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

Lexmark International (NYSE:LXK)

Q2 2011 Earnings Call

July 26, 2011 8:30 am ET


John Gamble - Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer and Executive Vice President

Paul Rooke - Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of Executive Committee

John Morgan - Director of Investor Relations


Brian Alexander - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.

Deepak Sitaraman - Crédit Suisse AG

Benjamin Reitzes - Barclays Capital

Bill Shope - J.P. Morgan

Toni Sacconaghi - Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., Inc.

Ananda Baruah - Brean Murray, Carret & Co., LLC

Michael Holt - Morningstar Inc.

Katy Huberty - Morgan Stanley

Benjamin Bollin - Cleveland Research Company

Shannon Cross - Weeden & Co., LP


Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Lexmark International Second Quarter 2011 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference call is being recorded on Tuesday, July 26, 2011. I would now like to turn the call over to John Morgan, Lexmark's Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, John.

John Morgan

Good morning, and thank you for joining us. Chairman and CEO, Paul Rooke; and EVP and CFO, John Gamble, are with me this morning. After their prepared remarks, we'll open the call for your questions as time permits. We ask that you please limit yourself to one question and one follow-up if needed, so that we can get to everyone.

Please note that Paul and John will be referring to specific earnings presentation slides that were posted to our Investor Relations website located at earlier this morning. Following the conclusion of this conference call, a complete replay will be made available on our IR website.

Also, on this site, you'll find details regarding our upcoming IR events, including our participation in Citigroup's 18th Annual Global Technology Conference on September 8th in New York.

As a reminder, any of today's remarks that are not statements of historical fact are forward-looking statements and involve certain risks and uncertainties that are disclosed in the Safe Harbor section of our earnings releases and SEC filings. Actual results may differ materially from such statements, and Lexmark undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

With that, I'll turn it over to Paul.

Paul Rooke

Well, thank you, John, and good morning to everyone. As John said, we'll be using a presentation slide deck as we did last time, and we'll refer to the slide numbers as we go to keep everyone on the same page. So let's begin.

Starting with Slide 3, the second quarter of 2011 showed good progress on a number of fronts. Our second quarter financial results were better than expected. We saw record quarterly earnings per share that reflected better-than-expected revenue, along with very strong gross profit and operating income margins.

We also continued year-to-year growth in our strategic focus areas, with double digit growth in our core supplies, software and managed print services. This year-to-year performance, however, was dampened by year-to-year declines in our legacy supplies, our legacy hardware and core low end hardware.

We also made good progress on the non-manufacturing costs we saw in the first quarter, and we remain on track to have this resolved by year end. And John will provide more detail on our progress in his comments.

And finally, we continue to execute our strategy focused on the higher growth and higher page-generating segments of the imaging market and the higher growth enterprise content management software market. We recently announced new hardware and software products to help businesses capture, manage and access content more efficiently, including a branch bank capture solution, a mobile printing solution for Android tablets and new color workgroup products for heavy users.

Now looking at our second quarter 2011 results, our GAAP revenue was $1.044 billion, up 1% year-to-year. GAAP earnings per share for the second quarter were $1.27, up 18% year-to-year.

On Slide 4, using the non-GAAP numbers, you can see the key second quarter takeaways. Revenue for the second quarter of 2011 was $1.045 billion, up 1% year-to-year, better than expected. Underneath this, on a year-to-year basis, we saw solid revenue growth in our strategic focus areas of core supplies, software and management services, where we grew over 25%.

Workgroup hardware revenue grew marginally in the quarter. However, this performance was dampened by declines in our legacy supplies, legacy hardware and core low end hardware.

Our operating margin of 14.2% was stronger than expected, up 1.1 percentage points year-to-year, driven by our continued strong improvement in hardware mix, as well as growth in laser supplies and software. Now versus expectations, the margin improvement was primarily driven by laser supplies overachievement, improved hardware margins and continued improvement in our non-manufacturing cost. Our non-GAAP earnings per share for the second quarter were a record $1.36, up 10% year-to-year.

Now let's move to Slide 5. Here, you see our 2 segments: Imaging Solutions and Services, or ISS, and Perceptive Software. ISS's revenue for the second quarter was $1.02 billion, a year-to-year decline of less than 1%.

This, combined with the software revenue addition of Perceptive Software, generated a total revenue increase of 1% year-to-year. Now Perceptive Software generated $25 million of revenue in the second quarter, an increase of 16% sequentially.

That is encouraging for us. Perceptive saw good activity in the U.S., across their industry segments, with particular success in the higher education, financial services and healthcare segments.

We're also beginning to see activity outside of the U.S. as our new international teams ramp up. While Perceptive represents only about 2% of our second quarter revenue, we expect it to grow faster than the other parts of our business and become a larger share of our mix over time.

On Slide 6, you can see the underlying product revenue dynamics. On a year-to-year basis, hardware revenue declined 9%, with supplies revenue growing 3%. Software and other grew 30%, primarily driven by Perceptive Software. Now the 9% year-to-year decline in hardware revenue was driven by declines in the core low end hardware and the legacy inkjet hardware.

The core low end hardware decline was driven by lower channel sales of both business inkjets and low end lasers, while the legacy inkjet hardware decline was driven by expected reductions in retail, distribution and the ongoing retirement of older inkjet platforms.

On the other hand, the core workgroup hardware revenue grew marginally in the second quarter. It was up for the first half and up sequentially, well above our historical trends. This is important, as the workgroup products produced the bulk of our supplies revenue.

Now on Slide 7, we have the total unit laser shipments from 2007 to an estimate for 2011. As you can see, our overall laser hardware shipments into the install base over the last 5 years have been up and down on a unit basis. At the same time, we are seeing record laser supplies revenues for 2010 for the first half of 2011, and we're projecting for the full year 2011.

Although we have seen uneven laser unit shipment performance into the installed base over the last several years, our statistical model indicates that the record laser supplies growth is attributable to the quality, not the quantity, of the installed base, since not all units are created equal. In other words, we're seeing increased average supplies consumption per installed unit of our base.

