Seeking Alpha
We cover over 5K calls/quarter
Profile| Send Message|
( followers)  

Nimble Storage, Inc. (NYSE:NMBL)

Q2 2015 Results Earnings Conference Call

August 26, 2014, 05:00 PM ET

Executives

Edelita Tichepco - IR

Suresh Vasudevan - CEO

Anup Singh - CFO

Analysts

Andrew Nowinski - Piper Jaffray

Bill Shope - Goldman Sachs

Brent Bracelin - Pacific Crest Securities

Katy Huberty - Morgan Stanley

John Roy - UBS

Alex Kurtz - Sterne Agee

Aaron Rakers - Stifel, Nicolaus

Rajesh Ghai - Macquarie

Maynard Um - Wells Fargo

Raymond James - Brian Alexander

Joe Wittine - Longbow Research

Richard Kugele - Needham & Company

Matt Robinson - Wunderlich Securities

Operator

Good day, everyone. Welcome to the Nimble Storage Fiscal Second Quarter 2015 Earnings Conference Call. Today's conference is being recorded. At this time for opening remarks, I would like to turn things over to Ms. Edelita Tichepco. Please go ahead ma'am.

Edelita Tichepco

Good afternoon and thank you for joining today’s conference call to discuss fiscal second quarter 2015 results for Nimble Storage. This is Edelita Tichepco, Investor Relations for Nimble Storage. Joining me today are Suresh Vasudevan, Chief Executive Officer and Anup Singh, Chief Financial Officer.

After the market closed today, Nimble Storage issued a press release and shareholder letter announcing the financial results for the fiscal second quarter. The shareholder letter, earnings press release and a live webcast of this session are available on the Investor Relations page of our website at nimblestorage.com.

During the course of this call, we will make forward-looking statements including statements regarding our revenue and earnings per share guidance for our fiscal third quarter. These forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, some of which are beyond our control, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by these statements. These forward-looking statements are prior as of today. You should not rely on them as representing our views in the future and we undertake no obligation to update these statements after the call.

For a more detailed description of these risks, please refer to our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on June 12, 2014 and earnings press release posted today on our Investor Relations website.

Also please note that certain non-GAAP financial measures will be discussed on this call. For a quantitative reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP measures, please refer to today’s shareholder letter and press release regarding second quarter results, available on our Investor Relations website.

I will now turn the call over to Suresh.

Suresh Vasudevan

Thank you, Edelita. Good afternoon and thank you for joining us on today's call.

Our founding thesis was that traditional enterprise storage architectures will be appended by flash optimized architectures and that Cloud-based management will append traditional approaches to storage management. We have translated these theses into an industry-leading platform that positions us to emerge as the market leader through the industry transformation.

Q2 was an inflection point for Nimble. During Q2, our Adaptive Flash Platform launch underscored the breadth and comprehensive nature of our approach to leveraging flash. Our positioning resonated with industry analysts and thought leaders drove substantially higher customer activity than ever before in our history and drove deeper engagement with larger enterprises and Cloud service providers.

Our strategy for driving growth remains focused on four broad themes. The first is new customer acquisition. Q2 was a record quarter in terms of new customer acquisition. We added 663 new customers to our install base, which now stands at over 3,750 customers.

Our channel partners remain key contributors. The number of unique partners account execs that closed deals almost doubled from a year ago. Deals where our channel partner contribution was deemed to have been 75% or greater also almost doubled compared to a year ago and additional factors that drove the strong pace of new customer acquisition during Q2 was the launch of our Adaptive Flash Platform. This translated into strong demand generation as well.

Our second growth driver is our growing customer base of Global 5,000 enterprises and Cloud service providers that we are serving. Our install base of large enterprises grew by 81% compared to the same quarter of the previous year and we now have 13 of the Global top 100 and 53 of the Global top 500 enterprises as customers. Our install base of Cloud service providers grew even faster by 119% compared to the same quarter of the previous year.

Our third growth driver is international expansion. Across EMEA and Asia Pacific, we now have teams in 19 countries and distribution arrangements in 26 additional countries. This translated into international bookings growth of 121% compared to Q2 of last year.

Our fourth and final growth driver is the propensity for each of our customers to deploy additional workloads on to our Adaptive Flash Platform after the initial deployment. This drives repeat bookings for us.

Customers more than doubled their initial spend over a two-year timeframe when measured across the entire install base. When we look at our Global 5,000 customers and our service provider customers, the propensity for repeat bookings is even higher.

Our Global 5,000 customers increased their spend by 3.3 times and Cloud service providers increased their spend by 3.5 times over a two-year timeframe after the initial purchase.

Turning now to our technology differentiation our Adaptive Flash Platform, which comprises the CASL file system and our InfoSight Cloud-based management software continues to deliver a compelling value proposition. That value proposition drove the largest deal in our history during Q2.

This deal was for a large government agency that selected us over two industry-leading storage vendors as a consolidation platform for their performance-sensitive oracle databases, their VMware server farm, their mission critical vertical market applications as well as for their capacity intensive video repositories. What was gratifying was that this specific customer win was driven by a high end platform that we introduced during Q2.

The functionality that we've already introduced during the year is helping drive larger deals at a faster pace. This includes our scale-out clustering software, which is now being deployed across a substantial portion of our install base of systems.

This also includes our high end CS700 controller and our All-Flash Shelf that we introduced during Q2, which allows us to target a much broader range of enterprise workloads. All of this has helped us record 444 deals greater than 100,000 over the last 12-month period, an increase of 86% compared to the same statistic last year.

In early August, we completed the new platform rollout by replacing our entry level CS200 and our mid range CS400 controllers with CS300 and CS500 controllers respectively.

The new controllers leveraged the platform enhancements that were part of the CS700 to also deliver 50% better price performance relative to the previous generation platforms. This further strengthens our economic advantage.

Several software features that are part of the Nimble Operating System 2.1 release accompanied the new platform introductions. Our 2.1 Nimble OS includes key functionalities such as Triple Parity RAID, multi tenancy features, non-disruptive volume migration, richer vCenter integration and deeper CommVault integration. These features further strengthen our appeal to enterprises and Cloud service providers.

