AeroVironment, Inc. (AVAV) 2010 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Good day, everyone, and welcome to the AeroVironment, Inc.'s third quarter fiscal 2010 earnings conference call. Today's call is being recorded.

各位大家好，歡迎參加 AeroVironment, Inc. 2010 會計年度第三季財報電話會議。今天的會議將進行錄音。

Now at this time, I would like to turn the call over to Mr. Steve Gitlin, Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

現在我想把電話會議交給投資人關係總監 Steve Gitlin 先生。請開始。

Thank you, Anthony, and welcome to AV's third quarter fiscal 2010 earnings call. With me today are Tim Conver, our CEO, and Steve Wright, our CFO.

謝謝你，Anthony，也歡迎各位參加 AV 2010 會計年度第三季財報電話會議。今天與我一同出席的有我們的執行長 Tim Conver，以及財務長 Steve Wright。

Please note that on this call certain information presented contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, forecasts and assumptions that involve risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to economic, competitive, governmental and technological factors outside of our control that may cause our business strategy or actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements. For a list and description of such risks and uncertainties see the reports we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Investors are cautioned not to place any undue reliance on forward-looking statements which speak only as of the date on which they are made. We do not intend and undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. The content of this conference call contains time sensitive information that is accurate only as of today, March 9th, 2010. The Company undertakes no obligation to make any revision to the statements contained in our remarks, or to update them to reflect the events or circumstances occurring after this conference call.

請注意，本次電話會議中所呈現的部分資訊包含《1995 年私人證券訴訟改革法》所定義的前瞻性陳述。前瞻性陳述係基於目前的預期、預測與假設，並涉及風險與不確定性，包括但不限於我們無法控制的經濟、競爭、政府及技術因素，這些因素可能導致我們的業務策略或實際結果與前瞻性陳述存在重大差異。關於此類風險與不確定性的清單與說明，請參閱我們向美國證券交易委員會（SEC）提交的報告。提醒投資人勿對前瞻性陳述過度依賴；該等陳述僅截至其作出之日有效。我們無意且不承擔任何義務因新資訊、未來事件或其他原因更新任何前瞻性陳述。本次電話會議內容包含具時效性的資訊，僅在今日（2010 年 3 月 9 日）為準確。本公司不承擔對我們發言中所含陳述作任何修訂之義務，亦不承擔更新以反映本次電話會議後發生之事件或情況的義務。

We will begin with remarks from Tim Conver and Steve Wright and then we'll move on to questions. Now, it's my pleasure to turn the call over to Tim.

我們將先由 Tim Conver 與 Steve Wright 發表談話，接著進入問答。現在很高興把電話會議交給 Tim。

Thank you, Steven. Welcome to our third quarter fiscal 2010 conference call. We have a lot to cover this quarter so I will organize my comments today around four specific subjects. First, I will discuss our Q3, including our plan for the quarter, the results and the reasons for our performance. Second, our current outlook for Q4, and the balance of our FY10 and why our outlook has changed since our last call. Third, I will address questions that arose last month when the DOD FY11 budget request was released. And fourth, I will share my thoughts on our long-term growth, including our five growth drivers in our business model, our serial innovation strategy and the timing of both. I will also provide an update on our major development programs. After Steve Wright's review of Q3, and year-to-date financial performance, I will give you a preliminary view of the direction of our FY11 operating plan as it's evolving.

謝謝你，Steven。歡迎各位參加我們 2010 會計年度第三季電話會議。本季要談的內容很多，因此我今天將圍繞四個特定主題來組織我的發言。第一，我將討論我們第三季（Q3），包括本季計畫、結果以及我們表現的原因。第二，我們對第四季（Q4）以及 2010 會計年度（FY10）剩餘期間的目前展望，以及自上次電話會議以來展望為何改變。第三，我將回應上個月國防部（DOD）公布 FY11 預算請求時所引發的問題。第四，我將分享我對我們長期成長的看法，包括我們商業模式中的五項成長驅動因素、我們的連續創新策略，以及兩者的時程。我也將就我們主要研發計畫提供最新進度。在 Steve Wright 回顧第三季與年初至今的財務表現之後，我將就我們 FY11 營運計畫在形成中的方向提供初步觀點。

Now, let's begin with Q3. When we last spoke, we were entering an aggressive production ramp in our second half that was driven by the cut-in of Digital Data Link into our Raven product. We anticipated that 70% of the total fiscal 2010 revenue would be generated in our second half, with 65% of that amount in the fourth quarter alone. We knew that the back end loaded year had increased our risk profile, and would require outstanding execution combined with timely order flow. The production risks we anticipated showed up as real challenges during the quarter, and then some. We were able to produce significant sequential growth in Q3, but still we missed our revenue target for the quarter.

現在，讓我們從第三季開始。上次通話時，我們正進入下半年積極的產能爬坡，主要由數位資料鏈路（Digital Data Link）導入我們的 Raven 產品所驅動。我們預期 2010 會計年度總營收的 70% 將在下半年產生，其中僅第四季就占該金額的 65%。我們知道這種「後段集中」的年度結構提高了風險輪廓，並需要卓越的執行力與及時的訂單流入。我們預期的生產風險在本季成為實際挑戰，甚至更甚。我們在第三季確實實現了顯著的季對季成長，但仍未達成本季的營收目標。

Most of that missed revenue was for our Raven UAS, as I will now explain. First, Digital Raven production start-up issues early in the quarter pushed most of the quarter's Raven production into January, the last month of the quarter. Then severe storms at our primary and our backup flight locations rained out about a third of our flight test days in January, precluding acceptance testing and revenue recognition for much of the Raven systems produced. We did achieve good production rates in January, and the Raven revenue missed in Q3 has already been realized in Q4.

如我接下來所說明，未達成的營收大多來自我們的 Raven 無人機系統（UAS）。首先，本季初 Digital Raven 的量產啟動問題，使本季大部分 Raven 產量被推遲到 1 月，也就是本季最後一個月。接著，我們主要與備援飛行場地在 1 月遭遇強烈風暴，約三分之一的飛行測試日因雨取消，導致許多已生產的 Raven 系統無法完成驗收測試並認列營收。我們在 1 月確實達到良好的生產速率，而第三季未認列的 Raven 營收已在第四季實現。

Secondary effects on the quarter included Posi charge revenue shortfall due to continued weak demand in the capital equipment markets for our industrial electric vehicle products. We believe that this market continues to struggle. The last and the smallest portion was due to delayed orders in our other UAS that we still expect to receive later. In summary, we had a strong Q3 in transition Digital Raven into production, but weather delays in our Raven acceptance test flights pushed significant revenue into Q4. Secondarily, the PosiCharge market is still weak and some US orders were delayed.

本季的次要影響包括：由於工業電動車產品所處的資本設備市場需求持續疲弱，PosiCharge 的營收低於預期。我們認為該市場仍在掙扎。最後且占比最小的一部分，來自我們其他 UAS 的訂單延後，但我們仍預期稍後會收到。總結而言，我們在將 Digital Raven 轉入量產方面的第三季表現強勁，但 Raven 驗收試飛因天候延誤，將可觀營收推遲至第四季。其次，PosiCharge 市場仍然疲弱，且部分美國訂單有所延後。

Now, I will address my second subject, Q4 and the balance of FY10. The fact that this year is so back end loaded means that timely receipt of the Raven system and retrofit orders funded in the government fiscal 2010 budget is crucial to our ability to meet our revenue plan this year. As late as a few weeks ago, we were still modifying production plans to be able to compensate for Q3 results in our Q4. As we moved through February, and the probable receipt of the major orders continued to slide out, the odds of recovery in Q4 continued to diminish. Ultimately, any chance of achieving our planned 2010 revenue, even with heroic Q4 production throughput, has been eliminated. The issues I discussed in regard to Q3 rolled into Q4.

接下來我將談第二個主題：第四季與 FY10 剩餘期間。由於今年營收高度集中在後段，能否及時收到由政府 2010 財政年度預算資助的 Raven 系統與改裝（retrofit）訂單，對我們今年達成營收計畫至關重要。就在幾週前，我們仍在調整生產計畫，以便在第四季彌補第三季的結果。隨著 2 月推進，主要訂單的可能到貨時間持續往後延，第四季回補的機率也持續下降。最終，即使第四季生產吞吐量達到極限，我們達成原先規劃的 2010 年營收的任何可能性都已被排除。我在第三季所討論的問題也延續到了第四季。

However, the primary factor in our lower FY10 outlook is order timing and I would like to explain that. The main issues start with the government fiscal 2010 budget being signed into law in late December, two months into the government fiscal year. The late signing of the budget was followed by an extended government order processing time, which has resulted into the delayed receipt of Raven orders funded by the budget. In February, we did receive an initial $37 million in government fiscal 2010 orders. A good start for our Q4, but insufficient to support our plan for the balance of the year. The balance of the Raven orders we expect from the approximate $121 million of Raven funding in the government fiscal '10 budget are still working their way through the procurement process. We now expect most of these purchase orders to arrive too late to contribute to our fiscal 2010 revenue.

然而，我們下修 FY10 展望的主要因素是訂單時點，我想加以說明。主要問題始於政府 2010 財政年度預算在 12 月下旬才簽署成法，當時政府財政年度已開始兩個月。預算延後簽署之後，又出現政府訂單處理時間拉長，導致由該預算資助的 Raven 訂單延遲到貨。2 月我們確實收到首批 3,700 萬美元的政府 2010 財政年度訂單，對第四季而言是個良好開端，但不足以支撐我們對年度剩餘期間的計畫。我們預期政府 '10 預算中約 1.21 億美元 Raven 經費所對應的其餘 Raven 訂單，目前仍在採購流程中。我們現在預期其中多數採購訂單將來得太晚，無法對我們 2010 會計年度營收作出貢獻。

We also see continued delays in some orders that we had expected for WASP and Puma systems. I say delays because we expect to receive these orders, however timing is uncertain. We expect the difficult capital equipment market conditions for our industrial EV systems to continue through Q4, significantly impacting the results of our smaller EES segment. Year-to-date deliveries of forklifts are down by almost 25% from the prior period, and demand for airport utility tug conversions to electric charging is down by about 60%. The significant interest in our passenger electric vehicle charging infrastructure, which I will be discussing in greater detail shortly, will not contribute to Q4.

我們也看到部分原先預期的 WASP 與 Puma 系統訂單持續延後。我之所以說是延後，是因為我們預期會收到這些訂單，但時點不確定。我們預期工業電動車（EV）系統所處的資本設備市場困難狀況將延續至第四季，並將顯著影響我們較小的 EES 事業部門的業績。年初至今，堆高機交付量較前一期間下降近 25%，而機場公用牽引車改裝為電動充電的需求下降約 60%。我稍後將更詳細討論的乘用電動車充電基礎設施所引發的高度興趣，將不會對第四季作出貢獻。

To summarize our view of the full year, we now expect fiscal 2010 revenue to be roughly $245 million, plus or minus $5 million. With lower than planned revenue, the SG&A and the R&D expenses that are geared to support the development and the launch of major new programs, I now expect FY10 operating income to be 9% to 11% of revenue. Our revised guidance for FY10 disappoints us all. The primary cause is timing of order receipts compared with the back end loaded production for the year. While these were known risks as we began the year, we did not expect the extended nature of the order delays. Our fundamental market position, customer relationships and long-term growth prospects remain strong. I also believe that we have good reason to expect a return to growing revenue in fiscal 2011, and I will share my reasons for that belief in my closing remarks.

