adopted  the  provisions  of  Emerging
Issues Task Force, Issue No. 00-21, “Revenue Arrangements with
Multiple Deliverables” on a prospective basis. 

Revenue is recognized when there is persuasive evidence that
an  arrangement  exists,  delivery  has  occurred,  the  price  is  fixed
and  determinable,  and  collectability  is  reasonably  assured.
Allowances are established for uncollectible amounts. 

We enter into collaborative research and development arrange-
ments with pharmaceutical and biotechnology partners that may
involve  multiple  deliverables.  For  multiple-deliverable  arrange-
ments entered into after July 1, 2003 judgment is required in the
areas  of  separability  of  units  of  accounting  and  the  fair  value  of
individual elements. The principles and guidance outlined in EITF
No.  00-21  provide  a  framework  to  (a) determine  whether  an
arrangement  involving  multiple  deliverables  contains  more  than
one unit of accounting, and (b) determine how the arrangement
consideration should be measured and allocated to the separate
units  of  accounting  in  the  arrangement.  Our  arrangements  may
contain  the  following  elements:  collaborative  research,  mile-
stones, manufacturing and supply, royalties and license fees. For
each separate unit of accounting we have objective and reliable
evidence  of  fair  value  using  available  internal  evidence  for  the
undelivered item(s) and our arrangements generally do not con-
tain a general right of return relative to the delivered item. In accor-
dance with the guidance in EITF No. 00-21, the Company uses
the  residual  method  to  allocate  the  arrangement  consideration
when it does not have fair value of a delivered item(s). Under the
residual  method,  the  amount  of  consideration  allocated  to  the
delivered item equals the total arrangement consideration less the
aggregate fair value of the undelivered items. 

Contract  revenue  from  collaborative  research  and  feasibility
agreements is recorded when earned based on the performance
requirements of the contract. Advance payments for research and
development revenue received in excess of amounts earned are
classified as deferred revenue until earned. Revenue from collab-
orative  research  and  feasibility  arrangements  are  recognized  as
the  related  costs  are  incurred.  Amounts  received  under  these
arrangements are generally non-refundable if the research effort is
unsuccessful. 

Payments  received  for  milestones  achieved  are  deferred  and
recorded  as  revenue  ratably  over  the  next  period  of  continued
development. Management makes its best estimate of the period
of time until the next milestone is reached. This estimate affects
the  recognition  of  revenue  for  completion  of  the  previous mile-
stone. The original estimate is periodically evaluated to determine
if circumstances have caused the estimate to change and if so,
amortization of revenue is adjusted prospectively. 

Product sales are derived primarily from cost-plus manufactur-
ing  and  supply  contracts  for  our  PEG  Reagents  with  individual
customers in our industry. Sales terms for specific PEG Reagents
are negotiated in advance. Revenues related to our product sales
are recorded in accordance with the terms of the contracts. No
provisions for potential product returns have been made to date
because we have not experienced any significant returns from our
customers. 

RECLASSIFICATION 

Subsequent to the filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, additional clarification
was  provided  regarding  the  financial  statement  classification 
of  auction  rate  securities  held  as  investments.  Pursuant  to  this
guidance, auction rate securities are not to be classified as cash
and cash equivalents. We invest in auction rate securities as part
of our cash management strategy. These investments, which we
have historically classified as cash and cash equivalents because
of  the  short  time  frame  between  auction  periods,  have  been
reclassified  as  short-term  investments.  We  have  reclassified
$72.4 million and $19.6 million of auction rate securities from cash
equivalents to short-term investments as of December 31, 2004
and 2003, respectively. There was no impact on the Consolidated
Statements of Operations or total current assets as a result of the
reclassification for the years ended December 31, 2004 or 2003.
The impact on the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows was
an  increase  of  $52.7  million  and  $9.7  million  in  cash  used  in
investing activities for the years ended December 31, 2004 and
2003,  respectively.  This  reclassification  did  not  result  in  any
change  to  our  revenue,  total  current  assets,  or  net  loss  for  the
years  ended  December 31,  2004  or  2003,  or  for  any  quarterly
period during the years ended December 31, 2004 or 2003. 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

17

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 18

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (continued)

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS 
Years Ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003 

Revenue (in thousands, except percentages) 

Years ended December 31,

2005

2004

2003

Contract Research Revenue

Product Sales and Royalty Revenue

$81,602

29,366

$89,185 

$78,962 

25,085 

27,295 

Exubera Commercialization 

Increase/ 
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

$(7,583)

4,281 

Increase/ 
(Decrease) 
2004 vs 2003

$10,223

(2,210)

Readiness Revenue

15,311

—

—

15,311 

—

Total Revenue

$126,279

$114,270 

$106,257 

$12,009 

$8,013 

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

(9)%

17%

N/A

11%

13%

(8)%

N/A

8%

Total revenue was $126.3 million for the year ended December
31, 2005, compared to $114.3 million and $106.3 million for the
years  ended  December 31,  2004  and  2003,  respectively.  Total
revenue increased 11% in 2005 compared to 2004 and increased
8% in 2004 compared to 2003. 

Contract  research  revenue  included  reimbursed  research  and
development expenses as well as the amortization of deferred up-
front signing and milestone payments received from our collabo-
rative partners. Contract revenues are expected to fluctuate from
year  to  year,  and  future  contract  revenue  cannot  be  predicted
accurately. The level of contract revenues depends in part upon
the continuation of existing collaborations, signing of new collab-
orations, and achievement of milestones under current and future
agreements. 

Contract research revenue was $81.6 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005, compared to $89.2 million and $79.0 mil-
lion for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respec-
tively. The decrease in contract research revenue of $7.6 million,
or 9%, for the year ended December 31, 2005, as compared to the
year  ended  December 31,  2004,  was  primarily  due  to  approxi-
mately $7.4 million decrease in revenue from Pfizer Inc related to
the transition of the Exubera® program from contract research and
development to commercialization readiness. The decrease in rev-
enue from Pfizer Inc was partially offset by $4.4 million increase of
launch  delay  revenues  recorded  in  2005.  In  addition,  during  the
year  ended  December 30,  2004,  we  recognized  $2.0  million  in
revenue from a one-time payment related to Aventis’ termination
of a collaborative program with us. Other decreases were prima-
rily due to the expected fluctuations in contract research revenue
and the timing of milestone payments. 

The increase of $10.2 million or 13% in contract research revenue
for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to the year
ended December 31, 2003, was due primarily to an $8.9 million
increase in contract research revenue from Pfizer Inc related to the
Exubera® collaboration and a $2.0 million payment received from
Aventis-Behring  related  to  the  termination  of  their  collaboration
with us. 

Product  and  royalty  revenue  was  $29.4  million  for  the  year
ended  December 31,  2005,  compared  to  $25.1 million  and
$27.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, 

respectively.  Product  and  royalty  revenue  accounted  for  23%  of
revenues for the year ended December 31, 2005, as compared
to 22% and 26% of revenues for the years ended December 31,
2004 and 2003, respectively. The increase in product revenue for
the  year  ended  December 31,  2005  as  compared  to  the  year
ended December 31, 2004, was due primarily to $5.0 million of
royalty  revenue  received  from  Eyetech,  $1.5  million  of  Exubera®
product sales to Pfizer Inc, and $1.4 million of product sales from
Aerogen. These product and royalty revenue increases were par-
tially  offset  by  decreases  of  $3.6  million  of  product  sales  from
Nektar Advanced PEGylation technology customers. 

Exubera® commercialization readiness revenue represents reim-
bursement, by Pfizer Inc, of certain agreed upon operating costs
relating  to  our  Exubera® drug  powder  manufacturing  facilities  in
preparation  for  commercial  production,  plus  a  markup  on  such
costs. Such reimbursable revenue will not necessarily equal actual
costs  incurred  and  expensed  as  Exubera® commercialization
readiness  costs.  We  do  not  anticipate  receiving  these  revenues
subsequent to the launch of Exubera.®

In the early phase of the Exubera® commercial launch in 2006,
we  expect  to  receive  a  substantial  amount  of  revenue  from  the
manufacture and sale of the Exubera® Inhalers and bulk powder
insulin, both of which have lower gross margins than when com-
bined  with  end  product  royalty  revenue.  We  do  not  expect  to
receive significant amounts of Exubera® royalty revenue until the
latter half of fiscal year 2006. 

The  decrease  in  product  revenue  for  the  year  ended  Decem-
ber 31,  2004,  as  compared  to  the  year  ended  December 31,
2003, was primarily due to lower demand, which resulted in lower
sales  of  commercially  approved  products  such  as  Neulasta,®
Somavert,® and PEGASYS.®

Future product sales are dependent upon regulatory approval
of new products for sale and adoption of current products in the
market. 

Pfizer Inc represented 64% of our revenue for the year ended
December 31,  2005,  61%  for  the  year  ended  December 31,
2004, and 61% for the year ended December 31, 2003. No other
single customer represented 10% or more of our total revenues
for  any  of  the  three  years  ended  December 31,  2005,  2004  or
2003. 

18

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 19

Cost of goods sold (in thousands except percentages) 

Years ended December 31,

2005

2004

2003

Increase/ 
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

Increase/ 
(Decrease) 
2004 vs 2003

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

Cost of Goods Sold

$23,728

$19,798 

$14,678 

$ 3,930

$5,120

20%

Exubera Commercialization 

Readiness Cost

12,268

—

—

12,268 

—

Combined Cost of Goods Sold

$35,996

$19,798 

$14,678 

$16,198 

$5,120 

N/A

82%

35%

N/A

35%

Combined cost of goods sold for the year ended December 31,
2005, was approximately $36.0 million resulting in a gross margin
from  product  sales  and  Exubera® commercialization  readiness 
revenue of 19%. Cost of goods sold for the year ended December
31, 2004,  was  $19.8  million  resulting  in  a  gross  margin  of  21%.
Cost of goods sold for the year ended December 31, 2003, was
$14.7 million resulting in a gross margin from product sales of 46%. 
Gross  margin  from  product  sales  were  approximately  19%  in
the year ended December 31, 2005, compared to gross margin
from  product  sales  of  approximately  21%  in  the  year  ended
December 31,  2004,  representing  a  decrease  of  approximately
2%.  The  decrease  in  product  gross  margin  for  the  year  ended
December 31, 2005, compared to December 31, 2004, was pri-
marily due to $1.5 million of Exubera® sales to Pfizer Inc at zero
margin and a decreased gross margin related to sales of Nektar
Advanced PEGylation products primarily due to decreased sales
which resulted in lower overhead absorption. 

In the early phase of the Exubera® commercial launch in 2006,
we  expect  to  receive  a  substantial  amount  of  revenue  from  the
manufacture and sale of the Exubera® Inhalers and bulk powder
insulin, both of which have lower gross margins than when com-
bined  with  end  product  royalty  revenue.  We  do  not  expect  to
receive significant amounts of Exubera® royalty revenue until the
latter half of fiscal year 2006. 

Exubera® commercialization readiness costs are start-up man-
ufacturing costs we have incurred in our Exubera® drug powder
manufacturing facility in preparation for commercial production for
the year ended December 31, 2005. We do not anticipate incur-
ring these costs subsequent to the launch of Exubera.®

The  decrease  in  product  gross  margin  for  the  year  ended
December 31, 2004, compared to December 31, 2003, was pri-
marily  due  to  a  temporary  shut  down  of  part  of  the  Nektar
Advanced PEGylation manufacturing operations in the year ended
December 31, 2004, and an increase in our inventory reserves. 

Research and development (in thousands except percentages) 

Years ended December 31,

2005

2004

2003

Research & development

$151,659

$133,523 

$122,149 

In process research and development

$ 7,859

$

—

$

—

Increase/ 
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

$18,136

$ 7,859 

Increase/ 
(Decrease) 
2004 vs 2003

$11,374

$ —

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

14%

N/A

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

9%

N/A

We  expense  all  research  and  development  costs  as  they  are
incurred. Research and development expenses were $151.7 mil-
lion  for  the  year  ended  December 31,  2005,  as  compared  to
$133.5 million and $122.1 million for the years ended December
31,  2004  and  2003,  respectively.  The  14%  increase  in  research
and  development  expense  for  the  year  ended  December 31,
2005, as compared to the year ended December 31, 2004, was
primarily  attributable  to  increased  spending  relating  to  Exubera®
as  well  as  increased  development  spending  for  our  proprietary
product programs. 

In the year ended December 31, 2005, we recorded a charge
of $7.9 million for in-process research and development costs in
connection  with  our  acquisition  of  Aerogen.  The  in-process
research and development primarily represents two programs in
clinical development, amikacin and surfactant. We expect to con-
tinue  investing  in  both  of  these  programs  over  the  next  several
years  as  part  of  our  ongoing  proprietary  product  development
programs.  The  amount  of  $7.9  million  was  expensed  on  the
acquisition  date  because  the  acquired  technology  had  not  yet
reached technological feasibility and had no future alternative use. 

The value of purchased in-process research and development
was  determined  by  estimating  the  related  future  net  cash  flows
between 2006 and 2020 using a present value risk adjusted dis-
count rate of 24%. This discount rate is a significant assumption
and is based on our estimated weighted average cost of capital
adjusted  upwards  for  the  risks  associated  with  the  project
acquired.  The  projected  cash  flows  from  the  acquired  projects
were  based  on  estimates  of  revenues  and  operating  profits
related  to  the  projects  considering  the  stage  of  development  of
each potential product acquired, the time and resources needed
to complete the development and approval of each product, the
life of each potential commercialized product and associated risks
including the inherent difficulties and uncertainties in developing a
drug  compound  including  obtaining  FDA  and  other  regulatory
approvals, and risks related to the viability of and potential alter-
native treatments in any future target markets. 

We  expect  research  and  development  spending  to  increase
over the next few years as we continue to fund development of
our  technologies  including  our  proprietary  product  development
program. While we believe our proprietary products strategy may 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

19

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 20

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (continued)

result in improved economics for any products ultimately devel-
oped and approved, it will require us to invest significant funds in
developing these products without reimbursement from a collab-
orative partner. 

The 9% increase in research and development expense for the
year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to the year ended
December 31,  2003,  was  primarily  due  to  annual  salary
increases, a one time expense of $1.4 million associated with the
buy-out  of  our  potential  future  royalty  and  milestone  obligations

with a partner, increased expenses related to validation testing of
our Exubera® drug delivery device and outside services related to
our proprietary programs. 

The following table summarizes our partner development pro-
grams for products approved for use and those in clinical trials.
The table includes the primary indication for the particular drug or
product,  the  identity  of  a  respective  corporate  partner  if  it  has
been disclosed, and the present stage of clinical development or
approval in the United States, unless otherwise noted. 

Molecule

Primary Indication

Exubera®  (insulin human 
[rDNA origin]) Inhalation Powder

Proprietary Products 

Adult Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes

Partner

Pfizer Inc.

Status (1) 

Approved in the EU and U.S.

Amphotericin B inhalation powder

Prevention of pulmonary aspergillosis

Nektar Product

Inhaled Antibiotics

Treatment of pneumonia in ventilated patients

Nektar Product

Partnered Products (other than Exubera®) 

Neulasta ® (pegfilgrastim)

Neutropenia

PEGASYS ® (peginterferon alfa-2a)

Hepatitis-C

Somavert ® (pegvisomant)

Acromegaly

Amgen Inc.

Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Pfizer Inc.

Phase I 

Phase II 

Approved 

Approved

Approved

PEG-INTRON® (peginterferon alfa-2b)

Hepatitis-C

Schering-Plough Corporation

Approved 

Definity® (PEG)

Cardiac imaging

Bristol-Myers Squibb Company

Approved 

Macugen ® (pegaptanib sodium injection) Age-related macular degeneration

OSI Pharmaceuticals (Eyetech)

Approved in the U.S. 
EU & Canada 

Macugen ® (pegaptanib sodium injection) Diabetic macular edema

OSI Pharmaceuticals (Eyetech)

Phase II 

Prevention of post-surgical adhesions 

Confluent Surgical Inc. 

SprayGel™ adhesion barrier system
(PEG-hydrogel)

CimziaTM (certolizumab pegol, CDP870)

CERA (Continuous Erythropoiesis 
Receptor Activator)

Crohn’s disease
Rheumatoid arthritis

Renal anemia

Tobramycin inhalation powder (TIP)

Lung infection

Undisclosed (PEG)

Undisclosed

Pivotal trials in U.S.
Approved in Europe

Filed in the U.S.
Phase III 

UCB Pharma

Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Phase III 

Chiron Corporation

Undisclosed

Phase III 

Phase II 

Pulmonary dronabinol 
(Dronabinol metered dose inhaler) 

Undisclosed (PEG)

CDP 791 (PEG-antibody fragment 
angiogenesis inhibitor) 

(1) Status definitions are as follows: 

Migraine (with and without aura)

Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Phase II 

Undisclosed

Cancer

Pfizer Inc.

UCB Pharma

Phase II 

Phase II 

Approved — regulatory approval to market and sell product obtained in the U.S. or EU 

Phase III or Pivotal — product in large-scale clinical trials conducted to obtain regulatory approval 
to market and sell a drug. Typically, these trials are initiated following encouraging Phase II trial results. 

Phase II — product in clinical trials to establish dosing and efficacy in patients 

Phase I — product in clinical trials typically in healthy subjects to test safety 

20

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 21

Our  product  pipeline  includes  both  partnered  and  proprietary
products. We have ongoing collaborations with more than 20 bio-
technology  and  pharmaceutical  companies  to  provide  our  drug
delivery  technologies.  Our  partner  product  pipeline  includes:
seven  products  (Exubera,® Neulasta,® PEGASYS,® Somavert,®
PEG-INTRON,® Definity,® and  Macugen®)  approved  by  the  FDA;
three products (SprayGel,TM Ex, Macugen® and Exubera®)) approved
in Europe; three additional products (TIP, CimziaTM and CERA) in
Phase III or pivotal trials; and at least ten products in either pre-
clinical,  Phase  I  or  Phase  II  trials.  In  addition  to  our  partnered
product programs, we have four proprietary products in the early
stages of development. One of these products involves an inhaled
small molecule that has entered Phase I and another product is in
proof-of-concept human studies. The remaining two products are
in preclinical testing. 

The length of time that a project is in a given phase varies sub-
stantially according to factors relating to the trial, such as the type
and intended use of the end product, the trial design, the ability to
enroll  suitable  patients.  Generally,  for  partnered  projects,
advancement from one phase to the next and the related costs to
do so is dependent upon factors that are primarily controlled by
our partners. 

Our  research  and  development  activities  can  be  divided  into
research and preclinical programs, clinical development programs
and commercial readiness. We estimate the costs associated 

with research and preclinical programs, clinical development pro-
grams, and commercial readiness over the past three years to be
the following (in millions): 

Years ended December 31, 

Research and preclinical programs
Clinical development programs
Commercial readiness

Total

2005

2004 

2003 

$ 53.6
76.1
22.0

$ 37.4
59.4
36.7

$ 29.0
58.0
35.1

$151.7

$133.5

$122.1

Our  portfolio  of  projects  can  be  broken  down  into  two  cate-
gories:  1)  partnered  projects  and  2)  proprietary  products  and
technology development. We estimate the costs associated with
partnered  projects  and  proprietary  products  and  technology
development to be the following (in millions): 

Years ended December 31, 

Partnered projects
Proprietary products and 
technology development

Total

2005

2004

2003

$ 83.3

$ 93.2

$ 92.7

68.4

40.3

29.4

$151.7

$133.5

$122.1

Our  total  research  and  development  expenditures  can  be 
disaggregated into the following significant types of expenses (in
millions): 

Years ended December 31,

2005

2004 

2003 

Salaries and employee benefits
Outside services
Supplies
Facility and equipment
Travel and entertainment
Allocated overhead, net
Other

Total

$ 68.3
32.7
22.5
26.9
1.8
(3.3)
2.8

$ 59.0
28.7
18.9
19.7
1.9
4.9
0.4

$ 57.2
21.0
16.7
16.7
1.5
7.1
1.9

$151.7

$133.5

$122.1

General and Administrative (in thousands except percentages) 

Years ended December 31,

2005

$43,852

2004

$30,967

2003

$29,966 

Increase/
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

$12,885

Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

$1,001 

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

42%

Percentage
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

3%

General and administrative expenses were $43.9 million for the
year  ended  December 31,  2005,  as  compared  to  $31.0  million
and  $30.0  million  for  the  years  ended  December 31,  2004  and
2005, respectively. 

General and administrative expenses increased $12.9 million or
42% in the year ended December 31, 2005, as compared to the
year  ended  December 31,  2004.  The  increase  in  general  and
administrative expenses was primarily due to the following: 

■ Increased accounting fees and expenses of approximately $2.0 mil-
lion, primarily due to Sarbanes Oxley compliance requirements,
and increased headcount to support our commercial operations
and manufacturing activity. 

■ Increased legal fees and expenses of approximately $3.0 million,
primarily due to increased patent fees related to our proprietary
development programs, increased headcount to support general

administration,  operations,  and  business  development  efforts,
and increased litigation expenses related to patent defense and
derivative shareholder claims. 

■ Incremental headcount and related expenses of $5.0 million to
support our product planning and marketing efforts for our propri-
etary and partnered programs. 

■ Addition of approximately $1.0 million from Aerogen operations
from the date of acquisition through December 31, 2005. 

General  and  administrative  spending  during  the  year  ended
December 31,  2004,  was  comparable  to  spending  during  the
year ended December 31, 2003. 

We  expect  general  and  administrative  spending  to  increase
over  the  next  few  years  to  support  increased  activities  in  most
areas of our operations. 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

21

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 22

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (continued)

Impairment of long lived assets (in thousands except percentages) 

Years ended December 31,

2005

$65,340

2004

$

—

2003

$

—

Increase/
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

$65,340

Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

$

—

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

NA

Percentage
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

NA

We  performed  our  annual  impairment  test  for  goodwill  in
October 2005 and determined at that time that the undiscounted
cash flow from our long-range forecast for each respective busi-
ness unit exceeded the carrying amount of the respective good-
will. In December 2005 we were apprised of unfavorable results of
clinical  data  related  to  programs  from  our  super  critical  fluids 
business  unit  located  in  Bradford,  England,  (Nektar  UK),  which
provided  an  indication  that  the  fair  value  of  the  respective  busi-
ness  units  goodwill  was  below  the  carrying  value.  Therefore,  in
connection with our year end close process, we re-performed the

impairment  analysis  of  goodwill  and  other  long  lived  assets  for
Nektar  UK.  We  determined  the  fair  value  of  the  intangibles  and
other  assets  of  Nektar  UK  based  on  a  discounted  cash  flow
model to be less than the carrying amount of goodwill and certain
long  lived  assets.  Based  on  management’s  assessment  of  the
results of clinical data that became available in December 2005,
and results of the discounted cash flow valuation as of December
31,  2005,  we  recorded  an  impairment  charge  to  goodwill  and
long  lived  assets  in  the  year  ended  December 31,  2005  in  the
amount of $59.6 million and $5.7 million, respectively. 