Finally I am pleased to state that we remain on track to release our Nimble OS 2.2, which has our Fiber Channel functionality by the end of our fiscal year.

In addition to innovations within our platform, a key investment area for us is in building solutions in conjunction with our alliance partners. Our converged infrastructure solutions SmartStack continued to see strong momentum with deployments growing at 40% over Q1, which is already a very strong SmartStack quarter for us.

During Q2, we became a splunk technology partner and two Fortune 1,000 companies selected us as a storage platform for their large scale splunk deployment. Our execution during the quarter continues to validate our founding belief and the magnitude of the growth opportunity ahead of us as we leverage our technology leadership in flash storage solutions.

Let me now turn this over to Anup for a brief overview of our financial performance.

Anup Singh

Thank you, Suresh and good afternoon, everyone.

As before, I will provide a summary of our financial results. For a more comprehensive discussion of the results, please refer to our shareholder update, which is available on our Investor Relations homepage.

Q2 was a great quarter for Nimble. We reported $53.8 million in revenue, above our guidance of $49 million to $51 million. This was growth of 89% from the year-ago quarter.

As Suresh had mentioned, we saw strong performance across all of our growth drivers. During Q2 we added over 660 new end accounts. During the last four quarter alone, we've added a total of over 2,000 new customers as we continue to increase our share of market.

Our land and expand strategy is working well. In Q2, orders from our install base of customers grew more than double the amount from Q2 of last year.

During Q2, we also recorded our greatest number of orders received above $100,000. We had 444 orders above $100,000 during the last 12 months compared to 239 orders in the prior 12 month period. We also saw continued traction in our international operations, which more than doubled in bookings and revenue from Q2 of last year.

Our non-GAAP number for gross margin of 67.4% reached an all time high and was up by over 3% from prior year. Our gross margin was driven by increases in both product and support and service as well.

Our gross margins continue to reflect the competitive differentiation of CASL and InfoSight, economies of scale as we grow, as well as our ongoing focus on operational excellence. Our long-term target for overall number for gross margin remains 63% to 65% even though we expect to be at the high end of this range in the near term.

Our non-GAAP operating income was negative 20% as compared to negative 30% from a year ago. This was due to improvements in both our gross margin and operating expense leverage even as we continue to invest in the business.

We ended Q2 with 735 employees on Board, an increase of 67 during the quarter. During the last 12 months alone, we’ve added 271 employees across our teams. Our Q2 non-GAAP loss was approximately $0.15 a share compared to our guidance for a loss of $0.16 to $0.17 per share.

Looking at cash flow, we ended Q2 with cash and cash equivalents of approximately $206 million, an increase of $1.5 million in the quarter. We achieved a cash to cash cycle of four days, flat as compared to Q1 and ahead of our target of 20 days.

Over the last 12 months, our total cash usage excluding the proceeds from our IPO was $6.4 million, approximately a $1.6 million each quarter.

Our Q2 cash flow from operations was approximately $2.8 million. Our free cash flow in Q2 was negative 2% versus negative 19% in Q2 of last year.

So, moving on to guidance for Q3, we expect our revenue to be in the range of $56 million to $58 million and operating losses between $11 million and $12 million. This translates into a non-GAAP loss of $0.16 to $0.17 a share, which is based on approximately 73 million shares outstanding.

As we have discussed in the past, we estimate that by the end of our next fiscal year FY ‘16 we will achieve our breakeven on non-GAAP operating income with a breakeven on free cash achieved ahead of that timeline.

With that, I will now hand it back to Suresh.

Suresh Vasudevan

Thank you, Anup. We have built the broadest flash platform in our industry; one, that we think positions up ahead of start-ups as well as large incumbents and one that is broader than the more narrowly focused approaches of tiered hyper storage offerings or all flash offerings.

We complemented this technology differentiation but very strong execution during Q2. This is reflected in our record pace of new customer acquisition. Record pace of driving deals over $100,000, record pace of bookings within Global 5,000 and Cloud service provider customers and a record pace of deployment of smart stack converged infrastructure deployments.

Perhaps the most gratifying highlight of the quarter was that we were recognized for the second year in a row as a top workplace in the Bay Area Newsgroup Ranking and replaced among the top 10 companies from among 100s of midsized organizations.

I want to thank our employees for this recognition and for their execution overall. We also want to thank our customers and partners for embracing us and our investors for the confidence in us.

Anup and I are now happy to take any questions. Operator?

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

Thank you. (Operator Instructions) We’ll go first to Andrew Nowinski with Piper Jaffray.

Andrew Nowinski - Piper Jaffray

Okay. Congratulations on the great results this quarter.

Suresh Vasudevan

Thank you, Andrew.

Andrew Nowinski - Piper Jaffray

First, I'd like to get some color on your cloud service provider growth. Looks like you added about 56 new cloud customers this quarter, which is much higher growth in the segment than we've seen from any of the legacy storage vendors.

So who are you typically displacing in the vertical? And then why are these customers spending 3.5 times the initial purchase, which is more than the enterprise customers?

Suresh Vasudevan

Thank you, Andy for the comments earlier, but just to go back and make sure our definition of Cloud service providers is well understood, as you know there are two categories of companies within our definition.

One is SaaS company, so people that are delivering software as a service and then the second is infrastructure as a service companies. And as I look back not much was different in terms of what drove that customer acquisition or the competitive dynamics for us. It continues to be the mainstream incumbent that we compete with in these large cloud service provider environments.

So, companies like EMC, NetApp, Dell and HP account still for most of the competition we see. As I think we’ve also mentioned before the dynamic in these SaaS companies and Cloud service and infrastructure as a service company is simply that for them every time they acquire a customer that creates a demand for more infrastructure and so because of that their propensity for repeat purchases tends to be high.

Now, our advantage in serving them if you look back at our traditional advantages, price performance, the lower economic advantage on cost of capacity, better data protection are all very much in play with cloud service providers as well.

There are a couple of dimensions that are additive when we target CSPs. The first dimension that makes a big difference is that because of the way we’re able to monitor the infrastructure using InfoSight and we are helping them with their SLAs to their end customers. So, the ability to maintain SLAs is a big driver.

