博通 (AVGO) 2018 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Welcome to Broadcom Inc.'s Third Quarter Fiscal Year 2018 Financial Results Conference Call. At this time, for opening remarks and introductions, I would like to turn the call over to Tom Krause, Chief Financial Officer of Broadcom Inc. Please go ahead, sir.

歡迎參加 Broadcom Inc. 2018 財年第三季度財務業績電話會議。現在，我想將電話轉給博通公司首席財務官湯姆·克勞斯 (Tom Krause) 進行開場發言和介紹。請繼續，先生。

Thank you, operator, and good afternoon, everyone. Joining me today is Hock Tan, President and CEO of Broadcom. Today, Hock is going to give you a detailed review on our core business and spend some time outlining the industrial logic behind our recently announced acquisition of CA. I will then spend time reviewing our Q3 results and Q4 outlook and most importantly, our financial model and capital allocation policy.

謝謝接線員，大家下午好。今天與我一起出席的是 Broadcom 總裁兼首席執行官 Hock Tan。今天，Hock將為大家詳細回顧一下我們的核心業務，並花一些時間概述一下我們最近宣布收購CA背後的產業邏輯。然後，我將花時間回顧我們第三季度的業績和第四季度的前景，最重要的是我們的財務模型和資本配置政策。

Quickly on the formalities, today's call will primarily refer to non-GAAP financial results. A reconciliation to U.S. GAAP measures is included in today's press release, which is available in the Investor section of our website at Broadcom.com. Information on risks that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements made on this call is also available on today's press release and in our recent SEC filings.

快速辦理手續，今天的電話會議將主要涉及非公認會計準則財務業績。今天的新聞稿中包含了對美國公認會計準則措施的調整，您可以在 Broadcom.com 網站的投資者部分查看該新聞稿。有關可能導致實際結果與本次電話會議中所做的前瞻性陳述存在重大差異的風險信息，也可在今天的新聞稿和我們最近提交給美國證券交易委員會的文件中找到。

This conference call is being webcast live. A recording will be available via telephone playback for 1 week and archived in the Investor section of our website at Broadcom.com.

本次電話會議正在進行網絡直播。錄音將通過電話播放 1 週，並存檔在我們網站 Broadcom.com 的投資者部分。

At this time, I'd like to turn the call over to Hock. Hock?

這時，我想把電話轉給霍克。霍克？

Well, thank you, Tom. The strength of our business model delivered another quarter of very sustained revenues, strong earnings and free cash flows.

好吧，謝謝你，湯姆。我們業務模式的優勢使我們又一個季度實現了持續的收入、強勁的盈利和自由現金流。

Consolidated net revenue for the third quarter was $5.07 billion, 13% increase from a year ago, and EPS came in at $4.98, a 21% increase from a year ago, while free cash flow at $2.13 billion is 42% of revenues.

第三季度合併淨收入為 50.7 億美元，同比增長 13%，每股收益為 4.98 美元，同比增長 21%，而自由現金流為 21.3 億美元，佔收入的 42%。

We have a lot to cover today, so let's dive right into the segments. Starting with wired. In the third quarter, wired revenue was $2.3 billion, growing 4% year-on-year, and this segment represented 45% of our total revenue. Third quarter wired results reflect strong year-on-year growth for both our networking and compute offload businesses, driven by robust demand from the cloud data center markets as well as traditional enterprises. Networking and compute offload represented approximately 60% of our total wired segment in the quarter and grew over 10% year-on-year in the quarter. This is off the back of growing over 15% annually in the second quarter.

今天我們要講的內容很多，所以讓我們直接進入各個部分。從有線開始。第三季度，有線收入為23億美元，同比增長4%，該部門占我們總收入的45%。第三季度有線業績反映出，在雲數據中心市場和傳統企業強勁需求的推動下，我們的網絡和計算卸載業務同比強勁增長。網絡和計算卸載約佔本季度有線業務總量的 60%，同比增長超過 10%。這是第二季度年增長率超過 15% 的結果。

So this part of the wired segment is doing really well. However, cyclical headwinds in certain parts of our broadband businesses have impacted year-on-year growth for the wired segment. While digital subscriber line or DSL demand remained stable, demand for PON, Fiber-to-the-Home in China as well as video access, particularly North America, has been soft compared to a very strong 2017. As a result, broadband was down year-over-year in the third quarter after being down in Q2 as well.

所以有線部分的這一部分做得非常好。然而，我們寬帶業務某些部分的周期性逆風影響了有線業務的同比增長。雖然數字用戶線路或 DSL 需求保持穩定，但中國對 PON、光纖到戶以及視頻接入（尤其是北美）的需求與 2017 年非常強勁的情況相比一直疲軟。因此，寬帶繼第二季度下降後，第三季度同比下降。

Turning to the fourth quarter fiscal 2018. We expect networking and compute offload to continue to grow double digits year-on-year, as strong demand from both the cloud and traditional enterprise sustain. However, cyclical headwinds we have seen in video access, including cable and satellite, are persisting into the fourth quarter; and as a result, in the fourth quarter, we expect wired to grow only mid-single digit year-on-year.

轉向2018財年第四季度。由於雲和傳統企業的強勁需求持續存在，我們預計網絡和計算卸載將繼續以兩位數的速度同比增長。然而，我們在視頻接入（包括有線和衛星）領域看到的周期性逆風持續到第四季度；因此，我們預計第四季度有線業務同比增長僅為中個位數。

While on the other hand, we are very encouraged by the prospects for fiscal 2019. We expect strong growth in our networking business to continue, driven by new product ramps of our Tomahawk 3 switch and our Jericho 2 router platforms. We also continue to see strength from our deep learning ASICs with our cloud customers, and we forecast broadband video will bottom this fourth quarter as we start to enter an up cycle in 2019. On enterprise wireless access too, we expect to be the first to enable -- integrate the 802.11ax chipsets during this coming year among service providers, enterprises and homes.

另一方面，我們對 2019 財年的前景感到非常鼓舞。我們預計，在 Tomahawk 3 交換機和 Jericho 2 路由器平台新產品的推動下，我們的網絡業務將繼續強勁增長。我們還繼續看到我們的深度學習 ASIC 與雲客戶的優勢，我們預測隨著 2019 年開始進入上升週期，寬帶視頻將在第四季度觸底。在企業無線接入方面，我們預計明年將成為第一個在服務提供商、企業和家庭中集成 802.11ax 芯片組的公司。

Let me now turn to enterprise storage. For the third quarter 2018, enterprise storage revenue was $1.25 billion, representing 25% of revenue. As we had experienced and mentioned in our wired networking businesses, robust enterprise IT spending drove over a 70% year-on-year revenue increase. This, of course, includes contribution from Brocade. But even without Brocade, storage was robust year-on-year in the third quarter. Looking at the fourth quarter, strong demand from enterprise continues to be good, and we expect year-on-year storage revenue growth to accelerate.

現在讓我談談企業存儲。2018年第三季度，企業存儲收入為12.5億美元，佔收入的25%。正如我們在有線網絡業務中所經歷和提到的那樣，強勁的企業 IT 支出推動了收入同比增長超過 70%。當然，這也包括博科的貢獻。但即使沒有博科，第三季度的存儲量仍同比強勁。展望第四季度，企業強勁需求持續向好，我們預計存儲收入同比增長將加速。

Moving on now to wireless. In the third quarter, wireless revenue was $1.3 billion, which was flat year-over-year. The wireless segment represented about 25% of our total revenue. In aggregate, wireless revenue were in line with our expectations for the third quarter. We benefited from the initial seasonal ramp at our North American OEM customer, which was partially offset by anticipated decline in our other large wireless customer. We expect this ramp at our North American OEM customer to drive wireless revenue to be over 25% sequentially even as it may be down single digit year-on-year.

現在轉向無線。第三季度無線收入為 13 億美元，同比持平。無線部門約占我們總收入的 25%。總體而言，第三季度無線收入符合我們的預期。我們受益於北美 OEM 客戶最初的季節性增長，但我們其他大型無線客戶的預期下降部分抵消了這一增長。我們預計北美 OEM 客戶的增長將推動無線收入環比增長 25% 以上，儘管同比可能下降個位數。

Let me take some time to put this in perspective. Like all our franchises, our RF front-end business, which makes up roughly half of our wireless segment, competes and competes very well based on its technology leadership and its ability to deliver differentiated high-performance products, generation after every generation. To generate the high returns we expect on our substantial R&D and manufacturing investments, we focus on delivering the best FBAR technology in every new generation of smartphones.

讓我花一些時間來正確看待這一點。與我們所有的特許經營業務一樣，我們的射頻前端業務約占我們無線業務的一半，基於其技術領先地位以及一代又一代提供差異化​​高性能產品的能力，我們的競爭非常激烈。為了讓我們大量的研發和製造投資獲得預期的高回報，我們專注於在每一代新一代智能手機中提供最好的 FBAR 技術。

Nonetheless, from time to time, not that often but time to time, the same technology platform used by our customer may extend beyond one generation. And when this happens, it does create an opportunity for our customer to temporarily use lower-performance alternatives in selected SKUs.