Remember, supplies revenue is a function of the installed base size and the supplies revenue generated per unit on the installed base. And while one may debate whether our laser installed base has actually grown or shrunk based on the variation in the shipments into the installed base over the past few years, our model indicates that a key driver of the core laser supplies growth we're seeing is an increase in supplies revenue per installed base unit.

Now we believe our strategy is driving this impact. First, we have expanded our laser product line over the last 5 years, particularly in workgroup class laser, multifunction and color devices. Secondly, customers are continuing to consolidate their fleets as indicated by our managed print services growth, driving more usage per device. And third, we're seeing customers substitute our A4 workgroup MFPs for their higher-usage A3 copiers, since the smaller, leaner A4 devices are now able to handle more of the copier-like paper-handling tasks than they could 5 years ago. These factors are all helping to drive increased usage per device.

We believe this increasing usage dynamics are the primary drivers of our supplies performance, more than compensating for fluctuations in unit shipments quarter-to-quarter or year-to-year. This is important since the supplies annuity drives our profit and cash generation engine. So let's look at our supplies revenue performance on Slide 8.

Now as we stated before, our strategic focus is to build a more productive, higher-value installed base in terms of pages and supplies revenue. Here you see the percentage of our supplies revenue split between net, which is driven from our core installed base, the red bars, fed from the laser products and business inkjet sales, and from our legacy inkjet supplies installed base, the gray bars, representing the supplies revenue still flowing from our legacy consumer inkjet installed base.

Now the percentages on the bars represent the year-to-year growth rates of the core and legacy supplies revenue. As you can see, the supplies revenue from our core installed base continues to grow, driven primarily by our lasers and the customer dynamics I just discussed, but also getting contribution from our high-end business inkjets.

It grew 13% again in the second quarter, an encouraging sign as we continue to make investments to grow this. On the other hand, the legacy supplies revenue continues to decline over time in both absolute terms and as a percentage of our supplies revenue. In the second quarter, legacy supplies were 17% of our supplies revenue.

So overall, in the second quarter, we had growth in supplies revenue from our core installed base that more than offset the decline in the legacy inkjet supplies revenue, resulting in 3% growth year-to-year. And as we've said before, as the legacy segment naturally declines with time and becomes a smaller piece, the growth of the core supplies segment becomes more dominant. And we expect it to drive growth in overall supplies revenue.

Now this double digit core supplies growth continued this quarter, and it's just another data point reinforcing the fact that what matters is improving the mix of the installed base, not the absolute size of it. As we improve the mix of the core installed base with our enterprise and small business initiatives, the average supplies revenue per installed unit continues to increased, more than compensating for any unit declines in our installed base.

Now putting this all together on Slide 9, we have the year-to-year revenue comparison for the first half, with the hardware and supplies components combined into the core and legacy split. And here you see that the core, along with the software and other piece, grew 6% and 39%, respectively. These 2 pieces represent the majority of our business.

The remaining consumer legacy component is declining as expected and becoming a smaller piece of our revenue. And we are committed to growing the core in total, focusing on the highest usage segments to drive profitable growth, along with the software and other segment to drive overall growth for Lexmark.

Now I want to shift from the financials to talk about some recent important announcements to our portfolio on Slide 10. First, we announced a new solution, jointly created by Lexmark and Perceptive Software for the financial services segment, joining the 3 solutions we announced earlier in the quarter.

The branch bank capture solution is designed to eliminate the pain points associated with loan processing and new account opening processes for branch banks. This end-to-end solution enables them to automate these workflow processes and electronically capture, manage and access key content more easily.

Now moving to Slide 11, you see our newly announced mobile printing solution for Android tablets. As tablets grow, our customers are asking us for print solutions for these mobile devices. This solution is targeted for enterprise customers, enabling them to print from their tablet and requiring very little to no IT burden. This has been announced initially to support the Cisco Cius business tablet and will be available later this year.

On Slide 12, during the quarter, we introduced 2 new color workgroup families, multifunction and single-function, strengthening our position in this important color workgroup segment. These families incorporate our industry-leading touch panel interface, enabling workflows and affordable color for heavy-usage workgroup environments.

On Slide 13, you see a sampling of the awards we received in the first half across our hardware and software platforms. These continue be a testament to the strength and innovation of Lexmark's product offerings.

On Slide 14, you can see our share position in 2 high-usage segments of workgroup laser and business inkjet greater than $200. On the left, according to IDC, for the last 4 quarters ending first quarter of '11, Lexmark held share in our focus segment of A4 workgroup lasers. And on the right, according to IDC, for the last 4 quarters ending first quarter '11, Lexmark continued to gain share in this higher performance inkjet segment.

Moving to Slide 15, during the quarter, we highlighted 2 large enterprise wins as continued evidence of the strength of Lexmark's value proposition and clear ability to compete in this market. With the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Lexmark will have a potential to place over 20,000 workgroup-class devices across 260 locations. With TBC, one of the largest marketers of auto replacement tires, Lexmark was awarded a 3-year management services contract for their 800-plus locations.

Now over time, our strategy has enabled Lexmark to grow a strong presence in the top enterprise customers across a number of key industry segments, as you see on Slide 16. We also find that once Lexmark is established as a presence, many of these customers also become managed print services customers. In fact, as you see in the retail and financial services segments, Lexmark has a high percentage of these top 10 customers as MPS, or managed print services customers.

Additionally, 36% of the Fortune 50 companies are Lexmark customers, and 24% of the Fortune 50 are managed print services customers of Lexmark. And for the second quarter, our overall managed print services revenue grew in excess of 25% year-to-year, and we have averaged over 25% year-to-year growth in the last 6 quarters. In fact, we have delivered year-to-year double digit annual revenue growth for managed print services over the last 5 years. And within the last 18 months, we competed for and won 18 new managed print services contracts with companies listed on either the Global 500 or Fortune 500 list, which represent incremental business to Lexmark.

We believe this is a clear indicator that our value proposition here is strong and continues to be relevant with these large, discriminating customers.

On Slide 17, our strategy continues to enable us to maintain a strong financial position with a solid balance sheet, $1.3 billion in cash and current marketable securities at quarter end and a long track record of cash generation.