總結我們對全年看法，我們目前預期 2010 會計年度營收約為 2.45 億美元，上下浮動 500 萬美元。由於營收低於原先規劃，而銷售、一般及行政（SG&A）與研發（R&D）費用係為支援重大新計畫的開發與上市而配置，我現在預期 FY10 營業利益將占營收的 9% 至 11%。我們對 FY10 的修正後指引令我們所有人都感到失望。主要原因是訂單到貨時點相較於本年度後段集中的生產安排出現落差。雖然這些在年初即為已知風險，但我們未預期訂單延遲會如此持久。我們的基本市場地位、客戶關係與長期成長前景仍然強勁。我也相信我們有充分理由預期在 2011 會計年度恢復營收成長，我將在結語中分享我持此看法的原因。

I will turn now to our third subject. The numerous investor questions on government fiscal '11 defense budget request that was released last month, and its implications on future Raven revenues. The Administration's fiscal 2011 budget request includes approximately $55 million for Raven procurement. By comparison, the government's fiscal 2010 budget included approximately $121 million of funding for Raven. And the prior government fiscal year of 2009 budget included about $85 million. However the majority of that came from supplemental funding after the initial budget had been released. There are several reasons why the government's fiscal '10 numbers were so high, relative to both government fiscal 2011 and the previous government fiscal '09. Our customers plan their annual procurement amounts years in advance, with some years higher than others and GFY10 happened to be a relatively high volume year.

我現在轉到我們的第三個主題。投資人對於上個月發布的政府2011財政年度（'11）國防預算申請，以及其對未來Raven營收影響的提問很多。政府2011財政年度預算申請中，包含約5,500萬美元用於Raven採購。相較之下，政府2010財政年度預算中，約有1.21億美元的Raven經費。而在更早的政府2009財政年度預算中，約為8,500萬美元。然而其中大部分是在初始預算發布後，透過追加預算（supplemental funding）取得。政府2010財政年度數字相較於政府2011財政年度與先前政府2009財政年度之所以偏高，有幾個原因。我們的客戶會提前多年規劃其年度採購量，有些年度會高於其他年度，而GFY10剛好是一個相對高採購量的年度。

Government fiscal 10 also included accelerated Raven system procurement by both the Army and the Marine Corps who had previously planned to buy these systems in different years. Government fiscal '10 also included the bulk of the funding for Digital Raven retrofits for both the US Army and the Marine Corps and we expect all of their baseline digital retrofits to be fully funded by GFY11. With about $6 million of funding in GFY11, the Marines will have completed procurement of new Raven systems against their current acquisition objective, leaving the Army and the Air Force to fulfill their acquisition objectives.

政府2010財政年度也包含陸軍與海軍陸戰隊加速採購Raven系統；他們原先計畫在不同年度購買這些系統。政府'10也涵蓋美國陸軍與海軍陸戰隊之Digital Raven改裝（retrofits）的大部分經費，而我們預期其所有基準數位化改裝將在GFY11獲得全額資金支持。GFY11約6百萬美元的經費下，海軍陸戰隊將完成依其現行採購目標（acquisition objective）所需的新Raven系統採購，剩下由陸軍與空軍來完成其採購目標。

I believe the many investor questions about the GFY11 budget request reflected concern over the amount of future revenue for Raven and by extension our small UAS. The Army's own public planning documents show continued Raven system procurement planned through 2015. What is not known for certain is what the Army will do as the completion of their acquisition objective approaches. We see at least three possible scenarios. First, the Army could decide that they only need the 2,182 Raven systems and once they procure them, they will only need support services and upgrades. Second, the Army could decide to increase the acquisition objective for Raven systems. A recent statement from the Army UAS Program Office indicates that this is a possibility. "In general, we have been extraordinarily happy with Raven. If I had to guess, we are going to end up buying a lot more Ravens than we are even showing right now."

我認為，投資人對GFY11預算申請的眾多提問，反映了他們對Raven未來營收、以及延伸到我們小型UAS的營收規模之擔憂。陸軍自身公開的規劃文件顯示，Raven系統的採購計畫將持續到2015年。尚無法確定的是，當陸軍接近完成其採購目標時將如何作為。我們至少看到三種可能情境。第一，陸軍可能認為他們只需要2,182套Raven系統，一旦採購完成，之後只需要支援服務與升級。第二，陸軍可能決定提高Raven系統的採購目標。陸軍UAS計畫辦公室近期的一段說法指出這是可能的：「總體而言，我們對Raven非常滿意。如果要我猜，我們最後買的Raven數量，會比我們現在呈現的還要多很多。」

A third scenario is indicated by the Army's order of $4 million of WASP and Puma systems in January, as part of the family of small UAS system evaluation. This one-year evaluation involves equipping a brigade combat team with WASP and Puma systems in addition to their Raven systems. The Army is considering extending their small UAS requirement beyond Raven to include a family of systems and has recently published planning documents to that effect. Remember, our common ground control system operates all of our unmanned aircraft vehicles, thereby enabling the family of systems concept.

第三種情境，則可由陸軍在1月下單4百萬美元採購WASP與Puma系統看出，該採購是小型UAS系統家族評估（family of small UAS system evaluation）的一部分。這項為期一年的評估，將為一個旅級戰鬥隊（brigade combat team）在其Raven系統之外，再配備WASP與Puma系統。陸軍正在考慮將其小型UAS需求從僅限Raven，擴展為包含一個系統家族，並已近期發布相關規劃文件。請記得，我們的通用地面控制系統可操作我們所有的無人航空載具（unmanned aircraft vehicles），因此能夠實現系統家族的概念。

We believe scenarios two and three are more likely. The Digital Data Link has significantly increased the operational value of Raven, which is already the highest volume unmanned airplane system in the world. We also believe that the incremental value of a family of small UAS built around Raven will provide compelling force protection and mission effects. Both could lead to long-term opportunities with the Army and other small UAS customers, significantly extending the life cycle of this product line.

我們認為第二與第三種情境更有可能。數位資料鏈（Digital Data Link）已大幅提升Raven的作戰價值；而Raven本來就是全球數量最多的無人飛機系統。我們也相信，以Raven為核心打造的小型UAS系統家族所帶來的增量價值，將提供具吸引力的部隊防護（force protection）與任務效果（mission effects）。兩者都可能帶來與陸軍及其他小型UAS客戶的長期機會，並顯著延長此產品線的生命週期。

Viewing Raven in the context of our small UAS product line strategy leads me to my fourth subject, long-term growth based on our five growth drivers and our strategy of serial innovation. To understand the long-term opportunity that AeroVironment represents, it's important to understand our strategy and our business model. We see AV as a technology company and our strategy is to enter large markets, compete effectively for market share, and grow as market adoption increases by developing serial innovative solutions. Entirely new solutions with compelling value have enabled us to capture large market opportunities that would have otherwise only been available to large entrenched competitors. The adoption of each innovative solution creates a new product line with its own product life cycle. For example, small UAS was an innovation we initially brought to the defense market as the Pointer system. Raven A was a major upgrade to Pointer, and Raven B has since grown to become the small UAS of choice for all US armed services and is currently our highest volume product.

從我們小型UAS產品線策略的脈絡來看Raven，讓我引出第四個主題：以五大成長驅動因素與「連續創新」（serial innovation）策略為基礎的長期成長。要理解AeroVironment所代表的長期機會，重要的是先理解我們的策略與商業模式。我們將AV視為一家科技公司；我們的策略是進入大型市場、有效競爭以取得市占，並透過開發連續創新的解決方案，隨著市場採用度提升而成長。具備強大價值主張的全新解決方案，使我們得以掌握原本可能只屬於大型既有競爭者的重大市場機會。每一項創新解決方案的採用，都會形成一條新的產品線，並擁有其自身的產品生命週期。舉例來說，小型UAS是我們最初以Pointer系統導入國防市場的一項創新；Raven A是Pointer的一次重大升級，而Raven B此後成長為全美各軍種首選的小型UAS，並且目前是我們出貨量最高的產品。

This Raven system history also provides a good example of the five growth drivers of our business in action. These are, one, selling more current products to current customers. Two, selling support services to a growing installed base of products. Number three, selling system upgrades and retrofits. Number four, penetrating new markets to sell existing products. And five, developing new solutions. As we develop and launch new solutions, each one contributes to the overall Company growth in multiple years. Beyond the discrete revenue contribution of each solution, we work to ensure that each one builds a more robust launch pad for subsequent new developments. Our intent is to launch new solutions sequentially such that in aggregate the serial product life cycle sum to produce a high compounded growth rate.

這段Raven系統的歷史，也很好地示範了我們業務的五大成長驅動因素如何運作。第一，向現有客戶銷售更多現有產品。第二，向不斷擴大的已安裝產品基礎（installed base）銷售支援服務。第三，銷售系統升級與改裝。第四，滲透新市場以銷售既有產品。第五，開發新解決方案。當我們開發並推出新解決方案時，每一項都會在多個年度對公司整體成長做出貢獻。除了每項解決方案本身的離散營收貢獻之外，我們也致力於確保每一項都能為後續的新開發建立更強健的發射平台（launch pad）。我們的意圖是依序推出新解決方案，使得整體而言，連續的產品生命週期加總能產生高複利的成長率。

The strength of this strategy is that it enables us to enter large multiple markets successfully and achieve much higher growth than would be otherwise possible. However, this strategy also brings with it the inherent uncertainty in timing and rates of adoption associated with innovation. And it often produces lumpy results in the short term. Our historic annual growth rates illustrate both the inherent lumpiness and the long-term effectiveness of this strategy. With year-over-year annual growth rates during the past six years ranging from 4% to 120%, but overall growth over that period reaching almost 500%. Developing innovative solutions is the centerpiece of our strategy and positioning our major development opportunities for adoption has been a major theme of our fiscal year 2010.

此策略的優勢在於，它使我們能成功進入多個大型市場，並達成原本不可能的更高成長。然而，這個策略也伴隨創新所固有的採用時點與採用速度不確定性，且短期結果往往呈現不均勻（lumpy）。我們過去的年度成長率同時展現了這種固有的不均勻性與該策略的長期有效性。過去六年，我們的年增率介於4%到120%之間，但該期間的整體成長接近500%。開發創新解決方案是我們策略的核心，而在2010財政年度，將我們的主要開發機會定位以促成採用，一直是重要主題。

Now I would like to review the status of four of our key development programs. First the family of systems concept is, in our view, compelling and significant. This concept involves equipping warfighters with a small Unmanned Aircraft System toolkit that includes different but interoperable air vehicles, each optimized for different mission requirements and all operated by a common ground control system. Given WASP's small size, weight and footprint, this air vehicle could be deployed to a lower level of the force structure in higher quantities. The larger Puma air vehicle offers a longer flight duration and more capable payload and could be deployed to a higher level of the force structure. The addition of WASP and Puma air vehicles to complement the thousands of Raven air vehicles in the Army could provide a significant and cost effective capability boost to our customers, as well as a significant revenue opportunity for AV.

現在我想回顧我們四項關鍵開發計畫的進度。第一，我們認為「系統家族」概念具有強大吸引力且意義重大。此概念是為作戰人員配備一套小型無人航空系統工具組（small Unmanned Aircraft System toolkit），其中包含不同但可互通的空中載具（air vehicles）；每一種都針對不同任務需求最佳化，且全部由通用地面控制系統操作。鑑於WASP的尺寸、重量與占用空間都很小，這種空中載具可在部隊編制中較低層級以更高數量部署。較大的Puma空中載具提供更長的飛行續航時間與更強的載荷能力，並可部署於部隊編制中較高層級。將WASP與Puma空中載具加入、以補足陸軍現有數千架Raven空中載具，可為客戶帶來顯著且具成本效益的能力提升，同時也為AV帶來可觀的營收機會。

A public presentation by the Army's Training and Doctrine Command shows the Army's evolution from Raven A to Raven B, and then to a family of small UAS from 2006 to 2027. This TRADOC presentation was likely not intended to serve as a prediction or as a forecast, but it demonstrates the Army's long-term view of small UAS and that a family of small UAS represents the next logical step in the evolution of this capability.

