PortalPlayer Inc. Q1 2006 Earnings Conference Call Transcript (PLAY)

May. 1.06 | About: Nvidia Corporation (NVDA)

PortalPlayer Inc. (NASDAQ:PLAY)

Q1 2006 Earnings Conference Call

May 1, 2006, 5:30 p.m. EST

Executives

Gary Johnson, President and CEO

Olav Carlsen, Chief Financial Officer

Kristine Mozes, Investor Relations

Analysts

Randy Abrams - Credit Suisse

Glen Yeung - Citigroup

Jason Pflaum - Thomas Weisel Partners

Daniel Ernst - Hudson Square Research

Krishna Shankar - JMP Securities

Adam Benjamin - Jefferies & Company

Quinn Bolton - Needham & Company

Chris Caso - Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co.

Craig Berger - Wedbush Morgan

Tayyib Shah - Longbow Research

Operator

Welcome to the PortalPlayer Incorporated First Quarter Fiscal 2006 Earnings Conference Call. Today’s call is being recorded and will be available for playback beginning one hour after the completion of the call. To access the replay, please dial 719-457-0820 with the pass code 7348100.

At this time, for opening remarks and introductions, I would like to turn the call over to Kristine Mozes, Investor Relations for PortalPlayer. Please go ahead.

Kristine Mozes

Thank you for joining us today. In addition to this call being available by phone replay, it is being broadcast live via the investor relations page of PortalPlayer’s website at www.portalplayer.com.

Earlier today, we issued our earnings press release and filed it with the SEC. the press release is also available on PortalPlayer’s website. That press release contains certain non-GAAP financial measures which we will discuss during today’s call, together with the most directly comparable financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP and reconciliations of the differences between these measures.

With me today is Gary Johnson, President and CEO of PortalPlayer, and Olav Carlsen, PortalPlayer’s Chief Financial Officer.

I will begin this call by reading our safe harbor statement.

The statements on today’s call, which are not historical fact, are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements as to our future plans and growth, our customers inventories, development efforts, features, benefits, and introductions of products and technology, sales of the PP5021, entrance into new markets, our plans to hire additional resources, our ability to execute our product roadmap, our revenue growth, including revenue from the Flash market and timing thereof, market trends and demand for high-capacity players and anticipated growth of this market, market trends and demand for differentiated notebooks and anticipated growth of this market, availability of Microsoft Vista Slideshow technology, market trends and demand for products with wireless connectivity and anticipated growth of this market, demand for our products and future financial results, GAAP and non-GAAP, including revenue, net income, expenses, gross margins, ASP’s, stock-based compensation charges, tax rates, cash flow, weighted average shares outstanding and operating expenses, including but not limited to future R&D spending and selling general and administrative expenses.

These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements. Please refer to today’s earning release, our form 10K for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the SEC and from time to time in our other SEC reports for information on risk factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements.

These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date hereof. PortalPlayer disclaims any intent or obligation to update these forward-looking statements. Additionally, this conference call is the property of PortalPlayer and may not be recorded or rebroadcast without specific written permission from the company.

PortalPlayer reports earnings per share and net income in accordance with GAAP and additionally on a non-GAAP basis. PortalPlayer uses non-GAAP additional measures to exclude certain expenses it believes appropriate to enhance an overall understanding of its past financial performance, and also its prospects for the future.

PortalPlayer believes that providing these non-GAAP financial measurements is useful to both its management and investors because they provide a consistent basis for comparison of the company’s financial condition and results of operations between quarters, which comparison is not influenced by stock-based charges, the amortization of purchased intangible assets, the related tax effects of these items, and the release of a portion of our tax valuation allowance.

The full reconciliation of the GAAP to non-GAAP financial data can be found in our earnings release issued earlier today, and we ask that you review it in conjunction with this call. Now I’d like to turn the call over to Gary for his introductory remarks. Gary.

Gary Johnson

Thank you, and welcome everyone. Q1 was a solid quarter for us, with strong financial performance, and a resulting record cash position of $192 million. We are clearly disappointed with the product transition setback that we announced on April 19th. Later on I will discuss the technical initiatives we are implementing to address this change, along with an update on our key technology developments.

Let me now outline for you some of the highlights of this quarter.

We have discussed in the past one of PortalPlayer’s goals is to build intellectual property, either by creating it in-house or by acquiring or licensing key IP to ensure that we can continue to build great products and supply innovative technology to our customers. This quarter we did indeed license and acquire some important IP for use in our target markets.

As for other aspects of the first quarter’s business, there were two important trade shows where we were able to demonstrate our leading-edge technology. First, at the Consumer Electronic Show in early January, our Personal Media Player division demonstrated our video solution working at 30 frames per second. By incorporating this high quality video solution into our platform, we are enabling customers to choose a lower cost one-chip solution rather than paying extra for another video processor.

Also at CS, our Personal Media Display division introduced and demonstrated our new preface technology for secondary displays in notebooks computers. Together with Microsoft, we showed the technology to many potential customers, including on the show floor in a prominent position in Microsoft’s booth.

The second show was the 3GSM in Barcelona in early February. There our Personal Wireless Entertainment division worked with a variety of leading-edge partners to demonstrate WiFi and HSDPA technologies to potential customers. In a few minutes, I’ll go into more detail about each of these initiatives and the steps we are taking in light of our recent announcement. But first, I will turn the call over to Olav, who will take you through the details of our first quarter financial results.

Olav Carlsen

Thank you, Gary, and welcome, everyone. As Gary mentioned, today we are reporting strong first quarter results. Revenue was $72.3 million, which is a 62% increase from the $44.5 million in the same period a year ago.

As you would expect following an extremely active holiday quarter, we saw significant seasonal quarter over quarter decline in shipping activity in the first calendar quarter of the year.

We started the first quarter with a record level of deferred revenue by presenting the shipments we made in the last three weeks of Q4. This, and the fact that we believe that our customers also restocked some of their channel inventory after leaving the year with lower-than-desired inventory positions, led to the strong revenue level in Q1.

Revenue from our largest customer was again more than 95% of our total revenue. Our first quarter gross margin of 42% is within our operating target model of 41% to 44%. The quarter-over-quarter decrease, as expected, was mainly due to lower ASP’s.