So in summary, we are encouraged by these second quarter results. We continue to execute our strategy focused on the higher growth and higher page-generating segments of the imaging market and the higher growth enterprise content management software market. We are focused on growing our core hardware, consisting of all laser hardware and our new business class inkjets.

We're continuing to expand and strengthen our laser product line, particularly in color lasers and laser MFPs, while strengthening our industry workflow solutions capabilities and advancing our managed print services business.

Now the transition of our inkjet hardware is nearly complete, as we expect to finish exiting legacy inkjet products by year-end 2011. We are focused on growing our core business inkjet position, targeting higher usage business customers with an improved, high-end inkjet product line and distribution through both retail and non-retail channels.

And in addition to strengthening our core imaging business, Perceptive Software has enabled us to compete in the fast-growing segment of enterprise content management software and is expanding and strengthening our industry workflow solutions capability.

And together with our managed print services business, Perceptive will be at the center of a strong, growing software and services business at Lexmark.

Looking ahead, on Slide 18, you can see our third quarter, full year 2011 and long term outlooks. For the third quarter, outlook is for revenue growth to be flat to down, low single digits year-to-year. We expect GAAP earnings per share for the third quarter 2011 to be in the range of $0.86 to $0.96, and earnings per share for the third quarter, excluding restructuring and acquisition-related adjustments, to be in the range of $0.94 to $1.04.

For the full year 2011, our outlook is for revenue growth to be flat to down, low single digits year-to-year and operating margin to be at or slightly above the 12.3% achieved in 2010. Long term, our outlook is to grow at or above the market with an operating margin in the range of 11% to 13%.

I'll now turn it over to John Gamble for his more detailed comments on our financials.

John Gamble

Thank you, Paul, and good morning. Consistent with previous calls, I'll discuss our results of the second quarter of 2011 relative to the prior year, then relative to the first quarter of 2011. I'll then discuss selected changes in the balance sheet and certain items of cash flow. Finally, I'll finish with more detail regarding our guidance for the third quarter of 2011 and our expectations for the calendar year 2011.

Now let me begin with the P&L. I will start by providing our second quarter 2011 GAAP results. Second quarter GAAP revenue was $1.044 billion. Gross profit was $413 million. Gross profit margin percent was 39.6%. Operating expense was $276 million. Operating income was $138 million. Net earnings were $101 million and earnings per share were $1.27.

The discussion that follows is on a non-GAAP basis and reflects non-GAAP adjustments unless otherwise noted. Non-GAAP adjustments in 2Q '11 were acquisition-related revenue adjustments of $1 million and total pre-tax income adjustments of $10 million. The non-GAAP pre-tax income adjustments of $10 million in 2Q '11 were comprised of $5 million for acquisition-related adjustments and $5 million for restructuring-related adjustments.

As a reminder, included in the earnings presentation slide deck posted to the Investor Relations section of the website are schedules detailing the non-GAAP adjustments and reconciliations of GAAP and non-GAAP measures.

Before I get into the details of 2Q '11, let me update you on the progress we have made addressing the North American non-manufacturing cost issues we incurred in 1Q '11. Please refer to Slide 18. As a reminder, let me take a few moments to again describe this issue and its causes. More detail on this topic, including the types of increased costs incurred in 1Q '11, is available in the slides and transcript from our Analyst Day in May.

Essentially, non-manufacturing costs represent all costs associated with delivering a manufactured product from the factory to the customer. For Lexmark hardware and supplies, this includes the following major activities and cost drivers: inbound shipping from a manufacturing site into our distribution centers; product customization, which includes configuring a device or group of products to meet specific customer specifications; regional product distribution, which includes managing the inventory of configured and unconfigured hardware and supplies; outbound shipping from the distribution center to the customer site; physical delivery of the product; and finally, the return process, including a recertification of returned hardware, collection and processing of cartridges returned as part of our cartridge collection programs, warranty and other costs.

Beginning in the second half of 2010, as part of our ongoing effort to reduce cost and improve customer service, we restructured much of the North American infrastructure described by this chart. This included relocation and consolidation of distribution and customization facilities, change in outsourced facility providers and upgrading of IT systems.

With these transitions, our first priority was to satisfy our customers and ensure we didn't miss shipments or fail to execute customer installations on time. While we managed to execute this restructuring with minimal customer impact, we weren't as efficient as we expected to be in our execution with the new facilities, people, processes and systems. This resulted in increased cost in 1Q '11 of about $15 million to $20 million.

At our Analyst Meeting in May, I indicated that we understood the causes of these transition issues and expected to resolve them by year-end 2011, making steady progress throughout the year. As indicated on Slide 19, in second quarter of 2011, we made substantial progress and believe we resolved the majority of the non-manufacturing cost issue ahead of the pace discussed at our Analyst Meeting in May. We are confident we will continue to make consistent progress addressing the remaining issues in 3Q '11 and 4Q '11.

Non-GAAP total revenue for the second quarter was $1.045 billion, up 1% both compared to last year and sequentially from 1Q '11. Hardware revenue in the second quarter decreased 9% year-to-year. Core hardware revenue, representing hardware revenue from all laser platforms and our new business-class inkjet platforms, was down 6% year-to-year. Importantly, workgroup laser hardware revenue was up marginally in 2Q '11 and is up 1% for first half '11.

As Paul Rooke discussed earlier, workgroup products produced the bulk of our supplies revenue, and we estimate that, on average, 4x to 5x the lifetime supplies revenue per placement is low-end devices. Hardware revenue increased 10% sequentially, well above our average sequential growth. Again, principally due to strong growth in workgroup hardware revenue.

Supplies revenue in the second quarter increased 13% versus 2Q '10. Core supplies revenue growth of 13% was stronger than expected, reflecting strong growth in both laser supplies, which represents about 90% of core supplies, as well as core inkjet supplies. As Paul Rooke indicated earlier, the continued strong growth of laser supplies revenue reflects our continued strong performance in workgroup hardware and growth in workgroup hardware lifetime revenue per placement.

Legacy supplies declined 29%, in line with our modeling for legacy supplies and representing only 17% of total supplies revenue in 2Q '11. In both 1Q '11 and 2Q '11, supplies revenue has been running above our models and hence, ahead of our expectations.