The second thing I would say is for these CSPs, their revenue stream tends to be variable and so for them to make chunky capital investments tends to be a difficult thing to do because of our modular scalability what they’re able to do with us is almost take a Lego building block model of deploying infrastructure, they start with a small footprint, as demand grows they’re able to sort of add to that foot print.

And so I think our competitive differentiation even on that front is ahead of others.

Andrew Nowinski - Piper Jaffray

Got it. And then, just a quick follow up. You had huge new customer growth this quarter, and it seemed possible that new customer growth might stall out in front of the fiber channel lease, the opposite actually occurred.

Is that attributed to your Lego block scale out capability that you just discussed? And when fiber channel comes out do you think it will sell into a new market segment that may not have penetrated yet accelerating the new customer growth? Thanks.

Suresh Vasudevan

I’ll comment on some aspects of the question. I don’t want to forecast what our new customer growth looks like and what I will say is because Fiber Channel functionality, it’s not as if we’re targeting an entire new class of customers, what we continue to leverage when we have fiber channel functionality is very, very similar in terms of value proposition.

So, the value proposition does not change when we compete against our major incumbents. The go-to-market model does not change. We continue to go through the same channel partners that are already very familiar with fiber channel.

And in many ways all it does is enhance our abilities as we’ve said in the past before among the technical, among the reason that we’re not chosen the leading reason why someone might not deploy us is fiber channel and so that barrier goes down as well.

So, I expect that much of the go-to-market momentum that we are seeing will continue in place with fiber channel as well. I’ll leave it at that.

Andrew Nowinski - Piper Jaffray

Okay. Thank a lot and great job.

Operator

We’ll move next to Bill Shope with Goldman Sachs.

Bill Shope - Goldman Sachs

Okay. Thanks guys. Could you give us a bit more detail on the drivers of the gross margins strength in the quarter? You mentioned a few things, if you could just sort of talk about what factors really drove the strength particularly versus your expectations and also discuss how we should think about those drivers in the overall trends for gross margins as you progress through 3Q?

Anup Singh

All right, I’ll take that one. Hey Bill, it's Anup.

Bill Shope - Goldman Sachs

How are you doing?

Anup Singh

So a couple of things on gross margins, the way we think about it, we break it up, we look at our margin for product and we look at our margin for support and service. So, the strength that we saw in the margin in the quarter so had actually improved about a point from Q1 that was actually the increase that we saw in support and service in the quarter.

So, if you recall the last time around during the call for Q1 we talked about how our margins for support had dropped a bit during Q1 because of investments that we had made in building out our support and service infrastructure.

So, now in Q2 our margins for support and service actually increased a fair bit from Q1 and now we’re sort of back to the levels we saw in Q4. And then we also saw strength, ongoing strength in our margin for product so we came in at 69.5 approximately and so for the last four quarters or so we’ve been around 69 per margin for product.

As you recall the guidance that we’ve given from a long-term standpoint for margin for product is in the 66 to 67 sort of range because of the fact that as we have -- as we’ve talked about, we're operating in a competitive environment and similarly the guidance that we’ve given for support and service from a long term is somewhere that is north of 60.

So in the quarter so both of those areas of gross margin if you will experience strength and as a combined effect it increased our margins to an all-time high.

Suresh Vasudevan

The only other observation I would add, is as you think about our gross margin, it will move within a band and when we think about guiding back to our long-term model, it's really not -- there is not a specific driver that says in the very next quarter something is going to happen to take it back as much as acknowledgment of every quarter we compete in larger deals. Every quarter we’re competing in larger customers and we expect to see more competition in those customers.

It’s a testament of the strength of our differentiation that we’re able to maintain and in fact expand margins as we go forward. Having said that, we also want to make sure we are ready to trade off a couple of points of product margin if need be to drive growth. And so it's really a acknowledgment of that that causes us to guide to the target model if you will.

Anup Singh

That's right and I think a part of your question there Bill, you asked about how you should think about in a go-forward basis and I think for the purposes of modeling, we basically assumed a slight decrease in margin for product on a go-forward basis and margin for support and service is going to be flat to slightly up in the back half of the year.

Bill Shope - Goldman Sachs

Okay. That’s helpful specifically. And I guess related to that last quarter you mentioned increasingly aggressive pricing actions from the incumbent, but clearly your gross margins are withstanding that. And while I’d expect the market to always be competitive particularly from the incumbents, can you comment on whether or not you saw unusually aggressive pricing from those vendors become less or more common throughout the second quarter and so far into the third quarter?

Suresh Vasudevan

No. I think the competitive dynamics have remained unchanged from a pricing perspective and from a product competitiveness perspective. If anything I think this quarter really we saw the expanded breadth of our products take us into a much broader range of discussions than we’ve had in the past. And frankly the new products only aid our competitive differentiation. So I would the competitive dynamic on the pricing front is unchanged and our differentiation is anything getting stronger.

Bill Shope - Goldman Sachs

Okay. That’s helpful. Thank you.

Operator

And next from Pacific Crest Securities will go to Brent Bracelin.

Brent Bracelin - Pacific Crest Securities

Thank you. Couple of questions here from me. Suresh, first, record number of $100,000 deals in the quarter, was that tied to pent-up demand for the 700 or are you seeing other drivers that are attributing to that.

Two, did you also close the largest deal in the history of the company this quarter, could you maybe talk little bit about how large the deal was? How competitive the deal was and maybe why you won? And then last but not least, now that you have All-Flash Shelves available in the 700 and now 300 and 500, are you seeing any mix shift where customers are requesting a higher percentage Flash in systems that are being shipped?

Suresh Vasudevan

Certainly, so, on the very first one which was the record number of deals driven by the 700 pent-up demand for the 700, the answer is not so much of pent-up demand, Brent. We are in -- I think what we accomplished with the launch was get into conversations of where we could participate in sort of higher end environments larger size deployment.

As it turns out the mix of platform is pretty broad. It’s not just a 700 that drove that nor was it necessarily beta conversion or anything of that sort that drove the large number of deals. I think it was just ongoing momentum in larger sized environments that drove the growth in $100,000 plus deals.

All I’ll say is on the other question of the large sized deals, it was not nine figures, it was not eight figures, it was not six figures. I’ll leave it at that.