We expect gross margins for the rest of the year on a cumulative basis to be at or slightly below the low end of our long-term guidance, due to the fact that our largest customer does not intend to transition to our follow-on product to the 5021 device.

Net income for the first quarter was $6.5 million, compared with a net income of $7.8 million in the same period a year ago. Our GAAP tax rate for the first quarter was 51%, which is much higher than anticipated. A year ago, the Q1 gap tax rate was 25%. I’ll go into some more detail about this in a minute.

The first quarter 2006 net income resulted in an income of $0.26 per diluted share, based on 25.5 million weighted average shares outstanding, compared with a net income of $0.31 per diluted share based on approximately 25 million weighted average shares outstanding in the same quarter a year ago.

Net income in the fourth quarter of ’05 was $23.8 million, or $0.92 per diluted share, based on 25.8 million weighted average shares. This included not only stock-based compensation charges but also one-time tax benefit of $8.6 million, or $0.33 per diluted share, related to the release of a portion of the valuation allowance against the first tax-base?

Now, excluding stock-based compensation charges of $2.4 million for the first time in Q1 reported in accordance with FAS 123R, and also excluding the $115,000 of amortization for our recently acquired IP, as well as the significant tax aspects associated with these charges, non-GAAP net income for the first quarter of ’06 was $10.4 million, or $0.40 per diluted share based on 25.8 million weighted average shares outstanding.

The non-GAAP effective tax rate was 35%, in line with our previous guidance. This compared with a non-GAAP net income in the first quarter of ’05 of approximately $8.2 million, or $0.33 per diluted share. Non-GAAP net income for the fourth quarter of ’05, at which in addition to excluding stock-based compensation also excludes the $8.6 million one-time tax benefit, was $15.9 million, or $0.62 per diluted share.

Two interesting details here. You will notice that under GAAP accounting rules, our diluted weighted average shares outstanding were 25.5 million, and under non-GAAP, the total was 25.8 million -- 300,000 higher. This difference is driven by the effect of FAS 123R on the rules to applying the treasury stock method to the weighted average shares outstanding calculations.

As we don’t include option expenses in the calculation of our non-GAAP earnings per share, we also exclude the effects of FAS 123R in the calculation of our diluted shares outstanding. This yields a conservatively higher share count. The accounting principals behind this calculation are pretty complex, and I explain further in the earnings release we filed today.

I also want to take a minute to explain our tax provision. As I mentioned earlier, our tax rate for GAAP purposes was 51%. This is higher than we expected and why is that? Because based on our recent product transition setback, we have now revised our financial outlook for 2006 downwards. This revision compounds the effect that certain 123R expenses have on our tax rate, and it also has the effect of limiting our ability to establish certain deferred tax assets. While the effect of this is an overall increase of our tax rate for accounting purposes, it does not necessarily reflect our actual tax liability or benefit for the future.

Excluding this accounting effect, as I said earlier, the tax rate for non-GAAP purposes is about 35%.

In our earnings release, we provided the detailed reconciliation between GAAP numbers and the non-GAAP numbers, which details the stock compensation charges and the charges resulting from the amortization of intangibles together with their tax effects for each relevant quarter, as well as the one-time tax adjustment in the fourth quarter of ’05.

Our operating expenses were about $16.5 million for R&D and SG&A in the first quarter, $2.3 million lower than our Q4 spending. We cautiously adjusted our spending to the seasonally lower activity level that we experienced in this quarter, and also forecast for the second quarter of this year. We leveraged our operations in India, as well as our highly flexible spending model, to quickly respond to the seasonally lower first quarter.

Through continued conservative spending, we expect operating expenses in Q2 to be about $13.5 million before non-tax charges. This is more than $5 million, or about 3% below our OpEx level in the fourth quarter of last year. Looking beyond the second quarter, we will continue to be very cautious with our spending.

Our stock-based compensation charge of $2.4 million this quarter was for stock-based compensation in accordance with FAS 123R, including expenses related to our restricted share grants that we began issuing in 2005, elements of amortization of deferred compensation and some variable charges.

For Q2, we expect our total compensation charges under FAS 123R to be about $2.4 million before the effects of taxes.

Now let’s turn to the balance sheet. Our inventory balance at March 31st was $3 million, most of which is finished goods. We continue to successfully manage our inventory level adjusting it to the seasonally lower level of activity we experienced in the first quarter. Our current inventory is primarily 5021 devices, which we continue to sell to our customers.

Our deferred income position, which represents the gross margin for shipments in the last three weeks of the quarter, was $2.8 million, naturally a lower level than a quarter ago. Headcount at the end of the quarter was about 314.

Before I turn the call back over to Gary, let me summarize our guidance for the second quarter of ’06. We expect revenues to come in between $30 million and $40 million. Total OpEx before stock charges is expected to be about $13.5 million. Stock-based compensation charges are expected to come in at $2.4 million before the effect of taxes. GAAP net income or loss per diluted share is expected to be between a loss of $0.03 and an income of $0.05, based on approximately 25.7 million weighted average shares outstanding.

Excluding the stock compensation charges, $350,000 of amortization related to our purchased intangibles, and related tax aspects, non-GAAP net income per diluted share is expected to be between $0.03 and $0.14.

At this time, I would like to turn the call back over to Gary for his comments. Gary.

Gary Johnson

Thank you, Olav. Although the first quarter was a good one, we recognize that we have significant challenges ahead of us and we are taking action to address them. We have kicked off an active and thorough evaluation of our business strategies, and how we can leverage our core competencies to respond to the product transition loss.

Supporting this is the fact that we’ve been working on our diversification efforts for quite a while now. For instance, we introduced our Preface technology to target the fast-growing notebook market, and are actively working on our wireless initiatives. Once we go through our evaluation process, we will come back to you with our strategic plans moving forward.

In the meantime, the tactical initiatives that we’re focused on from a high level are as follows;

  1. We certainly haven’t given up on winning back the business we have lost from our largest customer, and plan to aggressively pursue future product models with them. We will also continue to support them and plan to ship the 5021 device to them for some iPod models;
  2. We plan to leverage our existing products, including the follow-on product to our 5021 device, and updated firmware development kit features much more actively with other customers;
  3. We will now take our super integrate, single-chip product roadmap, which will now include analog, advanced video, and wireless capabilities, to a broader customer base; and
  4. Finally, as Olav mentioned, we will continue to leverage our flexible spending model to ensure that we invest in prudently only in those critical areas that allow us to innovate in the portable multimedia market.