Software and other revenue, which consists principally of hardware, spare parts and related service revenue, as well as software license subscription, professional service and maintenance revenue, was up 30% year-to-year. This reflects the addition of Perceptive Software in 2Q '10 and Perceptive's growth in 2Q '11.

Currency had a positive impact of 2% on Lexmark revenue in 2Q '11 versus 1Q '11. The currency impact on Lexmark revenue for 2Q '11 versus 2Q '10 was positive approximately 5% versus our expectations at the time we provided our financial guidance in April, which was based on the exchange rate as of 3/31/11. Currency had a less than 1% positive impact on revenue.

Slide 21 provides more detail on our laser and inkjet hardware revenue performance. Laser hardware revenue decreased 2% versus 2Q '10. As indicated earlier, workgroup laser hardware revenue was marginally positive, with all of the decline coming in low-end hardware. Laser hardware units decreased 7% in the quarter versus the prior year. Laser hardware average unit revenue increased 5% year-to-year in the second quarter, driven by positive shift to workgroup and MFP products.

Inkjet hardware revenue declined 37% in the second quarter versus the prior year, driven primarily by legacy inkjet, which declined over 75% year-to-year. Inkjet hardware units decreased 32% year-to-year in the second quarter, again, driven by legacy inkjet units which declined over 75% year-to-year. Inkjet hardware AUR in the quarter decreased 8% versus the prior year.

Moving to Slide 22 on your deck. Geographically, from the second quarter, U.S. revenue of $440 million grew about 1%. EMEA revenue of $380 million grew about 3%, and the remaining geographies declined about 1% year-over-year.

As shown on Slide 23, gross profit margin for 2Q was 40%, up 260 basis points for 2Q '10 and up 180 basis points sequentially. The 260 basis point increase versus 2Q '10 was driven by 360 basis points in product mix, principally less inkjet hardware and increased laser supplies and Perceptive Software.

This was partially offset by 100 basis points of negative product margins, including the impact of higher, non-manufacturing costs. The 180 basis points sequential increase was driven by a 290 basis point in improved product margins, principally in hardware and reflecting non-manufacturing cost improvements. This is partially offset by a 110 basis point-drop of negative product mix, primarily less supplies.

Non-GAAP operating expense for the quarter was $270 million, an increase of $19 million versus 2Q '10 and a decrease of $2 million sequentially. The majority of the increase versus 2Q '10 was due to the Perceptive acquisition. R&D was down $1 million year-to-year to $90 million, as expense savings from our 2009 and 2010 restructurings were more than offset by added Perceptive R&D.

SG&A increased $20 million versus 2Q '10 to $180 million, principally due to the addition of Perceptive SG&A, as well as higher marketing and sales expense in the ISS division, primarily due to currency. Sequentially, the decrease was in both R&D at $1 million and SG&A at $1 million. The sequential R&D decrease was principally program timing.

Non-GAAP operating income in 2Q '11 was $148 million, up $12 million from 2Q '10 and up $24 million sequentially from 1Q '11. The improvements versus 2Q '10 and 1Q '11 were in the ISS segment.

ISS segment revenue in 2Q '11 of $1.02 billion was down less than 1% versus 2Q '10, reflecting the hardware and supplies trends I discussed earlier. ISS segment non-GAAP operating income in 2Q '11 of $217 million was up $16 million versus last year and up $28 million sequentially.

The improvement versus 2Q '10 was principally due to the 3% growth in supplies revenue and improved hardware margins. A $28 million sequential improvement was driven by improved hardware margins, reductions in non-manufacturing costs and lower operating expense.

Perceptive Software revenue in 2Q '11 was $25 million. This represents 16% growth versus 1Q '11. Lexmark purchased Perceptive in June 2010 and hence, the 2Q '10 results represent only a partial period.

Perceptive segment non-GAAP operating income in 2Q '11 was 0 and decreased $3 million versus the partial 2Q '10 period and remained flat sequentially. We continue to be focused on investing to drive an expansion of Perceptive's international sales, accelerating Perceptive's development roadmap and increasing the industry solutions Perceptive offers to both Perceptive and Lexmark customers.

In 2Q '11, Perceptive had strength in healthcare and financial services industries, as well as continued very strong performance in higher education. We are pleased with Perceptive's performance this quarter and progress overall.

Other consists of shared support costs and expenses, primarily G&A, including IT, finance, HR and occupancy. In 2Q '11, other non-GAAP operating income was negative $69 million, consistent with our expectations and about flat with 2Q '10 and $3 million unfavorable to 1Q '11. The $3 million unfavorable versus 1Q '11 was primarily due to a relative negative transaction effect from the impact of movements in foreign currency in 2Q '11 versus 1Q '11.

Non-GAAP operating income margin in 2Q was 14.2%, an increase of 110 basis points from the second quarter of 2010 and an increase of 230 basis points sequentially. The majority of this increase versus both 2Q '10 and 1Q '11 is due to strong ISS operating margins. Concerning financing and non-operating costs, in the second quarter of 2011, the net interest in other was an expense of $7 million, up $1 million in net expense year-to-year and down $1 million sequentially.

Our effective tax rate in 2Q '11 was 22.7%. Non-GAAP net earnings for the quarter were $109 million. 2Q '10 net earnings were $98 million. Non-GAAP earnings per share for the quarter were a record at $1.36. This compares to 2Q '10 earnings per share of $1.23.

Non-GAAP earnings per share of $1.36 were significantly higher than the $1 to $1.10 we discussed with you on our April call. This improvement was primarily driven by higher-than-expected laser supplies revenue and stronger-than-expected MPS revenue, as MPS continues to grow extremely well. Together, these items drove the improvement in revenue and the significant majority of the relative improvement in income versus our guidance.

As I indicated earlier, laser supplies revenue has been running higher than our statistical models would indicate for the past several quarters, including 2Q '11. In addition, hardware gross profit margins, including the improvements in non-manufacturing costs, were also stronger than expected, driving the bulk of the remainder of the improvement in income.