Amortization of other intangible assets (in thousands except percentages) 

Years ended December 31,

2005

$4,206

2004

$3,924

2003

$4,219

Increase/
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

$282

Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

$(295)

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

7%

Percentage
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

(7)%

Acquired technology and other intangible assets include propri-
etary technology, intellectual property, and supplier and customer
relationships acquired from third parties or in business combina-
tions,  and  specifically  excludes  goodwill  and  other  long  lived
assets. We periodically evaluate whether changes have occurred
that would require revision of the remaining estimated useful lives
of  these  assets  or  otherwise  render  the  assets  unrecoverable. 
If such an event occurred, we would determine whether the other
intangibles are impaired. To date, no such impairment losses have
been recorded. 

The  components  of  our  other  intangible  assets  as  of  Decem-

ber 31, 2005, are as follows (in thousands except useful life): 

Useful
Life in
Years

Gross
Carrying
Amount

Core technology
Developed product technology
Intellectual property
Supplier and customer relations

5
5
5-7
5

$ 15,270 
2,900
7,301
9,870

Accumulated
Amortization

$ (7,529) 
(2,610) 
(6,779)
(4,971)

Net

$ 7,741
290
522
4,899 

Total

$ 35,341 

$(21,889) 

$13,452

Amortization expense related to other intangible assets totaled
$4.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, and $4.5 mil-
lion for each year ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, respec-
tively, ($0.7 million, $0.6 million, and $0.3 million was recorded to
cost of sales for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and
2003,  respectively).  The  following  table  shows  expected  future
amortization expense for other intangible assets until they are fully
amortized (in thousands): 

Years Ending December 31,

2006
2007
2008
2009
2010

Total

$ 4,329
2,380
2,380
2,380
1,983

$ 13,452

22

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 23

Gain (Loss) on debt extinguishment (in thousands except percentages)

Years ended December 31,

2005

$ (303)

2004

$ (9,258)

2003

$ 12,018

Increase/
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

$  8,955

Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

$(21,276)

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

97%

Percentage
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

(177)%

During the year ended December 31, 2005, we recognized a
loss on debt extinguishment of approximately $0.3 million in con-
nection with  the  retirement  of  $25.4  million  and  $45.9  million
aggregate principle amount of our outstanding 5% and 3.5% con-
vertible subordinate notes due February 2007 and October 2007,
for cash payments of $71.0 million in the aggregate, in privately
negotiated  transactions.  As  a  result  of  the  debt  retirement  we
wrote off approximately $0.1 million and $0.5 million of capitalized
debt issuance costs related to the 5% and 3.5% convertible sub-
ordinated notes, respectively. Prior to the retirement we had out-
standing principle balances of $61.4 million and $112.5 million of
our  5%  and  3.5%  convertible  subordinated  notes,  respectively.
Our  outstanding  obligation  at  December 31,  2005,  was  $36.1
million for the 5% notes, and $66.6 million for 3.5% notes. 

During the year ended December 31, 2004, we recognized a
loss  on  debt  extinguishment  in  connection  with  two  privately
negotiated  transactions  to  convert  our  outstanding  convertible
subordinated notes into shares of our common stock. In January
2004, certain holders of our outstanding 3.5% convertible subor-
dinated  notes  due  October  2007  completed  an  exchange  and
cancellation  of  $9.0  million  in  aggregate  principal  amount  of  the

Other income (expense) (in thousands except percentages)

notes for the issuance of 0.6 million shares of our common stock
in  a  privately  negotiated  transaction.  In  February  2004,  certain
holders  of  our  outstanding  3%  convertible  subordinated  notes
due  June  2010  converted  approximately  $36.0  million  in  aggre-
gate principal amount of such notes for approximately 3.2 million
shares  of  our  common  stock  and  a  cash  payment  of  approxi-
mately $3.1 million in the aggregate in privately negotiated trans-
actions. As a result of these transactions, we recognized losses
on  debt  extinguishment  of  approximately  $7.8  million  and  $1.5
million,  respectively,  in  accordance  with  SFAS  No. 84,  Induced
Conversions of Convertible Debt. 

For  the  year  ended  December 31,  2003,  gain  on  debt  extin-
guishment  totaled  $12.0  million.  Gain  on  debt  extinguishment
included a $4.3 million gain from the repurchase of $20.5 million
of  3.5%  convertible  subordinated  notes  due  October  2007  for
$16.2  million  during  the  second  quarter  of  2003.  Gain  on  debt
extinguishment  also  included  a  $7.7  million  gain  from  the
exchange of $87.9 million of 3.5% convertible subordinated notes
due  October  2007  for  the  issuance  of  $59.3  million  of  newly
issued 3% convertible subordinated notes due June 2010. 

Years ended December 31,

2005

$ (1,249)

2004

$ 296

2003

$ 983

Increase/
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

$(1,545)

Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

$

(687)

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

(522)%

Percentage
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

(70)%

Other  expense,  net,  was  $1.2  million  for  the  year  ended
December 31, 2005, as compared to other income of $0.3 million,
net,  for  the  year  ended  December 31,  2004.  The  additional
expense  incurred  in  the  year  ended  December 31,  2005,  is 
primarily  related  to  termination  of  our  lease  obligation  related  to
45,574 square feet of space located at our headquarters. In con-
nection with the termination agreement, we have recorded other
expense  of  approximately  $1.1  million  during  the  year  ended 

December 31, 2005, representing the write-off the capital asset
partially offset by a reduction in the present value of our future rent
liability.  In  addition,  other  income  for  the  year  ended  December
31,  2004,  included  $0.7  million  of  income  related  to  our  real
estate partnership which was dissolved in September 2004. 

Other  income  (expense),  net,  was  $0.3  million  income  for  the
year  ended  December 31,  2004,  as  compared  to  $1.0  million
income for the year ended December 31, 2003. 

Interest income (in thousands except percentages)

Years ended December 31,

2005

$13,022

2004

$ 6,602

2003

$ 5,360

Increase/
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

$  6,420

Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

$ 1,242

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

97%

Percentage
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

23%

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

23

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 24

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (continued)

Interest  income  was  approximately  $13.0  million  for  the  year
ended December 31, 2005, as compared to approximately $6.6
million and $5.4 million for years ended December 31, 2004 and
2003,  respectively.  The  increase  of  approximately  97%  for  the
year ended December 31, 2005, as compared to the year ended
December 31,  2004,  was  primarily  due  to  increases  in  average
daily cash balances as a result of net proceeds of approximately 

$305.6  million  in  convertible  subordinated  notes  in  September
2005, and higher prevailing interest rates during 2005 compared
to 2004. 

The $1.2 million increase in interest income for the year ended
December 31, 2004, as compared to December 31, 2003, was
primarily due to higher average cash, cash equivalents, and short-
term investment balances in 2004 compared to 2003. 

Interest expense (in thousands except percentages)

Years ended December 31,

2005

$ 14,085

2004

$  25,747

2003

$  19,327

Increase/
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

$ (11,662)

Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

$   6,420

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

(45)%

Percentage
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

33%

Interest expense was approximately $14.1 million and approxi-
mately $25.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2005 and
2004, respectively, a decrease of 45%. For the year ended Decem-
ber 31,  2004,  interest  expense  included  a  payment  of  approxi-
mately  $12.7  million  in  interest  made  to  certain  holders  of  our
outstanding 3.0% convertible subordinated notes due June 2010
which completed an exchange of $169.3 million in aggregate prin-
cipal amount of the notes held by such holders for the issuance of
approximately 14.9 million shares of our common stock. The net
increase of $1.0 million was primarily due to the interest expense
related  to  the  issuance  of  $315.0  million  of  3.25%  Convertible
Subordinated notes in September 2005 less the decrease in inter-
est expense related to the retirement of $25.4 million and $45.9
million  aggregate  principle  amount  of  our  outstanding  5%  and
3.5% convertible subordinate notes in September 2005. 

Interest  expense  was  $25.7  million  for  the  year  ended
December 31, 2004, as compared to $19.3 million for the year

ended December 31, 2003. The $6.4 million increase in interest
expense for the year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to
December 31, 2003, primarily relates to approximately $12.7 mil-
lion  in  “make-whole”  payments  made  to  certain  holders  of  our
outstanding 3.0% convertible subordinated notes due June 2010
in connection with the conversion of $169.3 million in aggregate
principal  amount  of  the  notes  held  by  such  holders  for  the
issuance  of  approximately  14.9 million  shares  of  our  common
stock following our call for the redemption of such notes during
the three-month period ended March 31, 2004. This was partially
offset by a decrease in interest expense due to the lower average
balance of convertible subordinated notes outstanding during the
year ended December 31, 2004, as compared to the year ended
December 31, 2003. 

We expect interest expense to increase in future periods as a
result of our $315.0 million convertible subordinated notes issued
in September 2005. 

Benefit (Provision) for income taxes (in thousands except percentages)

Years ended December 31,

2005

$

137

2004

$   163

2003

$   (169)

Increase/
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

$

(26)

Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

$

332

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

(16)%

Percentage
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

196%

We  recorded  a  benefit  for  income  taxes  of  $0.1  million  and 
$0.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004,
respectively;  and  a  provision  of  $0.2  million  for  the  year  ended
December 31, 2003. The benefit (provision) relate entirely to state
taxes on our Alabama subsidiary. 

We have also recorded a deferred tax asset related to our oper-
ations outside of Alabama of $259.9 million, which has been fully
reserved due to the lack of earnings history for these operations. 
We  account  for  federal  income  taxes  under  SFAS  No. 109,
Accounting for Income Taxes. Under SFAS No. 109, the liability 

method  is  used  in  accounting  for  income  taxes.  Under  this
method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based
on differences between financial reporting and tax reporting bases
of assets and liabilities and are measured using enacted tax rates
and laws that are expected to be in effect when the differences
are  expected  to  reverse.  Realization  of  deferred  tax  assets  is
dependent upon future earnings, if any, the timing and amount of
which are uncertain. Because of our lack of earnings history, the
net  deferred  tax  assets  for  our  operations  outside  of  Alabama
have been fully offset by a valuation allowance. 

24

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 25

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES 

We have financed our operations primarily through public and pri-
vate placements of our debt and equity securities, revenue from
development  contracts,  product  sales  and  short-term  research
and  feasibility  agreements,  financing  of  equipment  acquisitions
and  tenant  improvements,  and  interest  income  earned  on  our
investments of cash. We do not utilize off-balance sheet financing

arrangements as a source of liquidity or financing. At December
31,  2005,  we  had  cash,  cash  equivalents  and  investments  of
approximately $566.4 million. 

At  December 31,  2005  and  2004,  we  had  letter  of  credit
arrangements with certain vendors including our landlord totaling
$2.6 million and $2.2 million, respectively, which are secured by
investments or assets in like amounts. 

Years ended December 31,

2005

2004

2003

Increase/
(Decrease) 
2005 vs 2004

Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

Percentage 
Increase/
(Decrease)
2005 vs 2004

Percentage
Increase/
(Decrease)
2004 vs 2003

Cash, cash equivalents  

and investments 

Cash provided by/(used in)

Operating activities 
Investing activities 
Financing activities 

Capital expenditures (included 
in investing activities above) 

$ 566.4 

$ 418.7

$ 298.4

$ 147.7

$ 120.3

$ (78.0)
$ 32.4 
$ 274.8 

$ (78.1)
$ (141.7)
$ 207.4 

$ (76.2)
$
(5.6)
$ 101.3

0.1 
$
$ 174.1 
$ 67.4 

(1.9) 
$
$ (136.1) 
$ 106.1

$ (18.0)

$ (24.2)

$ (18.7)

$

6.2

$

(5.5)

35%

—
123%
32%

26%

40%

(2%)
(2430%)
105%

(29%)

Our  operations  used  cash  of  $78.0  million  for  the  year  ended
December 31,  2005,  as  compared  to  $78.1  million  and
$76.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2005, the $78.0
million  cash  used  in  operations  primarily  reflected  the  loss  of
$185.1 million partially offset by a non-cash charge for impairment
of long lived assets of $65.3 million, depreciation and amortization
of  $25.3  million,  in-process  research  and  development  costs  of
$7.9  million,  other  non-cash  items  of  $4.0  million,  and  net
changes in assets and liabilities of $4.5 million. The write off of in-
process  R&D  in  the  amount  of  $7.9  million  in  the  year  ended
December 31, 2005, resulted from the purchase of Aerogen, Inc.
The in-process R&D represents two programs in clinical develop-
ment, amikacin and surfactant. We expect to continue investing in
both of these programs over the next several years as part of our
clinical  development  programs.  For  the  year  ended  December
31, 2004, the $78.1 million of cash used in operations primarily
reflects  the  net  loss  of  $101.9  million,  partially  offset  by  a  loss  on
debt extinguishment of $9.3 million and depreciation and amorti-
zation of $18.0 million. For the year ended December 31, 2003,
the  $76.2 million  cash  used  in  operations  primarily  reflected  the
net loss of $65.9 million, the non-cash gain on debt extinguish-
ment of $12.0 million and depreciation and amortization expense
of $18.2 million. 

Cash  flows  provided  by  investing  activities  were  $32.4  million
for  the  year  ended  December 31,  2005,  as  compared  to  cash
used  in  investing  activities  of  $141.7  million  and  $5.6  million  for
the  years  ended  December 31,  2004  and  2003,  respectively.
Cash  flows  used  for  investing  activities  for  the  year  ended
December 31, 2005, were primarily related to the acquisition of
Aerogen, Inc in the amount of $30.7 million. Offsetting cash flows
used  in  or  provided  by  investing  activities  for  the  years  ended
December 31,  2005,  2004,  and  2003  were  driven  primarily  by
the purchase, sale, and maturity of investment securities. These 

cash proceeds were either reinvested or used in operations. We
purchased property and equipment of approximately $18.0 million,
$24.2 million, and $18.7 million, during the years ended Decem−
ber 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The increase in pur-
chased  property  and  equipment  in  2004  as  compared  to  2005
and 2003 primarily reflects the cost of improvements made to our
Huntsville,  AL  facility  as  well  as  capital  expenditures  made  in
preparation for the commercial launch of Exubera.®

Cash flows provided by financing activities were $274.8 million
for the year ended December 31, 2005, compared to $207.4 mil-
lion and $101.3 million of the years ended December 31, 2004
and 2003, respectively. Cash flow provided by financing activity in
the  year  ended  December 31,  2005,  was  primarily  due  to  the
sale of approximately 1.9 million shares of our common stock in
August and September 2005 at an average price of $16.93 per
common share for proceeds of approximately $31.6 million, net of
issuance  costs,  net  proceeds  of  $305.6  million  from  the  sale  of
our  3.25%  convertible  subordinated  notes  in  September  2005,
and  cash  received  from  employee  exercises  of  stock  options  of
approximately $9.6 million. During the year ended December 31,
2005, we used approximately $25.5 million and $45.5 million to
retire a portion of our outstanding 5% and 3.25% convertible sub-
ordinated  notes,  respectively.  Cash  flow  provided  by  financing
activities  in  the  year  ended  December 31,  2004,  was  primarily
due  to  the  sale  of  9.5 million  shares  of  our  common  stock  in
March 2004 at a price of $20.71 per common share for proceeds
of  approximately  $196.4  million,  net  of  issuance  costs;  cash
received  from  employee  exercises  of  stock  options  of  approxi-
mately  $13.7  million;  a  loan  received  from  Pfizer  Inc  of  approxi-
mately  $4.4  million;  partially  offset  by  repayment  of  bank  loans
and capital lease obligations of $8.0 million. Cash flows provided
by financing activities in the year ended December 31, 2003 was
primarily due to the issuance of $106.1 million of 3% convertible
subordinated notes due 2010. 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

25

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 26

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (continued)

In  August  2005,  we  entered  into  a  Common  Stock  Purchase
Agreement with an institutional investor in which we sold approx-
imately  1.9 million  shares  of  our  common  stock  at  an  average
price of $16.93 per common share for proceeds of approximately
$31.6 million, net of issuance costs. The proceeds were used to
acquire Aerogen. 

In  September  2005,  we  completed  the  sale  of  $315.0  million
aggregate  principle  amount  of  our  3.25%  convertible  subordi-
nated notes due 2012. The associated costs of the financing were
approximately  $9.4  million.  The  notes  bear  interest  at  a  rate  of
3.25% per annum and will be converted into shares of our com-
mon  stock  at  an  initial  conversion  rate  of  46.4727 per  $1,000
principle amount of notes which is equivalent to an initial conver-
sion price of approximately $21.52 per share. 

In September 2005, the Company used cash of $71.0 million
to  retire  $25.4  million  and  $45.9  million  aggregate  principle
amount  of  our  outstanding  5%  and  3.5%  convertible  subordi-
nated  notes  due  February  2007  and  October  2007,  in  privately
negotiated  transactions.  We  recorded  a  loss  on  the  early  extin-
guishment  of  debt  in  the  nine  month  period  ended  September
30, 2005, of approximately $0.3 million. 

As  a  result  of  the  transactions  related  to  convertible  subordi-
nated debt during the year ended December 31, 2005, our total
contractual  obligation  with  regard  to  convertible  subordinated
debt has increased from $173.9 million at December 31, 2004,
to  $417.7  million  at  December 31,  2005.  Aggregate  principal
amount  of  $102.7  million  and  $315.0  million  of  our  outstanding
convertible  subordinated  debt  as  of  December 31,  2005,  will
mature in 2007 and 2012, respectively. 

The following summarizes our outstanding convertible subordi-

nated debt as of December 31, 2005: 

Class

Maturity

Amount Outstanding

Conversion Price 

5% February 2007
3.5% October 2007
3.25% September 2012

$ 36.1 million
$ 66.6 million
$315.0 million

$ 38.36
$ 50.46
$ 21.52

Given our current cash requirements, we forecast that we will
have sufficient cash to meet our net operating expense require-
ments through at least the end of 2007. We plan to continue to
invest in our growth and the need for cash will be dependent upon
the timing of these investments. Our capital needs will depend on
many  factors,  including  continued  progress  in  our  research  and
development arrangements, progress with preclinical and clinical
trials  of  our  proprietary  and  partnered  products,  the  time  and
costs  involved  in  obtaining  regulatory  approvals,  the  costs  of
developing and scaling up manufacturing operations of our tech-
nologies, the timing and cost of our clinical and commercial pro-
duction  facilities,  the  costs  involved  in  preparing,  filing,
prosecuting, maintaining and enforcing patent claims, the need to
acquire licenses to new technologies, and the status of competi-
tive  products.  To  date  we  have  been  primarily  dependent  upon
equity  and  convertible  debt  financings  for  capital  and  have
incurred substantial debt as a result of our issuances of subordi-
nated notes and debentures that are convertible into our common
stock.  Our  substantial  debt,  the  market  price  of  our  securities,
and  the  general  economic  climate,  among  other  factors,  could
have material consequences for our financial position and could
affect our sources of short-term and long-term funding. There can
be no assurance that additional funds, if and when required, will
be available to us on favorable terms, if at all. 

The following is a summary of our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2005 (in thousands):

Obligations
Long-term debt, including interest
Capital leases, including interest
Operating leases
Purchase commitments(1)
Other

Payments due by period

Total

<=1 yr
2006

2-3 yrs
2007-2008

3-5 yrs
2009-2010

2011+

$497,773 
45,750 
19,743 
59,798 
2,739 

$118,142 
3,916 
3,787 
59,798 
1,494 

$23,681 
8,063 
7,254 

—   

1,245 

$20,475 
8,276 
5,058 

$335,475 
25,495 
3,644 

—   
—   

—   
—   

$625,803 

$187,137 

$40,243 

$33,809 

$364,614 

Note: The above table does not include certain commitments and contingencies which are discussed in detail in footnote 9 to the audited financial statements for the year ended December 31,
2005. The above table also does not include $9.2 million non-interest bearing loan from Pfizer Inc, which is contingently payable upon commercial launch of Exubera® (see note 8). 

(1) Substantially all of this amount had been ordered on definitive purchase orders as of December 31, 2005, but could be canceled by us at any time. If canceled, we could be charged

restocking and/or cancellation fees up to 25%. 

26

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 27

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES 
OF MARKET RISK 

Interest Rate Risk 

The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve
principal while at the same time maximizing yields without signifi-
cantly increasing risk. To achieve this objective, we invest in highly
liquid  and  high  quality  debt  securities.  Our  investments  in  debt
securities are subject to interest rate risk. To minimize the expo-
sure  due  to  an  adverse  shift  in  interest  rates,  we  invest  in  short
term securities and maintain a weighted average maturity of one
year or less. 

A  hypothetical  50  basis  point  increase  in  interest  rates  would
result in an approximate $1.1 million decrease, less than 1%, in the
fair value of our available-for-sale securities at December 31, 2005.
This potential change is based on sensitivity analyses performed
on  our  investment  securities  at  December 31,  2004.  Actual
results may differ materially. The same hypothetical 50 basis point
increase in interest rates would have resulted in an approximate
$1.2 million decrease, less than 1%, in the fair value of our avail-
able-for-sale securities at December 31, 2004. 

Foreign Currency Risk 

Our  operations  include  research  and  development,  manufac-
turing, and sales activities in the U.S. and Europe. As a result, our
financial results could be significantly affected by factors such as
changes in foreign currency exchange rates or economic condi-
tions  in  the  foreign  markets  in  which  we  have  exposure.  Our
results of operations are exposed to changes in exchange rates
between the U.S. dollar and various foreign currencies, most sig-
nificantly the British Pound. 

To  limit  our  economic  exposure  to  foreign  currency  exchange
rate  fluctuations  with  respect  to  British  Pounds,  we  periodically
purchase British Pounds on the spot market and hold in a U.S.
bank account. At December 31, 2005 and 2004, we held British
Pounds  valued  at  approximately  $1.3  million  and  $8.4  million,
respectively, in a U.S. bank account, using the exchange rate as
of  period  end.  This  amount  is  included  in  cash  on  our  balance
sheet. During the year ended December 31, 2005, an immaterial
amount  of  losses  resulting  from  revaluing  British  Pounds  at  the
current exchange rate were included in other income (expense).
As part of our risk management strategy, we may decide to use
derivative instruments, including forwards, foreign currency swaps
and  options  to  hedge  certain  foreign  currency  and  interest  rate
exposures, however, to date we have not entered into any such
derivative  instruments.  We  do  not  use  derivative  contracts  for
speculative purposes. 