With that said, let’s now turn to the first quarter highlights. Let me discuss some intellectual property initiatives. We are very focused on developing innovative technologies. To support that, we are always working to create intellectual property in-house, and licensing or acquiring additional IP from other sources.

Over the past year, there have been two technology changes in our business that have influenced our IP investment decisions. First is the growth of NAND Flash memory based products that use our technology platforms, and second is the increasing need for very memory intensive capabilities, such as video playback and encoding.

Because of these trends, we have executed a three-pronged intellectual property strategy to:

  1. Create innovative technology in-house;
  2. Work with great technology partners to bring memory-related technologies in-house; and
  3. Purchase patents and exclusive licenses to IP in the area of memory technology and more general semi-conductor applications.

On the patent side, this past quarter we obtained a five-year licenses to the patent portfolio of MOSAID Technologies, consisting of more than 500 U.S. and international patents. We also purchased 25 patents from them, and the combined transaction amount is approximately $8 million. According to the agreement, we have an exclusive license to grant sub-licenses in certain markets.

With these patents and our own internal developments, we believe we are building the right set of technologies needed to execute on a product roadmap for rich memory technology support, and advanced video capabilities, as well as strengthening our overall intellectual property position.

Now let’s look at each of our divisions. First, let’s talk about our Personal Media Player division. While we continued to support our largest customer in the market, we’ve also been very with additional customers to introduce to innovative products as well. For example, SanDisk introduced three feature-rich models that use our PP5024 device with up to 6 gigabytes of flash memory.

The Sensor E200 series of MP3 players -- these models utilizes PortalPlayer’s video capabilities and not a separate video chip, which allows them to offer low cost video solution to the consumer.

Our strategy of offering high-quality 30 frames per second video capability on small form-factor devices providing customers with important cost-performance value points that other customers could find compelling and choose to implement. Our current technology implements 30 frames per second QSYS MPEG4 video, and we are continuing our technology in IP investments to ensure that we will have a roadmap of products to support the growing number of high-quality protected content video services.

Now let’s talk about our Personal Media Display division. In January, we introduced our Preface technology platform for secondary displays in notebook computers. These always-on displays, in addition to eliminating the need to boot the computer to access notebook content, enable users to access up to 500 hours of music or other content on the notebook.

Because this new feature is tightly integrated with the Microsoft Vista operating system, the introduction of Preface-enabled notebooks is highly dependent on the availability of Vista. A few weeks ago, Microsoft announced that it had delayed the retail launch of Vista from late 2006 into January of 2007. Due to this delay, we now expect our first production level revenue from Preface to be in the fourth quarter of 2006 rather than the third quarter, as we previously expected.

In the meantime, notebook manufacturers continue to be excited about secondary displays and the ability it gives them to clearly differentiate their products -- something they haven’t been able to do since notebooks were introduced in the early 1990’s.

We are seeing strong design activity for this technology, and are working with our partners and notebook manufacturers to be ready for timely launches. In planning for growth in this segment, we recently expanded our Taiwan presence to include a new design sensor. These additional resources will help in the development of our Preface technology platform and provide local engineering support for Preface to our customers and partners in Taiwan and China.

We’ve also been active in supporting Microsoft in its worldwide third-party training and have supplied more than 100 Preface development kits into this effort, with more on the way.

We are excited about this market and the opportunity it gives us in leveraging our existing technology to an entirely new space, targeting a new customer base and significantly expanding our target market.

Our Personal Wireless Entertainment product division has also been hard at work. The group has been focused on the technology aspects of wireless applications, as well as engaging the eco-system required to deliver a compelling user experience onto wirelessly connected devices.

This past quarter, we announced partnerships with two market leaders in wireless technologies, CSR and Icera.

We have partnered with CSR to bring wireless connectivity to personal media players. The company’s expect to enable WiFi technology that simplifies the synchronization of media players with a PC, as well as open up entirely new ways to download and stream content from the Internet. We can also enable wireless stereo headset connectivity through Bluetooth solutions.

With Icera, we demonstrated technologies to enable a new class of portable multimedia devices that can support, in the future, an always-on connected service, allowing for on-the-air browsing and the fast download of music and video files through high-speed cellular broadband networks.

We demonstrated all of these technologies at the 3GSM show in Barcelona in early February, and the feedback from potential customers has been positive. They were excited about a class of wireless products that would incorporate the best of class multimedia technologies with the convenience of wireless technology.

Many existing products that combine wireless and multimedia compromise battery life and the overall user experience. That is why we are meeting with cell-phone carriers, content providers and manufacturers to develop a no-compromise, wireless enabled platform that offers the features, functionality, battery life, and user interface that consumers want can could have large mass-market appeal.

Our plan is to have our wirelessly enabled platform working for customer evaluation in the second half of this year.

In summary, we continue to focus on exciting high-growth markets, our investments over the past 18 months have enabled us to put together strong product roadmaps, and we are excited about working with customers across a broader set of markets. We now have challenging times ahead of us. Nevertheless, we believe the pace of innovation of our new technologies is accelerating. The market segments we have targeted are expected to see significant long-term growth, and we have made substantial investments in developing technology to enable highly integrated feature-rich products to pursue them.

Over the past year, we have invested in developing a super-integrated, single-chip product roadmap, which now includes analog, advanced video, and wireless capabilities, and are now seeing solid results from our internal testing on various silicone implementations.

We are now happy to open up the call to take your questions about our business, but I want to remind everyone that it is our policy not to comment on any specific customers’ products or roadmaps. Operator, we are ready for questions.

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

Thank you. (Operator Instructions)

We’ll take our first question from Randy Abrams with Credit Suisse.

Randy Abrams - Credit Suisse

In your guidance, are you factoring in a continuation of the hard-disk drive business or are you factoring in a slowdown or potential loss of a part of that opportunity?