Now moving to the balance sheet and cash flow items. My comments on the balance sheet, cash flow and cash conversion cycle are based on GAAP results and refer to Slide 24. Cash flow from operations for the quarter was $94 million compared to $91 million in 2Q '10. The $94 million generated in 2Q '11 reflects overall good cash flow and working capital performance.

Since the end of March 2011, accounts receivable decreased $37 million, inventory decreased $13 million, accounts payable decreased $53 million and accrued liabilities decreased $7 million. In 2Q '11, our cash cycle performance of 16 days, although slightly weaker than the March 31 performance, remains very good and ahead of the 18 days we achieved at the end of 2010.

The slight decline versus end March was lower payable days. For the quarter, capital spending was $34 million. Depreciation in the quarter was $53 million. Cash and current marketable securities at the end of 2Q '11 was $1.34 billion, up $71 million from 3/31/11, a large majority of which remains outside the U.S. Total long-term debt at the end of 2Q '11 remained at $649 million, with maturities on the debt in 2013 and 2018.

At quarter end, we had $491 million of share repurchase authority outstanding. No shares were repurchased in the quarter.

Now for my forward-looking comments for 3Q '11. Please refer to Slide 25. We expect third quarter revenue to be flat to down slightly versus 3Q '10. GAAP EPS in 3Q '11 is expected to be $0.86 to $0.96. GAAP EPS in 3Q '10 was $0.90 -- sorry, was $0.90.

In 3Q '11, non-GAAP adjustments to EPS were expected to be $0.08, comprised of acquisition-related adjustments of $0.06 per share and restructuring-related and other adjustments of approximately $0.02 per share. There will be no non-GAAP adjustments to revenue in 3Q '11.

Non-GAAP 3Q '11 EPS is expected to be $0.94 to $1.04. Non-GAAP EPS in the third quarter of 2010 was $1.09 per share. As a reminder, 3Q '10 had a low effective tax rate of 18%, reflecting discreet items the period. If the 3Q '10 effective tax rate was equal to the 23% we are expecting for 3Q '11, 3Q '10 non-GAAP EPS would have been about $1.04.

The 3Q '11 sequential revenue decline implied via our guidance is weaker than our historical average of flat to down 1% sequentially from 2Q to 3Q. This larger-than-average sequential decline in revenue is driven by our expectation that our supplies revenue will not consistently run above our statistical model and will revert to levels that are more closely correlated with our model over the second half of 2011. This assumption drives lower relative level supplies in the second half '11.

For total supplies revenue in 3Q '11, we expect a low single digit percentage of decline versus 3Q '10. We expect our supplies growth to remain strong, driven by very good growth in laser supplies but somewhat lower than the very strong 13% core supplies growth we saw in the first half '11. This strong core growth is offset by the expected 30% decline in legacy supplies, resulting in the low single digit percent decline in total supplies revenue.

We are expecting good year-to-year growth in hardware and software revenue in 3Q '11, better than sequential averages, driven by growth in workgroup printers as Paul Rooke discussed, and continued growth at Perceptive.

In terms of operating income and average sequential decline, is approximately 20%. The lower relative level of supplies in 3Q '11 results in larger-than-average sequential reduction in our operating income guidance.

The income statement guidance provided is on a non-GAAP basis. In the third quarter, we expect the gross profit margin percentage to be up versus the 36.5% we achieved in 3Q '10. Operating expense is expected to be up slightly versus the $270 million incurred in 2Q '11. Operating income margin in the third quarter is expected to remain at about the 10.9% level achieved in the third quarter of 2010.

For 3Q 2011 and all of 2011, we expect our ongoing effective tax rate to be approximately 23%. This guidance is based on foreign currency exchange rates as of 6/30/11. At these rates, the currency impact on revenue in 3Q '11 versus 2Q '11 is expected to be about flat. The currency impact on revenue of 3Q '11 versus 3Q '10 is expected to be positive 4%.

Regarding our expectations for the 2011 calendar year, please refer to Slide 26.

We now expect revenue to be flat, to decline at a low single digit percentage rate in 2011 versus 2010. We expect hardware revenue to decline year-to-year as growth in core hardware, driven by good growth in workgroup lasers, is more than offset by declines in legacy inkjet hardware.

We expect supplies revenue to be flat to down low single digit percent, again as good growth in core supplies revenue is offset by declines in legacy supplies. Given our strong margin performance in the first half of '11, we see some upside in margins and expect the operating margins to be at or slightly above the 12.3% level we achieved in 2010.

We project full year 2011 capital spending to be approximately $180 million, and we expect full year depreciation to be approximately $205 million. With that, we'll go ahead and open it up for questions.

Question-and-Answer Session


[Operator Instructions] Your first question is coming from the line of Brian Alexander of Raymond James.

Brian Alexander - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.

The workgroup hardware, I think, you said grew marginally. Can you talk about the unit growth you saw there? I think in prior quarters, it's been up double digits. And why did you see such a deceleration in the workgroup? Hesitation around your product launches? Increased competition? Macro-related? And how does that affect your supplies assumption going forward?

Paul Rooke

Yes, Brian. As we look in the second or the first half, we only start -- the first half workgroup revenue was up. And I think that's continuing to reflect the mix shift that we're seeing, even within the workgroup segment. And as we pointed out, that's important for our future supplies growth, because we are seeing increased consumption per device as we shift that mix up. So I think for the first half here, workgroup was up. Workgroup revenue was up about 1% year-to-year. And we're expecting, as we go into the second half, to actually see some more acceleration in workgroup.

Brian Alexander - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.

Can you just talk about what's going to drive that acceleration?

Paul Rooke

Yes. Well, I think it fundamentally comes down to our value proposition here with managed print services, the workflow, capabilities that we have in our product. We've invested a lot in that workgroup segment, expanding our product line into multifunction and color. And I think we're right in the sweet spot of where customers are looking these days as they look to consolidate their fleets. As we mentioned, we believe one of the factors in the increased consumption is beginning to substitute A3 copier models for the leaner, lower-cost A4 model. So I think all the investments we've made, expanding the product in that area, are driving acceptance of our value proposition.