A  hypothetical  10%  increase  in  the  U.S.  dollar  relative  to  the
British Pound as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively,
would have resulted in an additional $0.1 million and $0.7 million
of  foreign  exchange  loss  on  the  British  Pounds  held  in  our
account in the U.S. for the years ended December 31, 2005 and
2004, respectively. 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

27

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 28

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors and Stockholders 
Nektar Therapeutics 

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Nektar Therapeutics as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the
related  consolidated  statements  of  operations,  stockholders’  equity,  and  cash  flows  for  each  of  the  three  years  in  the  period  ended
December 31, 2005. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule listed in the index at 15(a). These financial statements
and  schedule  are  the  responsibility  of  the  Company’s  management.  Our  responsibility  is  to  express  an  opinion  on  these 
financial statements and schedule based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial
position of Nektar Therapeutics at December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2005, in conformity with U. S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also,
in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole,
present fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the effec-
tiveness of Nektar Therapeutics’ internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on the criteria established in
Internal  Control-Integrated  Framework  issued  by  the  Committee  of  Sponsoring  Organizations  of  the  Treadway  Commission  and  our
report dated March 13, 2006, expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

Palo Alto, California 
March 13, 2006 

28

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 29

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

The Board of Directors and Stockholders 
Nektar Therapeutics 

We have audited management’s assessment, included in the accompanying “Management Report on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting,” that Nektar Therapeutics (the “Company”) maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2005, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over
financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express
an opinion on management’s assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the company’s internal control over financial reporting
based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over finan-
cial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial
reporting, evaluating management’s assessment, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and
performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable
basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of
financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting prin-
ciples. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) pro-
vide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with
generally  accepted  accounting  principles,  and  that  receipts  and  expenditures  of  the  company  are  being  made  only  in 
accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding preven-
tion or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections
of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, management’s assessment that Nektar Therapeutics maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2005, is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on the COSO criteria. Also, in our opinion, Nektar Therapeutics main-
tained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on the COSO criteria.
We  also  have  audited,  in  accordance  with  the  standards  of  the  Public  Company  Accounting  Oversight  Board  (United  States), 
the consolidated balance sheets of Nektar Therapeutics as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements 
of  operations,  stockholders’  equity,  and  cash  flows  for  each  of  the  three  years  in  the  period  ended  December  31,  2005,  of  Nektar
Therapeutics and our report dated March 13, 2006, expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

Palo Alto, California 
March 13, 2006 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

29

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 30

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

As Nektar’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we are responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal con-
trol  over  financial  reporting  (as  defined  in  Rule 13a-l5(f)  under  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934).  Our  internal  control  system 
is designed to provide reasonable assurance to management, users of our financial statements and our board of directors regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and preparation of published financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting prin-
ciples (“GAAP”).

A control deficiency exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course
of performing their assigned functions, to prevent or detect misstatements on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a control defi-
ciency, or combination of control deficiencies, that adversely affects the company’s ability to initiate, authorize, record, process, or report
external  financial  data  reliably  in  accordance  with  generally  accepted  accounting  principles  such  that  there  is  a  more  than 
a remote likelihood that a misstatement of the company’s annual or interim financial statements that is more than inconsequential will
not be prevented or detected. A material weakness is a control deficiency, or combination of control deficiencies, that results in more
than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected.
Our management has assessed our internal control over financial reporting using the criteria issued in the report Internal Control—
Integrated Framework by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this assessment, our
management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2005.

Our independent registered public accounting firm has issued an attestation report on management’s assessment of our internal con-

trol over financial reporting which is included elsewhere herein.

30

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 31

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(In thousands, except per share information) 

December 31, 

ASSETS
Current assets: 

Cash and cash equivalents
Short-term investments
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts and sales 

returns of $70 and $43 at December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. 

Inventory
Other current assets

Total current assets

Long-term investments
Property and equipment, net
Goodwill
Other intangible assets, net
Other assets

Total assets

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY 
Current liabilities: 

Accounts payable
Accrued expenses
Other liabilities
Interest payable
Capital lease obligations
Deferred revenue

Total current liabilities

Convertible subordinated notes and debentures
Capital lease obligations — noncurrent
Other long-term liabilities
Accrued rent
Commitments and contingencies 
Stockholders’ equity: 

Preferred stock, 10,000 shares authorized 
Series A, $0.0001 par value: 3,100 shares designated; no shares issued 

or outstanding at December 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004.

Convertible Series B, $0.0001 par value: 40 shares designated; 20 shares issued 
and outstanding at December 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004; Liquidation 
preference of $19,945 at December 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004.

Common stock, $0.0001 par value; 300,000 authorized; 87,707 shares 

and 84,572 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2005 and 
December 31, 2004, respectively.

Capital in excess of par value
Deferred compensation
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
Accumulated deficit

Total stockholders’ equity

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity

See accompanying notes. 

2005

2004

$

261,273
214,928

$

32,064
211,670

8,205
18,627
16,810

519,843

90,222
142,127
78,431
13,452
14,479

12,842
10,691
12,266

279,533

175,006
151,247
130,120
6,456
2,559

$

858,554

$

744,921

$

18,895
20,988
9,952
3,791
482
15,487

69,595

417,653
20,276
21,810
2,409

$

7,141
15,065
15
2,010
1,532
29,890

55,653

173,949
23,568
22,292
2,117

—

—

—

—

9
1,233,690
(2,949)
(1,707)
(902,232)

326,811

8
1,187,575
(2,764)
(356)
(717,121)

467,342

$

858,554

$

744,921

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

31

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 32

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations

(in thousands, except per share information) 

Years ended December 31,

Revenue: 

Contract research revenue
Product sales and royalty revenue
Exubera® commercialization readiness revenue

Total revenue
Operating costs and expenses: 

Cost of goods sold
Exubera® commercialization readiness costs
Research and development
General and administrative
In process research and development — Aerogen
Amortization of other intangible assets
Impairment of long lived assets

Total operating costs and expenses

Loss from operations
Loss on extinguishment of debt
Other income (expense), net
Interest income
Interest expense

Loss before provision for income taxes
Provision for income taxes

Net loss

Basic and diluted net loss per share

Shares used in computing basic and diluted net loss per share

See accompanying notes. 

2005

2004

2003

$

81,602
29,366
15,311

$

89,185
25,085
—

$

78,962
27,295
—

126,279

114,270

106,257

23,728
12,268
151,659
43,852
7,859
4,206
65,340

308,912

(182,633)
(303)
(1,249)
13,022
(14,085)

(185,248)
137

(185,111)

(2.15)

85,915

$

$

19,798
—
133,523
30,967
—
3,924
—

188,212

(73,942)
(9,258)
296
6,602
(25,747)

(102,049)
163

(101,886)

(1.30)

78,461

$

$

14,678
—
122,149
29,966
—
4,219
—

171,012

(64,755)
12,018 
983
5,360
(19,327)

(65,721)
(169)

(65,890)

(1.18)

55,821

$

$

32

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 33

Consolidated Statement of Stockholders’ Equity  

(in thousands)

Preferred Shares
Amount
Shares Paid In

Common Shares

Shares

Par Value

Capital In
Excess of
Par Value

Accumulated 
Other

Deferred
Compensation

Comprehensive Accumulated
Income/(Loss)

Deficit

Total
Stockholders’
Equity

Balance at December 31, 2002
Common stock issued upon 
exercise of stock options

Premium associated with newly issued 

convertible subordinated notes 
(as restated)

Compensation in connection with stock 

40

—

— 55,553

$6

$ 754,680

$ (239)

$ 1,668

$(549,345) $ 206,770

—

362 —

1,959

—

—

—

1,959

19,208

19,208

options granted to consultants

—

—

— —

178

—

—

—

178

Compensation in connection 

with severance

Shares issued for ESPP
Shares issued for retirement plans
Amortization of deferred compensation
Other comprehensive income/(loss)
Net loss

Comprehensive loss

—
—
—
—
—

—

—
—
—
—
—

—

140  —
142  —
— —
— —
— —

— —

677
595 
1,203 
—

—

—

Balance at December 31, 2003

40  — 56,197 

6 

778,500 

Common stock issued upon 
exercise of stock options 

—

Common stock issued in secondary 

offering net of issuance costs of $3,088 —

Conversion of convertible subordinated 

—

—

1,817 —

13,665 

9,500

1

196,411

debentures net of issuance 
costs of $2,315

Preferred stock purchased by Enzon, Inc
Compensation in connection with stock 

options granted to consultants

Compensation in connection 

with severance

Amortization of deferred compensation
Shares issued for ESPP
Shares issued for retirement plans
Exercise of warrants
Tax benefit related to employee 

stock option exercises

Other comprehensive income/(loss)
Net loss

Comprehensive loss

—
(20) —

— 15,974 

1
880  —

—

—
—
—
—
—

—
—
—

—

—
—
—
—
—

—
—
—

— —

— —
— —
126  —
66  —
12 —

— —
— —
— —

191,281
—

678

247
3,902
1,285
1,158
—

448
—
—

—
—
201 
—
—

—

(38)

—

—

—
—

—

—
(2,726)
—
—
—

—
—
—

—
—
—
(710)
—

—

958 

—

—

—
—

—

—
—
—
—
—

—
—
—
—
(65,890)

677
595
1,203
201 
(710)
(65,890)

—

(66,600)

(615,235)

164,191

—

—

—
—

—

—
—
—
—
—

13,665

196,412

191,282
—

678

247
1,176
1,285
1,158
—

448
(1,314) 
(101,886)

(103,200)

—
(1,314)
—

—
—
(101,886)

Balance at December 31, 2004 

20  — 84,572 

8

1,187,575

(2,764)

(356)

(717,121)

467,342

Common stock issued upon 
exercise of stock options 

—

Common stock issued in secondary 

offering net of issuance costs of $427 —

Compensation in connection with stock 

options granted to consultants

Amortization of deferred compensation
Shares issued for ESPP
Shares issued for retirement plans
Other comprehensive income/(loss)
Net loss

—
—
—
—
—
—

—

—

—
—
—
—
—
—

Comprehensive loss

1,015 —

9,621

1,891 

1 

31,563

— —
34 —
108 —
87 —
— —
— —

208
2,039
1,239
1,445
—
—

—

—

—
(185)
—
—
—
—

—

—

—
—
—
—
(1,351)
—

—

—

9,621

31,564

—
—
—
—
—
(185,111)

208
1,854
1,239
1,445
(1,351)
(185,111)

(186,462)

Balance at December 31, 2005

20

— 87,707

$9

$1,233,690

$(2,949)

$(1,707)

$(902,232) $ 326,811

See accompanying notes. 

N E K T A R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

33

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 34

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows 

(in thousands)

Years ended December 31, 

Cash flows used in operating activities: 
Net loss
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: 

Depreciation
Amortization of other intangible assets
Amortization of debt issuance costs
Amortization of deferred compensation
Amortization of gain related to sale of building
Loss on termination of capital lease
Non-cash compensation for employee retirement plans
Non-cash compensation for employee severance
Stock-based compensation for services rendered
Gain (loss) on sale or disposal of assets
Loss(Gain) on early extinguishment of debt
Increase in provision for doubtful accounts and sales returns reserve
Tax benefit related to employee stock option exercises
In process research and development
Impairment of long lived assets
Changes in assets and liabilities:

Decrease (increase) in trade accounts receivable
Increase in inventories
Decrease (increase) in prepaids and other assets
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable
Increase (decrease) in accrued expenses
Increase (decrease) in interest payable
Increase (decrease) in deferred revenue
Increase (decrease) in other liabilities

Net cash used in operating activities

Cash flows from investing activities:
Purchases of short-term investments
Sales of short-term investments
Maturities of investments
Purchase of long-term investments
Business acquisition, net of cash acquired
Sales of long-term investments
Purchases of property and equipment
Disposal of property and equipment
Purchase of building, net
Proceeds from interest in partnership

Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities

Cash flows from financing activities:

Proceeds from debt and capital lease financing
Payments of loan and capital lease obligations
Proceeds from convertible subordinated notes
Repurchase of convertible subordinated notes
Issuance of common stock, net of issuance costs
Issuance of common stock related to employee stock purchase plan
Issuance of common stock related to employee stock option exercises

Net cash provided by financing activities

Effect of exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year

Cash and cash equivalents at end of year 

See accompanying notes. 

34

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

2005

2004

2003 

$ (185,111)

$ (101,886)

$  (65,890)

19,190
4,904
1,217
1,854
(934)
1,136
1,445
—
208
—
303
27
—
7,859
65,340 

6,017
(7,420)
(7,118)
10,329
5,259
1,781
(7,174)
2,890

12,557
4,507
947
1,176
—
—
1,158
247
678
(462)
9,258
(659)
448
—
—

(6,032)
(2,132)
(4,399)
(683)
(2,520)
(426)
11,341 
(1,260)

(77,998)

(78,142)

(234,991)
88,950
227,113
—
(30,714)
—
(17,955)
—
—
—

32,403

261
(2,517)
305,645 
(70,964)
31,564
1,239
9,621

274,849

(45)
229,209
32,064

(534,689)
165,077 
220,260 
(28)
—
12,470 
(24,241)
—
(2,953)
22,450 

(141,654)

4,399 
(7,971)
—
(376)
196,412 
1,285 
13,665 

207,414

—
(12,382)
44,446

12,279
4,507
1,430
201
—
—
1,203
677
178
(92)
(12,018)
69
—
—
—

(1,852)
(2,250)
1,708 
(581)
(11,361)
(1,326)
(3,367)
284 

(76,201)

(283,451)
118,616
190,351
(14,492)
—
2,050
(18,746)
92
—
—

(5,580)

12,363 
(3,537)
106,100
(16,180)
—
595
1,959

101,300

—
19,519
24,927

$ 261,273

$   32,064

$ 44,446

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 35

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 

NOTE 1 — ORGANIZATION AND SUMMARY 
OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES 

Organization and Basis of Presentation 

We are a biopharmaceutical company developing breakthrough
products  that  make  a  difference  in  patients’  lives.  We  create 
differentiated,  innovative  products  by  applying  our  drug  delivery
technologies to established or novel medicines. Our leading tech-
nologies are Nektar Pulmonary Technology and Nektar Advanced
PEGylation  Technology.  Nine  products  using  these  technologies
have received regulatory approval in the U.S. or the EU. Our two
technology platforms are the basis of nearly all of the partnered
and  proprietary  products  we  currently  have  in  preclinical  and 
clinical development. We are also engaged in exploratory devel-
opment with other early stage technologies. 

We create or enable breakthrough products in two ways. First,
we  develop  products  in  collaboration  with  pharmaceutical  and
biotechnology  companies  that  seek  to  improve  and  differentiate
their products. Second, we apply our technologies to established
medicines  to  create  and  develop  our  own  differentiated,  propri-
etary  products.  Our  proprietary  products  are  designed  to  target
serious diseases in novel ways. We believe our proprietary prod-
ucts  have  the  potential  to  raise  the  standards  of  current  patient
care by improving efficacy, safety, and/or ease-of-use. 

Reclassification 

Subsequent  to  the  filing  of  our  2004  Annual  Report  on  Form
10-K, additional clarification was provided regarding the financial
statement classification of auction rate securities held as invest-
ments. Pursuant to this guidance, auction rate securities are not
to be classified as cash and cash equivalents. We invest in auc-
tion  rate  securities  as  part  of  our  cash  management  strategy.
These investments, which we have historically classified as cash
and  cash  equivalents  because  of  the  short  time  frame  between
auction  periods,  have  been  reclassified  as  short-term  invest-
ments.  We  have  reclassified  $72.4  million  and  $19.6  million  of
auction rate securities from cash equivalents to short-term invest-
ments as of December 31, 2004 and 2003. There was no impact
on  the  Consolidated  Statements  of  Operations  or  total  current
assets  as  a  result  of  the  reclassification  for  the  years  ended
December 31,  2004  or  2003.  The  impact  on  the  Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows was an increase of $52.7 million and
$9.7 million in cash used in investing activities for the years ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. This reclassification
did not result in any change to our revenue, total current assets,
or net loss for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 or
for  any  quarterly  period  during  the  years  ended  December 31,
2004 and 2003. 

Use of Estimates 

The  preparation  of  financial  statements  in  conformity  with
accounting  principles  generally  accepted  in  the  United  States
requires  management  to  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. Actual results could differ from those
estimates. 

Principles of Consolidation 

Our consolidated financial statements include the financial posi-
tion and results of operations and cash flows of our wholly-owned
subsidiaries: Nektar Therapeutics AL, Corporation (“Nektar AL”),
formerly  Shearwater  Corporation;  Nektar  Therapeutics  UK,  Ltd.
(“Nektar  UK”),  formerly  Bradford  Particle  Design  Ltd,  Nektar
Mountain View (formerly Aerogen, Inc), Nektar Therapeutics (India)
Private Limited, and Inhale Therapeutic Systems Deutschland GmbH
(“Inhale Germany”). As of December 31, 2003 our consolidated
financial  statements  also  included  the  financial  statements  of
Inhale  201  Industrial  Road,  L.P.,  a  real  estate  partnership  in 
San Carlos,  California  and  Shearwater  Polymers,  LLC,  a  real
estate partnership in Alabama. As of September 30, 2004, these
real  estate  partnerships  were  dissolved  and  are  no  longer
included in our consolidated financial statements (see note 13). All
intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in
consolidation. 

Our consolidated financial statements are denominated in U.S.
dollars.  Accordingly,  changes  in  exchange  rates  between  the
applicable  foreign  currency  and  the  U.S.  dollar  will  affect  the
translation  of  each  foreign  subsidiary’s  financial  results  into  U.S.
dollars for purposes of reporting our consolidated financial results.
The  process  by  which  each  foreign  subsidiary’s  financial  results
are  translated  into  U.S.  dollars  is  as  follows:  income  statement
accounts are translated at average exchange rates for the period;
balance  sheet  asset  and  liability  accounts  are  translated  at  end 
of period exchange rates; and equity accounts are translated at
historical exchange rates. Translation of the balance sheet in this
manner  results  in  an  accumulated  other  comprehensive  gain
(loss) in the stockholders’ equity section. To date, such cumula-
tive translation adjustments have not been material to our consol-
idated financial position. 

Significant Concentrations 

Cash  equivalents  and  short-term  investments  are  financial
instruments that potentially subject us to concentration of risk to
the extent of the amounts recorded in the consolidated balance
sheet. We limit our concentration of risk by diversifying our invest-
ment  amount  among  a  variety  of  industries  and  issuers  and  by
limiting  the  average  maturity  to  approximately  one  year  or  less.
Our  professional  portfolio  managers  adhere  to  this  investment
policy as approved by our Board of Directors. 

Our customers are primarily pharmaceutical and biotechnology
companies that are located in the U.S. and Europe. Our account
receivable balance contains trade receivables from product sales
and collaborative research agreements. At December 31, 2005,
two  customers  represented  49%  and  10%  of  our  accounts
receivable, respectively, and at December 31, 2004, four different
customers represented 25%, 23%, 16%, and 10% of our accounts

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

35

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 36

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

receivable,  respectively.  We  provide  for  a  general  allowance  for
doubtful accounts by reserving for specifically identified doubtful
accounts plus a percentage of past due amounts. We have not
experienced significant credit losses from our accounts receivable
or  collaborative  research  agreements,  and  none  is  currently
expected.  We  perform  a  regular  review  of  our  customer’s  pay-
ment history and associate credit risks and do not require collat-
eral from our customers. 

In  addition,  we  are  dependent  on  our  partners,  vendors  and
contract  manufacturers  to  provide  raw  materials,  drugs,  and
devices of appropriate quality and reliability and to meet applicable
regulatory requirements. Consequently, in the event that supplies
are  delayed  or  interrupted  for  any  reason,  our  ability  to  develop
our  products  could  be  impaired,  which  could  have  a  material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operation. 

We are dependent on Pfizer Inc as the source of a significant
proportion of our revenue. Contract research revenue from Pfizer
Inc represented 64%, 61% and 61% of our revenue for the years
ended  December 31,  2005,  2004  and  2003,  respectively.
Deferred  revenue  from  Pfizer  Inc  represented  42%  and  76%  of
deferred  revenue  as  of  December 31,  2005  and  2004,  respec-
tively.  The  termination  of  this  collaboration  arrangement  could
have a material adverse effect on our financial position and results
of operations. No other single customer represented 10% or more
of our total revenues for any of the three years ended December
31, 2005, 2004, or 2003. 

Should the Pfizer Inc collaboration be discontinued during the
launch  of  Exubera,® we  will  need  to  find  alternative  funding
sources  to  replace  the  collaboration  revenue  and  will  need  to
reassess  the  realizability  of  assets  capitalized.  Additionally,  we
may have contingent payments to our contract manufacturers to
reimburse them for their capital outlay to the extent that they can-
not  re-deploy  their  assets  and  may  incur  additional  liabilities.  At
the  present  time,  it  is  not  possible  to  estimate  the  loss  that  will
occur as a result of these obligations should there be a delay in
the launch of Exubera.®

Recent Accounting Pronouncements 

In  November  2005,  the  FASB  released  FASB  Staff  Position
(“FSP”) No. FAS 115-1 and FAS 124-1, “The Meaning of Other-
Than-Temporary  Impairment  and  Its  Application  to  Certain
Investments.” This FSP, effective January 1, 2006, provides account-
ing guidance regarding the determination of when an impairment
of  debt  and  equity  securities  should  be  considered  other-than-
temporary, as well as the subsequent accounting for these invest-
ments.  The  adoption  of  this  FSP  is  not  expected  to  have  a
material impact on our financial position or results of operations. 
In  May  2005,  the  Financial  Accounting  Standards  Board
(“FASB”)  released  Statement  of  Financial  Accounting  Standard
(“SFAS”) No. 154, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections—a
replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3,
(“FAS  154”).  FAS  154  requires  retrospective  application  to  prior
periods’ financial statements for any change in accounting princi-
ple, unless it is impracticable to determine either the period-spe

36

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

cific effects or the cumulative effect of the change. The statement
defines retrospective application as the application of a different
accounting principle to prior accounting periods as if that princi-
ple  had  always  been  used  or  as  the  adjustment  of  previously
issued  financial  statements  to  reflect  a  change  in  the  reporting
entity. The statement also requires that a change in depreciation,
amortization,  or  depletion  method  for  long-lived,  non-financial
assets  be  accounted  for  as  a  change  in  accounting  estimate
affected by a change in accounting principle. The statement car-
ries forward without change the guidance contained in Opinion 20
for reporting the correction of an error in previously issued finan-
cial statements and a change in accounting estimate. We will be
required to adopt FAS 154 for any accounting changes or correc-
tions of errors on or after January 1, 2006. We do not expect the
adoption  of  FAS  154  to  have  a  material  impact  on  our  consoli-
dated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. 