Olav Carlsen

Randy, the guidance for Q2 definitely has the continued shipment of 5021 in there.

Randy Abrams - Credit Suisse

Okay, and maybe clarify on the 5021. You mentioned that you’ll still be shipping into iPods for the 5021. Is that existing models or does that also imply new models that haven’t been announced yet?

Gary Johnson

Randy, as you know, we’re always hyper-careful with our customers’ product roadmaps, so we haven’t disclosed the product roadmaps for both ourselves or our customers. As we said, the 5021 is shipping into existing iPod models as we see, including as you said the hard drive-based iPods.

Randy Abrams - Credit Suisse

To follow on that, where do you see the biggest opportunity to reemerge with your customer for following designs? Is that with that single-chip platform? Maybe within that context, talk about the type of wireless set-pool, kind of cellular wireless or is that the more Bluetooth wireless LAN type connectivity?

Gary Johnson

As you point out, in the semiconductor business, there are a design flux you compete for and you have to win each of them on their merits at the particular time. As I alluded to in this call, we have embarked earlier on a very heavy integration path, including as you mentioned wireless audio and advanced video. We’re not going to be tipping our hat at this point and giving more details on the wireless applications, apart to say that our home base is clearly the personal media player market. We think we understand the market and the requirements of that market pretty well, so you should assume that the wireless technology we’re referring to is directly relevant to the personal media player market.

Randy Abrams - Credit Suisse

Last question, on the flexible spending model, could you talk about in your pull-back and operating expenses, what program you’ve had to cut into at this stage and what’s the next round if you have to cut deeper?

Olav Carlsen

Mostly we’ve saved on SG&A. We also saved on some of the engineering expenses that we had actually already accelerated, so we didn’t really have to pull any program. We continue to focus on what we consider critical for this company. How much further would we be able to cut, I think the $13.5 million that we guided for the second quarter, being $5 million lower than already on Q4, 30%, we’re very comfortable with that at this time.

It is important for us to continue to invest in critical areas, but we’re going to be very cautious with spending, so we’re going to give you an update on the second quarter call, but I think we’ve moved already very swiftly.

Randy Abrams - Credit Suisse

Thanks a lot.

Operator

We’ll go next to the site of Glen Yeung with Citigroup.

Glen Yeung - Citigroup

Thank you. Can you tell us how much of your business in Q1 was non-Apple?

Olav Carlsen

Yes, Apple as I said was more than 95% of our revenue, so the rest was non-Apple.

Glen Yeung - Citigroup

And as you look into the second quarter, what’s the percentage you expect non-Apple?

Olav Carlsen

I don’t break that out, but it’s still a very important customer for us in the second quarter.

Glen Yeung - Citigroup

Next question I have is when you think about the business that was lost, is there a way to get a sense as to how quickly that was lost -- i.e., are we largely done with that business now, and as you move beyond the second quarter, it’s basically no longer present?

Gary Johnson

I’m not quite sure how to answer that question. There’s a fairly complex side to that.

If we step back and look at it, it essentially -- as you know, Glen, in the semiconductor business, there are design slots that you can compete for and there are clearly then follow-on design slots and new models that emerge typically in the consumer market probably twice a year -- typically refreshes in those types of cycles. So you should rest assured that we’re working to win back that business at our largest customer, and as was from the previous question, integration, low power performance and reducing the overall build-up material aspects, costs, are areas that we’ll be focusing on.

Glen Yeung - Citigroup

The next question I have is on gross margin, because you can look at it in a number of ways, right? One is that revenues are lower and there may be some costs that can’t fall quite as fast. On the other hand, the business you lose is arguably very -- not low margin, but it was tough negotiations, obviously. Can you give us a sense as to how you expect margins to trend, maybe over a longer-term period? A year to two years?

Olav Carlsen

I’m not going to comment on two years, but I think in the longer term, we do expect our margins to be within our 41% to 44% range. It’s only in the shorter term that I see them at the low-end or slightly below the range, and as you can imagine, our customer’s decision not to use the follow-on technology to the 5021 had a major impact on this. We’re not able to get the benefit from, at least for now, shipping a value-add technology where we would be able to reset the price, to a certain degree. So for the time being, that is the major impact on how I actually -- when I look at the margin over the next couple of quarters.

As I said earlier, you’re asking the longer term. I think with other business ramping, specifically in 2007, I would expect the margin at this point in time to be back again in the 41% to 44%.

Glen Yeung - Citigroup

Olav, is it typical that in a given device that you sell for a given opportunity in the market, whether that’s with your biggest customer or another, that over time we would expect to see pretty typical price declines as time passes?

Olav Carlsen

Yes, absolutely. Over the lifetime of a product, if you take a year for a product, you probably would expect somewhere a 25% decline year over year. If that product lives longer, the 5021, for example, has been shipping now for five quarters, you would expect a further decline. As it matures, you certainly -- ASP’s continue to decline. Does that answer your question? Sorry.

Glen Yeung - Citigroup

Maybe a question for Gary. You talked in the past about Preface and the opportunities that it presents for later this year and into next. Can you just give us any update on your thoughts with respect to Preface?

Gary Johnson

Yes, as I said, I think certainly the feedback we’ve been getting face to face with a wide range of the notebook OEM’s and ODM’s continues to be extremely strong. We’re having very detailed conversations with them about both implementation and the ecosystem and how we support them in terms of a wide variety, so they’re certainly engaging in our discussion, discussing a wide range of plans.

For example, even including marketing plans. So I think that is going extremely well. We worked prior to be part of supporting Microsoft as they go out now and evangelize this technology to their developer network on an international basis, it’s our development kit that is being used in many of those forums. So we very much like that as a way of getting developers familiar with the 5024 platform, familiar with the Preface platform, familiar with the software platform we have. So we think that all bodes well for us as we look at the second half.

Of course, we’re a little disappointed that the Vista launch pushed out, but we still see a tremendous amount of interest from the major notebook manufacturers.

Glen Yeung - Citigroup

Last question here, for Olav, which is you talk -- you are now looking at a $5 million reduction in operating expenses. Were there any major sort of features of the things that drove that, i.e. were there headcount reductions, or any other specific items that helped you get that number down?