So, what I will characterize is what drove that deal and who are we competing with. We were competing against the most mainstream large-scale vendors. What was remarkable about this was, about this deal was at one end of the spectrum, we had high performance oracle databases, mission-critical databases and on that very same platform, they also wanted to host extremely capacity intensive video repository.

So, as I think about what they were looking for, they are looking for a platform that consolidates all of the enterprise data, not an application specific platform and that’s what makes us so compelling for this customer.

As it happens there at VMware and I met with them yesterday, it was really interesting beside the platform his comment was the thing that caused you to win, the exact thing that caused you to win, this is a CIO who said was InfoSight because frankly even during the evaluation process there were two or three instances where you were able to troubleshoot what was going wrong in our network not even in your storage system that caused me to believe that it could support me better than even the largest incumbents.

Right and so, really interesting way he said the single biggest factor that drove the deal was InfoSight. So that’s the second part of your question. I forgot the third part of your question.

Brent Bracelin - Pacific Crest Securities

The third part was of the All-Flash Shelves, an increase amount of…

Suresh Vasudevan

I think, monotonically they’re seeing a slight increase in the amount of flash that our system go with, All-Flash Shelves certainly aids that process. We have quite a few All-Flash Shelves deployment. I don’t have the exact percentage of flash and how that shifted. All I do know is its being creeping up almost every quarter, Brent.

Brent Bracelin - Pacific Crest Securities

Okay. Really helpful. That's all I have. Thank you so much.

Suresh Vasudevan

Thank you.

Operator

We’ll hear next from Katy Huberty with Morgan Stanley.

Katy Huberty - Morgan Stanley

Yeah, thanks. Suresh as you noted that was inflection point quarter in part driven by adaptive flash platform. Can you guys give us any context for the percentage of other revenue or orders or new customers that came from demand on the back of that new platform?

Suresh Vasudevan

Katy, its honestly hard for us because I think the one thing we don’t do is talk about break-up of our revenue [technical difficulty] but with our newer controllers, the way that our systems are made up, you don’t order a specific model number with a capacity or a flash, it’s disaggregated where you chose how much performance you want, how much flash you want and how much capacity you want and it’s an on the fly configuration.

So, to try and model our skews is almost not even the right way to think about our product architecture. Having said that, what I will say is this was the quarter where after several quarters, the amount of business that we did driven by marketing generated opportunities was greater than the amount of business that we did driven by channel generated opportunities.

That was the reversal in trend that in many ways goes directly back to the fact that we introduced adaptive flash and that was really successful launch. So, there are a lot of subjective metric that speak to the fact that we are engaging in a much larger volume of discussions. I can’t link it back to specifically how many of which platform did we sell.

Anup Singh

I will just also add, I think it comes back to the earlier question from Brent about the larger deals and the platform as well. If you remember in Q1 is when we [GA-ed] (ph) the scale out software as well.

So, I think the combination of the availability of scale-out which is now substantially deployed across the installed base and the launch of adaptive flash in the quarter is what driving the bigger deals as well.

Katy Huberty - Morgan Stanley

Okay. That makes sense. And then, just a follow up for Anup on profitability goals. Obviously this quarter was a little better than guidance but you’re still moving in the wrong direction in terms of the absolute loss has been little bit greater sequentially the last few quarters.

What reverses that trend and gets you moving toward that goal for profitability in six quarters time?

Anup Singh

Sure. Again, just a quick reminder of the strategy that we have. So, explicitly you just said, we said that we are going to be at breakeven and profitable Q4 of next year. So, that’s about six quarters away and in the mean time we've talked about investing for growth. So, number one driving growth from a topline, number two, ensuring we keep the integrity and strength of gross margins and then number three, ensuring we show the leverage -- so operating leverage on a year-over-year basis every quarter.

So, that’s the strategy we led out and that’s the strategy that we’re executing again. I would say that the year we’re currently in is a year of investment and if you look at for example investments that we made in R&D as we’ve built out the launch of scale out, we did the adoptive flash platform, we’ve got in Q4 the launch of the fiber channel so on and so forth.

So, investments in R&D this year, investments in go-to-market, the large enterprises for cloud SPs and so on and these are investments that we’re expecting to payoff and drive the leverage in the business as we continue along the path of profitability Q4 of next year.

Katy Huberty - Morgan Stanley

Next year is more of a harvesting of the investment.

Suresh Vasudevan

That’s right.

Anup Singh

It is.

Suresh Vasudevan

There are three unique areas that are all -- in fact I think we went further in the last call Katy and said for the next couple, not just in Q2 but for the next couple of quarters you should expect us to operate in the same range of operating income partly because there were three specific areas all of which are invest areas for us.

Fiber channel and the adoptive flash platform driving R&D as an area of significant investment. International expansion as one area of significant investment in sales and marketing that has more of a return next year than this year.

And the last one is build out of our named account teams to go after enterprises and service providers, right. All of those are dilutive to our operating leverage this year but really what we expect will contribute to our operating leverage next year.

Katy Huberty - Morgan Stanley

Okay. That’s very helpful. Thanks so much. Congrats on the quarter.

Suresh Vasudevan

Thank you

Anup Singh

Thank you.

Operator

We’ll hear now from John Roy with UBS.

John Roy - UBS

Yeah, can you hear me?

Suresh Vasudevan

Yeah John.

John Roy - UBS

Yeah. So, what I was really trying to figure out was in the competitive landscape. We’re going more and more into the enterprise market. Are you seeing any pushback from, A, companies not wanting to add new vendors and, B, can you give us any color on what kind of percentage is in the enterprise today in terms of sales?

Suresh Vasudevan

Yes, so I think on the first one, not really I think at least in our industry where there are very, very few enterprises that tend to standardize on a single vendor there’s almost always a dual or a triple vendor strategy.

And in particular, because of the magnitude of the disruption that flash is causing is anything there’s a proactive outreach at the part of our customers to say who are the leading flash vendors and while my incumbent will always have an opportunity, I want to understand who else is doing -- who else is brining innovative solutions to bear with flash and so if anything at least looking back at my history, our customer base is more open now to new vendors than otherwise would have been true.

And on the second part of your question, John we don’t call out specific breakout of our bookings by either large enterprise or cloud service provider. So, I would not give you sort of a percentage breakdown of our business at that point.