In  March  2005,  the  SEC  released  Staff  Accounting  Bulletin
(SAB) 107, “Share Based Payment” which provides the SEC staff
position regarding the application of SFAS No. 123R. SAB 107 con-
tains  interpretative  guidance  related  to  the  interaction  between
SFAS No. 123R and certain SEC rules and regulations, as well as
provides the Staff’s views regarding the valuation of share-based
payment arrangements for public companies. SAB 107 also high-
lights the importance of disclosures made related to the account-
ing  for  share-based  payment  transactions.  The  Company  is
currently reviewing the effect of SAB 107 on its condensed con-
solidated financial statements as it prepares to adopt SFAS 123R. 
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(“FASB”) released a revision to Statement of Financial Accounting
Standard  (“SFAS”)  No. 123,  Accounting  for  Stock-Based  Com-
pensation (“FAS 123R”). FAS 123R addresses the accounting for
share-based  payment  transactions  in  which  an  enterprise
receives employee services in exchange for (a) equity instruments
of the enterprise or (b)
liabilities that are based on the fair value of
the enterprise’s equity instruments or that may be settled by the
issuance of such equity instruments. The statement would elimi-
nate the ability to account for share-based compensation trans-
actions using APB Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued
to  Employees,  and  generally  would  require  instead  that  such
transactions  be  accounted  for  using  a  fair-value-based  method.
We have adopted FAS 123R commencing on January 1, 2006.
As a result of our application of FAS 123R, we will have to recog-
nize  substantially  more  compensation  expense.  This  will  have 
a material adverse impact on our financial position and results of
operations. 

In  December  2004,  the  FASB  issued  FASB  Staff  Position  No.
FAS 109-1, Application of FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting
for  Income  Taxes,  to  the  Tax  Deduction  on  Qualified  Production
Activities  Provided  by  the  American  Jobs  Creation  Act  of  2004.
Also  in  December  2004,  the  FASB  issued  FASB  Staff  Position 
No.  FAS 109-2,  Accounting  and  Disclosure  Guidance  for  the
Foreign Earnings Repatriation Provision within the American Jobs
Creations Act of 2004. We do not expect the adoption of these
new tax accounting standards to have a material impact on our con-
solidated  financial  position,  results  of  operations,  or  cash  flows. 

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 37

In November 2004, the FASB released SFAS No. 151, Inventory
Costs—An Amendment to ARB No. 43. This Statement amends
the  guidance  in  ARB  No. 43,  Chapter  4,  “Inventory  Pricing,”  to
clarify  the  accounting  for  abnormal  amounts  of  idle  facility
expense,  freight,  handling  costs,  and  wasted  material.  This
Statement  requires  that  those  items  be  recognized  as  current-
period  charges  regardless  of  whether  they  meet  the  criterion  of
“so abnormal” as defined by ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, Inventory
Pricing. In addition, this Statement requires that allocation of fixed
production overheads to the costs of conversion be based on the
normal  capacity  of  the  production  facilities.  We  have  adopted
SFAS No. 151 commencing on January 1, 2006. As a result of
our  application  of  FASB  No. 151  we  will  expense  more  of  our
overhead costs as period expenses. 

Cash, Cash Equivalents and Investments 

We consider all highly liquid investments with a maturity at the
date of purchase of three months or less to be cash equivalents.
Cash  and  cash  equivalents  include  demand  deposits  held  in
banks, interest bearing money market funds, commercial paper,
federal  and  municipal  government  securities,  and  repurchase
agreements. 

Investments  consist  of:  1)  auction  rate  securities  with  varying
maturities,  and  2)  federal  and  municipal  government  securities,
corporate bonds, and commercial paper with A1, F1, or P1 short-
term  ratings  and  A  or  better  long-term  ratings  with  remaining
maturities  at  date  of  purchase  of  greater  than  90  days.
Investments with maturities greater than one year are classified as
long-term and represent investments of cash that are reasonably
expected  to  be  realized  in  cash  and  are  available  for  use,  if
needed, in current operations. 

At  December 31,  2005,  all  investments  are  designated  as
available-for-sale  and  are  carried  at  fair  value,  with  unrealized
gains and losses, net of tax, reported in stockholders’ equity as
accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). Investments are
adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts
to  maturity.  Such  amortization  is  included  in  interest  income.
Realized  gains  and  losses  and  declines  in  value  judged  to  be
other-than-temporary  on  available-for-sale  securities,  if  any,  are
included in other income (expense). The cost of securities sold is
based  on  the  specific  identification  method.  Interest  and  divi-
dends on securities classified as available-for-sale are included in
interest income. 

At  December 31,  2005  and  2004,  we  had  letter  of  credit
arrangements  with  certain  financial  institutions  and  vendors
including  our  landlord  totaling  $2.6  million  and  $2.2  million,
respectively. These letters of credit are secured by investments in
similar amounts. 

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The  carrying  amounts  of  certain  of  the  Company’s  financial
instruments,  including  cash  and  cash  equivalents,  accounts
receivable,  accounts  payable,  accrued  compensation  and  other
accrued  liabilities,  approximate  fair  value  because  of  their  short
term maturities. Fair value for investments in public companies is
determined using quoted market prices for those securities. 

Inventories 

Inventories consist primarily of raw materials, work-in-process
and  finished  goods  of  Nektar  San  Carlos,  Nektar  Al,  Nektar
Mountain View, and Nektar Ireland. Inventories are stated at the
lower  of  cost  (first-in,  first-out  method)  or  market.  Cost  is  com-
puted using standard cost, which approximates actual costs on a
first-in, first-out basis. Inventories are reflected net of a reserve of
$3.1 million and $3.2 million as of December 31, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Reserves are determined using specific identification
plus  an  estimated  reserve  against  finished  goods  for  potential
defective  or  excess  inventory  based  on  historical  experience. 
The following is a breakdown of net inventory (in thousands): 

December 31, 

Raw material
Work-in-process
Finished goods

Total

2005

2004 

$ 8,050 $ 4,848 
4,552
1,291

2,740
7,837

$18,627 $10,691

Property and Equipment 

Property  and  equipment  are  stated  at  cost.  Major  improve-
ments  are  capitalized,  while  maintenance  and  repairs  are
expensed  when  incurred.  Laboratory  and  other  equipment  are
depreciated  using  the  straight-line  method  generally  over  esti-
mated  useful  lives  of  three  to  seven  years.  Leasehold  improve-
ments  and  buildings  are  depreciated  using  the  straight-line
method over the shorter of the estimated useful life or the remain-
ing term of the lease. Buildings are depreciated using the straight-
line method over the estimated useful life of twenty years. 

Certain  amounts  have  been  expensed  for  plant  design,  engi-
neering  and  validation  costs  based  on  our  evaluation  that  it  is
unclear  whether  such  costs  are  ultimately  recoverable.  These
amounts  will  become  recoverable  when  Exubera® commercial
production commences (see note 3). 

Goodwill 

Goodwill  is  tested  for  impairment  at  least  annually  or  on  an
interim  basis  if  an  event  occurs  or  circumstances  change  that
would more-likely-than-not reduce the fair value below our carry-
ing value. The impairment tests for goodwill are performed at the
business  unit  level,  which  we  have  identified  as  our  pulmonary
and proprietary business unit, our advanced pegylation technol-
ogy business unit and our super critical fluids business unit. We
performed our annual impairment test for the respective business
unit  and  determined  that  the  undiscounted  cash  flow  from  the
long-range  forecast  for  the  pulmonary  business  unit  and
advanced pegylation business unit exceeds the carrying amount
of our goodwill. The goodwill and certain long lived assets asso-
ciated  with  the  supercritical  fluids  business  unit  was  deemed  to
be impaired as of December 31, 2005 (see note 5). 

Goodwill is tested for impairment using a two-step approach.
The first step is to compare our fair value to our net asset value,
including goodwill. If the fair value of our net assets is greater than
our net book value, goodwill is not considered impaired and the
second step is not required. If the fair value is less than our net
asset value, the second step of the impairment test measures the
amount of the impairment loss, if any. The second step of the impair-

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

37

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 38

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

ment test is to compare the implied fair value of goodwill to its carry-
ing amount. If the carrying amount of goodwill exceeds its implied
fair value, an impairment loss is recognized equal to that excess. 
The implied fair value of goodwill is calculated in the same man-
ner that goodwill is calculated in a business combination, whereby
the fair value is allocated to all of the assets and liabilities (including
any unrecognized intangible assets) as if they had been acquired
in  a  business  combination  and  the  fair  value  was  the  purchase
price. The excess “purchase price” over the amounts assigned to
assets  and  liabilities  would  be  the  implied  fair  value  of  goodwill. 

Other Intangible Assets 

Acquired  technology  and  other  intangible  assets  with  definite
useful lives are amortized on a straight-line basis over their esti-
mated useful lives, which we currently estimate to be a period of
five  to  seven  years.  Acquired  technology  and  other  intangible
assets are tested for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate the carrying amount of the assets may not
be recoverable from future undiscounted cash flows. If impaired,
asset values are adjusted to fair value. Acquired technology and
other intangible assets include proprietary technology, intellectual
property, and supplier and customer relationships acquired from
third parties or in business combinations. 

We periodically evaluate whether changes have occurred that
would  require  revision  of  the  remaining  estimated  useful  lives  of
these  assets  or  otherwise  render  the  assets  unrecoverable.  If
such an event occurred, we would determine whether the other
intangibles are impaired. To date, no such impairment losses have
been recorded. 

Derivative Instruments 

We are exposed to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations
and interest rate changes in the normal course of our business.
As part of our risk management strategy, we may use derivative
instruments,  including  forwards,  swaps  and  options  to  hedge 
certain  foreign  currency  and  interest  rate  exposures.  We  do  not
use  derivative  contracts  for  speculative  purposes.  To  date,  we
have not entered into any such derivative instruments other than
the interest rate swap discussed below which was accounted for
in  accordance  with  SFAS  133,  Accounting  for  Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities.

During  part  of  2004,  we  had  a  bank  loan  which  had  been
secured by one of our Nektar AL facilities in Alabama. This loan
originally had a variable rate of interest tied to the LIBOR index.
We  entered  into  an  interest  rate  swap  agreement  to  limit  our
exposure  to  fluctuations  in  U.S.  interest  rates.  The  interest  rate
swap  agreement  effectively  converts  a  portion  of  our  debt  to  a
fixed rate basis, thus reducing the impact of interest rate changes
on future interest expense. The swap is designated a cash flow
hedge. Under the terms of our swap arrangement, we paid an ini-
tial  effective  interest  rate  of  5.17%.  This  rate  was  variable  on  a
monthly basis based on changes in the LIBOR index, but only to
a maximum of 7.05%. 

38

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

In September 2004, we retired the bank loan after paying the
remaining  principal  balance  of  $5.6  million.  We  also  retired  the
interest rate swap agreement by paying $0.3 million to the lender,
representing  the  fair  value  of  this  instrument  on  that  date  which
was  equal  to  the  swap  liability  recorded  on  our  books.  This
amount was charged to interest expense. 

To limit our exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctu-
ations  with  respect  to  British  Pounds,  we  have  periodically  pur-
chased  British  Pounds  on  the  spot  market  and  hold  in  a  U.S.
bank  account.  At  December 31,  2005,  we  held  British  Pounds
valued at approximately $1.3 million in a U.S. bank account, using
the exchange rate as of period end. Such amount is included in
cash on our balance sheet. During the year ended December 31,
2005,  an  immaterial  amount  of  losses  resulting  from  revaluing
British  Pounds  at  the  current  exchange  rate  were  included  in
other income/(expense). 

Comprehensive Loss 

Comprehensive loss is comprised of net loss and other com-
prehensive  loss.  Other  comprehensive  gain  included  unrealized
gains  (losses)  on  available-for-sale  securities,  translation  adjust-
ments, and unrealized gains (losses) on available-for-sale securi-
ties using the specific identification method. The comprehensive
loss  consists  of  the  following  components  net  of  related  tax
effects (in thousands): 

Years ended December 31, 

Net loss, as reported
Change in net unrealized 

gains/(losses) on 
available-for-sale securities
Net unrealized (gains)/losses 
reclassified into earnings

Translation adjustment

2005

2004 

2003 

$(185,111)

$(101,886) $(65,890)

(101)

(2,129)

(975)

—
(1,250)

23 
792

(48)
313 

Total comprehensive loss

$(186,462)

$(103,200) $(66,600)

The components of accumulated other comprehensive loss are

as follows (in thousands): 

December 31, 

Unrealized gains/(losses) on 
available-for-sale securities

Translation adjustment

Total accumulated other 
comprehensive income

2005

2004 

$(1,957)
250

$(1,856)
1,500 

$(1,707)

$ (356)

Stock-Based Compensation 

For  the  period  ended  December  31,  2005,  we  applied  the
recognition and measurement principles of APB Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related interpre-
tations  in  accounting  for  those  plans.  Under  this  opinion,  no
stock-based  employee  compensation  expense  is  charged  for
options that were granted at an exercise price that was equal to
the market value of the underlying common stock on the date of
grant. Stock compensation costs are immediately recognized to
the extent the exercise price is below the fair value on the date of
grant and no future vesting criteria exist. 

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 39

For stock awards issued below our market price on the grant
date,  we  record  deferred  compensation  representing  the  differ-
ence between the price per share of stock award issued and the
fair value of the Company’s common stock at the time of issuance
or  grant,  and  we  amortize  this  amount  over  the  related  vesting
periods on a straight-line basis. 

Pro forma information regarding net loss and net loss per share
required by SFAS 123, as amended by SFAS 148, regarding the
fair  value  for  employee  options  and  employee  stock  purchase
plan  shares  was  estimated  at  the  date  of  grant  using  a  Black-
Scholes option valuation model with the following weighted-aver-
age assumptions: 

December 31,

Risk-free interest rate
Dividend yield
Volatility factor
Weighted average expected life

2005

4.0%
0.0%

2004

2003

3.3%
0.0%

2.8%
0.0%

0.710
4.5 years

0.707
5.0 years

0.744
5.0 years 

The Black-Scholes options valuation model was developed for
use in estimating the fair value of traded options, which have no
vesting  restrictions  and  are  fully  transferable.  In  addition,  option
valuation  models  require  the  input  of  highly  subjective  assump-
tions  including  the  expected  stock  price  volatility.  We  have  pre-
sented the pro forma net loss and pro forma basic and diluted net
loss per common share using the assumptions noted above. 

The following table illustrates the effect on net loss and net loss
per share as if we had applied the fair value recognition provisions
of SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, to
stock-based employee compensation (in thousands, except per
share information): 

Years ended December 31,

2005

Revised
2004

Revised
2003

Net loss, as reported
Add: stock-based employee 
compensation included 
in reported net loss

Deduct: total stock-based 
employee compensation 
expense determined under fair 
value methods for all awards

Net loss, pro forma

Net loss per share

$ (185,111)

$ (101,886)

$ (65,890)

1,854 

1,423 

878 

(21,986)

(25,183)

(27,468)

$ (205,243)

$ (125,646)

$ (92,480)

Basic and diluted, as reported
Basic and diluted, pro forma

$
$

(2.15)
(2.39)

$
$

(1.30) $
(1.60) $

(1.18)
(1.66)

The  revised  reported  pro  forma  net  loss  for  the  years  ended
December 31, 2004 and 2003, has been decreased by $6.0 mil-
lion  and  $6.8 million,  respectively,  for  options  exchanged  under
stock option exchange programs and adjustments from compu-
tational corrections. 

Stock  compensation  expense  for  options  granted  to  non-
employees  has  been  determined  in  accordance  with  SFAS  123
and EITF No. 96-18, Accounting for Equity Instruments That Are
Issued to Other Than Employees for Acquiring, or in conjunction
with Selling, Goods or Services, as the fair value of the consider

ation  received  or  the  fair  value  of  the  equity  instruments  issued,
whichever  is  more  reliably  measured.  The  fair  value  of  options
granted  to  non-employees  is  re-measured  as  the  underlying
options vest. 

Revenue Recognition 

We  recognize  revenue  in  accordance  with  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  Staff  Accounting  Bulletin  No. 104,
“Revenue  Recognition  in  Financial  Statements”  (“SAB  104”).
Effective  July 1,  2003,  we  adopted  the  provisions  of  Emerging
Issues Task Force, Issue No. 00-21, “Revenue Arrangements with
Multiple Deliverables.” 

Revenue is recognized when there is persuasive evidence that
an  arrangement  exists,  delivery  has  occurred,  the  price  is  fixed
and  determinable,  and  collectability  is  reasonably  assured.
Allowances are established for uncollectible amounts. 

We enter into collaborative research and development arrange-
ments with pharmaceutical and biotechnology partners that may
involve  multiple  deliverables.  For  multiple-deliverable  arrange-
ments entered into after July 1, 2003 judgment is required in the
areas  of  separability  of  units  of  accounting  and  the  fair  value  of
individual elements. The principles and guidance outlined in EITF
No.  00-21  provide  a  framework  to  (a) determine  whether  an
arrangement  involving  multiple  deliverables  contains  more  than
one unit of accounting, and (b) determine how the arrangement
consideration should be measured and allocated to the separate
units  of  accounting  in  the  arrangement.  Our  arrangements  may
contain  the  following  elements:  collaborative  research,  mile-
stones, manufacturing and supply, royalties and license fees. For
each separate unit of accounting we have objective and reliable
evidence  of  fair  value  using  available  internal  evidence  for  the
undelivered item(s) and our arrangements generally do not con-
tain a general right of return relative to the delivered item. In accor-
dance with the guidance in EITF No. 00-21, the Company uses
the  residual  method  to  allocate  the  arrangement  consideration
when it does not have fair value of a delivered item(s). Under the
residual  method,  the  amount  of  consideration  allocated  to  the
delivered item equals the total arrangement consideration less the
aggregate fair value of the undelivered items. 

Contract  revenue  from  collaborative  research  and  feasibility
agreements is recorded when earned based on the performance
requirements of the contract. Advance payments for research and
development revenue received in excess of amounts earned are
classified as deferred revenue until earned. Revenue from collab-
orative  research  and  feasibility  arrangements  are  recognized  as
the  related  costs  are  incurred.  Amounts  received  under  these
arrangements are generally non-refundable if the research effort is
unsuccessful. 

Payments  received  for  milestones  achieved  are  deferred  and
recorded  as  revenue  ratably  over  the  next  period  of  continued
development. Management makes its best estimate of the period
of time until the next milestone is reached. This estimate affects
the  recognition  of  revenue  for  completion  of  the  previous  mile-
stone. The original estimate is periodically evaluated to determine 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

39

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 40

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

if circumstances have caused the estimate to change and if so,
amortization of revenue is adjusted prospectively. Because there
is no future period of development beyond the final milestone, the
final milestone payment is recognized upon achievement. 

Product sales are derived primarily from cost-plus manufactur-
ing  and  supply  contracts  for  our  PEG  Reagents  with  individual
customers in our industry. Sales terms for specific PEG Reagents
are negotiated in advance. Revenues related to our product sales
are  recorded  in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  the  contracts.
Provisions for potential product returns have been made on a his-
torical trends basis. To date we have not experienced any signifi-
cant returns from our customers. 

Clinical Trial Accruals 

We record accruals for estimated clinical study costs. Most of
our clinical studies are performed by third party contract research
organizations  (CROs).  We  accrue  costs  for  clinical  studies  per-
formed by CROs on a straight-line basis over the service periods
specified  in  the  contracts  and  adjust  our  estimates,  if  required,
based upon our on-going review of the level of effort and costs
actually incurred by the CRO. We validate our accruals quarterly
with  our  vendors  and  perform  detailed  reviews  of  the  activities
related to our significant contracts. Based upon the results of these
validation processes, we assess the appropriateness of our accru-
als and make any adjustments we deem necessary to ensure that
our expenses reflect the actual effort incurred by the CROs. 

In general, our CRO contracts are terminable by us upon writ-
ten  notice  and  we  are  generally  only  liable  for  actual  effort
expended  by  the  CRO  at  any  point  in  time  during  the  contract,
regardless of payment status. Through December 31, 2005, dif-
ferences between actual and estimated activity levels for any par-
ticular  study  were  not  significant  enough  to  require  a  material
adjustment. However, if management does not receive complete
and accurate information from our vendors or has underestimated
activity levels associated with a study at a given point in time, we
would  have  to  record  additional  and  potentially  significant  R&D
expenses in future periods. 

Shipping and Handling Costs 

We record costs related to shipping and handling of product to

customers in cost of goods sold for all periods presented. 

Research and Development 

Research and development costs are expensed as incurred and
include salaries, benefits, and other operating costs such as outside
services,  supplies,  and  allocated  overhead  costs.  We  perform
research and development for our proprietary products and technol-
ogy development and for others pursuant to feasibility agreements
and development and license agreements. For our proprietary prod-
ucts we may invest our own funds without reimbursement from a
collaborative  partner.  Under  our  feasibility  agreements,  we  are
generally  reimbursed  for  the  cost  of  work  performed.  Feasibility
agreements are designed to evaluate the applicability of our tech

nologies to a particular molecule and therefore are generally com-
pleted in less than one year. Under our development and license
agreements, products developed using our technologies may be
commercialized  with  a  collaborative  partner.  Under  these  devel-
opment  and  license  agreements,  we  may  be  reimbursed  for
development costs, may also be entitled to milestone payments
when and if certain development and/or regulatory milestones are
achieved,  and  may  be  compensated  for  the  manufacture  and
supply of clinical and commercial product. We may also receive
royalties on sales of commercial product. All of our research and
development agreements are generally cancelable by the partner
without significant financial penalty. 

From time to time we acquire in-process research and develop-
ment  programs  as  part  of  strategic  business  acquisitions.
Generally, in-process research and development purchased in a
business combination is expensed on the acquisition date prima-
rily because the acquired technology had not yet reached techno-
logical  feasibility  and  had  no  future  alternative  use.  In  the  year
ended December 31, 2005, we recorded a charge of $7.9 million
for in-process research and development costs in connection with
our acquisition of Aerogen. 

Segment Reporting 

We  report  segment  information  in  accordance  with  SFAS  No.
131,  Disclosures  About  Segments  of  an  Enterprise  and  Related
Information. The Company is managed as one business segment.
The  entire  business  is  comprehensively  managed  by  our
Executive Committee that reports to the Chief Executive Officer.
The Executive Committee is our chief operating decision maker.
We  have  multiple  technologies,  all  of  which  are  marketed  to  a
common  customer  base  (pharmaceutical  and  biotechnology
companies  which  are  typically  located  in  the  U.S.  and  Europe).
We  have  three  drug  technology  platforms  that  are  designed  to
improve the performance of molecules and drug delivery. These
platforms represent our business units and are comprised of Nektar
Advanced PEGylation Technology, Nektar Pulmonary Technology
and Nektar Supercritical Fluid Technology, respectively. 

Our  research  revenue  is  derived  primarily  from  clients  in  the
pharmaceutical  and  biotechnology  industries.  Revenue  from
Pfizer Inc represented 64%, 61% and 61% of our revenue for the
years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.
Deferred  revenue  from  Pfizer  Inc  represented  42%,  76%,  and
89% of deferred revenue as of December 31, 2005, 2004, and
2003,  respectively.  Product  sales  relate  to  sale  of  our  manufac-
tured  Nektar  Advanced  PEGylation  Technology  products  by
Nektar AL and approximately $1.6 million of commercial product
sold to Pfizer Inc. 

Our  accounts  receivable  balance  contains  trade  receivables
from  product  sales  and  collaborative  research  agreements.  At
December 31, 2005, two customers represented 48% and 10%
of  our  accounts  receivable,  respectively,  and  at  December 31,
2004, four different customers represented 25%, 23%, 16%, and
10% of our accounts receivable, respectively. 