儘管如此，有時，不是經常，而是有時，我們的客戶使用的同一技術平台可能會超出一代。當這種情況發生時，確實為我們的客戶創造了在選定的 SKU 中暫時使用性能較低的替代品的機會。

With the benefit of hindsight, this may be precisely what happened with this 2018 generation. But every indication we have is that the cadence of annual platform upgrades will resume in the upcoming 2019 smartphone generation, and we believe we are very well positioned to win back the platform. And with 5G on the horizon, we expect this cadence of annual upgrades to sustain.

事後看來，這可能正是 2018 年一代所發生的事情。但我們掌握的所有跡像都表明，年度平台升級的節奏將在即將到來的 2019 年智能手機一代中恢復，我們相信我們已經做好了贏回平台的準備。隨著 5G 即將到來，我們預計這種每年升級的節奏將持續下去。

As a result, we are maintaining our high level of investment as the market transitions to 5G.

因此，隨著市場向 5G 過渡，我們仍保持高水平的投資。

Meanwhile, in WiFi, Bluetooth, the transition to 802.11ax continues to keep us in the lead. We believe we are very well positioned to sustain this particular franchise over the next several years; and accordingly, we expect to see our wireless revenue returning to double-digit growth in fiscal 2020 following a temporary dip in fiscal 2019.

與此同時，在 WiFi、藍牙領域，向 802.11ax 的過渡使我們繼續保持領先地位。我們相信，我們有能力在未來幾年維持這一特殊的特許經營權；因此，我們預計，繼 2019 財年暫時下滑之後，我們的無線收入將在 2020 財年恢復兩位數增長。

Finally, our last segment, industrial. In the third quarter, the industrial segment represented 5% of total revenues. Excluding IP licensing, industrial business was up over 10% year-on-year. Distribution resales continued to be strong with double-digit Q3 year-on-year growth. We expect the demand environment for industrial to remain strong and industrial resale to maintain double-digit year-on-year growth during the fourth quarter.

最後，我們的最後一個部分，工業。第三季度，工業部門佔總收入的5%。剔除知識產權授權，工業業務同比增長超過10%。分銷轉售繼續強勁，第三季度同比增長兩位數。我們預計第四季度工業需求環境將保持強勁，工業轉售將保持兩位數同比增長。

So in summary, we continue to execute well on our business model. More than half our consolidated revenue, you may note, is benefiting from strong cloud and enterprise data center spending. This, coupled with a seasonal uptick in wireless, will drive our forecast revenue in the fourth quarter to be $5.4 billion, an increase of 11% from a year ago.

總而言之，我們繼續良好地執行我們的業務模式。您可能會注意到，我們一半以上的綜合收入受益於強勁的雲和企業數據中心支出。再加上無線業務的季節性增長，我們預計第四季度的收入將達到 54 億美元，比去年同期增長 11%。

In the meantime, our margins continue to expand due to our focus on technology leadership and high-performance products. This is all driving exceptional cash flows, which provides us great flexibility in our capital allocation model of returning cash to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases while enabling us to pursue strategic acquisitions to expand our earnings capacity going forward.

與此同時，由於我們專注於技術領先和高性能產品，我們的利潤率繼續擴大。這一切都推動了非凡的現金流，這為我們的資本配置模式提供了極大的靈活性，通過股息和股票回購向股東返還現金，同時使我們能夠進行戰略收購，以擴大我們未來的盈利能力。

Speaking of acquisitions, before I turn this call back to Tom to talk about the financials in greater detail, let me perhaps take a few more minutes and talk about CA Technologies. The #1 question we get from -- we get with CA is why did we choose to buy them. Cut to the chase. We're buying CA because of their customers and their importance to these customers. CA sells mission-critical software to virtually all of the world's largest enterprises. These are global leaders in key verticals, including financial services, telcoms, insurance, health care and retail. And CA does have scale fairly unique to the infrastructure software space. This can only come from long-standing relationships with these customers that span several decades. In other words, these guys are deeply embedded.

說到收購，在我把這個電話轉回給 Tom 並更詳細地討論財務狀況之前，讓我再花幾分鐘時間談談 CA Technologies。我們從 CA 得到的第一個問題是我們為什麼選擇購買它們。切入正題。我們購買 CA 是因為他們的客戶以及他們對這些客戶的重要性。CA 向幾乎所有全球最大的企業銷售關鍵任務軟件。這些都是關鍵垂直領域的全球領導者，包括金融服務、電信、保險、醫療保健和零售。CA 確實具有基礎設施軟件領域相當獨特的規模。這只能來自於與這些客戶長達數十年的長期關係。換句話說，這些人根深蒂固。

Now Broadcom does a lot of business with the cloud companies building the digital economy. The leaders, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, are all large customers for us. They are growing rapidly, and we are, as you noticed, growing with them. They use our leading-edge silicon solutions to develop their next-generation data centers to enable many businesses worldwide.

現在，博通與構建數字經濟的雲公司開展了大量業務。領先者谷歌、亞馬遜、微軟都是我們的大客戶。他們正在迅速成長，正如您所注意到的，我們正在與他們一起成長。他們使用我們領先的芯片解決方案來開發下一代數據中心，為全球許多企業提供支持。

On the other hand, when you look at the largest enterprises, which comprise CA key customers, these guys really have limited direct access to our mission-critical technology. In that lies what we think is a new and huge opportunity. Just as we have done with hyper cloud players, we believe we can bring our compute offload solutions, our Tomahawk switchers, Jericho routers, fiberoptics and our server storage connectivity portfolio directly to these same large enterprises that are buying CA software. These large end users invest tens of billions of dollars on IT infrastructure every year. Through CA, we believe we have a big doorway to engage strategically with these customers and provide them direct access at very compelling economics to the same leading-edge -- and link to the same leading-edge networking, storage and compute technology that are used to enable the cloud service providers today.

另一方面，當你觀察由 CA 關鍵客戶組成的最大企業時，你會發現這些人對我們關鍵任務技術的直接訪問確實有限。我們認為這就是一個新的巨大機遇。正如我們對超級雲玩家所做的那樣，我們相信我們可以將我們的計算卸載解決方案、我們的Tomahawk 交換機、Jericho 路由器、光纖和我們的服務器存儲連接產品組合直接帶給這些購買CA 軟件的大型企業。這些大型最終用戶每年在 IT 基礎設施上投資數百億美元。通過CA，我們相信我們有一個大門可以與這些客戶進行戰略性接觸，並為他們提供以非常有吸引力的經濟性直接訪問相同前沿技術的機會，並鏈接到所使用的相同前沿網絡、存儲和計算技術為當今的雲服務提供商提供支持。

Beyond this industrial logic, I might note CA by itself is a great franchise. Mainframes remain the backbone of the enterprise computing environment and are relied on to run mission-critical applications. Mainframe process approximate -- mainframes process approximately 30 billion transactions per day and $7 trillion of credit card payments annually. Contrary to popular belief, over the last 10 years, mainframe workloads have actually increased 3.5x, driven largely by increasing amounts of data generated with every single transaction. Given mainframes power the most important parts of large enterprises, we believe this will remain a strong and stable market opportunity for us for a long time.

除了這種工業邏輯之外，我可能會注意到 CA 本身就是一個偉大的特許經營權。大型機仍然是企業計算環境的支柱，並依賴於運行關鍵任務應用程序。大型機流程近似——大型機每天處理大約 300 億筆交易，每年處理 7 萬億美元的信用卡付款。與普遍看法相反，在過去 10 年中，大型機工作負載實際上增加了 3.5 倍，這主要是由於每筆交易生成的數據量不斷增加。鑑於大型機為大型企業最重要的部分提供動力，我們相信這對我們來說在很長一段時間內仍然是一個強大而穩定的市場機會。

CA is a leader in delivering a suite of mainframe solutions across application development and ITOM tools. So bottom line, we actually see this opportunity a great opportunity, I might say, to double down for future growth.

CA 是提供跨應用程序開發和 ITOM 工具的一套大型機解決方案的領導者。所以最重要的是，我們實際上認為這個機會是一個很好的機會，我可以說，為未來的增長加倍努力。

With that, let me turn the call over to Tom at this time.

現在，讓我把電話轉給湯姆。

Thank you, Hock, and good afternoon, everyone. My comments today will focus primarily on our non-GAAP results from continuing operations unless otherwise specifically noted. Let me walk through our results for the third quarter of fiscal 2018.

謝謝霍克，大家下午好。除非另有特別說明，我今天的評論將主要關注我們持續經營業務的非公認會計準則業績。讓我回顧一下我們 2018 財年第三季度的業績。

Third quarter net revenue was $5.07 billion, just ahead of the midpoint of our guidance. Our gross margin from continuing operations was at the high end of our guidance at 67.3% as we benefited from the more favorable product mix in the quarter. Operating expenses were slightly lower than we expected at $874 million, driven by lower SG&A. As a result, operating income from continuing operations for the quarter was $2.54 billion and represented 50.1% of net revenue. Adjusted EBITDA for the quarter was $2.71 billion and represented 53.4% of net revenue. For housekeeping purposes, Q3 depreciation was $129 million in the quarter.

