Randy Furr
Analyst · KeyBanc Capital Markets
Thanks, KR. Throughout my prepared comments; I'll be referring to the slides in the earnings call presentation that Mark referred to earlier. First some highlights. Note that all profit numbers that I reference will exclude stock-based compensation. So, on to slide three. In summary, a very respectable quarter. Acceptances were 271 systems, up approximately 50% from Q2 2018’s 181 systems. Revenue was 233.8 million, up approximately 38% year over year. Non-GAAP gross margin come in at 22.3%. Our non-GAAP operating income was 1.1 million, with adjusted EBITDA coming in at 21.9 million. Adjusted EPS was a loss of $0.13. And we ended the quarter with 314.4 million in cash and short term investments, and this excludes 56.6 million for PPA cash. Now on to some color for the quarter. However, before I dive into the details, there is one housekeeping item I'd like to cover. In Q2, with respect to the estimates that we provided for Q2 on our Q1 earnings call, the financial statement presentation that we ultimately used for the PPA to upgrade project that we announced during the quarter was different than what we had originally planned for the estimates provided. The net is this, relative to our Q1 2019 estimates, instead of netting certain expenses associated with the upgrade against proceeds received; we are now recognizing incremental revenue and expenses on our profit and loss statement. So that you can better understand how the incremental revenue and expenses affect our final results, we have provided slide four to bridge the actual results to a normalized or adjusted actually that aligns with the methodology for the estimates that we provided. For example, you can see that the financial statement presentation added approximately 41 million in revenue to our top-line relative to our original estimate. Absent that change, our adjusted actuals show revenue would have been 193.2 million on a normalized basis, translating to a 14.4% year over year increase. I should also point out that all of the approximate 41 million in incremental revenue was offset with incremental expense. So, no impact on the bottom line net profit and EPS. Approximately 34 million ended up in cost of goods sold, approximately 6 million in operating expenses, and 1 million below the line in non-operating expense. You can also see that these adjustments are neutral to our API. Given that, in order to simplify our discussion, I will reference adjusted actuals for the rest of my comments, so that the results align with how you were originally estimating the quarter. With that behind us, onto slide five, the 271 acceptances and 193.2 million in revenue were both Q2 records for Bloom. Acceptances were up 49.7% year over year and up 15.3% sequentially. Adjusted revenue was 14.4% year over year; sequentially, revenue growth is down 3.8% due to a mix of lower ASPs, this coming from international, which once again, does not have installation revenue and the PPA to upgrade, which had minimal installation revenue. Included in Q2’s mix of acceptances for healthcare, technology, data centers, universities, sports venues, utility scale projects, and food and beverage retail. In total, the 271 systems were spread over 10 different customers in five different geographic markets. The majority of the installations were in the United States. On the slide six, as I just discussed, we do provide specific quarterly estimates. And in our Q1 shareholder letter, we provided you with a range of Q2 average sale price estimates as well as a range of total installed system cost estimates. For Q2 ’19, our adjusted average selling price or ASP come in at $5,704 per kilowatt, a number below our estimated range. As I have consistently pointed out, ASPs can and will vary depending upon customer mix and the geography mix where generally for international deployments, we do not have installation revenue included in the ASP. Total installed system cost came in at $4,329, down 22.8% year over year and down 23.5% sequentially. As I previously emphasize, the real key metric is the delta between the ASP and total installed system costs, which represents our margin on the equipment and installation of acceptances during the quarter. The midpoint of the estimated ASP and PISC yielded a delta or margin estimate of 1175 or $1175 per kilowatt. As you can see on slide six, our actual adjusted margin delta was $1,375 per kilowatt, a number toward the higher end of our estimates. Turning to slide seven, adjusted gross profit, excluding stock-based compensation was up almost 50% from 30.1 million in Q1 ‘19 to 45.1 million in Q2. On a year over year basis, adjusted gross profit increased 30%. Adjusted gross margin come in at 23.4%, a number nicely above last year's 20.6 and Q1 ‘19’s 15%. Adjusted non-operating income for Q2 was $114,000. Again, this number excludes stock-based compensation. As pointed out on slide four, adjusted operating expenses included the one-time incremental expense related to the PPA to upgrade. You will note that even after excluding this one-time expense, operating expenses are up both sequentially and year over year. This is primarily a result of increased spending in R&D as we invest in our next generation product. Our reported adjusted EBITDA, again adjusted to normalize the financial statement presentation with our Q2 estimates, was 12.8 million for the quarter. Excluding the 1 million referred to earlier associated with the one-time expenses, non-operating expenses were per plan and adjusted EPS came in at a loss of $0.13. Turning to the balance sheet on slide eight. We ended the quarter with 371.1 million of cash and short-term investments. This includes 56.6 million of PPA cash; so, excluding PPA cash, we