陸軍訓練與準則司令部（TRADOC）的一份公開簡報，展示了陸軍從Raven A到Raven B，並進一步演進到小型UAS系統家族的路徑，時間跨度為2006年至2027年。這份TRADOC簡報很可能並非用作預測或預估，但它呈現了陸軍對小型UAS的長期觀點，也顯示小型UAS系統家族是此能力演進的下一個合乎邏輯的步驟。

A second major development is Switchblade. Switchblade is a lethal small UAS that combines portability, eyes on target feedback, high precision, minimal collateral damage and wave off capabilities. In February, the US Army issued a Request For Information that included a lethal miniature aerial munitions systems, or LMAMs capability requirement that Switchblade will probably fit. The quantities customers are contemplating for this requirement suggest a very large opportunity relative to our current small UAS business. We have received three additional small Switchblade orders from three different customers since we last talked. The Switchblade orders to date do not yet constitute initial adoption but they do demonstrate a sustained high level of customer interest and broad activity.

第二項重大開發是Switchblade。Switchblade是一種具殺傷力（lethal）的小型UAS，結合了可攜性、目標回饋（eyes on target feedback）、高精準度、最小附帶損害（minimal collateral damage）以及中止攻擊（wave off）能力。2月時，美國陸軍發布了一份資訊徵詢（Request For Information），其中包含對「致命微型空中彈藥系統」（lethal miniature aerial munitions systems，或LMAMs）能力的需求，而Switchblade很可能符合。客戶對此需求所考量的數量，顯示相較於我們目前的小型UAS業務，這是一個非常龐大的機會。自我們上次交流以來，我們又收到來自三個不同客戶的三筆額外小額Switchblade訂單。迄今為止，Switchblade的訂單尚未構成初始採用（initial adoption），但它們確實顯示客戶持續維持高度興趣，且活動範圍廣泛。

Our third major development is Global Observer, a large UAS designed to operate like a stratospheric geosynchronous satellite, providing affordable and persistent ISR and communication relay over any spot on the globe for as long as needed. Aircraft number one was deployed to Edwards Air Force base in December for its ground testing, flight testing, payload integration and operational utility assessment. Aircraft number two is being assembled in our engineering and low rate production facility and will be sent to Edwards early next fiscal year where it will be rolled into the overall test and demonstration program. We expect airplane number three to support the first two, providing parts and testing capabilities as required. The flight test program at Edwards is rigorous and it's achieving its milestones but at a slower pace than planned. We currently expect to begin the flight testing phase of our Global Observer test plan in the first half of fiscal '11.

我們第三項重大進展是 Global Observer，一款大型 UAS，設計用以像平流層地球同步衛星一樣運作，能以可負擔的成本在全球任何地點提供持續性的 ISR 與通訊中繼，並可按需求維持任意長的時間。一號機已於 12 月部署至愛德華空軍基地，進行地面測試、飛行測試、酬載整合與作戰效用評估。二號機正在我們的工程與低速率量產設施中組裝，將於下一財政年度初送往愛德華，並納入整體測試與示範計畫。預期三號機將支援前兩架，按需要提供零件與測試能力。愛德華的飛行測試計畫相當嚴謹，雖然正在達成各項里程碑，但進度較原先規劃為慢。我們目前預期將在 2011 財年上半年開始執行 Global Observer 測試計畫的飛行測試階段。

The current Geo Joint Capabilities Technology demonstration, or JCTD program, is scheduled through the first calendar quarter of 2011. This program has transitioned out of the development phase and will soon complete the assembly phase. Meaning that the highest revenue run rate for the JCTD program is behind us. The customers funding the JCTD are eager to see the system operate in flight test and in operational utility assessment, which will likely have the greatest influence on their decision to move forward towards production. We are pursuing follow-on contracts, but we expect a decline in Global Observer revenue between the JCTD peak this year and the beginning of production. The government is spending and projecting to spend billions of dollars to achieve persistent ISR and communications relay. And we continue to believe that the Global Observer could be a large opportunity.

目前的 Geo 聯合能力技術示範（JCTD）計畫，排程將持續至 2011 年第一曆季。本計畫已從研發階段轉出，並將很快完成組裝階段。這表示 JCTD 計畫的最高營收運行速率已經過去。資助 JCTD 的客戶迫切希望看到系統在飛行測試與作戰效用評估中的運作情況，而這很可能對其是否推進至量產的決策產生最大影響。我們正在爭取後續合約，但我們預期 Global Observer 的營收將在今年 JCTD 高峰與量產開始之間出現下滑。政府正在投入並預計投入數十億美元，以實現持續性的 ISR 與通訊中繼。我們仍然相信 Global Observer 可能是一個龐大的機會。

The fourth development program that I will address today is our emerging electric vehicle charging infrastructure opportunity. We are building on two decades of EV charging leadership to support the coming wave of plug-in electric vehicles from nearly every major automaker and many start-ups around the globe. All plug-in vehicles require a place to plug into. So battery chargers will be to electric cars what gas stations are to internal combustion cars. We believe that most plug-in EV users will charge their vehicles overnight in their garages. For those without a garage or who make trips beyond the range of their battery pack, public charging infrastructure will be required. We offer a full solution of charging infrastructure, including overnight home chargers, public chargers, public fast chargers, installation support, systems data collection and communications. Ours is an integrated solution designed to enable the broad adoption and the practical use of EVs.

我今天要談的第四項開發計畫，是我們新興的電動車充電基礎設施機會。我們將以二十年的電動車充電領導地位為基礎，支援即將到來的插電式電動車浪潮，這些車款將來自全球幾乎所有主要車廠以及許多新創公司。所有插電式車輛都需要可插電的地方。因此，電池充電器之於電動車，就如同加油站之於內燃機車。我們相信多數插電式電動車使用者會在車庫過夜充電。對於沒有車庫者，或需要進行超出電池組續航里程的行程者，則需要公共充電基礎設施。我們提供完整的充電基礎設施解決方案，包括家用夜間充電器、公共充電器、公共快速充電器、安裝支援、系統資料蒐集與通訊。我們的方案為整合式解決方案，旨在促進電動車的廣泛採用與實際使用。

In our third quarter AV was selected by Nissan North America to support the rollout of the Nissan leaf battery electric vehicle across the United States. A major acknowledgement of our EV charging leadership. We will provide, install and support a home charging system that will enable the full recharging of the vehicle's battery pack in about eight hours. We believe this is a significant first production relationship in the market and we are excited to support such a game-changing product launch. This contract alone represents a significant growth opportunity for AV. And it also puts us in an extremely valuable position from which to expand our charging infrastructure footprint in the United States and globally. Being a partner in supporting the Nissan Leaf rollout is immensely motivating to everyone at AV.

在第三季，AV 獲日產北美選定，以支援 Nissan Leaf 純電動車在美國的上市推廣。這是對我們電動車充電領導地位的重要肯定。我們將提供、安裝並支援家用充電系統，使車輛電池組約可在八小時內完成充電。我們相信這是市場上重要的首個量產合作關係，我們也很期待能支援如此具顛覆性的產品上市。僅此合約即代表 AV 一項重大的成長機會。同時也使我們處於極具價值的位置，得以在美國及全球擴大我們的充電基礎設施版圖。能成為支援 Nissan Leaf 上市推廣的合作夥伴，對 AV 全體同仁而言極具激勵作用。

We have been asked to quantify the size of this EV charging infrastructure opportunity, and we can only refer to independent market studies. One industry study calculates the value of charging infrastructure required globally through the year 2030 at $170 billion. Another study anticipated the annual sale of battery electric vehicles in 2020 to be more than 4 million units globally. While studies like these are helpful, my experience suggests that actual adoption rates are difficult to predict. However, it is clear to me that when plug-in electric vehicle adoption proves sustainable, the charging infrastructure opportunity will be huge. We are working in the United States and internationally with automakers, utilities, government agencies at all levels and with private industry to explore business models and to promote our solutions. Our goal is market leadership and we believe we have made a good start.

我們曾被要求量化此電動車充電基礎設施機會的規模，而我們只能引用獨立市場研究。一項產業研究估算，至 2030 年全球所需充電基礎設施的價值為 1,700 億美元。另一項研究預期 2020 年全球純電動車年銷量將超過 400 萬輛。雖然此類研究有所助益，但依我的經驗，實際採用速度難以預測。然而，對我而言很清楚的是，一旦插電式電動車的採用被證明可持續，充電基礎設施的機會將非常龐大。我們正於美國及國際間與車廠、公用事業、各級政府機關及民間產業合作，探索商業模式並推廣我們的解決方案。我們的目標是市場領導地位，而我們相信已取得良好開端。

Each of these four long-term opportunities has the potential to drive significant growth for AV in large emerging markets. I believe we have established a leadership position in each of these areas, which is an essential, as well as a major first step towards achieving our strategic objectives and producing long-term compounded growth for the Company.

這四項長期機會中的每一項，都有潛力在大型新興市場中推動 AV 的顯著成長。我相信我們已在各領域建立領導地位，這既是必要條件，也是達成我們策略目標並為公司創造長期複利成長的重要第一步。

With that as an overview of the quarter, the budget, the full year, and our long-term growth opportunities, I will turn the call over to Steve Wright to review our Q3 performance in more detail. Steve?

以上為本季、預算、全年以及我們長期成長機會的概述。接下來我將把電話會議交給 Steve Wright，請他更詳細檢視我們第三季的表現。Steve？

Thanks, Tim, and good afternoon, everyone. Revenue for the third quarter was $60.9 million, an increase of 17% from third quarter prior year of $52.2 million. Looking at revenue by segment, UAS revenue was $55.1 million, an increase of 27% from the prior year. The increase in UAS revenue was primarily due to higher service revenue of $13.5 million, partially offset by decreased customer funded R&D of $1.2 million and product deliveries of $0.6 million. The increase in UAS service revenue was primarily due to the retrofitting of our analog Raven B systems with DDL technology. EES revenue was $5.8 million, a decrease of 35% from Q3 last year. The decrease in EES was primarily due to reduced deliveries of industrial charging and EV test systems.

謝謝你，Tim，各位下午好。第三季營收為 6,090 萬美元，較去年第三季的 5,220 萬美元成長 17%。按事業部門來看，UAS 營收為 5,510 萬美元，較去年成長 27%。UAS 營收增加主要來自服務營收增加 1,350 萬美元，但部分被客戶資助研發（R&D）減少 120 萬美元以及產品交付減少 60 萬美元所抵銷。UAS 服務營收增加主要是因為我們將類比 Raven B 系統改裝為採用 DDL 技術。EES 營收為 580 萬美元，較去年第三季下降 35%。EES 下滑主要是因為工業充電與電動車測試系統的交付量減少。

Turning to gross margin, gross margin in the third quarter was $23.5 million, up 41% from Q3 last year. Gross margin as a percent of revenue was 39%, up from 32% Q3 last year. By segment, UAS gross margin was $21.1 million, up 57% from Q3 last year. And as a percent of revenue, UAS gross margin was 38%, versus 31% in Q3 last year. This increase was primarily due to lower program costs, and a higher mix of fixed price contracts. EES gross margin was $2.4 million, down 27% from Q3 last year, and as a percent of revenue EES gross margin was 41% versus 36% in Q3 last year. This increase in gross margin rate was largely due to product mix.

接著看毛利率，第三季毛利為 2,350 萬美元，較去年第三季成長 41%。毛利占營收比重為 39%，高於去年第三季的 32%。按部門來看，UAS 毛利為 2,110 萬美元，較去年第三季成長 57%；毛利率為 38%，相較去年第三季的 31%。此增幅主要來自較低的專案成本，以及固定價格合約占比提高。EES 毛利為 240 萬美元，較去年第三季下降 27%；EES 毛利率為 41%，相較去年第三季的 36%。毛利率提升主要是由產品組合所致。

SG&A for the quarter totaled $9.8 million or 16% of revenue, compared to $8 million or 15% of revenue in the prior year. SG&A growth is primarily due to higher selling and business development expense, and increased bid and proposal activity. R&D for the quarter was $5.2 million, or 8% of revenue, compared to the prior year amount of $4.6 million, or 9% of revenue. The increase in R&D expense of $0.6 million was primarily due to increased investments in support of electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Operating income for the quarter was $8.5 million, or 14% of revenue. Operating income was 107% higher than the prior year, primarily due to the higher sales volume, resulting in high gross margins, partially offset by increased SG&A and R&D. Net income for the quarter was $6.5 million, or $0.30 per fully diluted share, compared to net income of $4.5 million, or $0.21 per fully diluted share in the same quarter last year.