第三季度淨收入為 50.7 億美元，略高於我們指引的中值。由於本季度更有利的產品組合，我們持續經營業務的毛利率達到了 67.3% 的指導上限。由於 SG&A 下降，運營費用略低於我們的預期，為 8.74 億美元。因此，本季度持續運營業務的營業收入為 25.4 億美元，占淨收入的 50.1%。該季度調整後 EBITDA 為 27.1 億美元，占淨收入的 53.4%。出於管理目的，第三季度折舊額為 1.29 億美元。

Below the line, net interest expense was slightly better than guidance due to higher interest income from our cash deposits. The tax provision was in line at 7% of operating income from continuing operations or $170 million.

在線下，由於我們的現金存款利息收入增加，淨利息支出略好於指引。稅收撥備符合持續經營業務營業收入的 7%，即 1.7 億美元。

The diluted share count was 453 million shares and includes the weighted average impact of the stock repurchases completed in the quarter. As a result, the company delivered $4.98 of EPS in the quarter. This represents 21% year-on-year growth, including the impact of share repurchases.

稀釋後的股票數量為 4.53 億股，其中包括本季度完成的股票回購的加權平均影響。結果，該公司本季度實現了 4.98 美元的每股收益。這意味著同比增長 21%，其中包括股票回購的影響。

Working capital, excluding cash and cash equivalents, increased approximately $209 million compared to the prior quarter due primarily to an increase in receivables. This increase was driven by seasonally higher shipments in the last month of the quarter as well as the effect of a distributor consolidation program for the Brocade business, where we were providing a temporary extension of payment terms to facilitate the consolidation. In addition, cash restructuring expenses were $18 million as we are now at the tail end of the Brocade integration.

營運資金（不包括現金和現金等價物）與上一季度相比增加了約 2.09 億美元，這主要是由於應收賬款的增加。這一增長是由於本季度最後一個月的季節性出貨量增加以及博科業務分銷商整合計劃的影響所致，在該計劃中，我們暫時延長了付款期限以促進整合。此外，現金重組費用為 1800 萬美元，因為我們現在正處於博科整合的尾聲。

Finally, we spent $120 million on capital expenditures, which was slightly below expectations. As a result, free cash flow from operations was $2.13 billion or 42% of revenue. This represents 52% year-over-year growth in free cash flow from operations.

最後，我們在資本支出上花費了 1.2 億美元，略低於預期。結果，運營自由現金流為 21.3 億美元，佔收入的 42%。這意味著運營自由現金流同比增長 52%。

In the quarter, we returned $754 million in the form of cash dividends and spent $5.38 billion repurchasing 24 million AVGO shares. We did not pay down any debt in the quarter. We ended the quarter with $4.14 billion of cash, $17.6 billion of total debt and 438 million fully diluted shares outstanding.

本季度，我們以現金股息的形式返還了 7.54 億美元，並花費 53.8 億美元回購了 2400 萬股 AVGO 股票。我們本季度沒有償還任何債務。本季度結束時，我們的現金為 41.4 億美元，債務總額為 176 億美元，完全稀釋後的流通股為 4.38 億股。

Now let me turn to our non-GAAP guidance for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2018. This guidance reflects our current assessment of business conditions, and we do not intend to update this guidance. This guidance is for results from continuing operations only.

現在讓我談談 2018 財年第四季度的非 GAAP 指引。本指南反映了我們當前對業務狀況的評估，我們不打算更新本指南。本指南僅適用於持續經營的結果。

Net revenue is expected to be $5.4 billion, plus or minus $75 million. Gross margin is expected to be 67%, plus or minus 1 percentage point. Operating expenses are estimated to be approximately [$874 million] (corrected by company after the call). Tax provision is forecasted to be approximately 7%. Net interest expense and other is expected to be approximately $125 million. The diluted share count forecast is for 436 million shares. CapEx will be approximately $110 million.

淨收入預計為 54 億美元，上下浮動 7500 萬美元。毛利率預計為67%，上下浮動1個百分點。運營費用預計約為 [8.74 億美元]（公司在電話會議後更正）。預計稅收撥備約為7%。淨利息支出及其他預計約為 1.25 億美元。稀釋後的股數預測為 4.36 億股。資本支出約為 1.1 億美元。

Before we open the call for questions, I want to update you on our financial model and capital allocation policy. On the financial model, there have been a lot of questions regarding our long-term growth and concerns about the growth rate of our core semiconductor business. The intention with the CA announcement has not been to signal a change in the growth rate of our core business. On the contrary, we believe our long-term growth rate for the semiconductor segment will remain mid-single digits driven by end market growth and content increases from new product introductions.

在我們開始提問之前，我想向您介紹我們的財務模型和資本配置政策的最新情況。在財務模型上，人們對我們的長期增長存在很多疑問，並對我們核心半導體業務的增長率感到擔憂。CA 公告的目的並不是要表明我們核心業務增長率的變化。相反，我們相信，在終端市場增長和新產品推出帶來的內容增加的推動下，我們半導體領域的長期增長率將保持在中個位數。

As we acquire businesses outside of semiconductors, including Brocade and more recently CA, we are taking a conservative approach relative to our internal expectations on revenue growth. The returns we modeled do not require growth to hit our targets; but make no mistake, we do expect to grow these businesses. So the important message is that we do not see any fundamental changes in our long-term growth rate.

當我們收購半導體以外的業務（包括 Brocade 和最近的 CA）時，相對於我們對收入增長的內部預期，我們採取了保守的態度。我們建模的回報並不需要增長來達到我們的目標；但毫無疑問，我們確實希望發展這些業務。因此，重要的信息是，我們沒有看到長期增長率發生任何根本性變化。

Now on to capital allocation. Here at Broadcom, we have a set of complementary highly profitable technology franchises that require limited capital expenditures and that sit on top of an efficient corporate platform. This in turn spits out a substantial and sustainable base of cash flows that we expect will grow over time. This expected cash flow generation provides us with a lot of flexibility on how we allocate capital to create value for you, the shareholders.

現在進行資本配置。在博通，我們擁有一系列互補的高利潤技術特許經營權，這些技術特許經營權需要有限的資本支出，並且位於高效的企業平台之上。這反過來又產生了一個巨大且可持續的現金流基礎，我們預計這些現金流將隨著時間的推移而增長。這種預期現金流的產生為我們如何分配資本為股東創造價值提供了很大的靈活性。

We are committed to our policy of distributing 50% of our prior fiscal year free cash flow to shareholders in the form of cash dividends. Given our fourth quarter outlook and expected full fiscal year '18 results, we anticipate another substantial increase in the quarterly dividend for calendar 2019.

我們致力於執行將上一財年自由現金流的 50% 以現金股息的形式分配給股東的政策。鑑於我們第四季度的前景和預期的 18 財年全年業績，我們預計 2019 年的季度股息將再次大幅增加。

Now with the remaining free cash flow, we see the opportunity to do a couple of things. One, we plan to continue to buy back shares. We currently have $6.3 billion left on our $12 billion stock repurchase authorization that extends through the end of FY '19. And two, with a focus on maintaining our investment-grade credit rating, we believe we also have the cash flow and the borrowing capacity to continue to expand our earnings base through strategic and accretive acquisitions.

現在，利用剩餘的自由現金流，我們看到了做幾件事的機會。第一，我們計劃繼續回購股票。目前，我們的 120 億美元股票回購授權還剩 63 億美元，該授權將持續到 19 財年末。第二，在專注於維持我們的投資級信用評級的同時，我們相信我們也擁有現金流和借貸能力，可以通過戰略性和增值性收購繼續擴大我們的盈利基礎。

Finally, as previously announced, we have cleared HSR with respect to the CA transaction in July. The transaction is still subject to CA shareholder approval and antitrust approvals in the EU and Japan. We expect to close in the fourth calendar quarter of 2018.

最後，正如之前所宣布的，我們已於 7 月份清算了與 CA 交易相關的 HSR。該交易仍需獲得 CA 股東的批准以及歐盟和日本的反壟斷批准。我們預計將於 2018 年第四季度結束。

That concludes my prepared remarks. During the Q&A portion of today's call, we request that you limit yourselves to one question each. So with that, operator, could you please open up the call for questions?

我準備好的發言就到此結束。在今天電話會議的問答部分，我們要求您每人只問一個問題。那麼，接線員，您能打開電話提問嗎？

(Operator Instructions) And our first question will come from the line of Tim Arcuri with UBS.

（操作員說明）我們的第一個問題將來自瑞銀集團的蒂姆·阿庫裡（Tim Arcuri）。

This is Pradeep Ramani on behalf of Timothy Arcuri. I had a question more on the longer term view of CA and how you view -- sorry, CA and the wireless solutions group and how you view the wireless solutions group from a strategic standpoint given that the CA acquisition is kind of focusing you guys towards more of an infrastructure company.