John Roy – UBS

Thank you.

Suresh Vasudevan

Sure.

Operator

We’ll move next to Alex Kurtz with Sterne Agee.

Alex Kurtz - Sterne Agee

Hey guys, thanks for taking the question. If you look at last quarter around ASPs, you added a lot of new customers versus the prior quarter and the prior year, was there any -- was there any change in ASP with those new customers? Were they roughly at the same deal price that you were looking at a couple of quarters ago.

Anup Singh

Yes, sure. I'll take that that one Alex, it's Anup. So look, I think our ASPs have been pretty flat I would say for the last three quarters or so, as we have -- as we've discussed the blended ASPs in my view a little bit of a misleading sort of metrics to look at because if you strip it apart, you’ve got to look at the increase in larger deals, which we define as deals above 100K and we saw really strong traction in larger deals in this sort of quarter.

I think we mentioned in the remarks, that it was a record quarter the large deals for us as a company including the biggest ever deal in the history of the company, but at the same time, in our mid side enterprise sort of space, it was blow-out sort of quarter for us in terms of just the number of new accounts and customers we added in the quarter and so the way we look at it is we basically analyze and track and measure how we are doing in both of those areas for large deals as well as mid size enterprise and both of those were really strong in the quarter, but net, net, the average ASP was actually unchanged.

Alex Kurtz - Sterne Agee

Okay. Well, that's helpful. And just on that point, Suresh, when you think about the Fiber Channel support that's coming up here soon and pushing into these direct accounts, how far up the -- how far up do you want to go?

Are we thinking about sort of the larger VNX installations that you're going after in the three par environment or are you thinking about more about regional offices where maybe you could take out the -- you could switch the whole floor instead of going for the global data center? Can you just sort of give us -- where you think that could take us?

Suresh Vasudevan

That's a very good question. I think and you drew a contrast well so -- to the three par model. I would say the first wave of deployment, the initial traction if I would were to take the first several quarter perspective, the classic -- the prototypical customer would be a larger commercial customer.

So someone in our Global 5,000, but certainly not the Global 500 if you will. So that's the way I would think about who is the most likely first wave of customer and what we've really done is built a channel that already is very, very good at reaching out to those customers.

What this allows us to do is take those customers that they know because we don't have a fiber channel product and serve them with our product offering right. And so, that's the first wave of deployment and initial success that I anticipate.

Now part of the reason we've built out both the named account team and a major accounts team is we'll also target the larger enterprise environment. Those though tend to be much longer sales cycles and this is going back to the three par experience, often you're camping in an account for 18 months before it converge. So we'll certainly baked into that, but that's not where I see our initial success over the next few quarters.

Alex Kurtz - Sterne Agee

That's helpful. Thank you, guys.

Operator

And from Stifel we'll hear from Aaron Rakers.

Aaron Rakers - Stifel, Nicolaus

Yes, thanks for taking the questions as well. So I wanted to go back to your commentary on the adaptive flash architecture and then obviously the launch of the obviously the launch of the CS700, which I think, correct me if I am wrong, was in the mid June timeframe.

So you had mentioned that this expands your ability to address new workload environment. So first part of the question is can you elaborate on that? What kind of workload environments does this platform, this architecture change move you into?

And then in terms of the existing customer install base, how do we think about those types of product cycles relative to the propensity to see your existing customer base upgrade their controllers and how are we thinking about that revenue stream going forward?

Anup Singh

Yes, so, and this is actually a linkage between the two questions that in there. The comment I would make is there are two components to our Adaptive Flash Platform, just to sort of go back. The first component of our Adaptive Flash Platform is a high end controller that's able to deliver a much larger number of IOPS if you will or a much higher IOPS performance.

In a scaled out cluster, it delivers half a million IOPS, which is sort of what you would expect out of a flash-only scale-out cluster of arrays, that's one attribute.

The second attribute is that because you are able to vary the flash ratio much more significantly as you workload varies, you are able to accommodate and minimize performance variations if you will and accommodate a growing workload requirement by changing the flash ratio, right. So the all flash shelf is a second component, which gives you to have a variable flash ratio.

Now when I take these two components and think about what does that translate into in terms of customer engagements, the first thing is that when a customer is saying, I am looking at a much larger environment absent our adaptive high-end platform.

We would have essentially suggested multiple let's say, mid range platforms in a scale-out cluster and now by being able to deploy a high-end platform, that's able to do much better job of consolidation, your price performance, your competitiveness versus the people you are competing against is much higher.

So that's the first thing. It's a consolidation platform that consolidates even more workloads cost effectively and so allows us to enhance our win ratios.

The second thing I would say is there are some extreme performance used cases. If you were going into a vertical new SQL database etcetera, where you really need all of the flash that we are able to bring to bear so high-performance used cases, the first as I mentioned is consolidation. The second one is extreme performance applications now have the ability to have very, very high IOPS as well.

And we saw a mix of both of those in the kind of customers that we saw during Q2. Hopefully that gives you a flavor for -- it's not that it's a single application that really becomes possible that was not possible before, but more that we were able to target a much broader range of consolidation used cases than we've been able to in the past.

Aaron Rakers - Stifel, Nicolaus

Okay. And then, final question for me just real quickly, I know you mentioned in support of the belief that you'll be breakeven profitable in the back half of fiscal '16, you also in the past have talked about being free cash flow positive, but yet you were nearing that here this last quarter, so remind us again are you seeing an earlier trend towards free cash flow positive generation for the company if not, why not?

Anup Singh

Yes, so, yes the good think Aaron is when you look at the cash sort of metric, so cash flow from operations, I think our burn overall and then our free cash flow, the trend for all three is nice and to the right. We still say that our free cash flow sort of breakeven is going to be earlier than breakeven and operating income sort of basis.

I would say and actually I called this out in the letter to shareholders that we've got a bunch of CapEx investments that we're making the second half of this year and the early part of the next fiscal year we just executed a lease in our new facility in RTP in North Carolina where we're going to be doing a build-out there. Q3, Q4 of this year we're doing some leasehold improvements that each in Q1, Q2 of next year.