Brian Alexander - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.

And just a follow-up for John, update on how much of the cash is domestic and whether your appetite for share buybacks has changed at all since the last quarter?

John Gamble

So as we indicated, the significant majority is overseas. And our strategic priorities with cash kind of remain consistent with what they've been. Our first focus is around strategic acquisitions to grow the software and solutions business so we can continue to drive not only the software business but also the workgroup and MPS business that you just asked about. And we think continuing to invest in solutions is critical to letting that happen. And then with the excess cash that's remaining beyond those strategic objectives, our intention is to return that to shareholders.


Your next question is coming from the line of Ananda Baruah of Brean Murray.

Ananda Baruah - Brean Murray, Carret & Co., LLC

I was just interested in getting your thoughts, particularly given the, I guess, the strength in supplies and even parts of hardware, I guess, relative to expectations this quarter. What do you think you may have benefited from the supply chain constraints this quarter that others may have felt, and maybe what the expectations are kind of for the second half of the year, or at least for the third quarter?

Paul Rooke

Yes, I think the thing that's driving our supplies performance are those fundamentals more than any constraints. So it's related to our installed base and the mix of that installed base more than any constraints there. So we're encouraged by that, and we'll see what the future holds. But we believe the strategy we are on is working, and we see that in our supplies strength. On the hardware side, we saw a little bit, as we mentioned in the last quarter, the constraints that are coming from the Japanese pricing. We saw a little bit of that in our low end laser, but we don't expect that to continue long term. We think in the second half, we may see a little bit of that. But we believe it's manageable and multi-year end [ph].

Ananda Baruah - Brean Murray, Carret & Co., LLC

And just a follow-up if I could, maybe for John. Could you just take a shot at quantifying what the base point impact was this quarter to gross margin from the progress that you made on the non-manufacturing cost?

John Gamble

Well, what we'd indicated, right, was that we thought we had a detriment in the first quarter of $15 million to $20 million, and that we thought would resolve more than the majority of it, or more than half of it. So actually, that's the math of trying to determine the improvement.


Your next question is coming from the line of Toni Sacconaghi of Sanford Bernstein.

Toni Sacconaghi - Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., Inc.

You mentioned a couple of times that supplies were running above your internal model. I'm wondering if you could comment on channel inventory levels? And then what hypotheses might explain why supplies are running above model and why you wouldn't actually revisit your model rather than just, say, it's going to revert in the second half?

John Gamble

Well, Tony, I mean we do continuously -- we do our model as we get more data points, and so that's a continuous process. So our channel inventories from everything that we monitor are flat sequentially. So we think that our channel inventories are within range. So we're just -- as we look at our results versus our model -- and the model is increasing, but it was more than what we thought. So we're just -- the actual data points bounce around quite a bit as you'd expect, reality versus the model. So we're just looking at that in making the judgment that we may see more of a reversion to the mean, if you will. But we think fundamentally in the model, that the strength is coming from increased consumption there. And while we may have tactical movements up and down around that quarter-to-quarter, we think long term, it's moving in the right direction.

Toni Sacconaghi - Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., Inc.

And to follow-up, I'm a little bit surprised about that given what appears to be some enthusiasm for hardware in the second half. Your laser units were down 11% in the first quarter, they were down 7% in the second quarter, and yet you're expecting about flat units for the year, which would imply actually pretty meaningful year-over-year growth in the second half. You commented about expecting better-than-normal seasonality in Q3. So perhaps you can comment on whether you have good visibility in your pipeline, whether there's a competitive dynamic that is giving you that level of confidence looking into the second half? And then again, given that it actually seems like your laser unit growth is going to accelerate, why, if anything, you'd expect -- that further confounds me about why you expect supplies to be weaker.

Paul Rooke

Yes. So we do believe as we go into the third quarter, we will have some stronger hardware numbers there. And so that is correct there in terms of making up some of that hardware miss. I would make the point to, relative to supplies, that the quarterly -- this quarter, the next quarter don't make the installed base. Installed bases are built over time, so it's a longer-term impact there that we're looking at in terms of the supplies model, not just the immediate -- this quarter or next quarter. But we think directionally, if we continue this and everything we're doing is to do that, it's driving things in the right direction.

John Gamble

I just wanted to make sure. We weren't saying the word "expect." We expect supplies be strong, and we expect core supplies to be strong, Toni. We did indicate that. We just said they were very strong in the first half, and we expect them to revert somewhat more to the model. And the model still indicates strong laser supplies growth. Right? And everything is completely consistent with what we indicated in terms of the trends in MPS and our laser placements and workgroup placements. But we do expect strong growth in core supplies. It's just not as strong as the 13% we saw on the first half.

Paul Rooke



Your next question is coming from the line of Shannon Cross of Cross Research.

Shannon Cross

I had a question with regard to end-market demand in the U.S. and Europe. There's clearly a lot of noise, or even more than noise, out there about what corporations are thinking, given all the uncertainties out there. So I'm curious as to what your customers are telling you in terms of their appetite for purchasing and also what you're seeing especially maybe within MPS business where you track page volume, what you're seeing on sort of a year-over-year basis in terms of printed pages?

Paul Rooke

Yes, Shannon, what we're seeing -- I'd say in those 2 big markets, U.S. and Europe, relative to the rest of the world, say, Asia and Latin America, is slower growth than what we're seeing outside of the U.S. and Europe. Yes, I think companies are cautious, but we're continuing to see activity as companies are looking to reduce their costs and improve their infrastructure. I mean, that's our value proposition, it lays right on top of that. So I think the activity we're seeing is companies taking advantage of that. And so we're seeing that in our MPS growth, for example, where we are helping companies consolidate fleets and reduce their printing infrastructure cost, and you see that in the 25%-plus growth. And you've seen it as we were giving you some numbers. They were going back in time. It's been a good, consistent pattern. So I think we're continuing to ride that wave of managed services and the improvements, cost improvements, particularly in some of these markets that maybe are a little more slow-growing and people are looking to reduce their cost.

John Gamble

I think you also see it in core supplies, right? Because we -- a heavy percentage of what we sell is to large accounts and to workgroups. And what you're seeing is core supplies growth of 13%. So the fact that, that is so strong is indicative of good activity.