我是蒂莫西·阿庫裡 (Timothy Arcuri) 代表普拉迪普·拉馬尼 (Pradeep Ramani)。我有一個關於 CA 的長期觀點以及您如何看待的問題 - 抱歉，CA 和無線解決方案小組，以及您如何從戰略角度看待無線解決方案小組，因為 CA 收購讓你們將注意力集中在更多的是一家基礎設施公司。

That's a very interesting question, and it affords me the opportunity to clarify how we look at our, as Tom calls it, set of businesses. Our business model is very much focused on putting together a portfolio -- or not -- a portfolio of what we consider product technology, product franchises. And that's not necessarily limited to IT infrastructure or networking or data centers in any particular specifics. As you noticed, we have a range of products that sells into multiple end markets, which ranges from wired, and even in wired, we have made the distinction, as I said, of networking data centers as well as more service provider spending as it relates to carrier access and PON and video delivery. And that's 2 sets of end markets by itself. Then we have enterprise storage, which is very data center centric, [I mean]. But then you're right. We have wireless, which is, as we define it, is very focused on mobility on smartphones, where we put up the best latest technology. And finally, we have industrial where there are set of products that goes to various industrial products and it's reconnected to the data centers. So they are very disparate. They are very diverse, and therein, in our view, lies our strength. It's a very set of diverse product franchises, and that's the key operating word, franchises. But each of them has very -- a set of common characteristics. One is they operate in niche markets typically. Those aren't just niche markets that become mass markets because mass markets have moved over to these niche markets. And -- but two is we have the technology, and more than technology, we are the leader in technology in each of these niche markets. And we tend to have the lead -- we tend to have the highest market share, too, in each of these end markets. And the common thing we do is it all sits on a platform, but each of those niches keep investing, and you're seeing the level of dollars we invest. We're investing over $3 billion, $3.2 billion a year just on R&D and product development as we move to each product generation and evolve the technology for use of our end customers. And we make sure we lead in each of those. And so we still believe -- to answer your questions specifically on wireless, we believe our position in wireless, in those wireless niche markets -- in those wireless products and markets, that we are very much in the lead technology. We are lead in market share in the niches we're in. So it's satisfying those considerations of us, of franchises in those specific markets as you would apply to switching and routing in data centers where we are very well represented too. And the benefit of all these particular franchises is they all are enormously profitable and they all continue to grow.

這是一個非常有趣的問題，它讓我有機會澄清我們如何看待我們（湯姆所說的）業務。我們的商業模式非常注重將我們認為的產品技術、產品特許經營權的組合（或不是）組合在一起。這不一定限於 IT 基礎設施或網絡或數據中心的任何特定細節。正如您所注意到的，我們有一系列產品銷往多個終端市場，其中包括有線，甚至在有線方面，正如我所說，我們已經區分了網絡數據中心以及更多的服務提供商支出，因為它涉及運營商接入、PON 和視頻傳輸。這本身就是兩組終端市場。然後我們有企業存儲，它非常以數據中心為中心，[我的意思是]。但你是對的。我們擁有無線技術，正如我們所定義的，無線技術非常注重智能手機的移動性，我們在其中採用了最好的最新技術。最後，我們有工業產品，其中有一組產品可用於各種工業產品，並重新連接到數據中心。所以他們是非常不同的。他們非常多樣化，在我們看來，這就是我們的優勢所在。這是一組非常多樣化的產品特許經營權，這就是關鍵的操作詞：特許經營權。但他們每個人都有一組非常共同的特徵。一是它們通常在利基市場運營。這些不僅僅是利基市場成為大眾市場，因為大眾市場已經轉移到這些利基市場。但第二點是我們擁有技術，而且不僅僅是技術，我們還是每個利基市場的技術領導者。我們往往處於領先地位——在這些終端市場中，我們也往往擁有最高的市場份額。我們所做的常見事情是，所有這些都位於一個平台上，但每個利基市場都在繼續投資，你會看到我們投資的美元水平。我們每年在研發和產品開發上投資超過 30 億美元，每年 32 億美元，因為我們正在邁向每一代產品並不斷發展技術以供最終客戶使用。我們確保在每一個方面都處於領先地位。因此，我們仍然相信，為了專門回答您關於無線的問題，我們相信我們在無線領域、在那些無線利基市場中的地位——在那些無線產品和市場中，我們在技術上處於領先地位。在我們所處的利基市場中，我們的市場份額處於領先地位。因此，它滿足了我們以及這些特定市場中的特許經營商的考慮，就像您應用於數據中心的交換和路由一樣，我們在數據中心也有很好的代表。所有這些特殊特許經營權的好處是它們都具有巨大的利潤並且它們都在持續增長。

Our next question will come from the line of Pierre Ferragu with New Street Research.

我們的下一個問題將來自 New Street Research 的 Pierre Ferragu。

So I'll ask you about Computer Associates as well so -- you have demonstrated in the past a rather unmatched ability to create value from your acquisition, and this is something you must be doing in the semiconductor industry, and that's why you got a lot of investors and analysts too. So today, it really feels like we need to better understand the Broadcom model, how Broadcom can create so much value from acquisition and how it can apply to CA. So in that spirit, my question to the 2 of you, Hock and Tom, would be can you tell us what you guys do like nobody else. What makes you unique at integrating a business you acquire and create value from these businesses like nobody else and in particular, like a private equity fund, for instance, will not be able to do? And then, of course, put that in the context of Computer Associate. How are you going to apply these unique capabilities to Computer Associate.

所以我也會問你關於Computer Associates的問題——你過去已經展示了一種無與倫比的能力，可以通過收購創造價值，這是你在半導體行業必須做的事情，這就是為什麼你得到了還有很多投資者和分析師。所以今天，我們真的感覺我們需要更好地理解 Broadcom 模式，Broadcom 如何通過收購創造如此多的價值，以及它如何應用於 CA。因此，本著這種精神，我向你們兩個人（霍克和湯姆）提出的問題是，你們能告訴我們你們做了什麼與眾不同的事情嗎？是什麼讓您在整合您收購的業務並從這些業務中創造價值方面獨一無二，這是其他人（尤其是私募股權基金）無法做到的？然後，當然，將其放在計算機助理的背景下。您將如何將這些獨特的功能應用到 Computer Associate。

Thank you. Interesting question. Let me try to address that if I could. One of which -- one around -- to start off with, we are non-private equity, by no means are we. Why? We know -- we understand the businesses that operates in Broadcom very well, and we operate those businesses. We are not financial investors. The financial performance, the capital allocation that comes [over here] is exceptional. Cash flow, we generate out those, making those businesses very successful. Happens to be just the end product. We run those businesses, and we run them as a group. That's the biggest difference between us and private equity, very, very much so. So where we see our -- where we see some differentiating traits in how we identify and acquire those businesses and then integrate them into a whole as part of Broadcom is simply this. I think we're very, very aware of our ecosystem, what product lines, what markets are very sustainable, very good as potential profit and growth opportunities, and we are very focused. And that's [good thing]. We are very focused in determining what differences make sense to invest in and what businesses we do not or should not invest in because it won't generate a return, which is why in -- to expand on my reply to the earlier question, today, Broadcom comprise of 19 separate product divisions. Each of them leader in their own right in each of those niche markets they are in. And by being extremely focused on continuing to be the technology and market leader, which basically means delivering generation after generation because one advantage in technology is you keep having to evolve with better and better products that your customers can use and ask for. As you do that, you actually create more and more value to your customers. And the extension of that is shown by the fact that if you look at our financials over the last several years, we expect our product margin, gross margin [to say] as a collective whole 100 basis points approximately every year. This is the same product. This is not about adding new acquisitions, which accrete the gross margin. We're talking about if you look organically at the same products that we have 3, 4, 5 years ago, you will see that margins expand as a whole. And the reason it can expand is because you're delivering more value to your customers. And so the real basic thing is be very focused. Stick to what you do very well and focus on where you are very successful and keep doing the same thing. And what we do when we look at acquisitions very simply is we look at companies where the opposite is actually sometimes happening, where the core business of the company -- of some of these business companies are not so focused on or neglected in many ways, and instead the bright, shiny objects get focused on where the strength of that particular company may not be so good. And we basically pull them back to their roots and put them into as part of the overall Broadcom portfolio. That's really what we are.