40

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 41

We primarily receive contract research revenue from, and pro-
vide product sales to, customers located within the United States.
Revenues are derived from customers in the following geographic
areas (in thousands): 

Years ended December 31,

Contract research revenue

United States
All other countries

Total contract research revenue
Product sales and royalty revenues 

United States
European countries
All other countries

Total product sales
Exubera® commercialization

readiness revenue
United States

Total Exubera® commercialization 

readiness revenue

2005

2004

2003

$74,728
6,874

$87,962
1,223

$77,496 
1,466 

$81,602

$89,185

$78,962

$19,449
8,101
1,816

$12,893
10,387 
1,805 

$15,837 
10,260 
1,198 

$29,366 

$25,085

$27,295

$15,311 

$15,311 

$

$

—  $

— 

—  $

— 

The net book value of our other long-lived assets are located in

the following geographic areas (in thousands): 

Years ended December 31, 

United States
United Kingdom
Other European Countries

Total

Net Loss Per Share 

2005

2004

$243,568 $220,714
69,509
159

1,582
3,339

$248,489 $290,382

Basic net loss per share is calculated based on the weighted-
average number of common shares outstanding during the periods
presented, less the weighted-average shares outstanding which
are subject to the Company’s right of repurchase. 

The  following  table  sets  forth  the  computation  of  basic  and
diluted net loss per share (in thousands, except per share data): 

Years ended December 31,

2005

2004

2003

Numerator:
Net loss

Denominator: 

$(185,111) $(101,886) $(65,890)

Weighted average number of 
common shares outstanding

85,915

Net loss per share — basic and diluted $

(2.15) $

78,461

55,821
(1.30) $ (1.18)

Diluted  earnings  per  share  would  give  effect  to  the  dilutive
impact of common stock equivalents which consists of convert-
ible preferred stock and convertible subordinated debt (using the
as-if converted method), and stock options and warrants (using
the  treasury  stock  method).  Potentially  dilutive  securities  have
been excluded from the diluted earnings per share computations
in all years presented as such securities have an anti-dilutive effect
on loss per share due to the Company’s net loss. Potentially dilu-
tive securities included the following (in thousands): 

December 31,

Warrants 
Options and restricted stock units 
Convertible preferred stock 
Convertible debentures and notes 

Total 

2005

2004

2003

36
16,721 
1,023
16,896 

34,676 

36
13,976
875
3,831

18,718

56
14,953
1,755
19,106

35,870

Income Taxes 

We  account  for  income  taxes  under  SFAS  No. 109,
Accounting for Income Taxes. Under SFAS No. 109, the liability
method  is  used  in  accounting  for  income  taxes.  Under  this
method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based
on differences between financial reporting and tax reporting bases
of assets and liabilities and are measured using enacted tax rates
and laws that are expected to be in effect when the differences
are  expected  to  reverse.  Realization  of  deferred  tax  assets  is
dependent upon future earnings, if any, the timing and amount of
which are uncertain. Because of our lack of earnings history, the
net  deferred  tax  assets  for  our  operations  outside  of  Alabama
have been fully offset by a valuation allowance. 

NOTE 2 — FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS 

As of December 31, 2005 and 2004, we held a portfolio exclu-
sively of debt securities. Certain of these securities have a fair value
less than their amortized cost. In accordance with SFAS No. 115,
Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities
and  EITF  03-01,  we  have  recorded  the  difference  between  the
amortized  cost  and  fair  value  as  a  component  of  accumulated
other  comprehensive  income.  Management  has  concluded  that
no impairment should be recognized related to these investments
because the unrealized losses incurred to date are not considered
other than temporary. Management has reached this conclusion
based  upon  its  intention  to  generally  hold  all  debt  investments
with  an  unrealized  loss  until  maturity  at  which  point  they  are
redeemed at full par value, a history of actually holding the major-
ity of our investments to maturity, and our strategy of aligning of
the maturity of our debt investments to meet our cash flow needs.
Therefore,  we  have  the  ability  and  intent  to  hold  all  of  our  debt
investments to maturity. 

We determine the fair value amounts by using available market
information. At December 31, 2005 and 2004, the average port-
folio  duration  was  approximately  one  year,  and  the  contractual
maturity  of  any  single  investment  did  not  exceed  twenty-four
months, with the exception of auction rate securities. Investments
with maturities greater than one year are classified as long-term
investments even though they are reasonably expected to be real-
ized in cash and are available for use in current operations. The
gross  unrealized  gains  on  available  for  sale  securities  at
December 31,  2005  and  2004,  amounted  to  approximately  nil,
respectively.  The  gross  unrealized  losses  on  available  for  sale
securities  at  December 31,  2005  and  2004,  amounted  to
approximately  $2.0  million  and  approximately  $1.9  million,
respectively. As of December 31, 2005, there were 58 securities
that had been in a loss position for approximately twelve months
or more and which had a fair value $103.9 million and an unreal-
ized loss of $0.5 million. As of December 31, 2004, there were 21
securities that had been in a loss position for approximately twelve
months or more and which had a fair value $31.4 million and an
unrealized loss of approximately $0.1 million. 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

41

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 42

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

The following is a summary of operating cash and available-for-sale securities as of December 31, 2005 (in thousands): 

Cash and Available-for-Sale Securities 

Obligations of U.S. government agencies
U.S. corporate commercial paper
Obligations of U.S. corporations
Obligations of non U.S. corporations
Repurchase agreements
Cash and other debt securities

Total Cash and Available-for-Sale Securities

Amounts included in cash and cash equivalents
Amounts included in short-term investments (less than one year to maturity)
Amounts included in long-term investments (one to two years to maturity)

Total Cash and Available-for-Sale Securities

Amortized 
Costs 

$123,679 
179,790 
180,253 
2,983 
64,199 
17,476 

$568,380 

$261,466 
215,942 
90,972 

$568,380 

Gross 
Unrealized 
Gains 

Gross 
Unrealized 
Losses 

Estimated
Fair Value 

$ —   
9 
— 
— 
— 
— 

$ 9 

$ 9 
— 
— 

$ 9 

$ (631)
(202)
(1,125)
(8)
— 
— 

$123,048 
179,597 
179,128 
2,975 
64,199 
17,476 

$(1,966)

$566,423 

$ (202)
(1,014)
(750)

$261,273 
214,928 
90,222 

$(1,966)

$566,423 

The following is a summary of operating cash and available-for-sale securities as of December 31, 2004 (in thousands): 

Amortized 
Costs 

$164,883
1,150
147,114
4,033
14,200
72,350
16,866

$420,596

$ 32,064
212,586
103,596
72,350

$420,596

Gross 
Unrealized 
Gains 

Gross 
Unrealized 
Losses 

Estimated
Fair Value 

$163,961
1,150
146,196
4,017
14,200
72,350
16,866

$ (923)
—
(918)
(16)
—
—
—

$(1,857)

$418,740

$ — $ 32,064
211,670
102,656
72,350

(916)
(941)
—

$(1,857)

$418,740

$ 1
—
—
—
—
—
—

$ 1

$ —
—
1
—

$ 1

NOTE 3 — PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT 

Property  and  equipment  consist  of  the  following  (in  thousands): 

December 31

Laboratory and other equipment
Building and leasehold improvements
Construction-in-progress

Property and equipment at cost

Less: accumulated amortization

and depreciation

Property and equipment, net

2005

2004 

$ 98,771 $ 66,503
86,887
61,525

114,902
15,198

228,871

214,915

(86,744)

(63,668)

$142,127 $151,247

Cash and Available-for-Sale Securities 
Obligations of U.S. government agencies
Obligations of U.S. state and local government agencies
U.S. corporate obligations
Non U.S. corporate obligations
Repurchase agreements
Auction rate securities
Cash

Total Cash and Available-for-Sale Securities

Amounts included in cash and cash equivalents
Amounts included in short-term investments (less than one year to maturity)
Amounts included in long-term investments (one to two years to maturity)
Amounts included in long-term investments (more than 2 years to maturity)

Total Cash and Available-for-Sale Securities

In March 2004, we converted $133.3 million of 3% convertible
subordinated  notes  due  June  2010  into  11.7  million  shares  of
common stock. In connection with the conversion, we agreed to
pay $75.00 per $1,000 of the notes to be converted, for an aggre-
gate  payment  of  approximately  $10.0  million.  This  amount  was
paid through the sale of these held-to-maturity pledged treasury
securities. As a result there were no held-to-maturity securities as
of December 31, 2004. The realized gain on these held-to-matu-
rity securities of the date of sale was less than $0.1 million. 

42

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 43

During the year ended December 31, 2004, we entered into a
redemption agreement with respect to our interest in a real estate
partnership (see note 13). We simultaneously entered into a sale-
leaseback agreement and, in accordance with FAS 98, Account-
ing for Leases, we capitalized the building by recording a capital
lease  asset  and  obligation  equal  to  the  fair  market  value  of  the
leased  asset  of  $25.5  million.  Accumulated  amortization  of  the
building under lease was approximately $2.3 million and $1.1 million
for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Amortization of capital leases is included in depreciation expense. 
Construction-in-progress  includes  assets  associated  with  the
scale-up of our commercial manufacturing operations and capi-
talized interest. 

Depreciation expense for the years ended December 31, 2005,
2004 and 2003 was $19.2 million, $12.6 million and $12.3 million,
respectively. 

In  accordance  with  SFAS  2,  Accounting  for  Research  and
Development Costs, we have expensed certain amounts paid for
plant design, engineering, and validation costs for the automated
assembly line equipment that will be used in connection with the
manufacture  of  the  inhaler  device  for  Exubera® because  such
costs have no alternative future use. The net credit of $0.2 million
recorded in the year ended December 31, 2005 was the result of
$0.5  million  of  expenses  incurred,  offset  by  a  $0.7  million  credit
received  from  our  contract  manufacturer.  The  total  amount
expensed was $1.7 million, and $6.6 million, for the years ended
December 31, 2004, and 2003, respectively. As of December 31,
2005, the capitalized net book value of the automated assembly
line equipment located at our contract manufactures’ sites totals
$22.8 million. These assets are intended to be used in connection
with the manufacture of the inhaler device for Exubera.® The total
amount capitalized amounted to nil, $0.2 million, and $1.4 million
for  the  years  ended  December  31,  2005,  2004,  and  2003,
respectively.  These  amounts  have  been  capitalized  based  upon
our  determination  that  the  related  assets  have  alternative  future
use  and  therefore  have  separate  economic  or  realizable  value.
The depreciation expense related to these assets was $1.0 million
for the year ended December 31, 2005. 

NOTE 4 — SIGNIFICANT COLLABORATIVE RESEARCH 
AND DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCT AGREEMENTS 

We perform research and development for others pursuant to fea-
sibility  agreements  and  collaborative  development  and  license
agreements.  Under  the  feasibility  agreements,  we  are  generally
reimbursed for the cost of work performed. Under our develop-
ment and license agreements, we may be reimbursed for a por-
tion  of  our  development  costs  and  may  also  be  entitled  to
milestone payments when and if certain development and/or reg-
ulatory milestones are achieved. We may also receive royalties on
sales of commercial product. All of our research and development
agreements are generally cancelable by our partners without sig-
nificant financial penalty to the partner. Cost associated with prod-
uct agreements are recorded as costs of goods sold. 

In January 1995, we entered into a collaborative development
and license agreement with Pfizer Inc to develop Exubera® based
on our Pulmonary Technology. Under the terms of the agreement,
we receive funding consisting of initial fees, contract research and
development funding and progress payments. Upon execution of
the agreement Pfizer Inc purchased $5.0 million of our Common
Stock. In addition, in October 1996, Pfizer Inc purchased an addi-
tional  $5.0  million  of  our  Common  Stock.  Pfizer  Inc  has  global
commercialization  rights  for  Exubera® while  we  receive  royalties
on sales of commercialized products. We will manufacture a por-
tion of insulin powder and supply the inhaler devices to Pfizer Inc.
Under  this  agreement  we  recognized  revenue  of  approximately
$78.2 million, $64.4 million, and $55.4 million in 2005, 2004, and
2003, respectively. 

In  February  2006,  we  entered  into  a  collaboration  with  Bayer
HealthCare AG to develop an inhaleable powder formulation of a
novel form of Ciprofloxacin (Cipro) to treat chronic lung infections
caused  by  Pseudomonas  aeruginosa  in  cystic  fibrosis  patients.
Under  the  terms  of  the  collaboration,  Nektar  will  be  responsible
for formulation of the dry powder and development of the inhala-
tion system, as well as clinical and commercial manufacturing of
the  drug  formulation  and  device  combination.  Bayer  will  be
responsible for the clinical development and worldwide commer-
cialization of the system. Nektar will receive funding for preclinical
development,  milestone  payments,  and  royalty  payments  when
and  if  the  product  is  commercialized.  Under  this  agreement  we
recognized revenue of approximately $4.1 million in 2005. 

In January 2005, we entered into a collaboration to develop an
inhaleable powder form of Zelos Pharmaceuticals Internationals’
parathyroid  hormone  (PTH)  analogue,  called  Ostabolin-C.TM Under
the terms of the agreement, Nektar will be responsible for develop-
ment of the formulated dry powder drug and inhalation system, as
well  as  clinical  and  commercial  manufacturing.  Zelos  will  be
responsible for supply of the active pharmaceutical ingredient or API,
clinical  development  and  commercialization.  Nektar  will  receive
research and development funding, milestone payments, and royalty
payments when the product is commercialized. Under this agree-
ment we recognized revenue of approximately $3.5 million in 2005. 
We entered into an agreement with Eyetech Pharmaceuticals,
Inc. in February 2002 to supply our Advanced PEGylation Tech-
nology  in  the  development  and  commercial  manufacturing  of
Macugen® (pegaptanib sodium injection), a PEGylated anti-Vascular
Endothelial Growth Factor aptamer currently approved for market-
ing approval in the U.S. and filed for approval in the EU by Eyetech
and its partner, Pfizer Inc. Macugen® is indicated for the treatment
of age-related macular degeneration (“AMD”), which is the leading
cause of blindness among Americans over the age of 55. Nektar
received  development  milestone  payments  and  will  receive 
royalties on sales of commercialized products, as well as revenues
from  exclusive  manufacturing  of  the  PEG  derivative.  We  will 
share  a  portion  of  the  profits  on  this  product  with  Enzon
Pharmaceuticals,  Inc.  Macugen® is  also  in  Phase  II  testing  for 
the  treatment  of  diabetic  macular  edema  (“DME”).  Under  this
agreement we recognized revenue of approximately $6.1 million,
$1.5 million and $0.7 million in 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

43

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 44

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

In February 2002, we entered into a collaboration with Unimed
Pharmaceuticals,  Inc.,  a  wholly  owned  subsidiary  of  Solvay
Pharmaceuticals,  Inc.,  to  develop  a  formulation  of  dronabinol
(synthetic  delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol)  to  be  delivered  using  a
metered dose inhaler. The product is under development for mul-
tiple  indications.  Dronabinol  is  the  active  ingredient  in  Unimed’s
MARINOL® capsules, which are approved in the U.S. for multiple
indications. Solvay initiated Phase II trials for pulmonary dronabi-
nol in 2005 for the treatment of migraines with and without aura.
We  will  receive  research  and  development  funding,  milestone
payments as the program progresses through further clinical test-
ing,  and  royalty  payments  on  product  sales  and  manufacturing
revenues if the product is commercialized. Under this agreement
we recognized revenue of approximately $2.8 million, $5.5 million,
and $5.3 million in 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively. 

In November 2001, we entered into a collaboration with Chiron
to  develop  a  next-generation  dry  powder  inhaled  formulation  of
tobramycin for the treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa in cys-
tic  fibrosis  patients  and  to  explore  the  development  of  other
inhaled  antibiotics  using  our  Pulmonary  Technology.  We  recog-
nized  $4.8  million,  $7.3  million,  $5.8  million  in  revenue  for  the
years  ended  December  31,  2005,  2004,  and  2003  respectively,
related to this collaboration. 

We  entered  into  a  license,  manufacturing  and  supply  agree-
ment  for  CimziaTM (certolizumab  pegol,  CDP870)  with  Celltech
Group  plc  in  2000,  which  was  subsequently  assigned  to
Pharmacia. In October 2002, Pharmacia initiated Phase III clinical
trials with CDP 870. In April 2003, Pfizer Inc acquired Pharmacia
and  in  February  2004,  Pfizer  Inc  reassigned  rights  to  CDP870
back to Celltech. In 2004, Celltech was acquired by UCB Pharma.
Under  the  agreement,  we  receive  milestone  payments,  royalties
on product sales and PEG manufacturing revenues if the product
is  commercialized,  which  are  partially  shared  with  Enzon.  UCB
has filed a biologics licensing application with the FDA for CimziaTM
for the treatment for Crohn’s disease. Under this agreement, we
recognized  product  revenue  of  approximately  $3.2  million,  $8.5
million and $5.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2005,
2004 and 2003, respectively. 

We  entered  into  a  license,  manufacturing  and  supply  agree-
ment  with  Sensus  Drug  Development  Corporation  (which  was
subsequently  acquired  by  Pfizer  Inc)  in  January  2000,  for  the
PEGylation  of  Somavert® (pegvisomant),  a  human  growth  hor-
mone receptor antagonist. The agreement provides us with mile-
stone  payments,  rights  to  manufacture  the  PEG  reagent  and  a
share of revenues. Somavert® has been approved for marketing in
the  U.S.  and  Europe  for  the  treatment  of  certain  patients  with
acromegaly. In 2005, 2004, and 2003, Somavert® accounted for
approximately $0.9 million, $1.2 million, and $4.8 million, respec-
tively, of our product sales. 

We  entered  into  a  license,  supply  and  manufacturing  agree-
ment with Confluent Surgical, Inc. in August 1999, for use of our
PEG-hydrogel in Confluent’s SprayGelTM adhesion barrier systems.
Under the terms of this arrangement, we manufacture and supply
PEG components used in the SprayGelTM system and receive man-
ufacturing  and  supply  revenues  from  Confluent.  We  may  also
receive  royalty  payments  on  sales  of  commercialized  products.

44

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

SprayGelTM was  approved  for  commercial  distribution  in  Europe,
receiving product certification by European regulatory authorities
in November 2001. In June 2002, Confluent initiated Phase II/III
pivotal  trials  in  the  U.S.  of  SprayGel.TM Under  this  agreement  we
recognized revenue of approximately $1.7 million, $0.3 million and
$0.3 million in 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. 

We  entered  into  a  license,  manufacturing  and  supply  agree-
ment in February 1997 with F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. whereby
we license to Roche the PEG reagent used in Roche’s PEGASYS®
(peginterferon alfa-2b) product for the treatment of chronic hepa-
titis  C.  This  agreement  provides  us  with  milestone  payments,
rights to manufacture the PEG reagent and a share of revenues
related to the PEGASYS® product. A subsequent agreement with
Roche  related  to  further  collaborative  work  on  PEGASYS® was
entered  into  in  April  1999  to  develop  the  PEGylated  interferon
alfa-2a product. In 2005, 2004, and 2003, Roche accounted for
approximately $2.5 million, $3.2 million, and $4.7 million, respec-
tively, of our product sales. 

We  entered  into  a  license,  manufacturing  and  supply  agree-
ment  with  Amgen  Inc.,  in  July  1995,  to  supply  one  of  our  PEG
reagents,  which  is  utilized  in  the  manufacture  of  Amgen’s
Neulasta.® This product is indicated for reducing the incidence of
infection,  as  manifested  by  febrile  neutropenia  in  patients  with
non-myeloid  malignancies  receiving  myelosuppressive  anti-can-
cer  drugs.  The  FDA  approved  Neulasta® for  marketing  in  the
United States in late January 2002. Under this agreement, we rec-
ognized product sales revenue of approximately $5.8 million, $5.2
million,  and  $6.2  million,  in  2005,  2004,  and  2003,  respectively. 

NOTE 5 — GOODWILL AND OTHER INTANGIBLE ASSETS 

Between 2001 and 2005 we acquired three businesses. The cost
to  acquire  these  businesses  has  been  allocated  to  the  assets
acquired (including intangibles) and liabilities assumed according
to  their  respective  fair  values,  with  the  excess  purchase  price
being allocated to goodwill. 

Goodwill  is  tested  for  impairment  at  least  annually  or  on  an
interim  basis  if  an  event  occurs  or  circumstances  change  that
would more-likely-than-not reduce the fair value below our carry-
ing value. The impairment tests for goodwill are performed at the
business  unit  level,  which  we  have  identified  as  our  pulmonary
and proprietary business unit, our advanced pegylation technol-
ogy business unit and our super critical fluids business unit. 

We  performed  our  annual  impairment  test  for  goodwill  in
October 2005 and determined at that time that the undiscounted
cash flow from our long-range forecast for each respective busi-
ness unit exceeded the carrying amount of the respective good-
will. In December 2005 we were apprised of unfavorable results of
clinical data related to programs from our super critical fluids busi-
ness  unit  located  in  Bradford,  England,  Nektar  UK,  which  pro-
vided an indication that the fair value of the respective business
units goodwill was below the carrying value. Therefore, in connec-
tion with our year end close process, we re-performed the impair-
ment analysis of goodwill and other long lived assets for Nektar
UK.  We  determined  the  fair  value  of  the  intangibles  and  other
assets of Nektar UK based on a discounted cash flow model to 

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 45

be less than the carrying amount of goodwill and certain long lived
assets.  Based  on  management’s  assessment  of  the  results  of
clinical data that became available in December 2005, and results
of the discounted cash flow valuation as of December 31, 2005,
we  recorded  an  impairment  charge  to  goodwill  and  long  lived
assets in the year ended December 31, 2005, in the amount of
$59.6 million and $5.7 million, respectively. The remaining carrying
value of goodwill, on a consolidated basis, at December 31, 2005
and 2004, was $78.4 million and $130.1 million, respectively. 

In  accordance  with  SFAS  No.  144  Accounting  for  the
Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, we perform a test
for  recoverability  of  our  intangible  and  other  long-lived  assets
whenever  events  or  changes  in  circumstances  indicate  that  the
carrying value of the assets may not be recoverable. An impair-
ment loss would be recognized only if the carrying amount of an
intangible  or  long-lived  asset  exceeds  the  sum  of  the  undis-
counted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual
disposal of the asset. Other than those long lived assets identified
at Nektar UK, to date, there have been no events or changes in
circumstances that would indicate that the carrying value of such
assets  in  our  other  business  units  may  not  be  recoverable,  and
therefore we have determined that there are no other impairments
on our intangible and other long-lived assets, including capitalized
assets related to Exubera.®

In assessing the recoverability of our intangibles and long-lived
assets, other than those of Nektar UK, we have concluded that
there  are  no  impairments  in  the  carrying  value  of  the  remaining
assets as of December 31, 2005. If this assessment changes in
the future, we may be required to record impairment charges for
these assets. The carrying value of our purchased intangibles as
of December 31, 2005 and 2004, is $13.5 million and $6.5 mil-
lion,  respectively.  These  assets  are  scheduled  to  be  fully  amor-
tized  by  December  2012.  The  carrying  value  of  our  other
long-lived assets as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, is $156.6
million and $153.8, respectively. 