ended with 314.4 million of cash and short-term investments. I would also note that non-recourse debt decreased by approximately 73 million. This was related to the PPA to upgrade as we paid off the debt associated with prior financing at closing from the proceeds of the revenue associated with the upgrades. Our cash balance increased by 1.2 million quarter over quarter. Referencing slide nine, days of sales was down by 14 days from Q1 to 24 days. Our days of inventory outstanding was up by three days from Q1 to 73 days, and our payable days was up from Q1 by two days to 37 days on normal business cycle variations. Changing the conversation to our outlook. In Q3, we expect acceptances to be between 280 and 310. ASPs to be between 6300 and 6,600, and our total installed system costs to be between 4,125 and 4,425. Also, we expect operating expenses to be between 44 million and 48 million. Given the market dynamics that KR outlined, we believe we have an opportunity that quickly to take advantage of the marketplace tailwinds to open up additional market opportunities. We are therefore accelerating spending an R&D and demand generation for our products that KR discussed or a simpler resiliency offering as well as bio-gas fuel solutions, hydrogen fuel solutions, and other products that we will announce in the future. As I mentioned in the past, both ASP and TISC are impacted by a number of factors to include: site location and applicable utility tariffs for that location; whether the site includes grid outage protection and/or this mission critical; the size of the site being installed, generally, the larger the installation, the lower the cost on a per kilowatt basis; and as previously mentioned, whether or not the scope of our work includes installation. Again, generally, our international business does not include installation. The bottom line is the important element is not the trend of the ASP or the TISC, but the trend in the delta between the two. The delta represents our unit level profit. Also related to our outlook, during our last earnings call, I highlighted one-time benefit of approximately 8 million related to our service profitability. That one-time benefit is reflected in our Q2 results. I just wanted to point out that we will not see that one-time Q2 benefit going forward. Therefore, in Q3, we expect service profitability to be a loss in the range of 6 million to 7.5 million. We do expect to see this loss narrow in Q4. I would like to turn the conversation to the year 2020. Next year, as we have discussed on past quarterly earnings calls, we will communicate and disclose our backlog once a year at year end and we do not intend to change that practice. However, we do feel it is appropriate at this time to provide some high-level visibility on 2020. This is based on first half 2019 orders. For our US commercial and industrial business, recall that the time from quarter booking to revenue ranges in the 9 to 12 months timeframe, translating to the bulk of 2020 US commercial and industrial revenue will come from orders booked in 2019. So, based on our first half 2019 incoming orders, we do expect to see the acceptance volume growth in 2020. In fact, we anticipate acceptance volume growth to be in the 30% range next year, all positive. However, given the customer mix, we also expect a drop in our ASPs by a similar percentage, translating to a generally flat top-line revenue growth for the year. Clearly, with a substantial increase in volume and no revenue growth, profitability may be impacted. That impact can be partially mitigated, and I will now provide some color on volume drivers, ASPs, and profitability. With respect to volume, we previously anticipated sufficient volume growth to offset planned ASP declines. Our utility scale and international businesses are performing well and generally in line with our internal plan. It is our US commercial and industrial business that is somewhat lagging internal expectations, still growing, but not at the level initially anticipated. Why is this? KR pointed this out earlier. The various US political headwinds around renewables and natural gas policies are creating confusion for our customers, and, in some cases, delaying purchasing decisions. With respect to ASPs and profitability, a portion of the decline in ASPs is attributable to an increase in our international business where we did not perform installation; thus, no installation revenue nor any installation costs. Therefore, no hit to our bottom line. Any portion of the ASP decline is attributable to the overall mix of our business. As our utility scale in international businesses are growing at a faster rate than US commercial and industrial, where historically our US commercial and industrial realizes higher ASPs given the federal investment tax credit. The majority of the decline is attributable to an anticipated ASP decline for our US commercial and industrial business, as we move into markets outside our typical California and New York markets, where the electricity tariffs are generally lower. However, in line with historical trends, we expect to mitigate a proportion of any ASP decline through continued product cost reductions. So, in summary, our ASPs are declining at a rate generally as anticipated, but the volume increase is not fully sufficient to offset the decline. As I mentioned earlier, we do expect to see another year of low-double digit product cost declines, and we do expect to see the commercial launch of our next generation product late next year. Finally, our goal is not to be a consumer of cash in 2020 notwithstanding the timing of any periodic working capital requirements. Once again, thank you for your time. I now like to turn the call back to the operator for Q&A.