謝謝。有趣的問題。如果可以的話，讓我嘗試解決這個問題。其中之一——周圍的一個——首先，我們是非私募股權公司，但我們絕不是。為什麼？我們知道——我們非常了解博通運營的業務，並且我們運營這些業務。我們不是金融投資者。[這裡]的財務業績和資本配置非常出色。我們產生現金流，使這些企業非常成功。碰巧只是最終產品。我們經營這些業務，並作為一個集團來經營它們。這是我們和私募股權之間最大的區別，非常非常不同。因此，我們在如何識別和收購這些業務，然後將它們整合為一個整體作為博通的一部分方面，我們看到了一些差異化特徵，就是這樣。我認為我們非常非常了解我們的生態系統，哪些產品線，哪些市場是非常可持續的，非常好的潛在利潤和增長機會，而且我們非常專注。這就是[好事]。我們非常專注於確定哪些差異是值得投資的，以及我們不或不應該投資哪些業務，因為它不會產生回報，這就是為什麼 - 今天擴大我對之前問題的答复Broadcom 由19 個獨立的產品部門組成。他們每個人都在各自所處的利基市場中處於領先地位。通過高度專注於繼續成為技術和市場領導者，這基本上意味著一代又一代地交付，因為技術的一個優勢是你必須不斷發展，推出越來越好的產品，讓你的客戶可以使用和要求。當您這樣做時，您實際上為客戶創造了越來越多的價值。事實上，如果你看看我們過去幾年的財務狀況，我們預計我們的產品利潤率、毛利率（可以說）每年大約為 100 個基點。這是同一個產品。這並不是要增加新的收購來增加毛利率。我們談論的是，如果你有機地觀察我們 3、4、5 年前的相同產品，你會發現利潤率整體上在擴大。它之所以能夠擴展，是因為您正在為客戶提供更多價值。所以真正基本的事情是要非常專注。堅持你擅長的事情，專注於你非常成功的事情，並繼續做同樣的事情。當我們審視收購時，我們所做的非常簡單，我們關注的公司實際上有時會發生相反的情況，公司的核心業務——其中一些業務公司在很多方面都沒有那麼關注或被忽視，相反，明亮、閃亮的物體會集中在該特定公司的實力可能不太好的地方。我們基本上將它們拉回到了根源，並將它們納入博通整體產品組合的一部分。我們確實就是這樣。

And our next question comes from the line of William Stein with SunTrust.

我們的下一個問題來自 SunTrust 的 William Stein。

Hock, one of the biggest questions that we've gotten especially more recently is on the semi-cycle. Now I understand you have 19 or so franchises that you can argue are more specialized, but I think you're certainly exposed to the broader trends in the industry. And there's an expectation that we're seeing a slowdown, in particular, in China, especially potentially related to tariffs. And I'm wondering if you can offer a comment as to where you think we are in that cycle, what you see going on in that regard.

霍克，我們最近遇到的最大問題之一是關於半週期的。現在我知道你們有 19 個左右的特許經營權，你們可以說它們更專業，但我認為你們肯定接觸到了該行業更廣泛的趨勢。人們預計我們會看到經濟放緩，特別是在中國，尤其可能與關稅有關。我想知道您是否可以就您認為我們在這個週期中所處的位置以及您在這方面看到的情況發表評論。

That's a very, very good question and a very timely question. And what we -- I can -- I'm not trying to look out far nor trying to basically postulate a vision here, but short -- but what we're seeing now and what we've seen recently and looking what we're seeing now is that the dynamics of the semiconductor space is constantly changing. I know that's an obvious answer. But what I mean is by different end markets. And we, in some ways, are fortunate in selling to 4, 5 end markets, very, very different end markets. And I can tell you, over the last 2 years, the behavior of all those 5 end markets are very -- had been very different. So it's hard for me to say how's the whole semiconductor industry because it does cover into a lot of spaces. And 2 -- like 1 or 2 years ago, I did say that in 2016, 2017 -- even 2017 and '16, broadband was very strong. What part of the, I guess, of service provider spending -- level of service provider spending worldwide and -- but also -- and leading to business that's kind of cyclical. It's a business I might add that's relatively flat but sustainable and cyclical. So today, as I say, broadband, as I mentioned, is not so strong anymore. Now last year -- 2 years ago, data center spending was okay. This year, 2018, it's extremely strong and continues to look good. So we see different parts of the cycle. Just like even wireless. I mean, wireless, 2 years ago, 3 years ago was great. Content was growing. Then what we've seen over the past year is smartphones literally, not just handset worldwide but smartphones, just kind of flattened out, totally flattened out and where cost becomes a concern more than that demand or innovation becomes limited, and people are now waiting for perhaps a 5G cycle before we see another uptick. And industrial -- oh, yes, automotive was moving away for a few years, drives industrial, continues to do so as we see, though we start to see definitely some slowdown from where we are, both in automotive and industrial. So you're seeing ups and downs across different segment, different end markets that's an -- which uses semiconductors. And I guess, our best saving grace here is, because we are fairly diversified, we cannot keep ourselves stable and secure on a total basis as opposed to riding any particular end market upwards are downwards.

這是一個非常非常好的問題，也是一個非常及時的問題。我們——我可以——我不是試圖展望遠方，也不是試圖在這里基本上假設一個願景，而是簡短的——而是我們現在所看到的、我們最近所看到的以及我們所看到的。現在我們看到半導體領域的動態正在不斷變化。我知道這是一個顯而易見的答案。但我的意思是不同的終端市場。從某些方面來說，我們很幸運能夠向 4、5 個終端市場銷售產品，這些終端市場非常非常不同。我可以告訴你，在過去的兩年裡，所有這 5 個終端市場的行為都非常不同。所以我很難說整個半導體行業怎麼樣，因為它確實涵蓋了很多空間。2——就像一兩年前，我確實說過，在 2016 年、2017 年——甚至 2017 年和 16 年，寬帶非常強大。我猜想，服務提供商支出的一部分——全球服務提供商的支出水平——而且——也導致了某種週期性的業務。我可能會補充說，這是一項相對平穩但可持續且具有周期性的業務。所以今天，正如我所說，寬帶，正如我所提到的，不再那麼強大了。去年——兩年前，數據中心支出還不錯。今年，即 2018 年，它的表現非常強勁，並且繼續保持良好的勢頭。所以我們看到了周期的不同部分。就像無線一樣。我的意思是，無線，2年前、3年前非常棒。內容不斷增長。那麼我們在過去的一年裡看到的是智能手機，不僅僅是全世界的手機，還有智能手機，只是一種扁平化，完全扁平化，成本成為一個比需求或創新更受關注的問題，人們現在正在等待在我們看到另一次上升之前，可能需要一個 5G 週期。工業——哦，是的，汽車已經消失了幾年，推動了工業的發展，正如我們所看到的，儘管我們開始看到汽車和工業領域的增速確實有所放緩。因此，你會看到不同細分市場、不同終端市場的起伏，這是一個使用半導體的市場。我想，我們最好的優點是，因為我們相當多元化，所以我們無法在總體上保持穩定和安全，而不是乘坐任何特定的終端市場向上或向下。

And our next question comes from the line of John Pitzer with Crédit Suisse.

我們的下一個問題來自瑞士信貸銀行的約翰·皮策 (John Pitzer)。

Hock, maybe the short way to ask my question is does this operating margin expansion story have a ceiling at some point? But I guess, the longer term or longer way to ask the question is I wonder if you can just talk a little bit about how you think about R&D. I think, oftentimes, investors get fixated on R&D as a percent of revenue and forget that at your scale, your absolute dollar spend is just enormous. But help me understand, is there something about your IP portfolio that gives it more leverage than a typical digital or SoC company? Or why are you able to drive so much more leverage out of your R&D line than many of your large peers? And again, as you answer that question, maybe you can talk about is there a ceiling to this op margin.

霍克，也許問我的問題的簡單方法是，這個營業利潤率擴張的故事在某個時候是否有上限？但我想，從長遠來看或者更長遠的方式來提出這個問題，我想知道你是否可以談談你對研發的看法。我認為，投資者常常只關注研發佔收入的百分比，而忘記了按照您的規模，您的絕對美元支出是巨大的。但請幫助我了解一下，您的 IP 產品組合中是否有某些東西比典型的數字或 SoC 公司更具影響力？或者為什麼你能夠比許多大型同行從你的研發線中獲得更多的槓桿作用？再說一次，當你回答這個問題時，也許你可以談談這個運營利潤是否有上限。

That's a great question, John, and I'll try to address that. And you're right. It starts with IP. We sell intellectual property except with productizing. With -- in many -- a lot of our business are semiconductors, and we sell IP embedded in silicon, is perhaps the simple best way to describe. That's what we do. We don't try to license this out. We make it into products that addresses what our end users, end customers need to make, to use or make into -- for the -- make into part of a systems. And it's that intellectual property that drives the technology evolution because we keep feeding that machine. We keep enhancing, innovating on those technologies in any particular markets we're in. And as I mentioned, we have 19 of those markets. In each of them, one -- it's -- we behave very commonly. We have a team of people, and in many cases, we -- or in most cases, I would add, we have the best engineers in the world, architects and engineers in the world in each area -- in the space they are in. We are among the best. And many of these -- and these guys, the other side to IP, they have IP they have developed over the years and innovate to the next better thing. And we keep doing that. And the customers love to have this product because it makes them successful. It makes them more productive. It makes them do things that otherwise they can't do. And when you do that with each evolving technology, each evolving generation of technology, you basically get a higher value added to your product. Always do because you give your customer more value. You get something more for it. I'll give you an example, right? The well-known Tomahawk 3 switch is 12.8 terabit per second throughput switch. The previous generation, Tomahawk 2, was only 6.4, half that throughput. So you are able to put into a data center and on top of a direct of servers twice the throughput, twice the capacity, twice the bandwidth. Do you -- do I -- am I able to charge 2x the price? Of course not. That's not the way technology works. But we are able to obviously improve against our value simply by the fact that even as dollars, our price per terabit drops, on the total 2x terabit, the value of the product goes up for us, for the customers. And if the demand, the usage consumption increases to use up all 12.8 terabit and basically, the data center scale gets to scale out tremendously at a very cost-effective set of economics. And that's an example that applies across all 19 product lines and to bottom -- at the bottom -- at the end of it all, so because of that, our ability to do that, to offer better products are more value to our customers. Our product margin goes up. And it goes up faster than the amount of R&D we pour in, and we pour in quite a bit to sustain that level of improvement. And that leads to an improved operating -- and expanding operating margin. That's what we've seen. That's what has happened.