Shannon Cross - Weeden & Co., LP

Okay, great. And then I just -- to get sort of a feeling, I mean, clearly, first quarter was kind of a big miss, and then this quarter is a big upside. How are you thinking about when you provide guidance to us these days? Because I know there's a lot of moving parts in that. I mean, can you sort of characterize how you're thinking about guidance? Are you trying to be conservative, given things that are going on? Do you see the numbers as more realistic? I'm just trying to get a handle because it would be -- clearly, you guys would like to have more consistency as well. So I'm thinking of wanting to know a little bit more, I guess, about how your thought process going into providing the guidance this quarter.

Paul Rooke

Yes, Shannon, it's an inexact science. We do our internal analysis, obviously, of everything we see. Our models in the market, put it altogether, and we do our best judgment of that guidance. We're far from perfect, but we based it on a lot of internal analysis, certainly, and do the best job we can.


Your next question is coming from the line of Bill Shope of Goldman Sachs.

Bill Shope - J.P. Morgan

Back to the non-manufacturing cost issue, if more than half of that is already resolved, shouldn't we assume that it's going to have a fairly insignificant impact on the second half? And then as we get beyond this issue, once its resolved, shouldn't it reverse to an incremental tailwinds margin since I believe the original goal was to actually cut cost of these manufacturing actions?

John Gamble

So we did resolve more than we expected in the period. So the incremental benefit as you look forward first was the current period, obviously, is less. So yes, we certainly would agree with that. And as we go forward, we're just trying to execute the plans that we've put in place for several years. Right? So we're continuing to try to drive all costs out of the business, including manufacturing cost. And our success of that will be based on our ability to execute efficiently. So I don't know that there's any specific implication beyond this year other than it puts us back on the path that we were attempting to deliver, which is around general cost improvement. It is true, as we continue to deliver a higher and higher level of product and more and more service to our customers, the cost of delivering that service is higher, so what we're doing is trying to find ways to deliver that service more efficiently. The good news is we get paid for the service. So hopefully, it shows up in the revenue.

Bill Shope - J.P. Morgan

And then looking at your second half outlook again, how are you thinking about pricing dynamics in the second half, particularly as some of your competitors' results, some of their product constraints? Are you modeling a more aggressive environment? Or are you assuming no real change?

John Gamble

Well, I think, Bill, as we saw in the first quarter, we saw aggressive pricing. That's continued in the second quarter. We're expecting that to continue in the second half. So that's contained in our outlook.


Next question is coming from the line of Ben Reitzes of Barclays Capital.

Benjamin Reitzes - Barclays Capital

I wanted to talk about cash flow. Your free cash flow in the quarter was about $60 million versus net income of $109 million on a non-GAAP basis. And I was just wondering, I think this is the second quarter in a row where the free cash flow is below net income by quite a bit. And I was just wondering what was holding down free cash flow? And is there a big snap back in the second half? And how does the free cash flow or cash flow guidance for the year look versus your net income guidance which we can back into?

John Gamble

Yes. So we didn't actually give cash flow guidance for the year. But in terms of the first half, right, there are some things that are negative to the first half cash flow, right? Generally, in the first half, you had payment of incentive compensation. And generally, in this year, our tax payments were higher in the first half likely than the second half. So if you take a look at our working capital in general, we think the performance is relatively good. If you take a look at the turns, we think they're relatively good. Our capital spending relative to depreciation is relatively good. So we don't think there's anything fundamental in our cash flow which is a negative. We just think it's just some timing of payments during the year. Second quarter, we have interest payments which make it look a little different relative to net income than in some other periods. So that's all. But in general, we think as long as we execute working capital well, meaning specifically payables, receivables and inventories, that in general, we'll perform relatively well in our cash flow.

Benjamin Reitzes - Barclays Capital

Okay, any thoughts on the share repurchase intensions? You have $491 million, I believe, remaining and the cash is piling up. Can you just revisit how you think of that versus acquisitions and repo?

John Gamble

We do look at it very frequently. And in terms of kind of the method by which we look at it, I can't really add anything to what I answered before. But I can assure you, we look at it very frequently and try to make the right decisions each period.


Your next question is coming from the line of Katy Huberty of Morgan Stanley.

Katy Huberty - Morgan Stanley

Just going back to the performance by geography, the U.S. and other segments actually decelerated versus the first quarter. And all of the acceleration came in EMEA. Obviously, currency is a benefit there. But can you talk about fundamentally where you're seeing improvements in that region?

Paul Rooke

Yes. I think, Katy, U.S. and Europe, we're seeing similar levels of activity. Again, versus the other parts of the world, we're seeing, particularly in Latin America, higher rates of activity. But I wouldn't differentiate between the U.S. and Europe there. I think again, back there, our value propositions are being accepted well across a number of vertical segments. So I wouldn't differentiate between the 2. I'd say -- but relatively speaking, between the U.S. and Europe, a little slower activity than what we're seeing outside the U.S. and Europe.

Katy Huberty - Morgan Stanley

And just a quick follow-up. Obviously, the strategy in inkjet is to move up to business inkjet through office superstores with higher ASPs. And yet, over the last couple of quarters, the ASP and the inkjet business declined, and this quarter, down 8%. Why are we seeing that decline in ASPs as you move away from the low-end mass-market channels?

Paul Rooke

Yes, I think, Katy, on a year-to-year basis, we have still a legacy decline component as we were, this time last year, still shipping some of that. So you see that legacy component as a part of that. Within our core inkjet, we are seeing improvement in our higher-end business inkjets. We still -- the lower end of that line has some price pressure on it, and we got a little more aggressive there from our first quarter. So there's different dynamics. A good chunk of it is still legacy roll-off there, and we've got a little more aggressive in our core inkjet.


Your next question is coming from the line of Deepak Sitaraman of Crédit Suisse.

Deepak Sitaraman - Crédit Suisse AG

Paul, you talked about MPS traction, which clearly appears to be very strong. You mentioned 18 new contracts. Can you give us a sense of what your win rate is here? And maybe also just give us an update on the competitive dynamics that you see within managed print? Who are you mainly up against? And are there any particular verticals or geographies that are driving strength in your business?