So I am not good to get into exactly a quarter for breakeven for free cash flow except to say that we are on track still to break even on free cash flow in the course of next year.

Aaron Rakers - Stifel, Nicolaus

Thank you.

Operator

We'll hear now from Rajesh Ghai with Macquarie.

Rajesh Ghai - Macquarie

Yes, thanks. Suresh, I wanted to get to your view on what you thought about the hypo-converge structure space and its likely impact on your market.

And obviously Nutanix seems to be doing really well based on their press release hitting $200 million in run rate and we had an announcement from VMware about EVO: Rail and its plans to take that product out to six and three six OEM partners and our talking of targeting the mid range storage market size VDI.

Just kind of curious what do you think that architecture does to network storage in general and your market going forward?

Suresh Vasudevan

Sure. Let me start first by saying Rajesh, I think you noticed but the way that we first of all the way that our system works, we very much use commodity hardware and our software runs on top of commodity hardware where there is no hardware dependency. So I want to start off by saying, the way we think about sort of our own stack is very much that it's software that can be de-coupled from the underlying hardware resource, right.

And so to some degree the question of can you decouple hardware from software, is what drives the software defined storage or hypo-converge wave. So I'll start by saying that.

The more interesting question is I think where does hypo-convergence overlap with our market and what does it do to our market and where do we see that going?

Hypo-convergence I think or in general sort of converged appliances there are certain used cases where they are very good solution, specifically when the amount of workload that you're serving like in a remote office is such that a couple of servers or a few handful of servers have enough compute IO capacity memory to serve all the needs then it makes sense to say instead to decoupling server from storage, it might make sense for me to deploy a converged appliance.

The other place where it might make sense is where you application and your storage requirements move in lock step. So things like CPU, memory, IOPS, capacity, bandwidth are all moving in lock step as we scale up, there it might make sense to converge big data environments are a good example, certain kinds of VDI are a good example.

On the flip side, the moment you get into more general purpose workloads, one of the biggest challenges that you start to see is that as those general purpose workload scale, you might run out of compute to run your application, you might run out of memory to run your application, you might run out of IOPS, you might run out of capacity and so you don't know which resource you'll run short of and hypo-convergence actually starts to become a big cost penalty because you're scaling all resources every time you run short of any single resource.

And so that's our belief when you think about consolidation within a data center, it's likely that individual applications will benefit from hypo-convergence and there are some applications going quickly that drive revenue growth there, but the broad-based consolidation of different workloads will still require best of breed approaches.

I'll just end with one last comment. Our own approach now towards convergence has been a strong partnership with Cisco where we've created the SmartStack infrastructure, partnering with Cisco, VMware partnering with Cisco and Microsoft with Oracle and so on and that is seeing very strong growth. The benefit there being it's converged and yet it's best of breed in each of the layers.

Rajesh Ghai - Macquarie

Last question, historically its other channel signs have had a higher gross margin compared to iSCSI SANs taking three par versus Compellent and EqualLogic. Do you see any benefit to gross margins on your fiber channels platform gets out later this year?

Suresh Vasudevan

I don't Rajesh. I would say I think I fundamentally believe that the gross margin profile stems more from attributes like how much performance per unit resource cost are you able to deliver. How much data protection, how much capacity and so really the driver of gross margin if you were to take in the past products like Compellent versus EqualLogic or Compellent versus three par was the strength of the underlying software value ad more than the protocol itself.

I could take Compellent, which is our fiber channel protocol and three par and there was almost a 20 point separation between those two products, even though both were Fiber Channel SAN and so I think it derives more from the underlying storage architecture than from the protocol itself.

So I would not want to signal any change in our gross margin profile as a result of Fiber Channel.

Rajesh Ghai - Macquarie

All right, congratulations. Thanks.

Suresh Vasudevan

Thank you.

Anup Singh

Thank you.

Operator

We'll go now to Maynard Um with Wells Fargo.

Maynard Um - Wells Fargo

Hi. Thank you. Modest specific follow-up on the cash flow side, how should we think about the cash conversion cycle over the next few quarters obviously lower than where you target is and then related to that CapEx, I think your target was 10%. So pretty big pop up in the back half early next year, but once those leasehold improvements in those builds are done, how should we think about what the normalized CapEx run rate is, thanks.

Suresh Vasudevan

Sure. So I'll take that one. So we talked about having a target of the cash conversion cycle of 20 days and just to give you the context of how we think of the target, there are basically three components. There is our DSO, which our target is in the range of 35 to 45 days, our days in inventory of which we got a target of 35 to 45 days and then our days and payables or DPO with a target of 60 to 70 days.

So those are kind of the ranges and basically the bands that we sort of expecting to operate in from a cash to cash sort of perspective.

The question you asked about the CapEx and the increase, so in the letter I called out the CapEx for this year is about 10% of the revenue for this year, which is similar to our spend last year, it was about 10% as well, I think in the absence of sort of operating expense and sort of guidance for next year, which I am not too keen on, the general sort of guidance I would say is I would expect that to come down a couple of points in the course of next year and I'll just leave it at that.

Maynard Um - Wells Fargo

Okay. Just a follow-up thought on the cash convergent cycle, so over the next couple of quarter, next quarter, we should expect that to be around your 20 days target.

Suresh Vasudevan

Well, look it comprises of those three elements I talked about and frankly in any given quarter, things are moving around in all three of those. As an example, in this quarter Q2, we saw an increase in both our DSO and DSI because we built some inventory at quarter end. We got a shipment in the last day of the quarter, which drove up the balance of inventory and also sort of drove up our balance for payables as well.

So the numbers are going to move around in any sort of given quarter, but the bands are indicated really the targets that we try to operate in.

Maynard Um - Wells Fargo

Okay. Perfect. Thank you.

Operator

And from Raymond James, we'll go to Brian Alexander.

Raymond James - Brian Alexander

Okay. Thanks. Good afternoon. Maybe just a couple of quick ones, so the new customer growth as everybody observed was very strong. If I look at the enterprise customers, it looks like they were up about 24 sequentially.

I am just wondering would you have expected more growth in the number of enterprise customers given your improved ability to address higher performance workloads to adapt to flash as well as the consolidation opportunity for customers.

