Ken Hsiang
Management
Hello. I am Ken Hsiang, the Head of Investor Relations for ASE Technology Holdings. Welcome to our First Quarter 2019 Earnings Release. All participants consent to having their voices and questions broadcast via participation of this event, please refer to our Safe Harbor notice. I would like to remind everyone on this call that the presentation that follows may contain forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are subject to a high degree of risk and our actual results may differ materially. For the purposes of this presentation, our dollar figures are generally stated in New Taiwan dollars, unless otherwise indicated. Like most Taiwan based companies, our financials are presented in accordance with the Taiwan IFRS. Results presented using Taiwan IFRS may differ materially from other accounting standards. For today’s event, I will be going over the financial results, then we will have a Q&A session with Joseph Tung, our CFO. Following the event, our VP in Charge of Public Relations, Eddie Chang will be available to address the media in Mandarin Chinese. As a reminder, because ASE Holdings was jointly formed on April 30, 2018, during the second quarter, as a legal entity, our SPIL subsidiaries results are consolidated only as of that date going forward. Results for the legal entity are labeled legal entity basis in this presentation. For the sake of comparability, we have also included results which are compared against a pro forma set of results as if SPIL was a subsidiary and consolidated as of the beginning of 2017. This set of results is labeled as pro forma basis. Given that the transaction was completed during the second quarter, the legal entity and pro forma basis will have the same sequential comparisons between the first and fourth quarters. However, the pro forma numbers are still relevant for the quarterly year-over-year comparisons. From our point of view, the business is going through a period of lackluster demand for some products and ramping unprecedented demand for others. Some of our customers are cautiously managing inventories, while some of our other customers don’t appear to have inventory concerns at all. We even have customers who are continuing to ramp their capacity requirements while into the second half of the year. I mention this because, even though our seasonal revenue drop was somewhat stronger than normal, there are still some highlights that were not part of a broad based softness. Recently, we have been frequently asked by – asked to comment on how much semiconductor inventory digestion has already occurred? And I would like to remind everyone that we do not have meaningful visibility of our customers’ inventory levels. From our perspective, once the wafer comes out from fab, it proceeds to get packaged as quickly as possible to minimize wafer oxidization. As such, we cannot make any thorough determination as to whether anything we build is for inventory accumulation or for immediate sell through. Thus, through the small peephole we have visibility over – for just a fairly short moment of our customer’s manufacturing cycle. From that short moment, we can say, nothing appears particularly abnormal at this time. However, from a wider macro perspective, we do see signs that global politics are impacting regional consumer preferences. These preference shifts do appear to benefit some of our customers while being detrimental to some others. For our ATM business, the first quarter results were somewhat sluggish. Orders for this quarter came in on the lower side of where we expected them to be. Our ATM revenues were down 15%, which probably represent a slightly stronger than seasonal decline for the first quarter. Some orders were pushed into the second quarter because of customer supply chain issues. However, when taken together with the last half of 2018, our first quarter results are probably best characterized as business being softer than expected because of end demand. For our EMS business, the first quarter came in behind our expectations. Our EMS revenues were down 31% sequentially. Softness within our Consumer and Communication segments were primarily responsible. We expect soft order volumes should persist following their seasonal trend, with orders being sluggish through the second quarter and eventually picking back up during the third quarter. Let’s start the financial overview. On Pages 3 and 4, you will find our legal entity quarterly results for the holding company and our ATM business unit. On a legal entity basis, the first quarter year-over-year results are not particularly comparable between 2019 and 2018, because of the inclusion of SPIL in 2019 or the lack of SPIL in 2018. I will generally discuss the sequential and year-over-year comparisons as part of the pro forma basis slides. With that, let’s briefly go over Page 3. For the legal entity recorded fully diluted EPS of $0.46, and basic EPS of $0.48. Sales were $88.9 billion, with a gross profit of $11.4 billion, and gross margin of 12.8%. Operating profit was $2.3 billion, and net income was $2 billion. On Page 4, you’ll find our legal entity results for our ATM business. Again, we will discuss this in the pro forma section a bit later. Let’s move to Page 5. Here we have our pro forma P&L for the consolidated holding company. To generate the historical pro forma periods, we added the historical P&Ls of each ASE and SPIL on a retroactive basis. We then added PPA and interest expenses related to the transaction as if the transaction was completed as of the beginning of 2017. And lastly, we removed relevant transaction fees and expenses. Given that the fluctuations from the holding company are comprised of the ATM and EMS businesses, I will try to keep explanations here short and provide detailed explanations during each of the business unit pages. For the first quarter, we had net revenues of $88.9 billion, representing a 22% decline quarter-over-quarter, a 6% increase year-over-year. The