這是一個很好的問題，約翰，我會盡力解決這個問題。你是對的。它從IP開始。我們出售知識產權，但產品化除外。在許多方面，我們的很多業務都是半導體，我們銷售嵌入矽中的知識產權，這也許是最簡單的描述方式。這就是我們所做的。我們不會嘗試將其許可出去。我們將其製成產品，以滿足我們的最終用戶、最終客戶需要製造、使用或製成系統的一部分的需求。正是這種知識產權推動了技術的發展，因為我們不斷地為這台機器提供動力。我們在我們所處的任何特定市場中不斷增強和創新這些技術。正如我提到的，我們有 19 個這樣的市場。在每一個國家中，我們的行為舉止都很常見。我們有一個團隊，在很多情況下，或者在大多數情況下，我想補充一點，我們在每個領域都有世界上最好的工程師、建築師和工程師，在他們所在的空間。我們是最好的。其中許多人——這些人，知識產權的另一面，他們擁有多年來開發的知識產權，並創新下一個更好的東西。我們一直這樣做。客戶喜歡擁有這個產品，因為它使他們成功。這使他們更有生產力。它使他們做一些他們無法做的事情。當你用每一種不斷發展的技術、每一代不斷發展的技術來做到這一點時，你基本上會為你的產品獲得更高的附加值。始終這樣做，因為您為客戶提供了更多價值。你會得到更多的東西。我給你舉個例子吧？著名的 Tomahawk 3 交換機是每秒 12.8 太比特吞吐量的交換機。上一代 Tomahawk 2 只有 6.4，吞吐量的一半。因此，您可以在數據中心和直接服務器之上投入兩倍的吞吐量、兩倍的容量、兩倍的帶寬。你——我——我可以收取兩倍的價格嗎？當然不是。這不是技術的運作方式。但我們能夠明顯提高我們的價值，因為即使美元每太比特的價格下降，但在總的 2 倍太比特上，產品的價值對我們、對客戶來說卻上升了。如果需求、使用消耗增加到用完所有 12.8 太比特，基本上，數據中心規模就會以非常經濟高效的方式大幅擴展。這是一個適用於所有 19 個產品線的例子，並且適用於所有產品線的底部，因此，正因為如此，我們提供更好產品的能力對我們的客戶來說更具價值。我們的產品利潤率上升了。它的增長速度比我們投入的研發數量還要快，而且我們投入了大量資金來維持這種改進水平。這會改善運營並擴大運營利潤率。這就是我們所看到的。這就是發生的事情。

Our next question comes from the line of Ross Seymore with Deutsche Bank.

我們的下一個問題來自德意志銀行的 Ross Seymore。

Hock, I wanted to focus on your wired business, both in the near term and the long term. In the near term, you did a great job of explaining some of the puts and takes between that 60-40 split of the fast-growing and slower-growing businesses. But to the extent it's 45% of your business today, and we look forward longer-term, how should we think about the growth rates of that 60-40, and what does it mean to the profitability of the company, either on the gross or operating margin line as the growth rates seem to be so different between those 2 subsegments?

霍克，我想專注於您的有線業務，無論是短期還是長期。近期，您很好地解釋了快速增長和增長緩慢的業務之間 60-40 的比例之間的一些看跌期權和期權。但就其目前業務的 45% 而言，我們展望更長期，我們應該如何考慮 60-40 的增長率，以及它對公司的盈利能力（無論是總盈利能力）意味著什麼或營業利潤率線，因為這兩個細分市場之間的增長率似乎如此不同？

Well, Ross, thanks for asking that too. But what you say is true right now. In 2016, I loved broadband. It was an on up-cycle. If you recall, there was the Summer Olympics floating around. Everybody was signing up for cable, cable access. So we were booming. That time paid. That thing outperformed data centers, networking, that is. Today, the cycle turned around. We look at broadband and say, "Man, this thing is dragging me." It's not. When the up-cycle happens as we fully expect within the next 12 months also, you'll be great again. So that's one of the interesting things about it, is looking at, say, even wired or even wireless. Every one of this -- a lot of these markets' growth has their ups and downs, and especially if you look at a quarter and much less annually. Quarterly, even worse. What we have to keep realizing is these are all technology-driven applications and market-driven as better and better, more innovative technology comes in. It keeps expanding, some at a slower pace than others, but what it does is it adopts new technology, and which allows us to keep adding more value as we progress through it, even though it goes through its ups and downs. And the key thing to all this is sustainability. These are all very sustainable end markets. The product we see today may be much better than the product in this end market we saw 5 years ago, and the product 5 years from now will be much better than the product we see today. But believe me, the end use continues.

好吧，羅斯，也謝謝你提出這個問題。但你現在說的都是事實。2016年，我喜歡寬帶。這是一個上升週期。如果你還記得的話，夏季奧運會正在舉辦。每個人都在報名有線電視。所以我們蓬勃發展。那一次付出了代價。也就是說，這個東西的性能優於數據中心和網絡。今天，這個週期發生了逆轉。我們看著寬帶並說：“伙計，這個東西拖著我的後腿。”它不是。當升級週期在接下來的 12 個月內如我們完全預期的那樣發生時，您將再次變得偉大。這是它的有趣之處之一，例如，甚至是有線甚至無線。每一個市場的增長都有起有落，尤其是如果你看一個季度甚至每年的情況。每季度的情況更糟。我們必須不斷認識到，這些都是技術驅動的應用，也是市場驅動的，隨著越來越好、越來越創新的技術的出現。它不斷擴張，有些速度比其他慢，但它所做的是採用新技術，這使我們能夠在前進過程中不斷增加更多價值，即使它經歷了起起落落。而這一切的關鍵是可持續性。這些都是非常可持續的終端市場。我們今天看到的產品可能比我們5年前看到的這個終端市場的產品要好得多，而5年後的產品也會比我們今天看到的產品好得多。但相信我，最終用途仍在繼續。

Our next question comes from the line of Craig Hettenbach with Morgan Stanley.

我們的下一個問題來自摩根士丹利的 Craig Hettenbach。

I have a question for wireless RF. I mean, you play mostly at the high end of the market. Interesting developments in China, when I think of some of the local brands there, some impressive specs coming out and as they start to ramp the volumes. So I just wanted to know if that potentially could change your opportunity set in RF in the China market over time.

我有一個關於無線射頻的問題。我的意思是，你主要在高端市場玩。中國的發展很有趣，當我想到那裡的一些本土品牌時，一些令人印象深刻的規格出現了，並且它們開始增加銷量。所以我只是想知道隨著時間的推移，這是否可能會改變您在中國市場射頻領域的機會。

A very interesting question, and it is, again, part of the whole franchise model. And then, yes, because again, in the case of wireless, we have very unique technology. We have very, very differentiated technology that allows us to produce very high-performance products in those smartphones. And so far, it's been the super high-end smartphones that tends to use our products. And I could see a situation where, especially with 5G coming into the mix, with all these difficult bands showing up, where 5G, you start running higher than 3 gigahertz spectrum bandwidth, you start to meet better and better RF components, especially in filtering, very much so in filtering, and we could see that being required across the board in many next-phase or next-generation 5G phones. And we can see that happening, in which case then, it starts to expand beyond just high-end phones, and you're exactly right in that regard. It has happened before, a few years ago, when there were certain bands that were so critical, it can only be done using FBAR. Very difficult FBAR technology, and for a while, that was pretty cool.

這是一個非常有趣的問題，而且它也是整個特許經營模式的一部分。然後，是的，因為在無線方面，我們擁有非常獨特的技術。我們擁有非常非常差異化的技術，使我們能夠在這些智能手機中生產非常高性能的產品。到目前為止，超高端智能手機往往使用我們的產品。我可以看到這樣一種情況，特別是隨著5G 的加入，所有這些困難的頻段都出現了，5G 開始運行高於3 GHz 的頻譜帶寬，你開始遇到越來越好的RF 組件，特別是在濾波方面，在過濾方面非常如此，我們可以看到許多下一階段或下一代 5G 手機全面需要這一點。我們可以看到這種情況正在發生，在這種情況下，它開始擴展到高端手機之外，在這方面你是完全正確的。幾年前，曾經發生過這種情況，當時某些頻段非常關鍵，只能使用 FBAR 來完成。FBAR 技術非常困難，但有一段時間，這非常酷。

And our next question comes from the line of Blayne Curtis with Barclays.