We periodically evaluate whether changes have occurred that
would  require  revision  of  the  remaining  estimated  useful  lives 
of our other intangible assets or otherwise render the assets unre-
coverable.  If  such  an  event  occurred,  we  would  determine
whether  the  other  intangibles  are  impaired.  To  date,  there  have
been no events or changes in circumstances that would indicate
that  the  carrying  value  of  such  assets  may  not  be  recoverable,
and therefore we have determined that there has been no impair-
ment  on  our  intangible  and  other  long-lived  assets,  including 
capitalized  assets  related  to  Exubera.® The  components  of  our
other  intangible  assets  as  December  31,  2005,  are  as  follows 
(in thousands except useful life): 

Core technology
Developed product 

technology

Intellectual property
Supplier and 

customer relations

Total

Useful
Life in
Years

Gross
Carrying
Amount

Accumulated
Amortization

Net

5

$15,270  $ (7,529) 

$ 7,741 

5
5-7

2,900
7,301

(2,610) 
(6,779)

290
522

5

9,870

(4,971)

4,899

$35,341

$(21,889) 

$13,452 

Amortization expense related to other intangible assets totaled
$4.9 million, $4.5 million and $4.5 for the years ended December
31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively ($0.7 million, $0.6 million
and $0.3 million was recorded to cost of sales for the years ended
December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively). The following
table shows expected future amortization expense for other intan-
gible assets until they are fully amortized (in thousands): 

Years ending December 31,

2006
2007
2008
2009
2010

Total 

$ 4,329
2,380
2,380
2,380
1,983

$13,452

NOTE 6 — OTHER ASSETS, OTHER ACCRUED EXPENSES
AND OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES 

Deposits and other assets consist of the following (in thousands): 

December 31, 

Debt issuance costs, net
Prepaid commercial costs
Other assets

Total deposits and other assets

2005

2004 

$ 9,676
3,473
1,330

$2,173
—
386

$14,479

$2,559

Debt issuance costs are associated with our outstanding series
of  convertible  subordinated  debentures  and  notes  (see  note  7)
and are amortized to interest expense ratably over the term of the
related debt. 

Prepaid  commercial  costs  represent  contract  manufacturing
fees and expenses to be amortized to cost of goods sold over the
remaining twenty-two month period. 

Other accrued expenses consist of the following (in thousands): 

December 31, 

2005

2004 

Accrued research and development 

expenses (other than compensation) 

Accrued general and administrative 

expenses (other than compensation) 

Accrued compensation 
Accrued clinical trials 
Deferred gain on sale of interest in partnership 

Total other accrued expenses 

$ 6,598  $ 2,789 

2,465
10,385
666
874

2,054 
8,629 
—  
1,593 

$20,988 $15,065 

Deferred  gain  on  sale  of  interest  in  partnership  is  associated
with our sale-leaseback transaction of one of our facilities and is
being amortized over the term of the lease (see note 13). 

Other long-term liabilities consist of the following (in thousands): 

December 31, 

Tenant improvement loan and equipment leases  
Deferred gain on sale of interest in partnership  
Loan from Pfizer  
Deferred revenue  
Accrued operating costs — long term 
Other  

Total other long-term liabilities 

2005

2004 

$ 1,372 $ 1,398 
10,596 
9,165 
1,131 
— 
2 

8,523
—
8,374
2,933
608

$21,810 $22,292

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

45

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 46

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

The tenant improvement loan and equipment leases represent
the  long-term  portion  of  the  present  value  of  a  tenant  improve-
ment  loan  and  certain  equipment  leases  (see  note  8).  The  loan
from Pfizer Inc relates to a non-interest bearing loan from Pfizer
Inc  which  is  contingently  payable  upon  a  commercial  launch  of
Exubera® (see note 8). 

NOTE 7 — CONVERTIBLE SUBORDINATED NOTES 
AND DEBENTURES 

Issuance of 3.25% convertible subordinated notes 

In September 2005, we issued $315.0 million in aggregate prin-
cipal amount of our 3.25% Convertible Subordinated Notes (the
3.25% Notes) due September 2012. Interest on the 3.25% notes
is payable semiannually in arrears on March 28 and September 28
of each year. The 3.25% Notes are unsecured and subordinate in
right  to  all  our  existing  and  future  indebtedness.  The  notes  are
convertible at the option of the holder, at any time on or prior to
maturity into shares of our common stock at a conversion rate of
46.4727 shares per $1,000 principal amount of the 3.25% notes,
which  is  equal  to  an  initial  conversion  price  of  approximately
$21.52. Beginning on September 28, 2008, we may redeem the
3.25%  notes  in  whole  or  in  part  for  cash  at  a  redemption  price
equal to 100% of the principal amount of the 3.25% notes plus
any accrued but unpaid interest if the closing price of the common
stock has exceeded 150% of the conversion price of the 3.25%
notes for at least 20 days in any consecutive 30 day trading period. 
At any time prior to maturity, if a fundamental change as defined
in  the  3.25%  subordinated  debt  indenture  occurs,  we  may  be
required  to  pay  a  make-whole  premium  on  notes  converted  in
connection therewith by increasing the conversion rate applicable
to  the  notes.  The  amount  of  the  make-whole  premium  will  be
determined in accordance with a table showing the make-whole
premium that would apply at various common stock prices and
fundamental change effective dates.

Costs relating to the issuances of these notes and debentures
are  recorded  as  long-term  assets  and  are  amortized  to  interest
expense over the term of the debt.

Retirement of certain 3.5% and 5% convertible 
subordinated notes 

In September 2005, we retired $25.4 million and $45.9 million
aggregate principle amount of our outstanding 5% and 3.5% con-
vertible subordinate notes due February 2007 and October 2007,
respectively,  in  cash,  in  privately  negotiated  transactions.  As  a
result of the transactions we recognized losses related to the early
extinguishment of the 5% and 3.5% of approximately $0.3 million
and  nil,  for  the  years  ended  December 31,  2005  and  2004,
respectively. 

As  a  result  of  the  transactions  related  to  convertible  subordi-
nated  debt  during  the  quarter  ended  September 30,  2005  our
total  contractual  obligation  with  regard  to  convertible  subordi-
nated debt has increased from $173.9 million at December 31,
2004, to $417.7 million at December 31, 2005. 

46

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

The following summarizes our outstanding convertible subordi-

nated debt as of December 31, 2005: 

Class 

5%
3.5%
3.25%

Maturity 

February 2007
October 2007
September 2012

Amount 
Outstanding

$ 36.1 million
$ 66.6 million
$315.0 million

Conversion
Price

$38.36
$50.46
$21.52

The  5%  convertible  subordinated  notes  were  issued  in
February 2000 to certain qualified institutional buyers pursuant to
an exemption under Rule 144A of the 1933 Act. Interest on the
notes accrues at a rate of 5.0% per year, subject to adjustment
in certain circumstances. The notes will mature in February 2007
and are convertible, at the discretion of the holder, into shares of
our Common Stock at a conversion price of $38.355 per share,
subject  to  adjustment  in  certain  circumstances.  The  notes  were
redeemable  in  part  or  in  total  at  any  time  before  February 8,
2003, at an exchange premium of $137.93 per $1,000 principal
amount, less any interest actually paid on the notes before the call
for  redemption,  if  the  closing  price  of  our  Common  Stock  has
exceeded 150% of the conversion price then in effect for at least
20  trading  days  within  a  period  of  30  consecutive  trading  days.
We can redeem some or all of the notes at any time, with redemp-
tion prices dependent upon the date of the redemption. Interest is
payable  semi-annually  on  August 8  and  February 8.  The  notes
are unsecured subordinated obligations, which rank junior in right
of  payment  to  all  of  our  existing  and  future  Senior  Debt.  At
December 31,  2005,  $36.1  million  of  these  5.0%  convertible
subordinated notes remain outstanding. 

The  3.5%  convertible  subordinated  notes  were  issued  in
October 2000 to certain qualified institutional buyers pursuant to
an exemption under Rule 144A of the 1933 Act. Interest on the
notes accrues at a rate of 3.5% per year, subject to adjustment
in certain circumstances. The notes will mature in October 2007
and are convertible, at the discretion of the holder, into shares of
our  Common  Stock  at  a  conversion  price  of  $50.46  per  share,
subject  to  adjustment  under  certain  circumstances.  The  notes
were redeemable in part or in total at any time before October 17,
2003,  at  $1,000  per  $1,000  principal  amount  plus  a  provisional
redemption  exchange  premium,  payable  in  cash  or  shares  of
Common  Stock,  of  $105.00  per  $1,000  principal  amount,  plus
accrued and unpaid interest, if any, to the redemption date, if the
closing price of our Common Stock has exceeded 150% of the
conversion price then in effect for at least 20 trading days within
a  period  of  30  consecutive  trading  days.  The  notes  are  also
redeemable in part or in total at any time, at certain redemption
prices dependent upon the date of redemption if the closing price
of  our  Common  Stock  has  exceeded  120%  of  the  conversion
price then in effect for at least 20 trading days within a period of
30 consecutive trading days. Interest is payable semi-annually on
April 17 and October 17. The notes are unsecured obligations,
which  rank  junior  in  right  of  payment  to  all  of  our  existing  and
future senior debt. At December 31, 2005, $66.6 million of these
3.5% convertible subordinated notes remain outstanding. 

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 47

As  of  December 31,  2005  and  2004,  we  had  approximately
$417.7 million and $173.9 million in outstanding convertible sub-
ordinated  notes  and  debentures  with  a  fair  market  value  of
approximately $422.4 million and $171.3 million, respectively. The
fair market was obtained through average quoted market prices. 
For the year ended December 31, 2004, we recognized a loss
on  debt  extinguishment  in  connection  with  two  privately  negoti-
ated transactions to convert our outstanding convertible subordi-
nated notes into shares of our common stock. In January 2004,
certain holders of our outstanding 3.5% convertible subordinated
notes due October 2007 completed an exchange and cancellation
of $9.0 million in aggregate principal amount of the notes for the
issuance of 0.6 million shares of our common stock in a privately
negotiated  transaction.  In  February  2004,  certain  holders  of  our
outstanding  3%  convertible  subordinated  notes  due  June  2010
converted  approximately  $36.0  million  in  aggregate  principal
amount of such notes for approximately 3.2 million shares of our
common stock and a cash payment of approximately $3.1 million
in the aggregate in privately negotiated transactions. As a result of
these transactions, we recognized losses on debt extinguishment
of approximately $7.8 million and $1.5 million, respectively, in accor-
dance with SFAS No. 84, Induced Conversions of Convertible Debt. 
For  the  year  ended  December 31,  2003,  gain  on  debt  extin-
guishment  totaled  $12.0  million.  Gain  on  debt  extinguishment
included a $4.3 million gain from the repurchase of $20.5 million
of  3.5%  convertible  subordinated  notes  due  October  2007  for
$16.2  million  during  the  second  quarter  of  2003.  Gain  on  debt
extinguishment also included a $7.7 million gain recorded in the
fourth quarter of 2003 from the exchange of $87.9 million of 3.5%
convertible  subordinated  notes  due  October  2007  for  the
issuance of $59.3 million of newly issued 3% convertible subordi-
nated notes due June 2010. 

NOTE 8 — DEBT 

Tenant Improvement Loans 

In November 1997, we received from the landlord of our facility
in San Carlos, California, a loan of $5.0 million to fund a portion of
the  cost  of  improvements  made  to  the  facility.  The  loan  bears
interest  at  9.46% per  annum,  and  principal  and  interest  pay-
ments are payable monthly over the ten-year loan term with a bal-
loon payment of $4.5 million due in November 2007. In October
2002,  we  renegotiated  the  terms  of  this  loan.  As  a  result,  we
made  a  $1.5  million  principal  payment  and  reduced  the  interest
rate by 1.5%. In October 2003, we made an additional $1.9 mil-
lion  principal  payment.  The  loan  now  bears  an  interest  rate  of
7.96% per  annum,  and  principal  and  interest  payments  are
payable  monthly  over  the  original  ten-year  loan  term  with  a  bal-
loon payment of $1.4 million due in November 2007. 

Future  non-cancelable  principal  payments  under  this  tenant
improvement  loan  as  of  December 31,  2005  are  as  follows 
(in thousands): 

Years ending December 31,

2006
2007

Total minimum payments required
Less amount representing interest

Present value of future payments
Less current portion

Non-current portion

$ 121
1,464

1,585
201

1,384
12

$1,372

Real Estate Capital Leases 

As  of  January 1,  2005,  we  occupy  a  facility  in  San  Carlos
under a capital lease for which a portion expires in August 2007,
while the remainder expires in September 2016. 

Effective  January 11,  2005,  Nektar  and  BMR-201  Industrial
Road LLC (landlord), entered into an agreement to terminate our
obligation  in  the  Amended  and  Restated  Built-To-Suit  Lease
dated August 17, 2004, related to a portion of our office space
located at our San Carlos location. In connection with the termi-
nation  agreement,  we  have  recorded  other  expense  of  approxi-
mately  $1.1  million.  This  amount  represents  the  write-off  of  the
capital asset related to this space partially offset by a reduction in
the present value of our liability related to this space. 

Under  the  terms  of  the  lease  our  rent  will  increase  by  2%  in
October of each year. The total committed future minimum lease
payments under the terms of these capital lease agreements are
as follows (in thousands): 

Years ending December 31,

2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011 and thereafter

Total minimum payments required
Less amount representing interest

Present value of future payments
Less current portion

Non-current portion

$ 3,831
3,907
3,986
4,065
4,147
25,495

45,431
24,673

20,758
482

$20,276

We have recorded a total liability of $20.8 million and $25.1 mil-
lion  relating  to  this  lease  as  of  December 31,  2005  and  2004,
respectively,  which  represents  the  present  value  of  future  mini-
mum  payments  on  the  lease.  During  the  year  ended  December
31, 2004, we entered into a redemption agreement with respect
to our interest in the partnership (see note 13). We simultaneously
entered into a sale-leaseback agreement and, in accordance with
FAS  98,  Accounting  for  Leases, we  capitalized  the  building  by
recording  a  capital  lease  asset  and  obligation  equal  to  the  fair
market value of the leased asset of approximately $25.5 million.
The interest rate on the lease is 18.0%. 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

47

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 48

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

Other Debt 

We have recorded a current liability of $9.2 million as of Decem-
ber 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively, in connection with a non-
interest  bearing  loan  from  Pfizer  Inc.  This  loan  is  contingently
payable only upon commercial launch of Exubera® in the United
States. 

NOTE 9 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES 

Operating Leases 

We lease certain facilities under arrangements expiring through
June  2012.  Rent  expense  was  approximately  $3.1  million, 
$3.0 million, and $3.2 million for the years ended December 31,
2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively. 

Future  non-cancelable  commitments  under  operating  leases 

as of December 31, 2005, are as follows (in thousands): 

Years ending December 31, 

2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011 and thereafter

Total minimum payments required

Legal Matters 

$ 3,787
3,658
3,596
2,629
2,429
3,644

$19,743

In  July  2005,  a  complaint  was  filed  by  UAH  against  Nektar
Therapeutics  AL,  Corporation,  and  Nektar  Therapeutics  in  the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.
The  complaint  alleges  patent  infringement,  breach  of  a  contract
royalty obligation, violation of the Alabama Trade Secrets Act, and
unjust enrichment. In August 2005, UAH amended its complaint
to add J. Milton Harris, a Nektar employee, as a party to the liti-
gation, add certain additional claims, seek declaratory judgment
on  patents  assigned  to  the  Company,  and  seek  compensatory,
treble  and  punitive  damages,  all  in  unspecified  amounts.  In
December  2005,  UAH  filed  its  second  amended  complaint
expanding  its  previously  asserted  claims  that  the  Company  and
Harris had infringed patents of UAH, misappropriated and taken
intellectual property rightfully belonging to UAH, concealed intel-
lectual property from UAH that was rightfully the property of UAH,
and converted these discoveries for their own profit notwithstand-
ing that the Company and Harris were fully aware that the inven-
tions rightfully belonged to UAH. UAH further claimed fraudulent
concealment, conversion, detinue, misrepresentation, conspiracy,
and,  as  against  Harris,  breach  of  express  and  implied  contract
and breach of an assignment of application. UAH is seeking equi-
table  relief  including  declaratory  judgment,  the  imposition  of  a
constructive  trust,  specific  performance,  injunction,  accounting
and  other  relief  on  the  theory  that  UAH  should  be  the  record
holder of certain patent’s assigned to the Company. We have filed
and  continue  to  assert  a  counterclaim  against  UAH  seeking  full
refund of all royalty payments erroneously paid to UAH under the
patent  at  issue  in  the  original  complaint.  The  litigation  is  at  too
early a stage to make an assessment about the probability of the 

48

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

outcome in the case. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves in
this litigation, however, there can be no assurances that we will be
successful in such defense. 

From time to time, we may be involved in other lawsuits, claims,
investigations and proceedings, consisting of intellectual property,
commercial,  employment  and  other  matters,  which  arise  in  the
ordinary course of business. In accordance with the SFAS No. 5,
Accounting for Contingencies, we make a provision for a liability
when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the
amount  of  the  loss  can  be  reasonably  estimated.  These  provi-
sions  are  reviewed  at  least  quarterly  and  adjusted  to  reflect  the
impact of negotiations, settlements, ruling, advice of legal coun-
sel,  and  other  information  and  events  pertaining  to  a  particular
case. Litigation is inherently unpredictable. If any unfavorable rul-
ing were to occur in any specific period, there exists the possibil-
ity of a material adverse impact on the results of operations of that
period or on our cash and/or liquidity. 

Workers Compensation 

Pursuant to the terms of our worker’s compensation insurance
policy, we are subject to self-fund all claims up to $250,000 per
occurrence subject to a maximum of $739,250 for the term of the
insurance policy, November 1, 2005—October 31, 2006. Histor-
ically, we have not been obligated to make significant payments
for these obligations, and no significant liabilities have been recorded
for  these  obligations  on  our  balance  sheet  as  of  December 31,
2005 or 2004. 

Royalties 

We have certain royalty commitments associated with the ship-
ment  and  licensing  of  certain  products.  Royalty  expense  was
approximately  $3.5  million,  $2.0  million,  and  $3.1  million  for  the
years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.
The  overall  maximum  amount  of  the  obligations  is  based  upon
sales  of  the  applicable  product  and  cannot  be  reasonably  esti-
mated. 

Director and Officer Indemnifications 

As  permitted  under  Delaware  law,  and  as  set  forth  in  our
Certificate  of  Incorporation  and  our  Bylaws,  we  indemnify  our
directors, executive officers, other officers, employees, and other
agents for certain events or occurrences that arose while in such
capacity. The maximum potential amount of future payments we
could be required to make under this indemnification is unlimited;
however, we have insurance policies that may limit our exposure
and  may  enable  us  to  recover  a  portion  of  any  future  amounts
paid. Assuming the applicability of coverage, the willingness of the
insurer to assume coverage, and subject to certain retention, loss
limits  and  other  policy  provisions,  we  believe  any  obligations
under  this  indemnification  are  not  material,  other  than  an  initial
$500,000 per incident retention deductible per our insurance pol-
icy. However, no assurances can be given that the covering insur-
ers will not attempt to dispute the validity, applicability, or amount
of coverage without expensive litigation against these insurers, in
which case we may incur substantial liabilities as a result of these 

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 49

indemnification obligations. Because the obligated amount of this
agreement is not explicitly stated, the overall maximum amount of
the  obligations  cannot  be  reasonably  estimated.  Historically,  we
have not been obligated to make significant payments for these
obligations, and no liabilities have been recorded for these obliga-
tions  on  our  balance  sheet  as  of  December 31,  2005  or  2004. 

Indemnification Underwriters and Initial purchasers of our
Securities 

In connection with our sale of equity and convertible debt secu-
rities from, we have agreed to defend, indemnify and hold harm-
less our underwriters or initial purchasers, as applicable, as well
as  certain  related  parties  from  and  against  certain  liabilities,
including liabilities under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
The term of these indemnification obligations is generally perpet-
ual. There is no limitation on the potential amount of future pay-
ments we could be required to make under these indemnification
obligations. We have never incurred costs to defend lawsuits or
settle claims related to these indemnification obligations. If any of
our  indemnification  obligations  are  triggered,  however,  we  may
incur substantial liabilities. Because the obligated amount of this
agreement is not explicitly stated, the overall maximum amount of
the  obligations  cannot  be  reasonably  estimated.  Historically,  we
have not been obligated to make significant payments for these
obligations, and no liabilities have been recorded for these obliga-
tions  on  our  balance  sheet  as  of  December 31,  2005  or  2004. 

Manufacturing and Supply Agreement with Contract
Manufacturers 

In August 2000, we entered into a Manufacturing and Supply
Agreement  with  our  contract  manufacturers  to  provide  for  the
manufacturing  of  our  pulmonary  inhaler  device  for  Exubera.®
Under the terms of the Agreement, we may be obligated to reim-
burse the contract manufacturers for the actual unamortized and
unrecovered portion of any equipment procured or facilities estab-
lished and the interest accrued for their capital overlay in the event
that Exubera® commercial launch is delayed to the extent that the
contract manufacturers cannot re-deploy the assets. While such
payments may be significant, at the present time, it is not possi-
ble to estimate the loss that will occur should the Exubera® launch
become  delayed  indefinitely.  We  have  also  agreed  to  defend,
indemnify and hold harmless the contract manufacturers from and
against third party liability arising out of the agreement, including
product liability and infringement of intellectual property. There is
no limitation on the potential amount of future payments we could
be required to make under these indemnification obligations. We
have  never  incurred  costs  to  defend  lawsuits  or  settle  claims
related to these indemnification obligations. If any of our indemni-
fication obligations is triggered, we may incur substantial liabilities.
Because the obligated amount of this agreement is not explicitly
stated, the overall maximum amount of the obligations cannot be
reasonably estimated. Historically, we have not been obligated to
make significant payments for these obligations, and no liabilities
have been recorded for these obligations on our balance sheet as
of December 31, 2005 or 2004. 

Security Agreement with Pfizer Inc

In connection with the Collaboration, Development and License
Agreement  (“CDLA”)  dated  January 18,  1995,  that  we  entered
into with Pfizer Inc for the development of the Exubera® product,
we entered into a Security Agreement pursuant to which our obli-
gations  under  the  CDLA  and  certain  Manufacturing  and  Supply
Agreements related to the manufacture and supply of powdered
insulin and pulmonary inhaler devices for the delivery of powdered
insulin, are secured. Our default under any of these agreements
triggers Pfizer Inc’s rights with respect to property relating solely
to,  or  used  or  which  will  be  used  solely  in  connection  with,  the
development,  manufacture,  use  and  sale  of  Exubera® including
proceeds  from  the  sale  or  other  disposition  of  the  property.
Because the obligated amount of this agreement is not explicitly
stated, the overall maximum amount of the obligations cannot be
reasonably estimated. Historically, we have not been obligated to
make significant payments for these obligations, and no liabilities
have been recorded for these obligations on our balance sheet as
of December 31, 2005 or 2004. 