Olav Carlsen

No, Glen, I already answered, I think Randy asked the same question. No, we didn’t do any restructuring or plan any headcount reduction. We had a lot of flexibility in our spending model, working with partners outside to develop technology for us. We accelerated a lot of that already in Q3, Q4, because we were preparing a little bit for some seasonality. It comes in very handy now that we’re facing this particular situation, and we haven’t really, other than looking very carefully at some of the SG&A and some of the nice-to-haves, we‘re concentrating on the must-haves.

Glen Yeung - Citigroup

Okay, thanks.

Operator

We’ll go next to Jason Pflaum with Thomas Weisel Partners.

Jason Pflaum - Thomas Weisel Partners

Yes, good afternoon. I guess now that you have had a couple of weeks to digest what’s gone on here, do you have a better sense, or can you talk about maybe some of the more specific reasons why there was the shift in your customer? Whether it’s more price-driven, or were there feature-set issues, or who knows the reason why they may have moved?

Gary Johnson

Well, there have been no direct public disclosure on those sort of items. I think we believe that our customer’s decision was very complex in that decision, and that when we look at both technology and product features, we believe that it extends beyond that and covers a whole plethora of items beyond that point.

We believe that the product follow-on to 5021 actually is a well-designed and an excitingly featured device, but we think customers sometimes have very complex decision-making processes. There could be numerous reasons why customers switch you out for a particular socket.

Having said that, we certainly haven’t given up with that customer, and we’ll continue to engage and fight back for those types of future sockets. As I said, no real news I can give you. We think it’s a very complex argument that involved more than just technology choices, but no more details than that at this point.

Jason Pflaum - Thomas Weisel Partners

Very well. Maybe you could talk a little bit about the linearity of Q1. Just looking at the balance sheet, it looks like the DSO is coming down pretty sharply, or it was in fact very front-end loaded. If you could talk about the momentum you’re seeing into Q2, then I guess just to follow-on with a question is how much legacy Nano product may still be in the Q2 number?

Olav Carlsen

Yes, Q1 was actually very front-end loaded. It was actually front-end loaded to the effect that we had a lot of revenue in the last three weeks of December, in accordance with our revenue recognition policy, so almost a third of that revenue was already and happened in the last three weeks of December, as you know.

Other than that, I think the quarter was relatively linear, and we don’t see any change there in Q2. This is, actually, I mean, we said it earlier, this is actually kind of like the pattern that we see, especially with our largest customer, it is a lot of linearity. There is usually maybe some one-off’s in the past, but linearity is how they have actually operated with us.

Jason Pflaum - Thomas Weisel Partners

Any sense for Q3 at this point? Can you give a general sense of whether it’s going to be up, down, or -- maybe you could just touch on that.

Olav Carlsen

No, I don’t give guidance beyond one quarter, but having said that, we do certainly expect a significant impact on our financials. It’s a little too early to say how much Q3 versus Q4 is impacted. We had a planned transition in the second half. I can’t tell you exactly for when. We certainly know the margins are under pressure. I talked about this before. We already talked about the spending reduction you’ve seen already in our Q2 guidance.

Jason Pflaum - Thomas Weisel Partners

Last question here is back on the Preface. Some of the feedback that we’ve been getting from customers is that the technology itself is pretty exciting and interesting, but it’s still currently too expensive for mass-market adoption. Maybe you could talk to us about where the bill of materials are today and where you see them six to twelve months out from here? And that’s it. Thank you.

Gary Johnson

The bill of materials for Preface I think very much depends on customer implementations. When we were at CS, for example, we wanted to show off some of it’s high-end features, and when we displayed that, we used a fairly expensive color display, in the region of $18 to $20, on the prototype units. We incorporated maybe a fair degree of NAND flash memory, and then there’s our SoC, our SOP, the 5024 -- so there really are the three key components.

As we have now spent more time with customers and, to your point, every penny becomes an item as they build their notebooks out, we are seeing customers now look at a wider variety of displays in particular, and I think as you start to look at just the general trend, price trend for small, form-factor displays, we’re seeing continued price declines as they gain volume in things like cell phones, and such.

So we think maybe the initial starting point of $18 for the display on the notebook may have been a little high, but we are seeing customers attack that and we do want, as you point out, really drive both some price differentiation and offer our customers really choices of a different bill of materials. So we’re working hard on reducing the bill of materials as well.

Operator

We’ll go next to the site of Daniel Ernst with Hudson Square Research.

Daniel Ernst - Hudson Square Research

Good evening. I really just want one question, and without trying to give specific guidance for the second half, or tip your hand or your customers’ hands about new products. Obviously you lost a socket in one of their products, and it sounds like it’s the follow-on to the Nano, and for Q2 in your shift into other models, which is really their hard drive video product, I would think that the key question for you and for Apple is are you shipping them in the second half? To whatever that product it is is irrelevant to us, sort of a binary situation. You either have them as a customer in the second half or you don’t. So have you made that determination yet?

Gary Johnson

Well, when we talked about the product transition setback, we were pretty specific in terms of really trying to focus in, again without disclosing our customer’s roadmap -- we really don’t want to be tipping our customer’s hands, and we were focused pretty tightly on the announcement about the follow-on from the feature Flash market. We didn’t expand it beyond that. We kept it very focused, but again, don’t take that into necessarily views of the customer’s roadmap.

The follow-on transition 5021, as we indicated, was not chosen for the feature Flash market. We are continuing to ship the 5021 into the Video iPod, and beyond that, customer cycles will emerge as we go through that. But we are shipping today the 5021 into a variety of models, including the Video iPod.

Daniel Ernst - Hudson Square Research

I understood today, but my question is -- again, without tipping Apple’s hands, whether they’re launching a new hard drive model or not, but the actual question is whatever product you, Apple, are shipping in the second half of the year, are we, PortalPlayer, part of that product or not?

Olav Carlsen

I think, Dan, I can’t even answer it without tipping the hat. I have no way of answering your question without actually talking about the customer, the roadmap, which, unfortunately, and you know that, we can’t do.

Daniel Ernst - Hudson Square Research

Thank you.

Operator

We’ll take our next question from Krishna Shankar with JMP Securities.