我們的下一個問題來自巴克萊銀行的布萊恩·柯蒂斯 (Blayne Curtis)。

I just want to follow up on that wireless. You were talking about cycles and some years better than others. When you look at wireless, cellular and then WiFi is 2 components. Just kind of curious, as you look out, you mentioned 5G. Maybe kind of what's the content story between now and a couple of years from now, when 5G will be a majority? And then on the WiFi side, can you just talk about timing of that?

我只是想跟進那個無線。你說的是周期，有些年份比其他年份好。當你看到無線時，蜂窩網絡和 WiFi 是兩個組成部分。只是有點好奇，當你看到時，你提到了 5G。也許從現在到幾年後 5G 將佔據主流的內容故事是什麼？然後在 WiFi 方面，您能談談具體的時間安排嗎？

Okay. You -- and so actually, 2 questions you're asking here, so let me try to address them separately. WiFi, in many ways, is a more stable, predictable evolution of the technology trends. And today, very much so, everybody uses the standard, WiFi standard called 802.11ac, C as in China, and that's great. It's definitely an improvement from what it used to be 5 years or 10 years ago. But we have a new technology, a new protocol coming in called 802.11ax, which I may have commented on a couple of times in my prepared remarks. What ax does is, in a nutshell, it increases, in layman's language, the bandwidth. Huge. You can imagine easily running data stream wirelessly from your handsets. Upwards and uplink and downlink weigh over 1 gigabit per second, even 2 gigabits per second. You get carried away. But what's even more interesting is it allows for multiple users simultaneously, which is something that's always been tricky. And it requires a lot of technology, hardware and software. And we are in the lead in doing it, as I indicated. We are the first out with our product, they're working, we're designing, and we started launching it with multiple partners starting October next month. By the way, this year, starting with the retail routers and going on to the enterprise access points and then operators by early next year. So it's a big thing, 802.11ax, and I bet you in the spring, you will find at least one big handset maker coming out big-time to push 802.11ax. And our chips will be right in those flagship phones. But -- so it's more predictable, and our technology is so strong. I have to say that we see ourselves in the road map of our key customers over the next 2, 3 years. More predictable as 802.11ax, that should go to a second wave and upgrade and all that. On RF, it's truly not that much different, except that what's happening here more than anything else is over every several years, we go from, as you know, 2G, GSM, we go out to 3G, and now -- and then we have 4G that's been going on now for 6 years. And now there's actually demand, or kind of a demand, I might add, for even higher speeds, higher throughputs, lower latencies, more connections, that's what 5G is all about, which leads to IoT applications and all those applications we had dreamed about previously. That -- those are great. It's just that those are very, very difficult to implement. And in order to make it happen, one, in a nutshell, it will happen as it has happened in the past on 4G, it's your phone already runs 3G, 4G. You now have to put in additional components, additional capability to run an additional set of spectrum that runs, that is operating in 5G. And once you start doing that, you really will have issues of coexistence. You also have to reach out in 5G to frequencies that are much higher, much more difficult to produce, to put in a phone for communications, data communications. And I'm referring to frequencies that go way above 3 gigahertz now as a first step. And as you go into more and more of these 5G phones, you have more frequencies, more requirements of components in the same limited space of a phone. So you start to have to innovate on your components to be able to put them in a phone, unlimited space, lower power, working very well together. And that's where our capabilities, our technology in RF, especially FBAR, comes into its own. And that's why we see this is as a sustainable franchise, especially for someone who is able to design, have the IP to design capabilities, components, that few people are able to replicate.

好的。實際上，您在這裡問了兩個問題，所以讓我嘗試分別解決它們。WiFi，在很多方面，都是一種更加穩定、可預測的技術發展趨勢。今天，非常如此，每個人都使用標準，WiFi 標準，稱為 802.11ac，C，就像在中國一樣，這很棒。與5年前或10年前相比，這絕對是一個進步。但我們有一項新技術，一項稱為 802.11ax 的新協議，我可能在準備好的發言中對此發表過幾次評論。簡而言之，axe 的作用是增加帶寬（用外行人的話來說）。巨大的。您可以想像通過手機輕鬆地無線運行數據流。上行、上行和下行的傳輸速率超過每秒 1 吉比特，甚至每秒 2 吉比特。你得意忘形。但更有趣的是它允許多個用戶同時使用，這一直是個棘手的問題。它需要大量的技術、硬件和軟件。正如我所指出的，我們在這方面處於領先地位。我們是第一個推出我們產品的公司，他們正在工作，我們正在設計，我們從十月下個月開始與多個合作夥伴一起推出它。順便說一句，今年，從零售路由器開始，到企業接入點，然後到明年初進入運營商。因此，802.11ax 是一件大事，我敢打賭，到了春天，您會發現至少有一家大型手機製造商大力推動 802.11ax。我們的芯片將適用於那些旗艦手機。但是——所以它更可預測，而且我們的技術非常強大。我不得不說，我們在未來兩三年的主要客戶路線圖中看到了自己。與 802.11ax 相比，它更可預測，應該會進入第二波併升級等等。在 RF 方面，確實沒有太大的不同，只是這裡發生的事情比其他任何事情都多，每隔幾年，我們從 2G、GSM 發展到 3G，現在——然後我們4G已經使用了6年了。現在實際上存在需求，或者說是某種需求，我可能會補充說，更高的速度、更高的吞吐量、更低的延遲、更多的連接，這就是5G 的全部內容，這會帶來物聯網應用程序以及我們夢想的所有應用程序之前。那——那些太棒了。只是這些實施起來非常非常困難。為了實現這一目標，一言以蔽之，它會像過去在 4G 上發生的那樣發生，你的手機已經運行 3G、4G。現在，您必須添加額外的組件和額外的功能來運行一組額外的頻譜，即在 5G 中運行的頻譜。一旦你開始這樣做，你真的會遇到共存問題。您還必須在 5G 中使用更高、更難以生產的頻率，以便將其放入手機中進行通信、數據通信。作為第一步，我指的是頻率遠高於 3 GHz 的頻率。隨著您使用越來越多的 5G 手機，在手機相同的有限空間內，您會遇到更多的頻率、對組件的更多要求。因此，您開始必須對組件進行創新，以便能夠將它們放入手機中，空間不受限制，功耗更低，並且可以很好地協同工作。這就是我們在 RF 領域的能力和技術（尤其是 FBAR）發揮作用的地方。這就是為什麼我們認為這是一個可持續的特許經營權，特別是對於那些能夠設計、擁有知識產權來設計能力、組件的人來說，而很少有人能夠複製。

Our next question comes from the line of Chris Caso with Raymond James.

我們的下一個問題來自克里斯·卡索和雷蒙德·詹姆斯的對話。

Just a follow-up question with regard to the wireless and some of the prepared comments that you made. You talked about expectations will return to double-digit wireless growth next year. You also talked about being in a position to win back some of the FBAR business. Can you reconcile those 2 comments? And is one dependent on the other? For the double-digit growth you're expecting next year, what are the assumptions behind that?

只是一個有關無線的後續問題以及您提出的一些準備好的評論。您談到了明年無線業務增長將恢復兩位數的預期。您還談到能夠贏回一些 FBAR 業務。你能調和這兩條評論嗎？其中之一是否依賴於另一個？對於您預計明年的兩位數增長，其背後的假設是什麼？

Chris, it's Tom. Let me just clarify the prepared remarks. What we were referring to is double-digit growth in 2020 off the back of a dip in 2019. And just also to clarify, we do feel really good about the prospects of winning back the business that we discussed, that we had lost in the current generation phone, which would impact the very back half of '19, but really would have an influence on the 2020 growth rate we discussed.

克里斯，是湯姆。讓我澄清一下準備好的發言。我們指的是繼 2019 年下滑之後，2020 年實現兩位數增長。還要澄清的是，我們確實對贏回我們討論過的業務的前景感到非常滿意，這些業務是我們在當前一代手機中失去的，這將影響 19 年後半段，但確實會產生影響關於我們討論的2020年增長率。

Our next question comes from the line of Harsh Kumar with Piper Jaffray.

我們的下一個問題來自 Harsh Kumar 和 Piper Jaffray 的對話。

The big question we're getting is what is Broadcom's expectation running a software company? This is the first one for you guys in this area. Could you maybe talk about some of the strengths and challenges you see and maybe some of the plan around running this business? And then also, for the nonmainframe business, what kind of margin opportunity do you expect to see from, for example, enterprise solutions?