Collaboration Agreements for Pulmonary Products 

As  part  of  our  collaboration  agreements  with  our  partners  for
the development, manufacture and supply of products based on
our Pulmonary Technology, we generally agree to defend, indem-
nify and hold harmless our partners from and against third party
liabilities  arising  out  of  the  agreement,  including  product  liability
and infringement of intellectual property. The term of these indem-
nification obligations is generally perpetual any time after execution
of the agreement. There is no limitation on the potential amount of
future  payments  we  could  be  required  to  make  under  these
indemnification obligations. We have never incurred costs to defend
lawsuits  or  settle  claims  related  to  these  indemnification  obliga-
tions. If any of our indemnification obligations is triggered, we may
incur substantial liabilities. Because the obligated amount of this
agreement is not explicitly stated, the overall maximum amount of
the  obligations  cannot  be  reasonably  estimated.  Historically,  we
have not been obligated to make significant payments for these
obligations, and no liabilities have been recorded for these obliga-
tions  on  our  balance  sheet  as  of  December 31,  2005  or  2004. 

License, Manufacturing and Supply Agreements for
Products Based on our Advanced PEGylation Technology 

As  part  of  our  license,  manufacturing  and  supply  agreements
with  our  partners  for  the  development  and/or  manufacture  and
supply  of  PEG  reagents  based  on  our  Advanced  PEGylation
Technology,  we  generally  agree  to  defend,  indemnify  and  hold
harmless our partners from and against third party liabilities aris-
ing out of the agreement, including product liability and infringe-
ment  of  intellectual  property.  The  term  of  these  indemnification
obligations is generally perpetual any time after execution of the
agreement. There is no limitation on the potential amount of future
payments we could be required to make under these indemnifica-
tion obligations. We have never incurred costs to defend lawsuits
or settle claims related to these indemnification obligations. If any 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

49

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 50

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

of our indemnification obligations is triggered, we may incur sub-
stantial liabilities. Because the obligated amount of this agreement
is not explicitly stated, the overall maximum amount of the obliga-
tions  cannot  be  reasonably  estimated.  Historically,  we  have  not
been  obligated  to  make  significant  payments  for  these  obliga-
tions, and no liabilities have been recorded for these obligations
on our balance sheet as of December 31, 2005 or 2004. 

Lease Restoration 

We have several leases for our facilities in multiple locations. In
the event that we do not exercise our option to extend the term
of the lease, we guarantee certain costs to restore the property to
certain conditions in place at the time of lease. If we were required
to  vacate  our  dry  powder  manufacturing  facility  located  in  San
Carlos, Ca, we could incur significant costs to remove the plant
equipment  and  restore  the  facility  to  its  pre-leased  condition.
Because the obligated amount of this agreement is not explicitly
stated, the overall maximum amount of the obligations cannot be
reasonably estimated. Historically, we have not been obligated to
make significant payments for these obligations, and no liabilities
have been recorded for these obligations on our balance sheet as
of December 31, 2005 or 2004. 

NOTE 10 — STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY 

Preferred Stock 

We  have  authorized  10,000,000  shares  of  Preferred  Stock,
each share having a par value of $0.0001. Three million one hun-
dred thousand (3,100,000) shares of Preferred Stock are desig-
nated Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock (the “Series A
Preferred Stock”) and forty thousand (40,000) shares of Preferred
Stock are designated as Series B Convertible Preferred Stock (the
“Series B Preferred Stock”). 

Series A Preferred Stock 

On June 1, 2001, the Board of Directors approved the adop-
tion  of  a  Share  Purchase  Rights  Plan  (the  “Plan”).  Terms  of  the
Plan provide for a dividend distribution of one preferred share pur-
chase right (a “Right”) for each outstanding share of our Common
Stock  (the  “Common  Shares”).  The  Rights  have  certain  anti-
takeover effects and will cause substantial dilution to a person or
group  that  attempts  to  acquire  the  Company  on  terms  not
approved by our Board of Directors. The dividend distribution was
payable on June 22, 2001 (the “Record Date”), to the stockhold-
ers  of  record  on  that  date.  Each  Right  entitles  the  registered
holder  to  purchase  from  us  one  one-hundredth  of  a  share  of
Series A Preferred Stock at a price of $225.00 per one one-hun-
dredth  of  a  share  of  Series  A  Preferred  Stock  (the  “Purchase
Price”),  subject  to  adjustment.  Each  one  one-hundredth  of  a
share of Series A Preferred Stock has designations and powers,
preferences  and  rights,  and  the  qualifications,  limitations  and
restrictions which make its value approximately equal to the value
of a Common Share. 

50

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

The  Rights  are  not  exercisable  until  the  Distribution  Date  (as
defined in the Certificate of Designation for the Series A Preferred
Stock). The Rights will expire on June 1, 2011, unless the Rights
are earlier redeemed or exchanged by us. Each share of Series A
Preferred Stock will be entitled to a minimum preferential quarterly
dividend  payment  of  $1.00  but  will  be  entitled  to  an  aggregate
dividend of 100 times the dividend declared per Common Share.
In  the  event  of  liquidation,  the  holders  of  the  Series  A  Preferred
Stock would be entitled to a minimum preferential liquidation pay-
ment  of  $100  per  share,  but  would  be  entitled  to  receive  an
aggregate  payment  equal  to  100  times  the  payment  made  per
Common Share. Each share of Series A Preferred Stock will have
100  votes,  voting  together  with  the  Common  Shares.  Finally,  in
the  event  of  any  merger,  consolidation  or  other  transaction  in
which  Common  Shares  are  exchanged,  each  share  of  Series  A
Preferred Stock will be entitled to receive 100 times the amount of
consideration  received  per  Common  Share.  Because  of  the
nature  of  the  Series  A  Preferred  Stock  dividend  and  liquidation
rights,  the  value  of  one  one-hundredth  of  a  share  of  Series  A
Preferred  Stock  should  approximate  the  value  of  one  Common
Share. The Series A Preferred Stock ranks junior to the Series B
Preferred Stock and would rank junior to any other series of pre-
ferred  stock.  Until  a  Right  is  exercised,  the  holder  thereof,  as
such, will have no rights as a stockholder, including, without limi-
tation, the right to vote or to receive dividends. 

Series B Convertible Preferred Stock 

In connection with a strategic alliance with Enzon Pharmaceu-
ticals,  Inc.,  we  entered  into  a  Preferred  Stock  Purchase
Agreement pursuant to which we sold to Enzon and Enzon pur-
chased from us 40,000 shares of non-voting Series B Preferred
Stock  at  a  purchase  price  of  one  thousand  dollars  ($1,000)  per
share for an aggregate purchase price of $40.0 million. A Certifi-
cate of Designation filed with the Secretary of State of Delaware
sets  forth  the  rights,  privileges  and  preferences  of  the  Series  B
Preferred  Stock.  Pursuant  to  the  Certificate  of  Designation,  the
Series B Preferred Stock does not have voting rights. The Series
B Preferred Stock is convertible, in whole or in part, into that num-
ber  of  shares  of  our  Common  Stock  (the  “Conversion  Shares”)
equal  to  the  quotient  of  $1,000  per  share  divided  by  the
Conversion Price. The “Conversion Price” was initially $22.79 per
share  or  125%  of  the  Closing  Price  and  at  no  time  can  the
Preferred Stock convert into shares of Common Stock at a dis-
count to the Closing Price. The “Closing Price” equals $18.23 per
share and was based upon the average of our closing bid prices
as listed on the Nasdaq National Market for the twenty (20) trad-
ing days preceding the date of the closing of the transaction. 

The Series B Preferred Stock is convertible at the option of the
holder. In accordance with the rights, privileges, and preferences
of the Series B Preferred Stock pursuant to the certificate of desig-
nation, on January 7, 2005 the Conversion Price was adjusted to
be equal to $19.49 per share based on the average of the closing
bid  prices  of  our  common  stock  as  quoted  on  the  Nasdaq
National Market for the 20 trading days preceding January 7, 2005. 

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 51

To the extent not previously converted, the Series B Preferred
Stock  will  automatically  convert  into  shares  of  our  Common
Stock,  based  on  the  then  effective  Conversion  Price,  upon  the
earliest  of  (i) the  fourth  anniversary  of  the  Original  Issue  Date
(January  7,  2006);  (ii)
immediately  prior  to  an  Asset  Transfer  or
Acquisition  (as  defined  in  the  Certificate  of  Designation);  or  (iii)
with the consent of the holders of a majority of the then outstand-
ing  Series  B  Preferred  Stock  immediately  prior  to  a  liquidation,
dissolution or winding up of Nektar. In accordance with the terms
and  conditions  of  the  Preferred  Stock  Purchase  Agreement,  on
January 7, 2006, all remaining and outstanding shares of Series
B  preferred  stock  were  converted  into  1,023,292  shares  of  our
common stock. 

Issuance of Common Stock 

On  August 15,  2005,  we  entered  into  a  Common  Stock
Purchase  Agreement  with  Mainfield  Enterprises  Inc.  pursuant  to
which we sold approximately 1.9 million shares of our common
stock at an average price of $16.93 per common share for pro-
ceeds of approximately $31.6 million, net of issuance costs. 

In March 2004, we entered into an underwriting agreement with
Lehman  Brothers  Inc.  pursuant  to  which  we  sold  9.5 million
shares  of  our  common  stock  at  a  price  of  $20.71  per  common

share for proceeds of approximately $196.4 million, net of issuance
costs. 

Employee Stock Purchase Plan 

In  February  1994,  our  Board  of  Directors  adopted  the
Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the “Purchase Plan”). Under the
Purchase  Plan,  300,000  shares  of  Common  Stock  have  been
reserved  for  purchase  by  our  employees  pursuant  to  section
423(b)  of  the  Internal  Revenue  Code  of  1986.  In  May  2002,  we
amended and restated the Purchase Plan to increase the number
of  shares  of  Common  Stock  authorized  for  issuance  under  the
Purchase Plan from a total of 300,000 shares to a total of 800,000
shares.  Our  stockholders  approved  this  amendment  in  June
2002.  As  of  December 31,  2005,  374,408  of  Common  Stock
have been issued under the Purchase Plan. 

The terms of the Employee Stock Purchase Plan provide eligi-
ble employees with the opportunity to acquire an ownership inter-
est in Nektar through participation in a program of periodic payroll
deductions  for  the  purchase  of  our  common  stock.  Employees
must make an election to enroll or re-enroll in the plan on a semi-
annual basis. Stock is purchased at 85% of the lower of the clos-
ing price on the first day of the enrollment period or the last day
of the enrollment period. 

Stock Option Plans 

The following table summarizes information, as of December 31, 2005, with respect to shares of our Common Stock that may be

issued under our existing equity compensation plans: 

Plan Category 

Equity compensation plans 

approved by security holders
Equity compensation plans not 
approved by security holders

Total

Number of securities to be 
issued upon exercise of
outstanding options 
(a) (1)

Weighted-average
exercise price of
outstanding options 
(b)

Number of securities remaining available 
for issuance under equity  compensation plans
(excluding securities reflected in column(a)) 
(c)

4,697,617

8,414,615

13,112,232

$17.48

$18.31

$17.84

1,513,427 (2)

1,988,320

3,501,747

(1) Does not include options to purchase 32,478 shares assumed in connection with the acquisition of Bradford Particle Design Ltd (with a weighted-average exercise price of $7.74 per
share) and options to purchase 104,097 shares we assumed in connection with the acquisition of Shearwater Corporation (with a weighted-average exercise price of $0.03 per share). 

(2) Includes  425,592  shares  of  common  stock  available  for  future  issuance  under  our  Employee  Stock  Purchase  Plan  as  of  December  31,  2004.  Eligible  participants  purchased  an 

aggregate amount of 108,648 shares and 125,617 shares under the Employee Stock Purchase Plan in fiscal year 2005 and 2004, respectively. 

2000 Equity Incentive Plan 

Our 1994 Equity Incentive Plan was adopted by the Board of
Directors on February 10, 1994, and was amended and restated
in  its  entirety  and  renamed  the  “2000  Equity  Incentive  Plan”  on
April 19, 2000. The purpose of the 2000 Equity Incentive Plan is
to  attract  and  retain  qualified  personnel,  to  provide  additional
incentives to our employees, officers, consultants and employee
directors and to promote the success of our business. Pursuant
to the 2000 Equity Incentive Plan, we may grant or issue incentive
stock options to employees and officers and non-qualified stock
options, rights to acquire restricted stock and stock bonuses to
consultants, employees, officers and employee directors. Options
granted to non-employees are recorded at fair value based on the
fair value measurement criteria of FAS 123. 

The  maximum  term  of  a  stock  option  under  the  2000  Equity
Incentive Plan is ten years, but if the optionee at the time of grant
has  voting  power  of  more  than  10%  of  our  outstanding  capital
stock,  the  maximum  term  of  an  incentive  stock  option  is  five
years. The exercise price of incentive stock options granted under
the 2000 Equity Incentive Plan must be at least equal to 100% (or
110%  with  respect  to  holders  of  more  than  10%  of  the  voting
power of our outstanding capital stock) of the fair market value of
the stock subject to the option on the date of the grant. The exer-
cise price of non-qualified stock options, and the purchase price
of  rights  to  acquire  restricted  stock,  granted  under  the  2000
Equity  Incentive  Plan  are  determined  by  the  Board  of  Directors. 
The  Board  may  amend  the  2000  Equity  Incentive  Plan  at 
any  time,  although  certain  amendments  would  require  stock-
holder approval. The 2000 Equity Incentive Plan will terminate on

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

51

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 52

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

February 9, 2010, unless earlier terminated by the Board. In 2004,
we  amended  and  restated  the  2000  Equity  Incentive  Plan  to
increase the number of shares of Common Stock authorized for
issuance  under  the  Purchase  Plan  from  a  total  of  10,350,000
shares  to  a  total  of  11,250,000  shares.  Our  stockholders
approved this amendment on June 17, 2004. 

Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option Plan 

On  February  10,  1994,  our  Board  of  Directors  adopted  the
Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option Plan under which options
to purchase up to 400,000 shares of our Common Stock at the
then fair market value may be granted to our non-employee direc-
tors. There are no remaining options available for grant under this
plan as of December 31, 2005. 

2000 Non-Officer Equity Incentive Plan 

Our 1998 Non-Officer Equity Incentive Plan was adopted by the
Board of Directors on August 18, 1998, and was amended and
restated in its entirety and renamed the “2000 Non-officer Equity
Incentive Plan” on June 6, 2000 (the “2000 Plan”). The purpose of
the 2000 Plan is to attract and retain qualified personnel, to pro-
vide  additional  incentives  to  employees  and  consultants  and  to
promote the success of our business. Pursuant to the 2000 plan,
we  may  grant  or  issue  non-qualified  stock  options,  rights  to
acquire  restricted  stock  and  stock  bonuses  to  employees  and
consultants who are neither Officers nor Directors of Nektar. 

The maximum term of a stock option under the 2000 Plan is ten
years. The exercise price of stock options and the purchase price
of restricted stock granted under the 2000 Plan are determined
by the Board of Directors. 

On January 25, 2002, we offered to certain employees (officers
and  directors  were  excluded)  the  ability  to  exchange  certain
options  (“Eligible  Options”)  to  purchase  shares  of  our  Common
Stock granted prior to July 24, 2001, with exercise prices greater
than or equal to $25.00 per share for replacement options to pur-
chase  shares  of  our  Common  Stock  to  be  granted  under  the
2000  Plan.  We  conducted  the  exchange  with  respect  to  the
Eligible  Options  on  a  one-for-two  (1:2)  basis.  If  an  employee
accepted  this  offer  with  respect  to  any  Eligible  Option,  such
employee also was obligated to exchange all options to acquire
our Common Stock granted to such employee on or after July 24,
2001  (the  “Mandatory  Exchange  Options”).  We  conducted  the
exchange with respect to Mandatory Exchange Options on a one-
for-one  (1:1)  basis.  A  total  of  90  employees  participated  in  the
exchange  offer,  exchanging  1,217,500  Eligible  Options  and
78,170 Mandatory Exchange Options to purchase shares of our
Common  Stock.  We  issued  Replacement  Options  to  purchase
686,920  shares  of  Common  Stock  on  August  26,  2002,  at  an
exercise price equal to the closing price of our Common Stock as
reported on the NASDAQ National Market on the last market trad-
ing day prior to the date of grant ($7.31). 

A summary of stock option activity under the 2000 Equity Incentive Plan, the Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option Plan and the 2000
Non-Officer Equity Incentive Plan is as follows (in thousands, except for per share information): 

Options Outstanding

Number of Shares

Exercise Price Per Share

Weighted-Average
Exercise Price Per Share

14,742
1,631
(362)
(1,058)

14,953
1,393
(1,817)
(760)

13,769
(206)

13,563
1,791
(1,014)
(1,091)

13,249

$ 0.01-61.63
4.46-14.63
0.01-14.63
0.11-57.03

$ 0.01-61.63
10.10-22.49
0.01-19.25
0.01-56.38

$ 0.01-61.63
0.01-0.01

0.01-61.63
13.46-19.76
0.01-18.47
3.88-56.38

$ 0.01-61.63

$17.20
8.75
5.42
16.74

$16.57
17.33
7.52
20.86

$17.71
0.01

17.57
17.44
9.47
21.33

$17.85

Balance at December 31, 2002

Options granted
Options exercised
Options expired and canceled

Balance at December 31, 2003

Options granted
Options exercised
Options expired and canceled

Balance at December 31, 2004, as reported

Less: restricted stock units*

Balance at December 31, 2004

Options granted
Options exercised
Options expired and canceled

Balance at December 31, 2005

*See disclosure of restricted stock units below 

52

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 53

At  December  31,  2005,  2004,  and  2003,  options  were  exercisable  to  purchase  9.4  million,  9.2  million,  and  9.2  million  shares  at

weighted-average exercise prices of $19.11, $18.49, and $16.52 per share, respectively. 

Weighted average fair value of options granted during the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, was $17.44, $10.45,
and $5.44 respectively. The following table provides information regarding our stock option plans as of December 31, 2005 (in thou-
sands, except per share information and remaining life): 

Options Outstanding 

Options Exercisable 

Range of
Exercise Prices

$ 0.01 - 7.15
7.19 - 9.31
9.38 - 13.54
13.63 - 14.50
14.53 - 16.82
16.85 - 18.54
18.55 - 23.00
23.05 - 27.88
27.90 - 54.09
54.13 - 61.63

$ 0.01 - 61.63

Number

1,351
1,407
1,334
1,470
1,370
1,420
1,384
2,180
1,326
7

13,249

Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
Per Share

Weighted-Average
Remaining Contractual
Life (in years)

$ 5.13
8.12
12.18
14.09
15.43
18.15
20.73
27.01
34.93
54.70

$17.85

5.67
5.62
5.57
4.00
5.02
7.26
6.35
4.55
4.87
4.81

5.38

Number

834
961
923
1,289
798
412
798
2,051
1,295
7

9,368

Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
Per Share

$ 4.54
8.14
12.24
14.09
15.26
18.14
21.65
26.96
34.98
54.70

$19.11

Restricted Stock Units 

During  the  years  ended  December  31,  2005  and  2004,  we
issued Restricted Stock Units (RSU) to certain officers, employees
and consultants. RSU’s are similar to restricted stock in that they
are issued for no consideration; however, the holder generally is
not  entitled  to  the  underlying  shares  of  common  stock  until  the
RSU vests. The RSU’s were issued under both the 2000 Equity
Incentive  Plan  and  the  2000  Non-Officer  Equity  Incentive  Plan.
The RSU’s are settled by delivery of shares of our common stock
on  or  shortly  after  the  date  the  awards  vest  and  become  fully
vested over a period of 36 to 48 months. 

Beginning with shares granted in the year ended December 31,
2005, each RSU depletes the pool of options available for grant
in a ratio of 1:1.5. 

A  summary  of  RSU  activity  under  the  2000  Equity  Incentive
Plan and the 2000 Non-Officer Equity Incentive Plan is as follows
(in thousands): 

Plans/Units

2000
Equity
Incentive
Plan

2000
Non-Officer
Equity Incentive
Plan

—
91

91
72
—

(15)

148

—
115

115
40
—

(19)

136

Total

—
206

206
112
—

(34)

284

Balance at January 1, 2004

Granted

Balance at December 31, 2004

Granted
Exercised

Canceled and released

Balance at December 31, 2005

In connection with the RSUs, we recorded deferred compensa-
tion of $2.0 million and $3.9 million for the years ended December
31,  2005  and  2004,  respectively.  This  deferred  compensation
represents the fair value of the RSUs. We are ratably amortizing
the  deferred  compensation  on  a  monthly  basis  over  the  vesting
periods of 36 - 48 months. 

For the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, we recog-
nized expense related to the RSUs of $1.9 million and $1.2 mil-
lion, respectively. 

Warrants 

In November 2000, we issued warrants to certain consultants
to purchase an additional 6,000 shares of common stock. These
warrants  bear  an  exercise  price  of  $45.88  per  share  and  expire
after six years. 

In  September  2000,  we  issued  warrants  to  purchase  10,000
shares of common stock to the landlord of one of our facilities in
connection  with  the  signing  of  a  capital  lease  on  that  facility.
These  warrants  bear  an  exercise  price  of  $45.88  per  share  and
expire  after  six  years.  These  warrants  were  accounted  for  as
equity  in  accordance  with  EITF  96-18,  Accounting  for  Equity
Instruments  That  Are  Issued  to  Other  Than  Employees  for
Acquiring, or in Conjunction with Selling, Goods or Services.

The  warrants  issued  in  2000  were  valued  using  a  Black-
Scholes option valuation model with the following weighted-aver-
age assumptions: a risk free interest rate of 6.4%; a dividend yield
of  0.0%;  a  volatility  factor  of  0.688;  and  a  weighted  average
expected life of ten years. 