Suresh Vasudevan

No, not sure that we measure. So enterprise customers is one factor I will call out both our enterprise customers and Cloud service providers have a Cap right. There is only -- as you get larger, because we are measuring growth within an finite population, there is a certain Cap that we’ll reach in both of those and to some degree over time, we'll start shifting towards metrics that are on bookings growth from enterprise customers versus absolute number of customers.

It's more important -- I'll give you an example, we are in the last quarter alone among the customers we've landed are -- that we sold to are some of the top 10 globally who spend over a $100 million per year in storage and for us a far more significant driver of growth though is what we accomplished within that customers than adding another logo to our mix.

And so I would expect that actually more than growth of the number of customers given that it's a finite number where you are selling within, it will transition towards how quickly are we growing our bookings dollars within those accounts.

Anup Singh

And Brian, you might have seen that this time around we've done a breakout of the land and expand analysis for the large enterprises, the Cloud ASP and then sort of the numbers in aggregate because our observations so far have been that there is a tendency for both the Cloud ASPs and large enterprises to come back obviously and buy even more after the initial deployment.

Raymond James - Brian Alexander

Okay. That's fair, and then just maybe a question on Cloud, over time as customers increasingly embrace public and hybrid Cloud, just how are you thinking about your competitive position in that transition and your overall role in enabling customers to move data seamlessly between private and public clouds, thanks.

Suresh Vasudevan

Yes, I think there is almost two different motions that are at work simultaneously. The first and perhaps the most significant initiative for us as we think about customers adopting Cloud service providers, is how do we become the arms merchant to the most significant Cloud service providers whether they are the SAS companies or infrastructure as a service companies.

And then the whole class of such providers where our value proposition is extremely strong, we're just as much as we're proud of the number of Cloud service providers we've sold to, the opportunity in some of the largest Cloud service providers is very much ahead of us rather than already someone that can. And so that's the most significant initiative that we've already started on and there is sort of several steps to executive on that.

The next question is really have enterprise customers think about their Cloud service provider, it is going to be a hybrid or hybrid Cloud strategy where they might use some private Cloud resource or some public Cloud resource and data mobility becomes very important as they think about where the data is located.

And there are early initiatives that we're already -- I'll give you a couple of examples with one customers we're doing a pilot where essentially the data would be hosted on our platform even though their computer is running on a public Cloud computer service if you will. And so that allows them to have data mobility even as they're leveraging the public Cloud for their computing resource.

Our replication and our data management capabilities would allow customers to migrate data or replicate data between one cloud service provider and on premise or one Cloud service provider and another Cloud service provider. So there are capabilities within our platform that over time will leverage. At this juncture though our most important growth initiative is to continue to serve the large Cloud service providers.

Raymond James - Brian Alexander

Thank you. That makes a lot of sense.

Operator

We'll hear next from Joe Wittine with Longbow Research.

Joe Wittine - Longbow Research

Thank you. Give a number of good metrics on growth. I am wondering if you're able to strip out the impact of adding new partners to the partner base and give us some idea of quote unquote pro forma growth you're seeing at the incumbent channel partners I guess in a way of somewhat of a same-store sales metric right, thanks.

Suresh Vasudevan

Yes, what I will do is give you some proxy ways of thinking about what our focus is within the channel and I'll point you to a few metrics in our investor deck, but perhaps just starting with our strategy, as I think I've mentioned before there are almost two different strategies that we're executing.

When we think about mature markets where our channel presence is very broadly built out, markets like the U.S., markets like Canada, markets like the U.K. and increasing portion of our -- almost all of our focus and a lot of our initiatives are directed at how do we get deeper engagement with existing channel partners rather than focus on how many more channel partners we're adding.

And then as we think about new markets where we've just started our presence, whether it's Scandinavia or Germany or other places, a lot of our focus is on building our distribution recruitment of partners, enabling sort of the early stage deals and so on.

So if you look at our investor deck, I think on Slide 21, I'll give you a couple of metrics that are indicative of the kind of metrics we measure. What we're looking for is how many active account executives within our partner base are selling our product.

It doesn’t matter that sort of those are active -- even if it's the same number of partners if we can engage more and more of the sales reps within our channel partners then we are gaining traction and so that's almost doubled from a year ago.

Another metric that we're focused on is how often can we drive deals particularly commercials deals with our sales force not having to play a strong role.

So we look at metrics like if a partners is able to drive more than three fourths of the deal on their own, than that aids our productivity and that metric is almost up two fold from a year ago.

We look at things like how many trained system engineers are within our partner base and that metric is almost up 158% from a year ago.

So those are the kind of metrics all of which speak to deeper engagement. These are proxies. They don't necessarily translate into same-store sales if you will, but these are proxies for say much of our focus now is on deeper engagement within our partners in the mature markets particularly.

Joe Wittine - Longbow Research

Okay. Helpful. And then switching gears and your stock comp is up to 28% of sales, I guess I understand pricing options are somewhat of a black medical box, but can you talk us thorough the long-term trajectory of stock comp when you're modeling guidepost for sales to grow into the number obviously I am trying to get some sense of the level of sales needed to achieve GAAP breakeven over time?

Anup Singh

Yes, no, that's a good observation. So yes, there was a stock-comp is quite interesting, but basically the expense is a result of two variables. It's the number of shares or options that we've issued as a company and then it's obviously the stock price as of the measurement date that you make those grants.

In terms of the shares that we have issued and are issuing this year, from a burn sort of perspective on the Cap table we're looking at about a 6% to about a 6.5% sort of percent for this year and that is actually in line if you do a benchmarking of companies that at similar stage grow, the year after IPO and so on I think that in terms of the burn that we're seeing on the Cap table, we're actually exactly in line with the peer group of companies there.

It's just so -- it sort of happened that early on in the year, is when we granted a fair number of those shares and the value of the stock at that sort of stage was double the price it is at this moment in time. So the measurement cost was quite high and obviously we are expensing that over the vesting period, which is four years.

In terms of looking ahead, I common a couple things. Number one, we expect the number of shares issued, the burn rate if you will to come down from the 6.5 to probably to the equally about point or point and a half in the next sort of year or so.