本季 SG&A 合計 980 萬美元，占營收 16%，相較去年為 800 萬美元、占營收 15%。SG&A 成長主要來自較高的銷售與業務開發費用，以及投標與提案活動增加。本季研發（R&D）為 520 萬美元，占營收 8%，相較去年為 460 萬美元、占營收 9%。研發費用增加 60 萬美元，主要因為加大對電動車充電基礎設施的投資。本季營業利益為 850 萬美元，占營收 14%。營業利益較去年成長 107%，主要因銷售量提高帶來較高毛利率，但部分被 SG&A 與研發增加所抵銷。本季淨利為 650 萬美元，完全稀釋後每股盈餘為 0.30 美元；相較去年同季淨利 450 萬美元、完全稀釋後每股盈餘 0.21 美元。

Now moving quickly through year-to-date results. Revenue for the first nine months totaled $150.2 million, down 12% from the prior year period. By segment, UAS revenue was $132.1 million, down 9%, and EES revenue was $18.1 million, down 30% from the prior year. Gross margin for the first nine months was $53.8 million versus $62.2 million in the same period a year ago. Gross margin as a percent of revenue was 36%, unchanged from the prior year period. And by segment, UAS gross margin $45.9 million, down 8%. EES gross margin $7.9 million, down 35%. SG&A for the first nine months totaled $30.8 million, or 21% of revenue, compared to the prior year period of $23.9 million or 14% of revenue. R&D for the first nine months totaled $16.6 million, or 11% of revenue, versus $14.8 million or 9% of revenue in the prior year. And operating income for the first nine months was $6.4 million, or 4% of revenue, compared to an operating income of $23.6 million, or 14% in the prior year.

接下來快速說明年初至今的結果。前九個月營收合計 1.502 億美元，較去年同期下降 12%。按部門來看，UAS 營收為 1.321 億美元，下降 9%；EES 營收為 1,810 萬美元，較去年同期下降 30%。前九個月毛利為 5,380 萬美元，去年同期為 6,220 萬美元。毛利占營收比重為 36%，與去年同期持平。按部門來看，UAS 毛利為 4,590 萬美元，下降 8%；EES 毛利為 790 萬美元，下降 35%。前九個月 SG&A 合計 3,080 萬美元，占營收 21%，相較去年同期為 2,390 萬美元、占營收 14%。前九個月研發（R&D）合計 1,660 萬美元，占營收 11%，相較去年同期為 1,480 萬美元、占營收 9%。前九個月營業利益為 640 萬美元，占營收 4%，相較去年同期營業利益為 2,360 萬美元、占營收 14%。

The effective tax rate for the first nine months was 21.4%, down from the prior year of 25.4%. And net income for the first nine months was $5.1 million, or $0.23 per fully diluted share compared to a net income of $18.4 million or $0.84 per fully diluted share last year. Looking at backlog, funded backlog at the end of the third quarter was $98.7 million, down $16.1 million or 14% from April 30th, 2009.

前九個月的有效稅率為 21.4%，低於去年同期的 25.4%。前九個月的淨利為 510 萬美元，或每股完全稀釋後 0.23 美元，相較於去年淨利 1,840 萬美元或每股完全稀釋後 0.84 美元。就在手訂單而言，第三季末的已獲資金支持在手訂單（funded backlog）為 9,870 萬美元，較 2009 年 4 月 30 日減少 1,610 萬美元或 14%。

Turning to our balance sheet, cash equivalents and investments at the end of the third quarter totaled $126.5 million, down $5 million from our prior quarter amount of $131.5 million. Turning to receivables, at the end of the third quarter, our accounts receivable, including unbilled receivables totaled $60.2 million, up $8 million from the prior quarter. Total days sales outstanding were approximately 89 days compared to 91 days at the prior quarter end. Receivable growth for the quarter was caused by higher sales volume generated towards the end of the quarter. Taking a look at inventory, inventories were $29.7 million at quarter end, compared to $25.1 million at the end of the prior quarter. Days in inventory were approximately 72 days compared to 71 days at the prior quarter. Inventory growth for the quarter was largely to build for anticipated high volumes of deliveries expected for Q4. Turning to capital expenditures, in the third quarter we invested approximately $1.8 million or 3% of revenue in property improvements and capital equipment.

接著看資產負債表，第三季末的現金約當物及投資合計為 1.265 億美元，較前一季的 1.315 億美元減少 500 萬美元。再看應收款項，第三季末我們的應收帳款（含未開立帳單之應收款）合計為 6,020 萬美元，較前一季增加 800 萬美元。應收帳款週轉天數（DSO）約為 89 天，較前一季季末的 91 天下降。當季應收款成長係因季末帶動的較高銷售量所致。再看存貨，季末存貨為 2,970 萬美元，較前一季季末的 2,510 萬美元增加。存貨天數約為 72 天，較前一季的 71 天略增。當季存貨成長主要是為了因應預期第四季將有大量交付而提前備貨。至於資本支出，第三季我們在不動產改善與資本設備上投資約 180 萬美元，約占營收的 3%。

And now I would like to turn things back to Tim to provide an initial view of our FY11.

接下來我想把時間交還給 Tim，請他先就我們的 FY11 提供初步看法。

Thank you, Steve. Our long-term growth prospects are strong. In the short term, and this year in particular, we have seen how the timing of orders can adversely impact our results. We have not yet finished our annual planning process and do not plan to provide FY 2011 guidance until our fourth quarter call. However, in general, as I look ahead to our fiscal year '11, I see many opportunities to make important progress in our production and development programs, which makes me optimistic that our fiscal 2011 will result in year-over-year top line growth. Our FY11 will include all of the GFY10 revenue from Raven funding that we now expect to slide out of this year. We expect contracts that have been delayed so far this year, including WASP and Puma, to generate revenue next year. The growing fleet of small UAS will continue to require services that we provide. We expect new revenue growth from the home charging station for the Nissan Leaf rollout in our second half.

謝謝你，Steve。我們的長期成長前景強勁。短期而言，尤其是今年，我們已看到訂單時點可能對我們的業績造成不利影響。我們尚未完成年度規劃流程，並且計畫在第四季電話會議之前不提供 FY 2011 的財測指引。不過整體而言，展望 2011 會計年度，我看到在生產與研發計畫上有許多機會取得重要進展，這讓我樂觀認為 2011 會計年度的營收將可年增。我們的 FY11 將包含目前預期會從今年遞延出去的 Raven 資金所帶來之 GFY10 全部營收。我們預期今年迄今延後的合約（包括 WASP 與 Puma）將在明年貢獻營收。小型 UAS 機隊規模持續擴大，將持續需要我們提供的服務。我們也預期在下半年，隨著 Nissan Leaf 上市推廣，我們的家用充電站將帶來新的營收成長。

We are optimistic that our efforts to expose new markets to our solutions will bear fruit, including new international opportunities and we expect to begin to realize growing revenues from further trials and/or initial adoption of Switchblade family of small UAS and our EV charging solutions. We are working hard to support our customers with innovative solutions that help them win today and new solutions that will help them be even more successful tomorrow. These solutions address significant global market requirements for improving security and cleaner transportation, and satisfying these requirements motivates everyone at AV. Our spirit of practical innovation is as strong as ever and I remain convinced that our prospects for long-term compounded growth remain compelling, although certainly that growth will not follow a straight line.

我們對於將解決方案導入新市場的努力能夠開花結果抱持樂觀，包括新的國際機會；並且我們預期將開始從 Switchblade 系列小型 UAS 以及我們的電動車（EV）充電解決方案之進一步試用與／或初期採用中，實現逐步成長的營收。我們正努力以創新解決方案支援客戶，協助他們在今天取得勝利，並提供能讓他們在明天更成功的新方案。這些解決方案回應了全球市場對提升安全與更潔淨運輸的重大需求，而滿足這些需求也激勵著 AV 的每一位同仁。我們務實創新的精神一如既往地強大；我仍深信我們長期複合成長的前景依然引人注目，儘管這樣的成長當然不會是一條直線。

Thank you for your time, and at this point we'll take your questions.

感謝各位撥冗，接下來我們開始回答問題。

Thank you. (Operator instructions). We will take our first question from Tim Quillin with Stephens Inc.

謝謝。（接線員指示）。我們的第一個問題來自 Stephens Inc. 的 Tim Quillin。

Good afternoon. In terms of your guidance for the remainder of the fiscal year, I know you said not expecting much in terms of new Raven orders but are you expecting any new Raven orders embedded in that new guidance?

下午好。關於你們對本會計年度剩餘期間的指引，我知道你們說不太預期會有新的 Raven 訂單，但在新的指引中是否仍有包含任何新的 Raven 訂單？

Tim, I will start off. I would say the lower end of that guidance has very little, if any, reliance on new Raven orders. In terms of new orders generally, there's some reliance to the extend EES is always book and ship business, but in general, we have derisked that forecast reliance on new orders.

Tim，我先回答。我會說該指引區間的下緣幾乎不依賴新的 Raven 訂單（如果有的話也非常少）。就一般新訂單而言，仍有一些依賴，因為 EES 一向是接單即出貨（book and ship）的業務；但整體來說，我們已降低該預測對新訂單的依賴風險。

Okay. And so there's these four long-term drivers of growth, the family of systems, Switchblade, Geo and the EV systems and, Tim, you mentioned that you could get some good news over the course of fiscal '11. I know you have a lot of visibility now into fiscal '11 with the Raven revenue, but which of those, and I know it's always tough to predict the timing adoption, but which of those would you feel good about contributing to fiscal '12 numbers?

了解。你們有四個長期成長驅動因素：系統家族、Switchblade、Geo 以及 EV 系統。Tim，你提到在 2011 會計年度期間可能會有一些好消息。我知道你們現在對 2011 會計年度的能見度很高，尤其是 Raven 的營收；但在這些項目中——我知道要預測採用時點總是很困難——你對哪一些項目在 2012 會計年度的數字上能有所貢獻會比較有信心？

Tim, I will hedge the answer to begin with, with the caveat that these are innovative new solutions and we're looking into the future at the initial adoption or as I suggested extended evaluations. So I would say the probability of extended small orders and/or initial adoption of Switchblade is real. We think there's a likelihood that we can see some additional trials of small UAS. And as I indicated in the comments, we're working very actively and very broadly with potential customers in the EV infrastructure for charging beyond our initial announced customer Nissan North America. I think there's a reasonable expectation that we will see larger revenues next year in those three areas than we saw this year.

Tim，我先保留一些彈性來回答，先提醒一下：這些都是創新新方案，我們是在展望未來的初期採用，或如我所說的延伸評估。因此我會說，Switchblade 出現延伸的小額訂單與／或初期採用的可能性確實存在。我們認為也很可能會看到更多小型 UAS 的試用。如我在評論中提到的，我們在充電 EV 基礎設施方面，除了已宣布的首位客戶 Nissan North America 之外，也正非常積極且廣泛地與潛在客戶合作。我認為合理的預期是：明年在這三個領域的營收將高於今年。

Okay. And just a quick question or two for Steve, if I may. One is the percent of progress towards the Army stated acquisition objective for Raven. And the second is the tax rate was a little bit low in the quarter. What kind of tax rate should we expect in the fourth quarter and going forward, thank you?