quarter-over-quarter decline is somewhat stronger than what we normally see relative to seasonality. This was driven primarily by a stronger than expected decline in our EMS revenue. The year-over-year increase is primarily the result of a higher revenue base within our EMS entity, despite stronger than seasonal weakness. Gross profits were down 39% quarter-over-quarter, and 7% year-over-year. These quarterly declines in gross profit are the product of lower than seasonal loading as a result of inventory control among some of our customers across both ATM and EMS. Gross profit margin declined 3.6 percentage points on a quarter-over-quarter basis and 1.7 percentage points on a year-over-year basis. Both of these declines were primarily driven by higher EMS revenue mix. Our operating expense percentage was up 1.3 percentage points to 10.2% from 8.9% in the fourth quarter, and up 0.5 percentage points on a year-over-year basis. We believe this to be the peak of our OpEx percentage for this year. From a total year perspective, we are looking to contain the OpEx percentage increase to within a 30 basis points increase. Operating profit was $2.3 billion. This represents a seasonal decline of $6.3 billion quarter-over-quarter and $1.8 billion year-over-year. Sequentially, operating margin declined 4.9 percentage points, and was down 2.2 percentage points year-over-year. During the quarter, we had a net non-operating gain of $0.3 billion. This includes net interest expense of $1 billion. The gain was primarily from our financial instruments and foreign exchange hedging activities during the quarter, offset by net interest expenses. Tax expense for the quarter was $0.4 billion, with an imputed tax rate of 15%. The imputed tax rate was low during the quarter due to high utilization of tax assets. For the second quarter, we expect to book a tax charge $0.3 billion related to our annual undistributed earnings tax. We expect the imputed tax rate for the year to be 21%, inclusive of the annual undistributed earnings tax. Net income for the first quarter was $2 billion representing a decline of $3.4 billion from the previous quarter. On a year-over-year basis net income was up $1.3 billion from the same period in 2018, principally from lower non-operating costs and tax expenses. On the bottom of the page, we have again provided here key P&L line items, without the inclusion of PPA related expenses. Consolidated gross profit, excluding PPA expenses, would be $12.6 billion with a 14.2% gross margin. Operating profit would be $3.8 billion with an operating margin of 4.2%. Net profit would be $3.5 billion with net margin of 3.9%. Basic EPS, excluding PPA expenses would be $0.82. On Page 6 is our ATM pro forma P&L. For the first quarter, revenues for our ATM business were $54.4 billion, down $9.7 billion from the previous quarter and down $1.6 billion from the same period last year. This represents a 15% decrease sequentially and a 3% decrease year-over-year. Loading levels for our ATM business fell somewhat short of our expectations, principally from softer loading and customer supply chain issues. Gross profits within ATM were down $5.5 billion quarter-over-quarter and $1.1 billion year-over-year to $8.4 billion. Lower gross profits were driven by lower seasonal loading and costs associated with ramping new products. Gross margin for ATM was down 6.3 percentage points sequentially and down 1.5 percentage points year-over-year. The sequential decline is primarily due to the lower seasonal loading and a higher raw material pass-through of product mix. The year-over-year drop in gross margin is primarily the result of softer than expected loading and new product ramps. During the first quarter operating expenses were $6.9 billion, down $0.8 billion from the fourth quarter and up $0.6 billion from the same period last year. Year-over-year operating expenses were primarily up as a result of increased compensation expenses and ramping R&D expenses. And even though it may appear outwardly that we are just adding ongoing expenses, we believe the increased compensation expenses help us recruit and retain the individuals necessary to move the company forward to the next stage of evolution. Further, a portion of incremental R&D expenses spent are for projects meant to generate new streams of revenue by the latter part of this year and a significant portion of R&D expense is specifically for helping support the ramp up of our new panel level fan-out technologies and processes. OpEx percentage was 12.7%, up 0.8 percentage points sequentially and up 1.4 percentage points year-over-year. Sequentially speaking, the OpEx percentage increase was primarily the result of lower revenues. On a year-over-year basis, higher OpEx is due to higher R&D costs from new project ramp ups and higher compensation expenses. We expect the first quarter to represent the peak operating expense percentage for the year. We expect the quarterly operating expense percentages to start trending downward going forward. During the first quarter, operating income was $1.6 billion representing a decline of $4.8 billion quarter-over-quarter and $1.6 billion year-over-year. Without the impact of PPA related depreciation and amortization, ATM gross profit margin would have been 17.7% and an operating profit margin would have been 5.5%. On Page 7 you will find the graphical presentation of our pro forma ATM P&L. Here, you can see the impact of the overall softer than expected growth environment, starting from the middle part of last year. On Page 8 is our ATM revenue by market segment. As you can see here, there hasn’t been any substantial change in mix or you can also interpret that the software environment has been fairly broad-based. On Page 9, you can see here that during the first quarter, not much has changed from our fourth quarter. Test revenue fell off a bit as a result of it being on the tail end of our business cycle. So it will be the last to pick up. On Page 10, you can