Krishna Shankar - JMP Securities

Yes, a couple of questions. One, for the new product that you are prototype, ensuring that full video capabilities, you said that it has the capabilities to do low-power, high-quality video in a single chip, with MPEG4 capabilities. What about videos, H.264, and to do video quality equivalent to the current Video iPod, which uses a separate video chip? Can you compare your feature chip with the current Video iPod, which uses a separate chip?

Gary Johnson

The software implementation, which is how we’ve put this together on our existing platform, the 5021, that we demonstrated at CS, is really targeted to the smaller screen implementation, so that wouldn’t scale to a larger screen implementation. The video for free strategy, as we call it, essentially providing that 30 frames per second capability on the 5021 on video, is targeted at the smaller, hand-held devices.

In terms of other codec standards, our customers, for example, have applications which transcode the video applications to run on that type of platform. So that is what we call our video for free strategy.

As we said, we’ve also been working extremely hard internally, and are not making product announcements at this point, but we do have a very aggressive roadmap that does start to really span the full high-end view of video playback. But that’s a product yet to be announced.

Krishna Shankar - JMP Securities

Also, can you give us some sense for the Preface technology, how exclusively are you with Microsoft in terms of the best time to pick implementation, and what level of competitive mix do you see for the Preface type of platform going forward?

Gary Johnson

Without disclosing specific agreement aspects, what I will say is that we certainly have the first move advantage. We’ve worked very closely with Microsoft during 2005. Together we learned a great deal as we put together the platform in understanding how to develop the API’s and the technology, so we think we do have a significant, both implementation and optimization advantage, with our platform going to market.

Also, what’s very important for this segment is that we’re having so many more new ideas brought to us from customers and from input to Microsoft that we’re already starting to think about the second or third generations already.

So part of this is not standing still, making sure that we have the great features needed for generations two and three, and we’ve already started to focus on them. So part of it is familiarity with the platform, optimization with the platform, and then frankly, competitively, it’s be ready with our next platform iteration of features when competition does arrive.

Krishna Shankar - JMP Securities

I just wanted clarification. Did you say in your prepared comments that the video, the wireless enabled single-chip solution will be targeted at a broader range of customers than just your single largest customer? Is that what you are saying?

Gary Johnson

Yes.

Krishna Shankar - JMP Securities

So the wireless digital media player chips that you’re working on are really targeted at a broad range of customers, and not necessarily your largest customer?

Gary Johnson

That’s correct. We think, as you know, I think our vision of a single-chip implementation with audio, video and wireless -- single chip -- we think is applicable to many market segments. So yes, we are taking now that broadly to quite an exciting customer set.

Krishna Shankar - JMP Securities

Thank you.

Operator

We’ll go next to Adam Benjamin with Jefferies & Company.

Adam Benjamin - Jefferies & Company

Thank you. First question, just to go back to the OpEx. What is the bare minimum OpEx number you can get to, Olav, that does not include an NRE? Maybe to ask in a different way, with respect to your guidance for Q2, what’s the amount of the NRE in Q2?

Olav Carlsen

The NRE, we don’t disclose the NRE in it, but there is NRE in there, if you’re asking. So every quarter there is NRE. It depends on your product roadmap and where you stand. There is one-time event that happen in one quarter or the other, so Q2 has NRE, as did Q1 and our other quarters.

What is the minimum we can drive it down to? I think as I kind of signaled, the $13.5 million that we guided to for the second quarter is a very comfortable level. That ensures that we can actually continue to focus on the critical areas. We want to continue to innovate. We, as Gary said in his prepared remarks, we have a tactical plan that focuses on working to win back the business of our largest customer, to leverage our current and future technology to a broader base of customers. There’s a lot of innovation we need to do. There is Preface. There is wireless. So we have a business to take care of, and we do this with a minimum of operating expenses. We will leverage what we have in the flexible spending model.

You know, can it be another million? Sure, but this is for us to evaluate now. We did what we could do in these ten days of response to the situation. There’s probably more we can do when we look at it further down, but now we have to really go and evaluate the situation further, and then we come up with a plan.

Adam Benjamin - Jefferies & Company

So is it fair to say, Olav, that roughly the amount you guided to Q2 is roughly where you can get to in terms of a bottom, maybe give or take a million?

Olav Carlsen

For the time being, yes. But again, as I said, we can evaluate this, but this is a number that we already feel very comfortable with. This has all the resources that we currently have. This has all the headcount we currently have. We’re going to be very cautiously evaluate what we want to spend further, whether we want to grow in certain areas in terms of headcount.

So it is a level that for now we feel comfortable with. There is still flexibility in the model. I don’t want to say that, as you said, a million or two, but for now, $5 million lower than Q4 is quite an achievement already.

Adam Benjamin - Jefferies & Company

Previously, you’ve given the ASP declines on a year over year basis. Can you give the ASP decline for Q1?

Olav Carlsen

Yes, I can give you that. The ASP decline was, year over year, about 30%, year over year for Q1 over Q2, which is a little higher than the 20% to 25% that we would expect, but it certainly has a little bit to do with the maturity, the continued maturity of the 5021 product, which is now in its fifth quarter of shipping.

Adam Benjamin - Jefferies & Company

Last question, with respect to your guidance, I’m just trying to get a handle on the $30 million to $40 million. Can you try and quantify for us, with respect to, is it a burning down of channel inventory versus the design loss at Apple, and can you give us some kind of percentages as to how that guidance shapes up, the $30 million to $40 million, based on that?

Olav Carlsen

It’s hard to give you the percentages, but let me talk about the guidance, maybe, and let me explain that a little bit. So first you need to analyze the Q1 revenue before you can actually evaluate the second quarter revenue guidance, so we started as you know Q1 with a record deferred revenue position, and we believe that a significant portion of that relates to actual customer product sell-through in the fourth quarter, as you know. So you’re familiar with that.

You also believe that our customers left 2005 with lower than desired inventory balances, and they ordered some of our products during the first quarter in order to restock their channel inventory to a more desirable level.

So after eliminating these two effects from our Q1 revenue, if you compare Q1 with Q2, we see two factors that affect our Q2 guidance. One is we expect certainly do some additional ASP’s, as our 5021 product continues to mature. Also, we expect to see a bit of an overall seasonal slow demand for our products in Q2 compared to Q1.