In November 1996, we issued warrants to purchase a total of
40,000  shares  of  common  stock  in  connection  with  a  tenant
improvement loan for one of our facilities. These warrants bear an
exercise price of $6.56 per share and expire after ten years. These
warrants  were  accounted  for  as  equity  in  accordance  with  EITF
96-18. These warrants allow for net share settlement at the option
of the warrant holder. In November 2004, one of the warrants rep-
resenting 20,000 shares of common stock was exercised in the
form of a net share settlement for 11,775 shares of common stock. 
The  warrants  issued  in  1996  were  valued  using  a  Black-
Scholes option valuation model with the following weighted-aver-
age assumptions: a risk free interest rate of 6.4%; a dividend yield 
of  0.0%;  a  volatility  factor  of  0.620;  and  a  weighted  average
expected life of ten years. 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

53

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 54

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

Reserved Shares 

At December 31, 2005, we have reserved shares of Common

Stock for issuance as follows (in thousands): 

Convertible subordinated notes and debentures
Stock options
Convertible preferred stock
Employee purchase plan
Restricted Stock Units
Shares reserved for retirement plans
Warrants to purchase Common Stock

Total

NOTE 11 — INCOME TAXES 

16,896
16,381
1,023
426
340
185
36

35,287

For financial reporting purposes, “Loss before provision for income
taxes,” includes the following components (in thousands): 

Domestic
Foreign

Total

2005

2004 

2003 

$(172,232)
(13,016)

$ (95,999)
(6,050)

$(58,983)
(6,738)

$(185,248)

$(102,049)

$(65,721)

As of December 31, 2005, we had a net operating loss carry-
forward for federal income tax purposes of approximately $532.6
million,  which  expire  beginning  in  the  year  2006.  We  had  a
California state net operating loss carryforward of approximately
$259.2 million, which expires beginning in 2005. We had a foreign
net  operating  loss  carryforward  of  approximately  $12.3  million,
which has an unlimited carryforward period. The company has a
net  operating  loss  for  Alabama  state  tax  purposes  which  would
reduce the amount of tax to be paid to Alabama in the future. 

Utilization of the federal and state net operating loss and credit
carryforwards  may  be  subject  to  a  substantial  annual  limitation
due  to  the  “change  in  ownership”  provisions  of  the  Internal
Revenue Code of 1986 and similar state provisions. The annual
limitation may result in the expiration of net operating losses and
credits before utilization. 

The benefit (provision) for income taxes consists of the following 

(in thousands):

Current:
Federal
State
Foreign

Total Current
Deferred:
Federal
State
Foreign

Total Deferred

2005

2004  

2003

$ — $ — $ —
(169)
(665)
—
—

137
—

137

(665)

(169)

—
—
—

—
828
—
828

—
—
—
—

Benefit/(provision) for income taxes

$137

$163

$(169)

We recognized approximately $0.1 million of expense related to
warrants  for  the  year  ended  December  31,  2005  and  2004,
respectively. 

At December 31, 2005, we had warrants outstanding to purchase
a total of 36,000 shares of our common stock. No warrants were
issued  during  the  years  ended  December  31,  2005  and  2004. 

Stock options issued to non-employees 

Options granted to consultants are recorded according to the
fair  value  method  over  the  vesting  period.  For  the  years  ended
December  31,  2005,  2004,  and  2003,  we  have  recorded  com-
pensation  costs  of  $0.2  million,  $0.7  million,  and  $0.2  million,
respectively. 

These options were valued using a Black-Scholes option valu-
ation  model  with  the  following  weighted-average  assumptions: 

2005

2004

2003

Risk-free interest rate
Dividend yield
Volatility factor
Weighted average 

expected life

4.07%-4.35% 1.1%-4.7% 3.2%-4.6%
0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.723

0.707

0.688

7.2 years

4.2 years

8.4 years

Time Accelerated Restricted Stock Award Plan (“TARSAP”) 

During the year ended December 31, 2004, we issued options
for  111,000  shares  of  stock  out  of  our  2000  Non-Officer  Equity
Incentive Plan to certain employees. The options have an exercise
price  equal  to  fair  market  value  on  the  date  of  grant.  These
options become 100% vested upon the earlier of: 1) approval of
Exubera® by the FDA or 2) five years from the date of grant. 

401(k) Plan 

We sponsor a 401(k) retirement plan whereby eligible employ-
ees may elect to contribute up to the lesser of 60% of their annual
compensation or the statutorily prescribed annual limit allowable
under Internal Revenue Service regulations. The 401(k) plan per-
mits  us  to  make  matching  contributions  on  behalf  of  all  partici-
pants.  Currently,  we  match  the  lesser  of  75%  of  year  to  date
participant contributions or 3% of eligible wages. The match vests
ratably  over  the  first  three  years  of  employment,  such  that  after
three years of employment, all matching is fully vested. The match-
ing  contribution  is  in  the  form  of  shares  of  our  common  stock. 
We  issued  approximately  87,000  shares,  66,000  shares,  and
142,000  shares  of  our  common  stock  valued  at  approximately
$1.4 million, $1.2 million, and $1.2 million in connection with the
match in 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively. During part of 2004,
shares  reserved  for  issuance  related  to  matching  contributions
that had been previously been approved by our Board of Directors
became  fully  depleted.  During  this  time,  we  purchased  approxi-
mately 14,000 shares on the open market on behalf of employees
for a total cost of $0.2 million. This amount was recorded as com-
pensation expense. During the year ended December 31, 2004,
our Board of Directors approved an additional 300,000 shares to
be reserved for issuance related to matching contributions. A total
of 184,501 shares were reserved for issuance related to matching
contributions as of December 31, 2005. 

54

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 55

Income  tax  expense  benefit  (provision)  related  to  continuing
operations differ from the amounts computed by applying the statu-
tory income tax rate of 34% to pretax loss as follows (in thousands):

2005

2004  

2003

U.S. federal benefit/(taxes) 

At statutory rate
State taxes
Net operating losses not benefited
Investment impairment and 

non-deductible amortization

Non-deductible in process 

research charge

Other

Total

$ 62,984 $ 34,697 $ 22,345
(169)
(20,674)

137
(50,221)

163
(33,000)

(4,904)

(1,532)

(1,434)

(7,859)
—

(165)

$

137 $

163 $

(237)

(169)

Deferred  income  taxes  reflect  the  net  tax  effects  of  loss  and
credit carryforwards and temporary differences between the car-
rying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting pur-
poses and the amounts used for income tax purposes. Significant
components  of  our  deferred  tax  assets  for  federal  and  state
income taxes are as follows (in thousands):

December 31,  

Deferred tax assets: 

Net operating loss carryforwards
Research and other credits
Capitalized research expenses
Deferred revenue
Depreciation
Other

Total deferred tax assets
Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets
Acquisition related intangibles

Net deferred tax assets

2005

2004 

$ 196,716 $ 154,200
16,900
9,200
11,900
5,400
22,700

20,301
7,529
7,177
13,184
28,311

273,218
(267,941)
(4,455)

220,300
(219,472)
—

$

822 $

828

Realization  of  deferred  tax  assets  is  dependent  upon  future
earnings,  if  any,  the  timing  and  amount  of  which  are  uncertain.
Because  of  our  lack  of  earnings  history,  the  net  deferred  tax
assets related to our non-Alabama operations have been fully off-
set by a valuation allowance. The valuation allowance increased
by  $48.5  million  and  $37.7  million  during  the  years  ended
December  31,  2005  and  2004,  respectively.  The  valuation
allowance includes approximately $34.6 million of benefit related
to employee stock option exercises which will be credited to addi-
tional paid in capital when realized. Also, at the end of December
31, 2005, approximately $14.0 million of the valuation allowance
relates to acquisition related items, if and to the extent realized in
future periods, will first reduce the carrying value of goodwill, then
other long-lived intangible assets of our acquired subsidiary and
then income tax expense. 

We have recorded a deferred tax asset related to our Alabama

subsidiary of $0.8 million. 

We also have federal research credits of approximately $13.7 mil-
lion, which expire beginning in the year 2006 and state tax research
credits of approximately $12.3 million which have no expiration date. 

NOTE 12 — STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS DATA 

Years ended December 31,

2005

2004  

2003

Supplemental disclosure of cash 
flows information (in thousands):
Cash paid for interest
Cash paid for income taxes

Supplemental schedule of non-cash 
investing and financing activities 
(in thousands):
Net reduction in convertible 
subordinated notes due to exchange 
of 3.5% notes for 3% notes

Conversion of debt into common stock
Deferred compensation related to the 

$12,468 $ 25,226 $19,223
—
$

238 $

27 $

$
$

— $
— $186,029 $

— $28,700
—

issuance of stock options

$ 2,039 $ 3,902 $

—

Non-cash disclosure related to 
consolidation of Shearwater 
Polymers, LLC (in thousands): 
Tangible assets primarily property 

and equipment

Capital lease obligation

$
$

— $
— $

— $ 2,362
— $ 2,402 

NOTE 13 — RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS 

Redemption of Interest in Inhale 201 Partnership 

In connection with a Contribution Agreement dated September
14,  2000,  by  and  between  Nektar  and  Bernardo  Property
Advisors, Inc., we had contributed certain property located at 201
Industrial  Road,  San  Carlos,  CA  to  the  Partnership  in  exchange
for a limited partnership interest in the Partnership. In addition, we
entered  into  a  Build-to-Suit  Lease  with  the  Partnership  (the
“Lease”)  with  respect  to  the  property  contributed  to  the
Partnership and the building subsequently built on such property,
now occupied by us as its headquarters (the “Building”). 

Effective  June  23,  2004,  Nektar,  SciMed  Prop  III,  Inc.  (the
“General  Partner”),  Bernardo  Property  Advisors,  Inc.,  and  Inhale
201 Industrial Road Partnership (the “Partnership”) entered into a
Redemption  Agreement  (the  “Redemption  Agreement”)  with
respect to our limited partnership interest in the Partnership. The
Redemption Agreement provides for the redemption of our limited
partnership interest in the Partnership in exchange for a cash pay-
ment  of  $19.5  million  from  Bernardo  Property  Advisors,  Inc.  to
Nektar, the repayment from Bernardo Property Advisors, Inc., to
Nektar  of  a  $3.0  million  outstanding  loan  from  Nektar  to  the
Partnership,  and  a  modification  of  the  Lease.  The  redemption
contemplated  by  the  Redemption  Agreement  and  related  trans-
actions were subject to certain closing conditions which were met
on August 18, 2004, resulting in the dissolution of the Partnership
on that date. As of September 30, 2004, we are no longer con-
solidating  the  Partnership  as  part  of  our  consolidated  financial
statements. 

Pursuant to the Redemption Agreement, Nektar and Bernardo
Property Advisors, Inc., entered into an Amended and Restated
Build-to-Suit Lease (the “Amended Lease”). The Amended Lease
provides  for,  among  other  things,  a  decrease  in  the  term  of  our
obligations with respect to a portion of the Building not currently
occupied by Nektar from 12 years to 3 years and the elimination
of our rights to occupy certain other space in the Building. 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

55

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 56

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements (continued)

In accordance with FAS 98, Accounting for Leases, we recorded
a capital lease asset and obligation equal to the fair market value
of the leased asset of $25.5 million. We also recorded a deferred
gain on the sale-leaseback transaction of $12.7 million. In accor-
dance  with  FAS  66,  Accounting  for  Sales  of  Real  Estate, this
deferred  gain  was  recorded  as  a  liability  and  is  being  amortized
over the term of the lease as a reduction to depreciation expense.
During the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, we amor-
tized a gain of $0.9 million and $0.5 million, respectively. 

Purchase of Nektar, AL Facility 

On  September  30,  2004,  we  purchased  our  Church  Street
facility in Alabama from Shearwater Polymers, LLC (“the LLC”) for
$2.9 million. The land and building were recorded as fixed assets
at their fair market value as of the purchase date of $0.7 million
and $2.2 million, respectively. 

Prior to this purchase, Nektar, AL paid $0.2 million, $0.3 million,
and $0.3 million in 2004, 2003, and 2002, respectively, as rent to
the LLC. The LLC was 4% owned by Nektar AL with the remain-
ing 96% owned by Dr. J. Milton Harris. Dr. Harris is an employee
of Nektar, AL and prior to March 4, 2004, he was one of our exec-
utive  officers.  Both  Nektar  AL  and  Dr.  Harris  had  jointly  guaran-
teed a bank loan on the Nektar AL facility, and the lease income
from Nektar AL was the sole source of revenue for the LLC. We
had  fully  consolidated  this  entity  in  our  consolidated  financial
statements  since  December  31,  2003,  in  accordance  with  FIN
46R, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities. On September 30,
2004, the LLC paid the principal balance owed on the bank loan
of  $1.7  million,  and  we  were  relieved  of  the  guarantee.  As  of
September  30,  2004,  the  LLC  was  dissolved  and  we  are  no
longer consolidating the LLC as part of our consolidated financial
statements. 

Other 

In 2004 and 2003 we paid $0.2 million and $0.5 million, respec-
tively,  for  legal  services  rendered  by  Alston  &  Bird  LLP  of  which
Paul F. Pedigo, Esq. is a Partner. Mr. Pedigo is a relative by mar-
riage  of  J.  Milton  Harris.  Prior  to  March  4,  2004,  Dr.  Harris  was
one of our executive officers. 

NOTE 14 — AEROGEN ACQUISITION

On October 20, 2005, the Company completed its acquisition of
Aerogen,  Inc.  (Aerogen)  pursuant  to  a  definitive  agreement  and
plan of merger dated August 12, 2005 (“Acquisition Agreement”). 
Pursuant  to  the  Acquisition  Agreement,  Aerogen  merged  into
the  Company  and  ceased  to  exist  as  a  separate  entity  as  of
October  20,  2005.  The  results  of  Aerogens’  operations  were
included in the consolidated financial statements after that date.
The Aerogen acquisition was accounted for under the purchase
method of accounting. 

The total purchase price of $34.5 million for the Aerogen acqui-
sition consisted of: $32.1 million in cash (including $3.8 of cash
on hand), plus expenses associated with the transaction and lia-
bilities  incurred  by  the  Company  resulting  from  the  transaction
totaling approximately $2.4 million. The allocation of the purchase
price  resulted  in  $8.0  million  of  goodwill.  The  purchase  price
under the plan of merger was fixed and there was no contingent
consideration.  The  Company  assessed  that  the  purchase  price
allocation period had closed at December 31, 2005. 

The total original purchase price was allocated as follows: $6.7
million to net tangible assets; $19.8 million to the fair value of iden-
tifiable intangible assets, including $7.9 million of in-process tech-
nology that was written off during the year ended December 31,
2005; and $8.0 million to goodwill. No amount of the goodwill is
tax deductible. The fair value of amortizable intangible assets and
their useful lives were as follows (in thousands): 

Useful
Life in
Years

Gross
Carrying
Amount

Accumulated
Amortization

Net

Product and Core technology
Supplier and  

customer relations

5

5

Total

$ 7,170 

$(239) $ 6,931 

4,730

(158)

4,572 

$11,900 

$(397) $11,503 

56

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T  

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 57

NOTE 15 — SELECTED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA 

We reclassified approximately $0.2 million, $0.2 million, and $0.3
million for the three month periods ended September 30, 2004,
June  30,  2004,  and  March  31,  2004,  respectively,  from  general
and  administrative  expenses  to  interest  expense.  For  the  three
month periods ended December 31, 2003, September 30, 2003,
June 30, 2003, and March 31, 2003, the reclassification adjust-
ment  was  approximately  $0.4  million,  $0.4  million,  $0.3  million,
and  $0.3  million,  respectively.  This  reclassification  was  made  to
record the amortization of debt issuance costs to interest expense
as required under Accounting Principles Board No. 21, Interest on
Receivables and Payables and EITF 86-15 Increasing-Rate Debt. 
These reclassifications did not result in any change to our cash
position, revenue, or net loss for any quarterly period during the
years ended December 31, 2004 or 2003. 

We have experienced fluctuations in our quarterly results. Our
results have included costs associated with acquisitions of various
technologies,  increases  in  research  and  development  expendi-

tures, and expansion of late stage clinical and early stage com-
mercial  manufacturing  facilities.  We  expect  these  fluctuations  to
continue in the future. Due to these and other factors, we believe
that  quarter-to-quarter  comparisons  of  our  operating  results  will
not be meaningful, and you should not rely on our results for one
quarter  as  any  indication  of  our  future  performance.  See
“Management’s  Discussion  and  Analysis  of  Financial  Condition
and  Results  of  Operations”  for  a  discussion  of  our  critical
accounting policies. 

The following table sets forth certain unaudited quarterly finan-
cial  data,  as  adjusted  to  correct  for  the  misapplications  of  our
accounting policies under U.S. GAAP discussed above, for each
of the eight quarters ended December 31, 2005. In our opinion,
the unaudited information set forth below has been prepared on
the same basis as the audited information and includes all adjust-
ments necessary to present fairly the information set forth herein.
The operating results for any quarter are not indicative of results
for  any  future  period.  All  data  is  in  thousands  except  per  share
information.

Contract research revenue 
Product sales 
Exubera® commercialization 

readiness revenue

Gross margin on product sales 
Research and development 

expenses*

General and administrative 

expenses* 
Operating loss*
Interest expense*
Net loss 
Basic and fully diluted net 

loss per share 

Fiscal Year 2005

Fiscal Year 2004

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

$ 19,529 
$ 6,392 

$ 19,552 
$ 5,470 

$ 23,657 
$ 8,450 

$ 18,864
9,054 
$

$ 21,509 
$ 4,322 

$ 22,102 
$ 6,425 

$ 23,556
$ 4,990 

$ 22,018
$ 9,348

$ 2,573 
$ 1,137 

$ 3,528 
37 
$

$ 4,247 
$ 2,325 

$
$

4,963
2,139

— 
$ 1,786 

— 
(308)

$

$

— 
513

—
$ 3,296

$ 34,945 

$ 35,785 

$ 38,591 

$ 42,338

$ 31,292 

$ 33,650 

$ 34,534 

$ 34,047

$ 9,110 
$(24,092)
$ 3,060
$(26,165)

$ 10,135 
$(26,450)
$ 2,856 
$(26,912)

$ 10,948 
$ 13,659
$(23,367) $ (108,724)
$
$ 2,992 
5,177
$(108,239)
$(23,795)

$ 6,828 
$(15,806)
$ 16,357 
$(40,000)

$ 8,072 
$(20,909)
$ 2,987 
$(22,164)

$ 7,382 
$(18,828)
$ 3,259 
$(20,452)

$ 8,685
$(18,399)
$ 3,144
$(19,270)

$ (0.31)

$

(0.32)

$ (0.28)

$

(1.23)

$ (0.64)

$ (0.27)

$ (0.24)

$ (0.23)

* These amounts have been restated for all quarters of 2003 and for the first three quarters of 2004 as discussed above. 

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

57

NKT05-244_RlsdFin_040506.qxd  4/19/06  8:27 AM  Page 58

Nektar Corporate Information

Corporate Headquarters
Nektar Therapeutics 
150 Industrial Road 
San Carlos, CA 94070-6256 
Telephone (650) 631-3100 
Facsimile (650) 631-3150 

Annual Report on Form 10-K
Copies of Nektar’s Annual Report
on Form 10-K, exclusive of exhibits,
are available without charge upon
written request to:

Investor Relations 
Nektar Therapeutics 
150 Industrial Road 
San Carlos, CA 94070-6256

Or via email to
investors@nektar.com; 
Online copies can also be 
obtained at www.nektar.com 
under “investor relations.”

Annual Meeting
The Annual Meeting of Stockholders
will be held at 10:00 a.m. Pacific
Daylight Time on Thursday, June 1,
2006 at Nektar’s corporate head-
quarters located at 150 Industrial
Road, San Carlos, CA 94070-6256.

Corporate Counsel
Cooley Godward LLP 
Palo Alto, CA 

Independent Auditors
Ernst & Young LLP 
Palo Alto, CA

Transfer Agent and 
Stockholder Services
Mellon Investor Services, LLC 
525 Market Street, Suite 3500 
San Francisco, CA 94105 
1-800-522-6645

Securities
Our Common Stock trades on the
NASDAQ National Market under the
symbol NKTR. The table below sets
forth the high and low closing sales
prices for our Common Stock (as
reported on the NASDAQ National
Market) during the periods indicated.

Year Ended December 31, 2005

1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter

$ 19.80
$ 19.02
$ 19.59
$ 17.49

Year Ended December 31, 2004

1st Quarter
2nd Quarter
3rd Quarter
4th Quarter

$ 23.24
$ 22.83
$ 19.81
$ 20.46

$ 13.41
$ 13.72
$ 16.24
$ 14.66

$ 14.30
$ 16.33
$ 9.89
$ 13.95

The  preceding  discussion  contains  forward-looking  statements  that  involve  risks  and  uncertainties.  Nektar’s  actual
results could differ materially from those discussed here. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences
include,  but  are  not  limited  to,  those  discussed  in  Part  I  of  the  Form  10-K  filed  with  the  Securities  Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 under the heading “Risk Factors.”

All Nektar brand and product names are trademarks or registered trademarks of Nektar Therapeutics in the United
States  and  other  countries.  The  following,  which  appear  in  this  Annual  Report,  are  registered  or  other  trademarks
owned by the following companies:  Exubera (Pfizer Inc); PEGASYS (Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.); Neulasta (Amgen Inc.);
Cimzia  (UCB  Group);  Definity  (Bristol-Myers  Squibb  Medical  Imaging,  Inc.);  Somavert  (Pfizer  Inc);  PEG-INTRON
(Schering-Plough  Corporation);  SprayGel  (Confluent  Surgical  Inc.);  Macugen  (OSI  Pharmaceuticals,  Inc.);  MARINOL
(Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc.); Alfacon (InterMune, Inc.); AXOKINE (Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.).

58

2 0 0 5   A N N U A L   R E P O R T

h_1665_cvrs.qxd  4/18/06  4:51 PM  Page c3

Nektar Board of Directors

Robert B. Chess 
Acting President & 
Chief Executive Officer,  
Chairman of the Board
Nektar Therapeutics

John S. Patton, Ph.D.
Director, Co-Founder & 
Chief Scientific Officer
Nektar Therapeutics

Michael A. Brown 
Director, Quantum Corp. 
Former Chairman, 
Quantum Corp.

Joseph J. Krivulka
Founder and President, 
Triax Pharmaceuticals

Christopher A. Kuebler,
Chairman,
Covance Inc.

Irwin Lerner
Former Chairman, 
F. Hoffmann-LaRoche Inc.

Susan Wang
Former Chief Financial Officer, 
Solectron Corporation

Roy A. Whitfield
Former Chairman & CEO, 
Incyte Corporation

Nektar Management Team

Robert B. Chess
Acting President & 
Chief Executive Officer,  
Chairman of the Board

Louis Drapeau
Senior Vice President, 
Finance & Chief Financial Officer

Nevan Elam
Senior Vice President,
Corporate Operations, 
General Counsel & Secretary

Elizabeth Frisby
Vice President, 
Human Resources

Hoyoung Huh, M.D., Ph.D.
Senior Vice President,
Business Development & 
Marketing

David Johnston, Ph.D.
Senior Vice President,
Research & Development

Truc Le
Senior Vice President, 
Operations & Corporate Quality

John S. Patton, Ph.D.
Director, Founder & 
Chief Scientific Officer

Christopher J. Searcy, Pharm.D.
Vice President,
Corporate Development

David Tolley
Vice President, Operations 
and Site Manager,
Nektar Alabama

N E K TA R   T H E R A P E U T I C S

59

h_1665_cvrs.qxd  4/18/06  4:50 PM  Page BC4

NEKTAR THERAPEUTICS
150 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070 
www.nektar.com