好的。再請教 Steve 一兩個快速問題（如果可以的話）。第一個是 Raven 距離陸軍所述採購目標的達成進度百分比。第二個是本季稅率有點偏低。第四季以及往後我們應該預期什麼樣的稅率？謝謝。

The Army acquisition objective is 2182 systems. We delivered 92 Digital systems to the Army during the quarter. So we are now 62% delivered against that Army acquisition objective. And the tax rate for the quarter benefited by the relief of some reserves, FIN48 reserves. AeroVironment, Inc. Basically they were R&D credit reserves that we released because they were for older years that had passed the statute of limitations on audit. Again, that's $600,000 or so for the year. The tax rate will be higher, probably 29% to 30% is what we'd be looking at now.

陸軍的採購目標是 2,182 套系統。我們在本季向陸軍交付了 92 套數位系統。因此，對照陸軍採購目標，我們目前已交付 62%。至於本季稅率，受惠於釋回部分準備金（FIN48 準備金）。AeroVironment, Inc. 基本上那是研發抵減（R&D credit）準備金，我們之所以釋回，是因為那些較早年度已超過稽核追溯的法定期限。再次說明，全年約為 60 萬美元左右。稅率將會較高，目前我們預估大約會落在 29% 到 30%。

Thank you.

謝謝。

And we will hear our next question from Michael Lewis with BB&T Capital Markets.

接下來我們的問題來自 BB&T Capital Markets 的 Michael Lewis。

Thanks for taking my question here. Tim, is my math correct here, if we look at the revenue delta for fiscal year '10 to '11, are we seeing about a $50 million shift?

謝謝讓我提問。Tim，我的計算是否正確：如果我們看 2010 會計年度到 2011 會計年度的營收差異（delta），大約是移轉了 5,000 萬美元？

Yes, that's about what we are looking at, Mike.

是的，Mike，我們看到的大致就是這個數字。

Okay. So the shortfall that we are going to expect -- I just want to make sure that I'm clear on this -- the shortfall that we are going to expect in the fiscal Q4 and what we witnessed in Q3 amounts to about $50 million, that should fall in probably in the first half of your fiscal 2011?

好的。所以我們將在會計年度第四季預期的缺口，以及我們在第三季看到的情況，加總起來大約是 5,000 萬美元；而這些應該會落在你們 2011 會計年度的上半年，對嗎？我只是想確認我理解正確。

The $50 million is about right when you look at our previous guidance to now, Mike, but it's not all order shifting. I think Tim indicated a majority is. Probably 70% of it is orders, order timing. The majority of that is DDL and related items, and then some Puma and WASP items. Then another 20% or so would be EES. So that is a book and ship business. It's hard to say that's just order timing. And then maybe another 10% of cats and dogs.

Mike，當你把我們先前的指引與現在的指引相比，5,000 萬美元大致沒錯，但並非全部都是訂單移轉。我想 Tim 提到其中大多數是，約 70% 是訂單／訂單時點的因素。其大部分是 DDL 及相關項目，另外還有一些 Puma 與 WASP 項目。再來約 20% 左右會是 EES。那是接單即出貨的業務，很難說那只是訂單時點。然後可能還有另外 10% 的零零總總。

Okay. And that was the reason for the question because EES, it's basically coming in about 50% lower than what we were originally expecting in the beginning of the year, and so that has a big delta impact on the full year revenue number. So what about if we look out into fiscal year '11 with regard to EES? The Nissan Leaf is a big opportunity, but we've heard really nothing from AeroVironment with regard to what the unit costs would be like. We've heard from different participants in the industry saying that there are 20,000 to 50,000 possible vehicles that could be sold in the United States in 2011 or '12, but we have no idea what the cost is to AeroVironment for charging systems. Can you help us out a little bit and help us quantify what this market really does look like for you?

了解。我之所以這樣問，是因為 EES 的表現基本上比我們年初原先預期低了約 50%，因此對全年營收數字造成很大的差異影響。那如果我們展望 2011 會計年度的 EES 呢？Nissan Leaf 是一個很大的機會，但我們幾乎沒有聽到 AeroVironment 對單位成本會是什麼樣子的說法。我們聽到產業中不同參與者提到，2011 或 2012 年美國可能會賣出 2 萬到 5 萬輛車，但我們不知道充電系統對 AeroVironment 的成本是多少。你能否多幫我們一些，協助我們量化這個市場對你們而言實際會是什麼樣子？

Yes, I understand the significance of the question, Mike. And my answer is somewhat constrained because our customer Nissan wants to take the lead on announcing their view of their quantities, as well as the pricing, which would include their car and the charging system. And I believe they have not yet done that. So with that caveat, we expect the impact of this contract to be significant on our FY11 performance relative to our EES segment. So we think we are looking at that contract alone, producing growth in the EES business. And I'm not sure I can go too much further beyond saying that, beyond what the statements I made in my prepared comments, because of the customer intent to take the lead on announcing price and quantity.

是的，Mike，我理解這個問題的重要性。而我的回答在某種程度上受到限制，因為我們的客戶 Nissan 希望在宣布其數量觀點以及定價（其中將包含他們的車輛與充電系統）方面扮演主導角色。我相信他們目前尚未這麼做。因此在此前提下，我們預期這份合約對我們 FY11 的表現、相較於我們的 EES 事業部門，將會有顯著影響。所以我們認為，單就這份合約本身，就會帶動 EES 業務的成長。由於客戶希望主導對外宣布價格與數量的意圖，除了我在事先準備的發言中所做的陳述之外，我不確定我是否能再進一步多說什麼。

Other than we would probably add that those revenues will coincide with the launch of the Leaf which would be in the second half of our next fiscal year.

此外，我們可能會補充的是，這些營收將會與 Leaf 的上市同步，而 Leaf 的上市時間將在我們下一個會計年度的下半年。

Yes, I believe they have announced an intent to begin selling those vehicles in December of calendar year '10.

是的，我相信他們已宣布計畫在西元 2010 年 12 月開始銷售這些車輛。

Okay. And, Tim, if I could ask the question another way, then, if you look at your fiscal year '12, do you think that the electric vehicle charging systems could possibly double the size of that energy business as it stands today?

好的。那麼，Tim，如果我換個方式問，若你看你們的 2012 會計年度，你認為電動車充電系統是否有可能讓目前的能源業務規模翻倍？

I think that's entirely possible, Mike.

Mike，我認為那完全有可能。

Okay. Thank you so much for your time.

好的。非常感謝你撥冗。

And we'll take our next question come from Michael Ciarmoli with Boenning & Scattergood.

接下來我們的下一個問題來自 Boenning & Scattergood 的 Michael Ciarmoli。

Hi, good afternoon. Thanks for taking the question. Can you just help us out, maybe, as we look out to Global Observer, you mentioned that there would be a revenue gap. I look at that as maybe a $3 million to $5 million monthly business today, now. Looking out, how do we view that gap? How long does that gap persist? Can you give us any sort of data points to help us out with 2011 there?

嗨，午安。謝謝讓我提問。能否請你協助我們理解一下：展望 Global Observer，你提到會有一段營收缺口。我把它理解為目前每月大約 300 萬到 500 萬美元的業務。往前看，我們該如何看待這個缺口？這個缺口會持續多久？你能否提供任何數據點，幫助我們理解 2011 年的情況？

I can maybe give you some color, Mike. I don't have a definitive answer. The existing program is currently scheduled to run through Q1 of calendar '11. Most of that from now on will be in the testing program, especially as we finish up the assembly of the second airplane and move that to Edwards to join in the flight test program. We are working on a number of opportunities for follow-on contracts, but the multiple customers that have funded this JCTD program are all waiting to see the results of our military utility assessment. Once we integrate the payloads that we plan to demonstrate on the airplane and then operate that and deliver the mission effects that the entire system is designed for around delivering persistent, intelligent surveillance recognizance, as well as communication relays and potentially other payload effects.

Mike，我或許可以提供一些補充說明，但我沒有明確的答案。現有計畫目前排程是執行到西元 2011 年的第一季。從現在起其中大部分將會是在測試計畫上，特別是當我們完成第二架飛機的組裝並將其移至 Edwards，加入飛行測試計畫之後。我們正在推進多項後續合約機會，但資助這個 JCTD 計畫的多個客戶都在等待我們的軍事效用評估結果。一旦我們整合計畫在飛機上展示的載荷，並進行操作、交付整套系統所設計要達成的任務效果——包括提供持續性、智慧型的監視偵察，以及通訊中繼，並可能還有其他載荷效果。

So, it's going to be extremely important to those customers to see those results and to evaluate those and the value of that persistence and the relative cost effectiveness as they then make decisions on future procurement. So I think it's possible that we may find customers that want to invest some contract amounts to either evaluate additional payloads, to look at additional effects or to extend the military assessment prior to the production adoption. I think the most likely earliest time we would see production funding would be in palm 12. Of course, I'm guessing there because I haven't seen any of those numbers at this point.

因此，讓這些客戶看到結果、評估結果，以及評估這種持續性的價值與相對成本效益，對他們在未來採購上的決策將極為重要。所以我認為，我們有可能找到願意投入一些合約金額的客戶，用於評估額外載荷、研究額外效果，或在量產採用之前延長軍事評估。我認為最可能、最早看到量產資金的時間會是在 2012 年的規劃期（plan 12）。當然，我這裡是在猜測，因為我目前還沒看到任何相關數字。

Sure, okay. That's helpful. Just one more question on '11. I don't know if you can answer this or not. Talking about the timing of orders, roughly $50 million, down from your original guidance. Is this still an 18% to 22% top line growth business? Looking out, if I were to say you guys didn't have the timing issues, you came in at 290, I'm looking at maybe 18% growth in '11. Can you give us any help there, because I don't want to make the mistake of viewing this as a 20% growth business and piling on another $50 million of revenue, just due to timing. Has anything structurally changed with the growth outlook you see for your core business?

了解，好，這很有幫助。再問一個關於 2011 年的問題。我不確定你能不能回答。談到訂單時點，約 5,000 萬美元，低於你們原先的指引。這仍然是一個營收年增 18% 到 22% 的業務嗎？往前看，如果我假設你們沒有時點問題、你們做到 2.9 億美元，我看 2011 年大概是 18% 的成長。你能否給我們一些協助，因為我不想犯錯，把它當成 20% 成長的業務，然後僅因時點因素就再加上 5,000 萬美元的營收。你們對核心業務的成長展望，在結構上有任何改變嗎？

I think I tried to indicate in my comments that we still think that our market position, our customer relationships, and our long-term opportunities remain very strong. And as I commented on the implications of the timing of adoption on any year-to-year performance, I think our last six year history indicates that we can see years like this where we're not seeing significant growth or even less than that, and we have seen other years where we have seen extraordinary growth. So I think the compounded long-term growth outlook remains strong and is certainly in the double digit arena. And I don't see any significant change in that outlook from my perspective.

我想我在發言中已試著表達，我們仍然認為我們的市場地位、客戶關係以及長期機會都非常強勁。至於我提到採用時點對年度間表現的影響，我認為我們過去六年的歷史顯示，我們可能會出現像今年這樣成長不顯著、甚至低於此的年度；也有其他年度出現非常突出的成長。因此，我認為長期複合成長的展望仍然強勁，且肯定在雙位數區間。就我個人觀點而言，我沒有看到這個展望有任何重大改變。

Clearly, this year is going to end up in the approximate range that we had last year, and a lot of that revenue we had anticipated this year will move into next year. We will see some countervailing effects next year which is the expected reduction in some Global Observer revenue. And we haven't seen any improvement in the industrial capital equipment market for our EES segment, but that's obviously offset by the growth opportunities I mentioned. So in summary, without getting into guidance for next year, I expect that we are going to end up with real year-over-year growth, both next year and the longer term opportunities driven by these new developments, I remain very optimistic about.