So what we don’t believe is that the product transition setback that we announced has materially affected our Q2 guidance yet. If you put all these together between how Q1 was certainly higher than the actual shipping activity level in Q1, and you followed our customer’s announcement in terms of how, and about the sell-through for their products was in Q1 versus Q4, if you also consider that they left 2005 with a pretty low inventory level, all of them, I guess, and ordered some restocking, and then look at Q2, a little bit of seasonality in ASP drops, you can actually reconcile the $72 million to a guidance of $30 million to $40 million.

Adam Benjamin - Jefferies & Company

One last question. It just appears from the ASP’s that your units were up sequentially from Q4 to Q1, is that right?

Olav Carlsen

Unit shipments -- you know, it’s a discussion here. Do you want a GAAP data, calendar data? On a calendar basis, the units were down. On a GAAP basis, I think the units were almost similar.

Adam Benjamin - Jefferies & Company

Okay, great, that’s all I have. Thank you.

Operator

We’ll go next to Quinn Bolton with Needham & Company.

Quinn Bolton - Needham & Company

Thanks, just wanted to come back to Gary, your comment on the follow-on to the 5021 was not designed into your biggest customer’s future products. I just want to clarify, you’re saying sort of what you said two weeks ago, that that’s the Flash-based feature product, but no comments on hard drive at this point?

Gary Johnson

That’s correct.

Quinn Bolton - Needham & Company

Then you mentioned I think the follow-on to the 5021 was taped out last summer. On this call, you’ve talked about the super SOC that integrates more analog, more wireless -- is that a next generation chip or is this one and the same?

Gary Johnson

No, that one is quite a leap in terms of the degree of integration, and as we pointed out, in terms of silicone implementation, we actually already in-house having various aspects of that type of integration tested out.

So you should regard the sort of follow-on to the 5021 by the term follow-on as a more traditional type of architecture increase. The super-integrated chip we’ve gone after, we’ve got a very positive response back from in terms of the leap and the level of integration we’ve taken with that next generation.

Quinn Bolton - Needham & Company

Okay, and then just lastly, just wanted to comment, if one of your big customers has sort of designed your software out with say a 5021 generation, what’s the likelihood that you can get future generation designs back in? How much does the software change? How important is software to new features such as wireless? Is that an opportunity to get the software back in, or is it sort of once the core firmware is out, does it tend to stay out?

Gary Johnson

No, I think you hit the nail on the head in that offering new features and capabilities of new platforms, as is common in the chip market, you have to bring a complete solution to it, which inevitably today involves firmware in particular with the new features.

So no, I think the capability that we have in-house of developing the firmware in parallel with the new chip features I think serves us particularly well to your very point, as you look at things like wireless, and in the future, other types of advanced video technologies taken to a customer and a chip-set with new features, plus the firmware ready, and plus they know how to work with you on the firmware, I think is clearly an advantage.

Quinn Bolton - Needham & Company

Okay, and then lastly, Olav, I think you said a couple weeks ago that you might be able to give us an update on what percent of your business was Flash-related, and I was just wondering if you could follow-up on that.

Olav Carlsen

I don’t know that I actually said that I could break out Flash versus hard drive, so I’m not prepared to do this today.

Quinn Bolton - Needham & Company

Okay. Thank you.

Operator

We’ll go next to Chris Caso with Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co.

Chris Caso - Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co.

Thanks. I just wonder if you could clarify something you said earlier, just relative to the Q2 revenue run-rate didn’t yet take into account the design loss yet. Just clarify my understanding on that. If you could help us out with sort of the magnitude between the excess inventory in comparison to the magnitude of the design loss. I guess what we’re trying to get to is order of magnitude, what we should expect going in Q3, but I understand your difficulty in answering the question.

Olav Carlsen

So you mentioned inventory, so let me comment on that. We don’t currently have any inventory on hand for that follow-on technology. It’s mainly the 5021 that we have on hand, so I don’t expect any unfavorable impact from our largest customer’s decision on our balance sheet or on inventory or gross margins or anything, so I’m not sure whether I got your question there correctly.

Gary Johnson

Then on the first point, just to reiterate so we’re perfectly clear, is as Olav said, we don’t believe that the product transition setback has materially affected the Q2 guidance. Just to make that crystal clear as we don’t believe it has materially affected Q2 as we see it today.

Chris Caso - Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co.

I guess then just order of magnitude, you know, as you go into the third quarter, you get some positive seasonal effect, I mean, should we expect revenue to be up or down in Q3?

Olav Carlsen

Unfortunately, I’m not going to be able to tell you that today. Number one, it’s too early. Number two, it’s our policy not to go above and beyond one quarter of guidance. So I’m going to have to -- we will have to wait and we’ll give you that guidance in our second quarter call.

I told you a little bit about, you know, against our own policy, we’ve given a little more insight into the second half. We talked about the margins, we talked about the spending that you could expect from us. We’ve also given you some tax rate information for the rest of the year.

How we’re impacted on revenue, I wouldn’t tell you at this point in time. It’s a little too early.

Chris Caso - Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co.

Could you share some of the factors that you’re looking at going in the second half? I guess is it as you’re looking at the second half, is it safe to say it’s sort of more design win dependent at this point in the calendar, on what revenue turns out to be in the second half?

Olav Carlsen

There’s certainly an element of design wins in there. I mean, we have an exciting design win activity with customers outside of our largest customer. There is, in the second half, a little bit of an element of what our first revenue from the Preface technology in the fourth quarter could be.

And there is the element of the announcement we made. It is really too early to say how we’re going to be impacted by this in the second half. It is a transition that was planned for some time in the second half. The timing of this, to some degree, it hasn't been announced and we are not totally clear what the timing is. I can't make any comment on this, because any announcement I would make here could be taken as a comment, an indication of my customer's roadmap.

So it is really too early to make those statements. It is clear that our financials are going to be impacted and it is clear, we said we revised our internal forecasts for 2006 downwards. I think that is as much as I can tell you about the second half at this time.

Charles Zhang

Thanks very much.

Operator

We will go next to Craig Berger - Wedbush Morgan.