see the results of our EMS business. During the first quarter we had revenues of $35 billion, representing a decline of $15.7 billion or 31% sequentially and an increase of $6.3 billion or 22% year-over-year. Our original expectations for the first quarter were based on higher run rates within a few of our key Consumer and Communication business lines. However, demand for our EMS services was trim during the quarter and revenues for the quarter came in short of our expectations. The year-over-year increase was driven by higher revenues from our Consumer Products segment. Our EMS gross profit dropped to $2.9 billion, representing a decline of $1.7 billion sequentially and an increase of $0.2 billion year-over-year. Gross profit margin for the EMS business unit came in at 8.4%, representing a 0.7 percentage point decline from the previous quarter. This decline was driven by our product mix and slower than expected loading for the quarter. Compared with the previous year, EMS gross margin declined a percentage point. This difference was primarily the result of generational device differences in product mix. Operating profit for the quarter was $0.7 billion which is a $1.4 billion decline sequentially and a $0.2 billion decline year-over-year. Operating profits declined as a result of the expanded scale, ramp up costs and higher bonus. Our operating margin came in at 2.1%, which is a 2.2 percentage point decline sequentially and a 1.2 percentage point decline year-over-year. The operating margin was somewhat behind our expectations and was primarily the result of lower than expected loading of expanded operational scale. On Page 11, you will see our products segment mix within our EMS business. Our Consumer Products segment declined six percentage points of segment share, subsequently while – sequentially, while our Communication segment also declined by three percentage points. Our Automotive, Industrial and Computing segments picked up that share. Page 12, you will find key line items from our balance sheet. Now, at the end of the quarter, we had cash and cash equivalents and current financial assets of $70.4 billion. Our interest-bearing debt increased from $198.4 billion to $201.4 billion. Total unused credit lines amounted to $207.7 billion. Our EBITDA for the quarter was $16.5 billion. On Page 13, you will find our pro forma equipment capital expenditures. Machine and equipment capital expenditures for the first quarter totaled $239 million of which $156 million were used in packaging operations, $72 million in testing operations $8 million in EMS operations and $3 million in interconnect material operations and others. We continue to expect our 2019 capital equipment spending related to capacity expansion of existing product lines to be low that of 2018 levels. Going into the second quarter, we still see the overall environment is being somewhat unbalanced and a little bit volatile. There are certain pockets of strength as the industry gets its legs back underneath it. However, our customer mix seems to differ from the traditional customer mix at this time. If you wanted us to characterize the environment, we would say the overall competitive environment continues to be fierce. In this fierce market, we believe we can continue to earn the vast majority of the OSAT sector’s free cash flow. With that free cash flow, we are paying off our debts, cleaning up our balance sheet and continuing to pay our dividend. The free cash flow generation also allows us to continue to develop operational advantages such as rolling out multiple lights-out factories and leveraging new technologies. Of particular importance to us this quarter is that we have just put in place one of the most advanced packaging lines ever with the ability to achieve unparalleled fan-out yields, while improving structural integrity and electrical performance of the device. And hopefully, we’ll become a principal building block of the heterogeneous integration. On the test front, we will continue to invest in our own capacity. During this year, we will be executing an aggressive test business strategy by leveraging our unparalleled assembly capacity to reach its corresponding downstream test business. We believe test business, sprinkled across Taiwan and other parts of the world can be precisely targeted with our turnkey solution. We believe such a campaign will allow us to gain market share against our competition. Looking into the second quarter, we believe the worst is most likely behind us, and a moderate recovery is starting to happen. Our customers continue to give us consistently upbeat outlooks for the second half of 2019. And even though downward revisions are still common. The sizes of those revisions are becoming significantly smaller. Given that trend is somewhat unusual – given that trend is somewhat unusual this year, we don’t have much of the position to say whether such outlooks are accurate, overstated or understated. We can rationalize them to the best extent we can and internally digest these expectations to generate our own outlook. With that said, we still see a strong seasonal uptick beginning in the latter part of the second quarter and sustaining through a latter half of the year. Things are still rather dynamic and we will remain prudently cautious in our approach. So, for our guidance, on a pro forma basis in an NT$ terms, ATM second quarter 2019 business should be similar to – I got the old thing stuck back on here. So, on a pro forma basis in NT$ terms, ATM’s second quarter 2019 business should be similar to the quarterly average of the first half of 2018. On a pro forma basis, ATM business for the second quarter of 2019 gross margin should be similar to the first half of 2018. In U.S. dollar terms, EMS second quarter 2019 business should be similar to second quarter of 2018 levels. In U.S. dollar terms, EMS second quarter of 2019 operating profit should be similar to second quarter of 2018 levels. We would – we can start the Q&A.