很明顯，今年最終會落在與去年大致相近的區間，而我們原先預期今年會實現的許多營收將會移到明年。明年我們也會看到一些相反方向的影響，也就是 Global Observer 部分營收預期會下降。我們在 EES 事業部門的工業資本設備市場也尚未看到任何改善，但這顯然會被我提到的成長機會所抵銷。總結來說，在不提供明年指引的前提下，我預期我們明年以及更長期都會呈現實質的年對年成長，而由這些新發展所驅動的長期機會，我仍然非常樂觀。

Fair enough. Thanks a lot, guys.

了解。非常感謝，各位。

We will hear our next question from Brian Ruttenbur with Morgan Keegan.

接下來我們將聽取 Morgan Keegan 的 Brian Ruttenbur 的提問。

Thank you very much. A couple of quick questions. First of all, the cash drop in the period, was that all because of the receivables or was there something else that caused the $5 million drop in cash?

非常感謝。我有幾個簡短問題。首先，本期現金下降，是完全因為應收帳款，還是還有其他因素造成現金下降 500 萬美元？

Brian, free cash flow was $5 million for the quarter. $3.2 million of that was operating cash and $1.8 million was CapEx. The operating cash was the receivables because a large portion of the revenue happened at the tail end of the quarter, which upped the receivables and then we also saw growth in our inventories.

Brian，本季自由現金流為 500 萬美元。其中 320 萬美元來自營運現金流，180 萬美元是資本支出（CapEx）。營運現金流的部分主要是應收帳款，因為相當大一部分營收發生在季度末端，推高了應收帳款；同時我們也看到存貨增加。

Okay, thank you. The other question I had was on Global Observer. Can you walk me through the timing? In the next six months or is it nine months, that you are going to flight test the first Global Observer. And then how long -- six months of flight testing before you get another order? Maybe you can walk me through the flight testing ritual there.

好的，謝謝。我另一個問題是關於 Global Observer。你能帶我走一遍時程嗎？在接下來六個月，或是九個月內，你們將對第一架 Global Observer 進行飛行測試。然後接著要多久——例如六個月的飛行測試之後才會拿到另一筆訂單？也許你可以帶我走一遍那個飛行測試的流程。

The test protocol that we are going through at Edwards starts with ground testing and a lot of system integration and translates ultimately into flight testing, with sequentially expanding the flight envelope and the operations there. Following that, we'll begin to integrate payloads, multiple different payloads into the airplane and then we'll be flying the airplane with payloads and demonstrating the effects of that entire system for our customer base.

我們在 Edwards 進行的測試流程，從地面測試開始，包含大量系統整合，最終會轉入飛行測試，並逐步擴展飛行包線與相關操作。之後，我們將開始把載荷整合進飛機，包括多種不同載荷，接著我們會在搭載載荷的情況下飛行，並向我們的客戶群展示整套系統的效果。

Okay. So can you walk me through, are you doing ground testing right now?

好的。那你能帶我走一遍：你們現在是在做地面測試嗎？

Yes, we are.

是的，我們正在做。

Okay. So ground testing started when?

好的。那地面測試是什麼時候開始的？

We moved the airplane to Edwards in December, and then there was a number of weeks of putting the airplane back together. This airplane's designed to be taken apart and shipped in C-130s to remote locations and then put back together. So that was the first process. Then we went through multiple testing scenarios that include system integration tests, ground vibration tests, weight and balance, things like that, that are all preparatory to flight testing.

我們在 12 月把飛機移到 Edwards，之後花了好幾週把飛機重新組裝起來。這架飛機的設計就是可以拆解後用 C-130 運到偏遠地點，再重新組裝。所以那是第一個流程。接著我們進行了多種測試情境，包括系統整合測試、地面振動測試、重量與平衡等，這些都是飛行測試前的準備工作。

Okay. So starting in January, roughly, ground testing started. Starting roughly in June, July, August, maybe you can tell me around when the actual flight testing start and then when does payload testing start after that?

好的。所以大約從 1 月開始進行地面測試。那大約從 6 月、7 月、8 月開始——也許你可以告訴我大概什麼時候開始實際的飛行測試？然後在那之後，載荷測試什麼時候開始？

So at this point, my statement was that our flight testing and our military utility testing are expected to begin in the first half of our next fiscal year. So that would be between starting in May of the six months starting in May of 2010. Then we will continue on with military utility assessment and evaluation through the first calendar quarter of 2011.

所以就目前而言，我的說法是，我們的飛行測試與軍事效用測試預期會在我們下一個會計年度的上半年開始。也就是在 2010 年 5 月起算的六個月期間內開始。接著我們會持續進行軍事效用評估與驗證，直到西元 2011 年第一個曆年季度。

Okay. And when do you think would be the soonest that you could get additional orders? During flight testing, during payload testing, or is it after all that testing is done?

好的。那你認為最早什麼時候可能拿到額外訂單？是在飛行測試期間、載荷測試期間，還是要等所有測試都完成之後？

I think after we have begun the testing program, the window for potential additional orders will open. Most likely if we were to receive additional orders in that time frame, they would be of the nature of additional payload integration and testing subsystem work and evaluation, and probably the kinds of things that would allow our customers to rigorously evaluate the benefits of this system in their enterprise. I think the probability of looking at production orders is most likely out in the early phase, out in government fiscal '12.

我認為在我們開始測試計畫之後，潛在追加訂單的窗口就會打開。最有可能的是，如果我們在那段期間收到追加訂單，性質會是額外的載荷整合與測試、子系統工作與評估，可能是那些能讓客戶在其組織內嚴謹評估此系統效益的項目。我認為生產訂單最可能會在較早階段之後，也就是政府2012財政年度的早期階段出現。

Okay. So the earliest that you are probably talking about additional production planes would be beyond March 2011 before there would be additional orders for planes, not necessarily payloads or subsystems, right?

好的。所以你所說的最早可能追加生產飛機，大概會是在2011年3月之後才會有額外的飛機訂單，而不一定是載荷或子系統，對嗎？

I think that's our best view at the moment, and obviously that can and will change as we get more feedback from customers as they get more insight into the demonstrations later this calendar year.

我認為這是我們目前最好的判斷；當然，隨著我們從客戶那裡獲得更多回饋、他們在今年稍晚看到示範後有更多了解，這個判斷可能而且也將會改變。

Right. Thank you very much.

好的。非常感謝。

Our next question will come from Troy Lahr with Stifel Nicolaus.

下一個問題來自 Stifel Nicolaus 的 Troy Lahr。

Yes, I'm wondering if you can get a little more specific on why you are seeing some of the delays in WASP, Puma and Switchblade. How much of these are chocked up to budget issues versus customer just reevaluating the product?

是的，我想請你更具體說明一下，為什麼你們在 WASP、Puma 和 Switchblade 上看到一些延遲。這些延遲有多少是預算問題造成的，還是客戶只是重新評估產品？

From the best of my ability to judge that right now, Troy, it's budget and these, I think, in a number of cases turned out to be unfunded requirements where we expected them to have been funded.

以我目前所能做的最佳判斷，Troy，這是預算問題；而且我認為在不少案例中，這些最後變成了未獲資金支持的需求（unfunded requirements），而我們原本預期它們是有經費的。

Okay. And when you said on Switchblade that you think that it might probably or probably could compete for this LMAMs, I think that was the acronym that you used, is the funding still up in the air for Switchblade based on that one particular budget line item?

好的。那你提到 Switchblade 時說你認為它可能、或很可能可以競爭這個 LMAMs（我想那是你用的縮寫），那 Switchblade 的資金是否仍取決於那一個特定的預算科目、因此還不確定？

Let me recharacterize that. Maybe I wasn't clear with my intent. The intent of bringing up the LMAMs RFI that was released by the Army is primarily -- this is public information that, I believe, supports our view that there is a growing level of interest around this kind of requirement in our defense customer base, to the point that they are issuing public Requests For Information around defined requirements. In this case, this LMAMs requirement, that we believe Switchblade is a good fit for.

我重新表述一下。也許我沒有把我的用意講清楚。提到陸軍發布的 LMAMs RFI（資訊徵詢）主要是——這是公開資訊——我相信它支持我們的看法：在我們的國防客戶群中，對這類需求的興趣正在提升，甚至到了他們會針對明確需求發布公開的資訊徵詢。在這個案例中，就是 LMAMs 的需求，而我們認為 Switchblade 很適合。

Now, beyond that, we are seeing continued small orders by multiple customers for Switchblade and Switchblade Variance, and they are using those orders to both further the development of the capabilities of Switchblade, and to acquire small quantities of units, both for evaluation, for demonstration, and for evaluation use. And I think the sum total of that broad and growing level of interest and activity supports this optimism I have for relatively early adoption of that capability. Is that helpful?

此外，我們也持續看到多個客戶對 Switchblade 與 Switchblade Variance 下小額訂單；他們利用這些訂單一方面推進 Switchblade 能力的進一步開發，另一方面也採購少量單位，用於評估、展示，以及評估用途。我認為，這種廣泛且日益增長的興趣與活動的總和，支持了我對其相對較早採用該能力的樂觀預期。這樣有幫助嗎？

That's perfect, thank you. And if you look out over the next couple of years, how should we think about the revenue? Do you think that we are going to see these periods of no growth and then a lot of growth and then back to no growth? Or do you think you weather the storm and it's going to be pretty smooth sailing? Because I look out into 2012 and we are a bit concerned that some of the growth might not be repeatable as most of the revenue has been pushed into this 2011 period. How should we think about that?

非常清楚，謝謝。那如果看未來幾年，營收應該怎麼看？你認為我們會看到一段沒有成長、接著大幅成長、然後又回到沒有成長的循環嗎？還是你認為撐過這段風暴後就會相對平穩？因為我看到 2012 年，我們有點擔心部分成長可能無法重複，因為大部分營收已被推到 2011 年這段期間。你建議我們怎麼看？

As we pointed out on the call, we had one year six years ago where one period, where we were about flat year-to-year, and it looks like we are into another one of those this year. In the intervening years, we've had varying rates of growth, and in one case, exceeding 100% year-over-year. I would hope that we have the flat years behind us, but obviously when we started this year, we didn't expect to see this result we've got. So I wanted to make it abundantly clear that the strategy we are pursuing, we believe has huge long-term compounded growth potential and we think we've demonstrated the ability to achieve that kind of growth over the last six years. But, the dark side of that strategy is the inherent uncertainty of adoption timing.

如同我們在電話會議中指出的，六年前我們曾有一年、某一段期間，年對年大致持平；看起來今年我們又進入另一個類似情況。在其間的幾年，我們有不同幅度的成長，其中有一年年增率甚至超過 100%。我希望我們已經把持平的年份拋在身後，但顯然在今年開始時，我們並不預期會看到目前這樣的結果。因此我想非常清楚地說明：我們正在推進的策略，我們相信具有巨大的長期複利成長潛力，而且我們也認為過去六年已展現出達成那種成長的能力。但這個策略的另一面，是採用時點本身就存在不確定性。

So, while we believe we have these opportunities stacked up in a way that they can be adopted in a sequential way and produce sustained compounded growth, we obviously have seen periods when we end up with a gap. I do see and expect sustained long-term compounded growth over multiple years.

因此，雖然我們相信已把這些機會以可依序被採用的方式堆疊起來，能帶來持續的複利成長，但我們也確實看過某些時期最後出現空窗。我確實看見並預期在多年期間會有持續的長期複利成長。

Okay. And could you help me put a finer point on the double digit comment? Should we think of that as teens or 20% long-term? Double digit is a big range.

好的。那你能否幫我把「雙位數」的說法再精確一點？我們應該把它理解為十幾％還是長期 20%？雙位數的範圍很大。

Yes it is and I'm trying to avoid putting a specific number on it. At one point in the past, I talked about a long-term compounded growth goal that we had internally, and I tried diligently to separate that from guidance, and I turned out to be not successful. So what I want to do is not put a number on long-term growth that sounds like I'm guiding to that growth, but, in fact, we have internal goals and we believe that they are supported by the extraordinarily large opportunities that we're pursuing, that can support significant growth like we have seen in the past. But I'm reluctant to get specific about a number, because it has a way of sounding like guidance.