Craig Berger - Wedbush Morgan

Good afternoon, thanks for taking my question. You have talked about doing 30 frames per second of QSYS MPEG 4 video. Can you tell us what bit rate that is at?

Gary Johnson

Frankly, not at the top of my head. We will look it up and find a way to get that information to you.

Craig Berger - Wedbush Morgan

That would be great, thank you. With respect to the follow-on product to the 5021, you have talked about this super-integrated chip. Did you know what features are on that, and also whether you sad wireless radios are going to be integrated on chip? I think that might be a departure from some of your previous comments?

Gary Johnson

Just for clarity, the follow-on chip, the 5021 is a member of its own family and you should view that as one part. What we have started to talk about today, you are right, is this more aggressive, highly integrated solution we have underway.

Again, it does include for the first time, integrated audio, integrated wireless and integrated advanced video. But frankly, for competitive reasons, we are not going to tip our hat beyond that, apart from saying that we have made good progress on that and we think from customer response we have had, that we are certainly on the right track with that type of aggressive performance increase in that solution.

Craig Berger - Wedbush Morgan

And with respect to the follow-on to the 5021, the question is: where is it?

Gary Johnson

Where is it? Well we have it here. We obviously have it here now. It is a product that is available. We now, frankly, are looking at how to use that more aggressively with our other customers in the second half. It is a product that we now think is very stable and we look forward to discussing that now with other customers in the market.

Craig Berger - Wedbush Morgan

With respect to the Sansa e200, is that business ramping and captured in the second quarter guidance or is that ramped more in the back half of the year?

Olav Carlsen

All of our customers' backlog is captured in the guidance, as always. We've given you the guidance as we see it. So we continued with our process that we had in the past couple of quarters where we don't judge or be conservative or anything, we just really look at the customer backlog and tell you as is. SanDisk is a part of that.

Craig Berger - Wedbush Morgan

Okay. Thank you.

Gary Johnson

Thanks a lot.

Operator

We have time for one more question, and that question will come from Tayyib Shah - Longbow Research.

Tayyib Shah - Longbow Research

Hi guys. I guess you are not able to provide a lot of clarity on whether you expect to retain the video iPod business through this year. Can you give us an idea of where the competition is coming from for that product? What, if any, have you taken to fend off that competition?

Gary Johnson

In the high end video market, if you look across a broader swath of competitors, there are a number of areas that competitors are offering solutions; companies like Texas Instruments at the high end has your good video capability; Broadcom clearly, through acquisitions, has started to bolster its video capability. They would be two in particular that we've done a lot of work on in analysing their road maps, look for their weaknesses and strengths. So I would point those two out in particular as very worthy competitors.

As I said, our job now is to make sure that we fight and win every socket on the merits of our solution, focused primarily on integration and performance. Obviously cost has to be a part of that. We do our market intelligence well; we have a fast-moving team. We are going to compete very vigorously for each and every one of those slots that is available for us at our biggest and big customers.

Tayyib Shah - Longbow Research

Thank you. And then after having some time to digest the Apple news, what do you have to change in terms of product design to possibly get Apple's business back next year? Is it something in terms of power consumption or is it software? I know you have talked about integration, but is there anything other than integration involved as well?

Gary Johnson

Well I wouldn't necessarily make the assumption that integration is necessarily a winning scenario or a current scenario in the decision-making process of customers. At different times, they look at different elements in terms of costs, for example. There are various reasons why design spots get won and lost.

Where we move forward, as we do, we have to address all of the key elements at the time. We think the development of a highly integrated SoC is critical. We think the knowledge of which market that is going to apply to, and take the learnings from the last five years to really drive down, as you said, power consumption, are critical elements.

Also, all-in-all, we have to satisfy sometimes very aggressive price points that are offered by the competition. Some of them appear very difficult to reach, but you have to go at them with a better technical solution. When you do at that time, other elements of cost and such can be overcome.

So we haven't lost the customer. We are working to win back business at our largest customer and we are going to be very aggressive at going at that with great integrated, power-optimized solutions and be a very vigorous competitor for each of those design slots.

Tayyib Shah - Longbow Research

Thank you. And the next innovation platform that you integrated, is that going to come out in time for any design wins this year?

Gary Johnson

We haven't, as you can imagine, particularly at the moment with a very competitive environment, we plainly are not tipping our hats in terms of the timing aspect there. We are moving very expeditiously, have a great deal of focus on that, but no. We are not announcing timing at this point.

Tayyib Shah - Longbow Research

Maybe you can give us an idea of the follow-on to the 5021? How many design wins, or how much revenue can we realistically expect this year?

Gary Johnson

As we indicated, the follow-on is essentially available today. We are able now to make that available and discuss that with a larger variety of customers. In terms of its prognosis for the second half and its timing, it is really too early to tell at this point. We have literally just moved into May. There are customers, particularly in Asia that are in the ODM market that can move quickly, but I wouldn't want to pre-forecast particular additional revenue from that follow-on product as we sit here today.

But trust us; our sales team is going to be very actively engaged with that product and pursue the opportunities that we have out there. We will use this new part very aggressively in Asia.

Tayyib Shah - Longbow Research

Finally, for a preface, I think we have talked about 6 million to 7 million in the first year, but that was before the Vista delay was announced. Now that you are talking with the notebook manufacturers, do you think 6 million or 7 million in the first half year after launch, is that realistic?

Gary Johnson

6 million or 7 million you are asking in the first half of the year, so I will be cautious with this, because we still need to continue to discuss with all of our ODM partners there in terms of how they are actually going to see the market with the push out of Vista now. Everybody is pointing to a January release at this point in time, so when we stick with that I think there is going to be probably an even faster ramp than before, because now some other guys have more time to integrate it into their road map.

It is a little too early to give you a first half number. I don't want to do that at this time. From the feedback that we are getting from the discussion we are having, we are very encouraged.

Tayyib Shah - Longbow Research

Thank you.

Gary Johnson

Thank you very much.

Operator

That does conclude the Q&A session. I will turn it back over to Gary Johnson for any additional or closing remarks.

Gary Johnson

Well thank you to everyone for joining us today. With that. We will conclude this conference call. Thank you.

Operator

This does conclude today's conference call. You may disconnect at this time. Thank you for participating.

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!