And then I would also say if you look at the expense as a percentage of revenue, you mentioned 28% for Q2, I would probably sort of expect it to be around the same sort of ratio for the back half of this year for Q3, Q4 and then so for next year I would expect it come down. Again, I am not offering a guidance because you could actually infer the revenue number from next year, but basically I would say after the end of this year, which I expect to sort of peak up, I would expect it to start to come down in the course of next year. Does that make sense?

Joe Wittine - Longbow Research

Yes, it does. Thanks a lot.

Anup Singh

Okay.

Operator

We'll go next to Rich Kugele with Needham & Company.

Richard Kugele - Needham & Company

Thank you. Good afternoon. Just two quick questions. First, as your deal sizes do increase, are you finding that the channel is more or less reliant on your own sales force to lead the deal and then I've got a follow-up.

Suresh Vasudevan

Yes, typically the -- in a lot of the mid size deals that we've wrote, that's really where a channel is taking a strong row in driving engagement. On the larger deal, our sales team tends to play a heavier role in driving the deal. Now even in the larger deals, as you know, our strategy remains to be completely channel centric.

So all deals flow through the channel. Our sales teams tend to play a much stronger role in the larger deals if you will than in the sort of lower end deals.

Richard Kugele - Needham & Company

Okay. So you wouldn’t expect gross margins to benefit disproportionately for yourselves versus being more involved because you are in general still channel focused?

Suresh Vasudevan

That's right. What we track is whether a deal is originated by a channel partner or whether it's originated via marketing, but in terms of how we fulfill and sort of the flow of product, our strategy remains even as we sell to larger enterprises to go through our channel partners and so gross margin won't be fundamentally affected by the channel being there or not being there and of course the dynamics are that a larger deal other dynamics come into play, but a channel doesn’t influence the gross margin range.

Richard Kugele - Needham & Company

Okay. And then just lastly, you’ve been very adamant for a long time about your targets for tax break even on an operating basis and at the same time though those of you us who have known you for a long time, the market was very different back then late last year and clearly and storage was not growing much at all, IT spending was very muted.

Things are starting to get better now, enterprises are starting to spend IT spending clicking up a little one of your large competitors in storage was talking about that just the other day, and so I guess, I am just wondering strategically rather than kind of myopically focusing on EPS I don't know whether it's a pending here or there, is there an opportunity to accelerate growth now in the current sector of this broader market and if you were doing that, what would you do beyond your four strategic pillars that you are talking about for some time.

Suresh Vasudevan

Yes, so I think that if I may, our growth strategy even a year ago was always premised on frankly our growth strategy was not based on market conditions where storage will either be flattish or narrow ended or little bit of a more bullish tone because fundamentally much of our growth comes from taking share from others, right.

And so we're not necessarily relying on market growth, so that's the first comment I will make. So it's not changed that much from three quarters ago to now.

The second comment I would make was if anything three or four quarters ago, my consent was more that there were quite a few companies that were executing a strategy of growth at all costs, while we we're executing a strategy of we will continue to drive topline growth aggressively, but our pace of investment also will be aggressive.

However, we will be able to grow revenue faster than we can grow expenses and so it was always about growth, combined with driving leverage on a sequential basis. If you look at year-over-year every quarter we want to deliver operating leverage. So that part of our strategy is also not changing.

Now I don't think that somehow we're sacrificing growth. I think it's just prudent for us to be thinking about saying let's grow revenue as aggressively as we can and by other factors like how quickly we can hire without diluting quality of the talent making sure that the sustained growth they're not just growing sales without making sure our support is sacrificed.

All of those will imply that our topline will grow faster than our investment. So that's sort of my perspective. I am not sure we want to react strategically to sort of two or three quarters of market conditions if you will. Our biggest opportunity it's a really large TAM and it's all about gaining share versus incumbent.

Richard Kugele - Needham & Company

Good answer. Thanks a lot and great quarter.

Suresh Vasudevan

Thank you.

Operator

And it looks like we have time for one more question, that will be from Matt Robinson with Wunderlich Securities.

Matt Robinson - Wunderlich Securities

Hey thanks for fitting me in. Couple of things, in the past couple of letters you gave a metric for repeat bookings, could you comment on that and then maybe give a little bit more background on the strength and SmartStack sales and that how meaningful that is to your revenue and then the last one the number of share count under conditions of profit were something like $89 million last quarter. If you can comment where that might be now.

Anup Singh

Sure I'll take the one on the new versus existing split. I think there is a slide in the IT sort of deck that shows the trailing 12 months in which it says 62 new and 38 sort of existing and Matt, that is pretty much the split it's been for a couple of quarters now. So kind of about a 60-40 sort of split between new busyness and existing sort of business.

Matt Robinson - Wunderlich Securities

So it was about the same as the prior quarter, which was…

Anup Singh

Exactly, and then, your question around share count, I think you were asking about some commentary on diluted share count even though obviously we're not using that for purposes of EPS at this time. So for Q2, our diluted share count was about $89 million shares for Q3, which is the next quarter we're expecting it to be about 90 million shares on a diluted basis.

Matt Robinson - Wunderlich Securities

Okay. Thank you. And then…

Anup Singh

And as far as your question on SmartStack Matt, I think it's really significant for us one measure of tracking that is of course sort of percentage of our revenue that are derived as converged infrastructure, but what's significant about that is the fact that we are partnering with really key partners and so there is a leverage that we are building in our go-to-market model.

There are several joint engagements with our SmartStack partners whether that's Cisco or VMware or others. And so really for us, the measure of growth in SmartStack is not just a measure of how much revenue contribution it's driving, it's the fact that our field relationships between our field and our partner field are driving sort of joint engagement and that bodes well for continued growth and momentum right. And so that's really why we pay so much attention to that.

Matt Robinson - Wunderlich Securities

All right. Thanks a lot.

Suresh Vasudevan

Thank you for joining us today and thank you to all of our employee for making the quarter successful. At this point, we'll end the call. Look forward to seeing you all next quarter again, thanks.

Operator

Again, that will conclude today's conference. We thank you all for joining us.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS.

If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com. Thank you!

Source: Nimble Storage's (NMBL) CEO Suresh Vasudevan On Q2 2015 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

Check out Seeking Alpha’s new Earnings Center »

This Transcript
All Transcripts