Paul Rooke

Yes, the MPS data points, they are encouraging for us, and we are seeing traction. And we put some of that additional information out there just to give everyone confidence that we are able to compete and we are competing and we are winning. And we are winning against the other big players in the market, whether it's HP here or Xerox. And so we're encouraged by that because it indicates that our customers are seeing that differentiation in our value proposition, even within the managed print area. Geographically, our vertical segments, I think it's across -- I mean, all the segments are looking to consolidate fleets and figure out how to reduce their print infrastructure. We also -- our value proposition is not based just on consolidation and reducing cost. It's also on workflow improvements. So we see in particular sectors, for example, in financial services and a few of the others where the workflow component is becoming an increasingly important part of that differentiation as people look to capture documents and manage and access them in more electronic ways.

Deepak Sitaraman - Crédit Suisse AG

And John, if I can just follow up, your guidance for the full year implies operating margins in the fourth quarter being up about 90 basis points or so sequentially in what is typically a strong hardware quarter. Can you speak a little bit about what gives you confidence in that happening? And maybe just comment on your level of visibility as you look out toward the end of the year?

John Gamble

Yes, I mean, obviously, we only give guidance one at a time, one quarter at a time. So in terms of specific fourth quarter guidance, we're not going to give any at this point in time. But right now, as we take a look at the way we move forward, right, what is certainly happening in the business, as more and more of the business moves toward business devices and lasers and inkjets and lasers and less low-end inkjet devices, the fourth quarter effect of selling much higher, much more hardware and much more low-end hardware is becoming less and less prevalent. So we think that, that seasonality effect is becoming less and less prevalent. And just as we look forward and take a look at our supplies models and our expectations as we indicated for what we think will be a relatively good hardware period in the third and fourth quarter, that we think we have a good opportunity to deliver the full year margins that we indicated.


Your next question is coming from the line of Ben Bollin of Cleveland Research.

Benjamin Bollin - Cleveland Research Company

The first question I had, if you look at the inventory levels of supplies and customers and in businesses, have you seen any change in their comfort levels of holding working capital? Are their pantries running lean? Or do you see them holding more than they did last quarter or last year at this time?

Paul Rooke

We don't have full visibility to that, so I couldn't make a comment on that. On our managed services proposition, we are managing some of those inventories to help them. So it clearly is a pain point for them in terms of their realizing that managing a whole mixed mess of devices out there and all the different inventories, is a pain point. And so our managed services proposition actually is an advantage in helping them manage those things. And that's an element of our proposition. But I can't comment specifically on actual levels out there.

John Gamble

Yes, and just factually, just so you're aware, we generally have some visibility into the first year of distribution, but really not much beyond that.

Benjamin Bollin - Cleveland Research Company

Okay. The other item, I'm interested if you're anticipating any material impact into the third quarter results as you lose some inkjet placements in some of the smaller Best Buy stores.

Paul Rooke

Yes, I would say, relative to Best Buy, our relationship is good and continues to evolve as we seek to reach more business customers as opposed to consumer-customers. But overall, as we're managing our inkjet business, you still see the impacts of rolling off the legacy on a year-to-year basis. So we're continuing to look at that distribution that we used to have versus what we want to have. And clearly, we're steering at more towards business channels as you heard us talk about office superstores and even beyond retail. But Best Buy specifically is not a major part of our business. Not a core part, and we're evolving that relationship to make sure we're targeting the customers, the higher-usage, business-class customers.


Our final question will be coming from the line of Michael Holt of Morningstar.

Michael Holt - Morningstar Inc.

I want to build on the earlier questions regarding end-market demand. And certainly, supplies growth implies that printing habits are healthy. But I was wondering if you could comment on the page volumes or printing habits in your customer base and maybe dividing it up between emerging or developed or managed print service versus traditional? Or is there any kind of breakdown where you are seeing kind of divergent printing habits or page volume trends?

John Gamble

No. I think it's probably more -- I mean, we're focusing on business customers. And business customers do print. And I think that as we talked through our discussion here, the bigger driver is really the degree of sharing and the degree of consolidation going on within fleets. And we're seeing that all over the world, across all vertical markets. And that's driving up the consumption per device. But the printing behavior, I wouldn't differentiate it across geographies or verticals. I mean, some applications are obviously more print-intensive than others. But that's within any industry, and we do look for those. And I think our value proposition continues to evolve as we're not only having customers print more efficiently, we're also helping them to take that printed information and get it into their digital infrastructure with our Perceptive Software, Lexmark Linkage, and trying to integrate that into a more easy, integrated solution. And so you see that in some of our recent announcements as well. But overall, we're encouraged.


With that, I would like to turn it back over to Paul Rooke, Lexmark's Chairman and CEO, for closing remarks. Please go ahead, Paul.

Paul Rooke

Well, in closing, our second quarter saw a number of very encouraging signs. Our financial results were better than expected, with record earnings per share, a strong operating income margin and better-than-expected revenue performance. We also saw continued growth in our strategic focus areas. Our core supplies grew 13% with record laser supply shipments. This is important since supplies are a key driver of our profitability. This growth is being driven by our strategy to target higher-usage segments and our continued success growing managed print services in excess of 25%. This, coupled with the investments we have made and continue to make to improve the functionality of our working products, are also enabling us to capture more pages from the high-usage, competitive copier installed bases. We're also making good progress in growing and integrating Perceptive Software into our business. As we invest in Perceptive Software in bringing new and differentiated solutions to market, our future is focused on building a strong core of software solutions and services to complement our strong sales of workgroup lasers and high-end inkjet devices that together, will grow sustained margins and drive long term success for Lexmark.

With that, I'll turn it back over to the operator to close out the call. Thank you.


Thank you. That does conclude today's teleconference. You may disconnect your lines at this time, and have a wonderful day.

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 All other use is prohibited.


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

Source: Lexmark International's CEO Discusses Q2 2011 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

Check out Seeking Alpha’s new Earnings Center »

This Transcript
All Transcripts