是的，確實如此，而我正試著避免給出一個具體數字。過去某個時點，我曾談到我們內部的長期複利成長目標，並且我很努力想把它和財測指引區分開來，但結果證明我沒有成功。所以我現在想做的是，不去給出一個聽起來像是在提供長期成長指引的數字；但事實上，我們有內部目標，而且我們相信，這些目標有我們正在追求的極其龐大機會作為支撐，能支持像過去所見那樣的顯著成長。不過我不太願意對數字講得太具體，因為那很容易聽起來像指引。

No, I figured. I was just going to take a shot at it. Okay, thanks, guys.

了解，我猜也是。我只是想試試看。好的，謝謝各位。

And we will take our next question from John Croke with Jefferies & Company.

下一個問題來自 Jefferies & Company 的 John Croke。

Good afternoon. Tim, I had a question concerning the EV market. You mentioned in your opening comments that there's a variety of business models you are looking at, and I was curious specific to the Nissan Leaf. I know there's a lot of different forecasts out there and you can pick the one that excites you the most, but what I'm interested in, and if you can talk about it a little bit, is the types of investments that AeroVironment needs to make in order to support the Leaf and maybe support other EVs that might be coming out in terms of R&D, CapEx, G&A. It sounds like AeroVironment is going to be much more national than it has in the past and I'm just trying to get a sense of what kind of investments are involved and what we should be looking for as this market develops.

下午好。Tim，我有個關於電動車（EV）市場的問題。你在開場提到你們正在評估多種商業模式，我特別想問 Nissan Leaf。我知道外面有很多不同的預測，你也可以挑最讓你興奮的那一個，但我更關心的是——如果你能稍微談談——AeroVironment 為了支援 Leaf、以及未來可能推出的其他 EV，需要做哪些投資，包括研發（R&D）、資本支出（CapEx）、以及一般與行政費用（G&A）。聽起來 AeroVironment 將比過去更偏向全國性布局；我想了解這個市場發展過程中涉及哪些投資，以及我們應該觀察哪些重點。

I will start off here, John. I would say we've been investing in this business area throughout the year and you'll notice when we talk about R&D growth, the growth year-over-year has been, to an extent, driven by investments in this area. So we have been and probably expect to continue to invest as we go into next year.

John，我先回答。我會說我們今年一直在這個業務領域投資；你也會注意到，當我們談到研發成長時，年對年的成長在某種程度上就是由這個領域的投資所帶動。因此我們已經在投資，而且進入明年時也很可能會持續投資。

And I think you've got good insight, John, into the various levels of investment. The R&D is built around largely the product line itself, and extending that into fully validated production units which then leads into CapEx around the production capacity for those units. There's a significant supply chain that is built up to support that, and there is a significant distribution channel, a significant installation organization, customer requirements software and operating systems to support a very large number of consumer customers in addition to industrial customers. And that's all required to effectively execute on the Nissan Leaf opportunity. Once in place, that is a highly leverageable investment that extends across the industrial opportunity for the support of plug-in electric vehicles.

而且我想你對各層面的投資也有很好的理解，John。研發主要圍繞產品線本身，並將其延伸到完全驗證的量產單位，接著就會帶動為這些單位建立產能的資本支出。為了支援這些，還需要建立相當可觀的供應鏈，以及相當重要的通路與安裝組織、客戶需求軟體與作業系統，以支援大量的消費者客戶以及工業客戶。這些都是有效執行 Nissan Leaf 機會所必需的。一旦建置完成，這是一項高度可槓桿化的投資，能延伸到工業領域，用於支援插電式電動車。

Okay. That's very helpful. And then going back to the Global Observer, more on the infrastructure side of that program, you are clearly going to be looking at some period of time where activity is not going to be what it has been recently. And I know you've got a pretty impressive facility out there and a lot of talented folks who have been focused on designing and assembling the first few aircraft. How do you manage that cost basis as you enter this transition period? Can you rotate people in the other parts of the business that you mentioned that there might be some different types of tweaks and turns, contracts coming through, but how do you manage that cost base as we wait for those first production orders?

好的，這很有幫助。接著回到 Global Observer，更多是該計畫的基礎設施面：你們顯然將面臨一段時間，活動量不會像最近那樣。我知道你們那邊有相當令人印象深刻的設施，也有很多優秀人才一直專注於設計與組裝前幾架飛機。當你們進入這個過渡期時，要如何管理那個成本基礎？你能把人員調度到你提到的其他業務部門嗎？那邊可能會有不同類型的調整與轉向、合約進來；但在等待第一批量產訂單的同時，你們要如何管理這個成本基礎？

Addressing that issue in general is one of the significant challenges that we bit off when we adopted this growth through innovation strategy. Because we are unable to accurately predict adoption timing, we have a constant challenge of developing the technology and the market for that technology, and the productive capacity to support its adoption while we live with an uncertainty of the timing of actual adoption. So the point you bring out with Global Observer is a good, specific example of that generalized part of what we have learned to live with for years as we've pursued this strategy of serial innovation.

總體而言，處理那個問題是我們在採用這項「以創新帶動成長」策略時所承擔的重大挑戰之一。由於我們無法精準預測採用時點，我們一直面臨一項持續性的挑戰：在實際採用時點仍不確定的情況下，同步發展技術、該技術的市場，以及支援其採用所需的產能。因此，你以 Global Observer 提出的重點，是我們多年來在推動這種連續創新策略過程中，學會必須與之共存的那種普遍性問題的一個很好的、具體例子。

What we are doing now is looking at options, as you suggest, to move a lot of the unique talent that has been focused on Global Observer development around into other areas of development as we see this development phase beginning to wind down, in this part of the Global Observer program. Much of the new contract development work we're pursuing is designed to support that unique talent base in technology. And we have a constant internal evaluation of balancing the investments we make to improve the probability of the adoption of these very large new opportunities against the annual delivery of earnings associated with our near term revenues. And we are constantly evaluating the return on investment we expect from this portfolio of new opportunities relative to its short-term costs.

我們目前正在如你所建議的那樣評估各種選項：隨著 Global Observer 計畫這一部分的開發階段開始進入收尾，我們會把先前專注於 Global Observer 開發的許多獨特人才，調整並轉移到其他開發領域。我們正在推進的許多新合約開發工作，都是為了支撐這個在技術方面具獨特性的專業人才基礎。我們也持續在內部評估：在提升這些非常龐大的新機會被採用之可能性所需的投資，與我們近期期收入所帶來的年度獲利交付之間，如何取得平衡。同時，我們也不斷評估，相對於短期成本，我們預期這個新機會組合能帶來的投資報酬。

Understood. And one last question on Global Observer, then I will go. Boeing put out a release this morning on an interesting program they are working on. It's called Phantom Eye. And I'm not an expert but it looks like it fits into a similar market that Global Observer is pursuing. I wonder if you could give us a sense of what you think your competitive position is in this market and does maybe the fact that there's what appears to be a similar product in development, does that cause the customer to take its time a little bit longer to maybe benchmark the Global Observer against something else?

了解。那我再問 Global Observer 最後一個問題，然後我就不佔用時間了。波音今天早上發布了一則新聞稿，提到他們正在進行一個很有趣的計畫，叫做 Phantom Eye。我不是專家，但看起來它所對應的市場與 Global Observer 正在追求的市場相當類似。我想請你談談你們認為自己在這個市場的競爭地位如何？另外，既然看起來有一個類似產品也在開發中，這會不會讓客戶花更長時間，去把 Global Observer 與其他方案做基準比較？

I obviously have no insight into their internal development status. I did see that announcement myself. Maybe a little bit of history on Global Observer from the past would inform what we might see in the future.

我當然無法洞悉他們內部的開發進度。我自己也看到了那則公告。或許回顧一下 Global Observer 過去的一些歷史，能幫助我們理解未來可能會看到什麼。

When we decided to transition our solar electric airplane development into a hydrogen electric airplane development that was designed to be a robust military platform to provide operational persistence and affordability, we put together a program plan around the Global Observer concept, and we began to pursue a JCTD start and funding around that. And that was maybe on the order of five years ago. Very shortly after that, we had competitive programs with PowerPoint charts similar to ours with a surprisingly similar platform suggestion. Over a year's period of competition, we were successful in the face of that competition, and one of those competitors was the same that you are referring to here. And we were successful in winning that with the strong support of half a dozen funding customers and a broader group of supporters. And we are now in the process of testing that first real airplane that's not a PowerPoint slide, and in the next few months, we'll be demonstrating that real airplane as opposed to PowerPoint slides.

當我們決定把太陽能電動飛機的開發，轉型為氫能電動飛機的開發，並將其設計成一個具備作戰持續性與成本可負擔性的強健軍用平台時，我們便圍繞 Global Observer 的概念制定了計畫方案，並開始推動 JCTD 的啟動與相關資金。那大概是五年前左右。很快地，我們就遇到競爭方案——對方用的也是像我們一樣的 PowerPoint 圖表，提出的平台建議也出奇地相似。在為期一年左右的競爭中，我們在面對那樣的競爭下仍然勝出，而其中一個競爭者就是你現在提到的那一家。我們能夠贏得該案，得益於約半打資助客戶的強力支持，以及更廣泛的一群支持者。現在我們正在測試第一架真正的飛機——不是 PowerPoint 投影片——並且在接下來幾個月，我們將展示這架真實的飛機，而不是 PowerPoint 投影片。

So I think we are in a leading position here. There's no doubt that I like our cards relative to others, and at the same time, we're appropriately paranoid. And certainly Boeing is a lot larger established aerospace and defense contractor than we are, so we would be silly to not take that seriously.

所以我認為我們在這裡處於領先地位。毫無疑問，相較於其他人，我更看好我們手上的牌；同時，我們也保持適度的戒心。當然，波音是比我們規模大得多、且更成熟的航太與國防承包商，所以如果我們不認真看待，那就太愚蠢了。

I hear you. That's very helpful and the historical perspective definitely helps round out the situation. Thanks, Tim.

了解。這非常有幫助，而歷史脈絡確實讓整個情況更完整。謝謝你，Tim。

We'll take our next question from Jeff Evanson with Dougherty & Company.

接下來我們請 Dougherty & Company 的 Jeff Evanson 提問。

Thanks, gentlemen. A couple of questions on future profitability. We started to touch on that already, but if I look at the guidance that ends up being implied for Q4, and I think about the mix of business I had expected, or you are indicating here, I would have thought that gross margins would have been a little bit better. Should we not assume that the DDL upgrades are at higher margin than the rest of your small UAS business?

謝謝，兩位先生。我有幾個關於未來獲利能力的問題。我們剛才已經稍微談到一些，但如果我看你們的指引所隱含的第四季表現，再結合我原先預期的、或你們在這裡所指出的業務組合，我原本以為毛利率應該會更好一些。我們是不是不該假設 DDL 升級的毛利率會高於你們其他小型 UAS 業務？

I think we would stay with the operating income and we're not going to peel back the margins by product area. We did 39% gross margin in Q3, which is near the top end of where we performed, and we would expect Q4 to be another good quarter. But we're really digging ourselves out of the hole from Q1, and despite good operating margins in Q3, and if you do the math, which you have done, Q4 is even better. We are still only in the 9% to 11% range.

我想我們會以營業利益為主，我們不會按產品領域去拆解毛利率。我們第三季的毛利率是 39%，接近我們表現區間的上緣，我們預期第四季也會是另一個不錯的季度。但我們其實是在把第一季挖的洞補回來；儘管第三季的營業利潤率不錯，而且如果你做一下你已經做過的數學計算，第四季甚至更好，但我們全年仍然只落在 9% 到 11% 的區間。

All right. Given your arrangements with respect to the Nissan Leaf chargers, can we expect that that will have an initial period of lower margins given the investments you need to make and then return to higher margins in the out years? Is that how we should think about that?

好。就你們在 Nissan Leaf 充電器方面的安排而言，我們是否可以預期一開始會有一段較低毛利率的期間，因為你們需要投入一些投資，然後在往後年度回到較高毛利率？我們應該這樣理解嗎？

I'm looking at Tim. I think it's hard to say. It's a year out before we begin making deliveries. So it's hard to say right now.

我在看 Tim。我覺得很難說。距離我們開始交付還有一年，所以現在很難下定論。

Yes, I think in general, Jeff, we clearly are and will continue to make significant investments in that emerging market area, based on what we believe to be very attractive return on investment expectations. The initial rollout of any of our new products tends to have lower margins than we expect and realize as that product gets through its start-up and into rate production. So I wouldn't expect to see a different pattern here, but we don't have any specific information at this point to talk about it, and as Steve mentioned earlier, we have not guided on specific product line margins or even revenues, for the most part, in the past.

是的，我想一般而言，Jeff，我們確實正在、也將持續在那個新興市場領域進行重大投資，因為我們相信其投資報酬預期非常具吸引力。我們任何新產品的初期導入，毛利率通常都會低於我們在產品完成啟動、進入量產後所預期並實現的水準。所以我不預期這裡會出現不同的模式，但目前我們也沒有任何具體資訊可以進一步討論；而且如 Steve 先前提到的，過去大多數情況下，我們並未對特定產品線的毛利率、甚至營收提供指引。

Okay. That's helpful. And then on Global Observer, with all of this testing that's going to be involved, I get the sense that there might be a fairly high period of continued cost here on AeroVironment's part, and yet, I think you did indicate that Q4 revenue for that program would be down sequentially. So is that going to start to negatively impact margins?

好的，這很有幫助。接著關於 Global Observer，考量到將涉及大量測試，我的感覺是 AeroVironment 這邊可能還會有一段相當高的持續成本；但同時，我記得你們也表示第四季該計畫的營收會較前一季下降。那這會不會開始對毛利率造成負面影響？

I don't think we expect the testing to with -- I wouldn't characterize that as costs. The testing program that we are pursuing is part of the development program that's currently funded and so that's a cost plus contract and we're executing on that. Cost plus contracts typically in our history have had lower margins than our fixed price contracts, but they are funded contracts.

我不認為我們預期測試會——我不會把那描述為成本。我們正在進行的測試計畫是目前已獲資金支持的開發計畫的一部分，因此那是一份成本加成（cost plus）合約，我們正在按計畫執行。就我們過去的經驗而言，成本加成合約的毛利率通常低於固定價格合約，但它們是有資金支持的合約。

Okay. So to wrap all of those questions up there, should we think about -- I know you are going to love this one -- 2011 profitability, somewhere consistent with 2010?

好的。那把這些問題總結一下，我們是否應該這樣看——我知道你會很喜歡這題——2011 年的獲利能力大致會與 2010 年一致？

I think we clearly are waiting to provide guidance on 2011 until we finish our planning process and we will expect to be in a position to provide that in our next call, which would be Q4 of this year. Historically we've provided guidance on annual revenues and operating profits and I would expect that's probably where we are headed next quarter.

我想我們會等到完成 2011 年的規劃流程後再提供指引；我們預期在下一次電話會議，也就是本年度第四季的電話會議時，能夠提供相關資訊。歷來我們會提供年度營收與營業利益的指引，我預期下個季度大概也會朝這個方向進行。

Okay. Thank you very much.

好的，非常感謝。

We'll hear next from Tyler Hojo with Sidoti & Company.

接下來請 Sidoti & Company 的 Tyler Hojo 提問。

Good evening. I was just wondering if you could answer two cleanup questions. What was customer funded R&D in the quarter? And then just as it relates to the Geo contract, how much funding is currently available under the contract that you currently have?

晚安。我想請教兩個補充性的問題。本季由客戶資助的研發（R&D）是多少？另外，關於 Geo 合約，就你們目前持有的合約而言，合約項下目前可用的資金大約有多少？

The second part of that, I think we have talked about the total funding on Global being $120 million, approximately. The program is essentially fully funded or almost fully funded. The project R&D in Q3 was $16.3 million, or 27% of our revenue.

第二個部分，我想我們已經談過 Global 的總資金大約是 1.2 億美元。該計畫基本上已完全獲得資金支持，或幾乎已完全獲得資金支持。第三季的專案研發（R&D）是 1,630 萬美元，約占我們營收的 27%。

Okay. And just in terms of your backlog, how much Geo revenue is currently in there, just ballpark.

好的。那就你們的在手訂單（backlog）而言，目前其中大約有多少是 Geo 的營收，粗略估計即可。

Our policy is not to unpack the funded backlog by program, but, GO is a component of that. It is not as big as it has been in the past.

我們的政策是不按計畫去拆解已獲資金支持的在手訂單（funded backlog），但 GO 是其中的一個組成部分。它的占比不像過去那麼大。

Okay. And then just one last one for me. On the fed bus op site, I saw that you won a $1.2 million, $1.3 million contract for a Anubis and it looks like an interesting development program. I was wondering if you could maybe talk to that.

好的。然後我這邊最後一個問題。在聯邦商業機會（fed biz op）網站上，我看到你們拿到了一份 120 萬到 130 萬美元的 Anubis 合約，看起來是一個很有意思的開發計畫。我想請問你是否可以談談這件事？

I think on that, we saw that announcement as well, Tyler, and I think I will have to refer any information beyond what was published by our customer to our customer, which would probably be the Public Affairs Office at AFRL.

關於那個，我們也看到了那則公告，Tyler。我想，除了我們客戶已公開發布的內容之外，任何進一步資訊我都必須請你向我們的客戶詢問；那邊很可能是 AFRL 的公共事務辦公室。

All right. Thanks.

好。謝謝。

Sorry.

抱歉。

Our next question will come from Peter Arment with Broadpoint.

我們的下一個問題來自 Broadpoint 的 Peter Arment。

Yes, good afternoon, guys. Tim, we have talked a lot about this funding and the timing of it. Can you maybe just talk briefly about if you are seeing any changes in the utilization of Raven in theater? Obviously we see contracts and service sales are maybe up. Are you seeing any differential in terms of the utilization, in terms of spares or now that we've seen some troops coming down from Iraq and troops increasing in Afghanistan, could you just give us some color there?

是的，各位下午好。Tim，我們談了很多關於這筆資金以及其時點。你能否簡要談談，你是否看到 Raven 在戰區的使用率有任何變化？顯然我們看到合約與服務銷售可能有所上升。就使用情況而言，例如備品或零件方面，你是否看到任何差異？另外，現在我們看到伊拉克的部隊在減少、阿富汗的部隊在增加，你能否就此提供一些看法？

I don't know that we have, at least that I have any insight into any significant different utilization in terms of what we see in spare parts, repairs, feedback. Obviously, the concept of operations in Afghanistan is significantly different than it was in Iraq. Also, the terrain is significantly different. I would think that over time, if anything, we would see that more hostile environment in Afghanistan produce more operational repair demand than the flatter, more urban environments that our guys saw in Iraq. But that's not based on any data that we have seen coming through yet. Steve, do you have any insight?

我不確定我們是否有——至少就我而言——對任何顯著的使用差異有洞見，從我們在備品、維修、回饋所看到的情況來看。顯然，阿富汗的作戰概念與伊拉克時期有很大不同；地形也大不相同。我認為，隨著時間推進，如果有任何影響的話，我們可能會看到阿富汗較為敵對的環境，相較於我們的人員在伊拉克所面對較平坦、較都市化的環境，會帶來更多的作業維修需求。但這並不是基於我們目前已看到的任何數據。Steve，你有什麼看法嗎？

No. I think that's pretty much a non answer, Peter. Sorry.

沒有。我想這基本上算是沒有回答，Peter。抱歉。

That's okay. Do you have the ability to track what's in theater or what your customer has in theater and what is being deployed in other operations?

沒關係。你們有能力追蹤戰區內有哪些裝備，或你們的客戶在戰區內有哪些裝備，以及有哪些被部署到其他行動中嗎？

Relatively limited. We have a forward deployed support base in Iraq. We may well be asked to stand up similar capability in Afghanistan. I'm not sure. But there's a significant difference with these small Unmanned Aircraft Systems versus conventional airplanes or even their larger unmanned airplane systems and that is that almost all of the other systems are operated by air components that are geared around airplane maintenance and operation and control with a very large footprint and very rigorous maintenance and record keeping.

相對有限。我們在伊拉克有一個前線部署的支援基地。我們也很可能會被要求在阿富汗建立類似的能力。我不確定。但小型無人航空系統與傳統飛機，甚至與較大型的無人飛機系統之間有一個很大的差異：幾乎所有其他系統都是由空軍單位操作，而這些單位的架構是圍繞飛機維修、操作與管制，具有非常龐大的後勤足跡，以及非常嚴謹的維修與紀錄保存。

Our systems are used by soldiers, sailors and marines that are on the ground with boots and they are usually in a fight. They couldn't keep good records. They use them. They are there when they need them. They work when they need them and when they break them, they want them fixed and that's when we find out what they need. So it's quite a different scenario in terms of available data and being able to report on that.

我們的系統是由在地面作戰的士兵、水手與陸戰隊員使用，他們穿著軍靴在地面上，通常正在交戰。他們不可能維持良好的紀錄。他們需要時就使用；需要時它就得能運作；當他們把它弄壞時，他們希望它被修好，而那時我們才會知道他們需要什麼。因此，就可取得的資料以及能否據此進行回報而言，情境是相當不同的。

Okay. And is there any lag, though, with the DDL in terms of training with the troops in terms of their utilizations, in terms more training that will be required now that there will be that many more Ravens that can be utilized for an individual controller?

了解。不過，就 DDL 而言，在部隊訓練方面是否存在任何滯後，進而影響他們的使用率？也就是說，現在每位控制員可以運用更多 Raven，是否會需要更多訓練？

What we're seeing now as we roll out the Digital Data Link in the new Digital Raven systems, is these systems go with the priority to units that are being deployed, so they are being trained up on the Digital system, and there are some differences in how they use that system and its capabilities. And I think we have not yet seen the effects of the capability of the Digital system to put so many more airplanes in the same physical space and in the same frequency allocation. So that is, I believe, a future opportunity that could drive, or at least enable much larger quantities, and if those were adopted, then presumably we would have a much larger training opportunity to go with that.

我們目前看到的是，隨著我們在新的數位 Raven 系統中推出數位資料鏈（Digital Data Link），這些系統會優先配發給即將部署的部隊，因此他們會接受數位系統的訓練；在使用方式與能力運用上確實有一些差異。我認為，我們尚未看到數位系統的能力所帶來的影響——也就是能在相同的物理空間、相同的頻率配置下，同時運作更多架飛機。我相信那是一個未來的機會，可能會推動——或至少使得——數量大幅增加；如果那樣的做法被採用，那麼相應地，我們也可能會有更大的訓練機會。

Okay. Thanks very much for that.

好的。非常感謝你的說明。

And that is all the time we have for questions. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Steve Gitlin for any additional or closing remarks.

我們的提問時間到此結束。現在我想把電話會議交回給 Steve Gitlin，請他做任何補充或結語。

Thank you, Anthony. With that as our final question, we'd like to thank you for your attention and interest in AeroVironment. We'd also like to remind you that an archived version of this call, all SEC filings and relevant Company and industry news can be found on our web site, www.avinc.com. We look forward to speaking with you again following next quarter's results. Bye.

謝謝你，Anthony。既然這是我們最後一個問題，我們要感謝各位對 AeroVironment 的關注與興趣。我們也想提醒各位，本次電話會議的錄音存檔版本、所有 SEC 申報文件，以及相關的公司與產業新聞，都可以在我們的網站 www.avinc.com 上找到。我們期待在下季財報結果出爐後再次與各位交流。再見。

This does conclude today's conference call. We thank you for your participation.

今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝各位的參與。