我們遇到的一個大問題是博通對運營一家軟件公司的期望是什麼？這是你們在這個領域的第一個。您能否談談您看到的一些優勢和挑戰，以及圍繞運營該業務的一些計劃？另外，對於非大型機業務，您期望從企業解決方案中看到什麼樣的利潤機會？

Well, I love this question. I'm almost tempted to tell you, hello, the same reason we've put together a bunch of businesses in semiconductor, what we call semiconductor solutions. On one extreme semiconductor solution, I am pulling simple hardware semiconductors, pure hardware analog components. To the extreme, it's not even silicon, in some cases, it's nanotechnology, it's Indium Phosphide, Gallium Arsenide, as in lasers, to the more well-known, well-recognized silicon SoCs, silicon over -- on a tube, that we built our routers and switches and deep-learning chips on, with a lot of software, by the way, on distance, lots of software. I have, in our networking team, I have as many software engineers as I have hardware engineers. Silicon sort of changed in there. In our video delivery business, video, which is basically a set-top box with cable modem, I have more software engineers because there are tons of different kinds of software that goes into a set-top box chip thus compared to hardware engineers. We understand software. CA, you're right, is all software. But a set-top box is, to put a number, over 60% software. And if I have to look at the switch, I can make the switch as simple, programmable and install software-defined networks and write a lot of software specs to program this, and that's 70% software, 30% hardware. Or I could hard-code chips as I do in certain other versions of my networking business, which are typically lower-end switches. And I would say I have 80% hardware and 20%, 30% software. So I go -- it varies across a lot of spectrum. One thing that's common is technology. It's technology solutions you provide to your customers, who cannot operate very productively, very efficiently, they don't sometimes operate at all without that, and it's technology solutions that evolve over time and your ability to keep up with customer needs over time. We're very good at managing that. We are very good at understanding how to monetize intellectual property in technology. I think that's a common thing we have.

嗯，我喜歡這個問題。我幾乎很想告訴你，你好，這與我們在半導體領域整合大量業務（我們稱之為半導體解決方案）的原因相同。在一種極端的半導體解決方案中，我使用簡單的硬件半導體、純硬件模擬組件。在極端情況下，它甚至不是矽，在某些情況下，它是納米技術，它是磷化銦、砷化鎵，如激光器中的那樣，到更廣為人知、公認的矽SoC，矽在管子上，我們我們用很多軟件構建了我們的路由器、交換機和深度學習芯片，順便說一句，在遠程，有很多軟件。在我們的網絡團隊中，軟件工程師和硬件工程師一樣多。矽在那裡發生了某種變化。在我們的視頻傳輸業務中，視頻基本上是帶有電纜調製解調器的機頂盒，我有更多的軟件工程師，因為與硬件工程師相比，機頂盒芯片中有大量不同類型的軟件。我們了解軟件。CA，你說得對，都是軟件。但從數字來看，機頂盒的 60% 以上都是軟件。如果我必須查看交換機，我可以使交換機變得簡單、可編程，並安裝軟件定義的網絡並編寫大量軟件規範來對其進行編程，其中 70% 是軟件，30% 是硬件。或者，我可以像在網絡業務的某些其他版本中所做的那樣對芯片進行硬編碼，這些版本通常是低端交換機。我想說我有 80% 的硬件和 20%、30% 的軟件。所以我認為——它在很多方面都有所不同。共同的一件事是技術。這是您向客戶提供的技術解決方案，他們無法非常高效地運營，如果沒有這些解決方案，他們有時根本無法運營，而且技術解決方案會隨著時間的推移而發展，以及您隨著時間的推移跟上客戶需求的能力。我們非常擅長管理這一點。我們非常擅長了解如何將技術知識產權貨幣化。我認為這是我們的共同點。

Our next question comes from the line of Matt Ramsay with Cowen.

我們的下一個問題來自馬特·拉姆齊 (Matt Ramsay) 和考恩 (Cowen) 的對話。

I think it would be helpful for either one of you guys to talk a little bit about the M&A philosophy going forward. I think, Tom, you did an excellent job in sort of reiterating the capital return policy. It sort of struck me on a lot of the questions that we got from investors were it was sort of a surprise at the size of the CA deal, given some of the prior commentary around maybe focusing on smaller M&A deals. So I just kind of open it up and I'd love to hear some philosophy, conversation about how you're thinking about maybe verticals or size or any of those things, if there's anything that's off limits going forward, or we should just think about the capital return policy only and nothing's really off the table in terms of M&A. And I'll just open it up at that.

我認為對你們中的任何一個人談論一下未來的併購哲學都會有幫助。我認為，湯姆，你在重申資本返還政策方面做得非常出色。我們從投資者那裡得到的很多問題讓我感到震驚，因為考慮到之前的一些評論可能集中在較小的併購交易上，CA 交易的規模有點令人驚訝。所以我只是打開它，我很想听聽一些哲學，關於你如何思考垂直或尺寸或任何這些事情的對話，如果有什麼是禁止前進的，或者我們應該思考僅涉及資本回報政策，在併購方面沒有什麼是真正不可能的。我就打開它。

Good question, Matt. I think that the important message is not much has changed. The business model and what we think drives the returns of the acquisitions that we do is very consistent. And we understand and appreciate that CA was a bit of a surprise and certainly larger than maybe what many people expected, but the reality is it was the right deal for us at the right time as we think about how to grow the earnings base of the company and how to drive value for shareholders over time. And if you think back, and this follows up on Harsh's question a minute ago, when we bought LSI, we were getting into what you could argue as a very different business. We had a largely mobile business at Avago, RF business that's sustained today has grown organically very rapidly, but we're getting into businesses that included rechannel SoCs, preamps for hard disk drives. We were getting into enterprise storage and SaaS connectivity, serving -- delivering to the server market. And these were all businesses that we frankly didn't know very well, but it was the characteristics of those businesses, just to follow in on what Hock discussed in terms of the intellectual property, the barriers to entry, the sustainability of the businesses, and by focusing on those businesses, that's what allowed us to drive the returns we've seen. And we have obviously expanded from there. We've done smaller transactions, but we've also more recently done Brocade. Clue, that's a systems business. It's largely software. It has an end-user sales force. It's opened our eyes to end customers and what we can do with those end customers. But more importantly, it's proven to us that we can manage these businesses. The performance of Brocade over the last year, and we've obviously been quite familiar with the business for more than that time period, has been quite exceptional. And so CA is really an extension of a strategy that we've been pursuing for a number of years and has driven a tremendous amount of value for shareholders. So we look to continue to do that as a way to drive value. Obviously, we're going to deliver on the dividend, which is really important to us. But we have a lot of financial flexibility off the back of significant and substantial operating cash flows to continue to do buybacks and to do accretive M&A, and we see opportunities going forward to do that.

好問題，馬特。我認為重要的信息沒有太大改變。商業模式和我們認為推動收購回報的因素非常一致。我們理解並讚賞CA 有點令人驚訝，而且肯定比許多人預期的要大，但事實是，當我們考慮如何擴大公司的盈利基礎時，這對我們來說是在正確的時間進行的正確的交易。公司以及如何隨著時間的推移為股東創造價值。如果你回想一下，這是哈什一分鐘前提出的問題的後續，當我們購買 LSI 時，我們正在進入一個你可能會認為非常不同的業務。我們在 Avago 擁有主要的移動業務，如今持續存在的 RF 業務有機增長非常迅速，但我們正在進入包括重新通道 SoC、硬盤驅動器前置放大器在內的業務。我們正在進入企業存儲和 SaaS 連接領域，為服務器市場提供服務。坦率地說，這些都是我們不太了解的業務，但這是這些業務的特點，只是為了遵循霍克在知識產權、進入壁壘、業務可持續性方面所討論的內容，通過專注於這些業務，我們能夠實現我們所看到的回報。我們顯然已經從那裡開始擴展。我們已經完成了較小的交易，但我們最近也完成了 Brocade。線索，這是一個系統業務。它主要是軟件。它擁有一支最終用戶銷售隊伍。它讓我們了解了最終客戶以及我們可以為這些最終客戶做些什麼。但更重要的是，這向我們證明了我們可以管理這些業務。博科去年的表現非常出色，而且我們顯然已經對該業務相當熟悉了。因此，CA 實際上是我們多年來一直追求的戰略的延伸，並為股東帶來了巨大的價值。因此，我們希望繼續這樣做，以此作為推動價值的一種方式。顯然，我們將兌現股息，這對我們來說非常重要。但在大量運營現金流的支持下，我們擁有很大的財務靈活性，可以繼續進行回購和增值併購，而且我們看到了這樣做的機會。

And our next question will come from the line of Edward Snyder with Charter Equity Research.

我們的下一個問題將來自特許股票研究公司的愛德華·斯奈德。

One of the things that struck me though in your initial comments, when you were talking about your new customer base with see CA because they do open up a lot of clients that you don't have with the semiconductor business. You were talking about porting in some of your networking and compute solutions, storage solutions to them. But right now, you're selling semiconductors, and a number of your big customers, you mentioned them, Google, Facebook or Google, Amazon, Microsoft, build their own boxes using your silicon. I would imagine, most of the CA's customers do not do this. So how are you going to port your -- how do you think you could port your semiconductor products to these new customers without getting into boxes? Or are you thinking about that? Or do you think they will start up such endeavors to start porting through? So I guess I don't understand how your existing products are going to be ported to these new clients without some sort of intermediary or white box guy or something. Maybe I'm a little bit confused there, but if you could explain that, I would appreciate it.

在你最初的評論中，讓我印象深刻的一件事是，當你談論你與 see CA 的新客戶群時，因為他們確實開闢了很多你在半導體業務中沒有的客戶。您正在談論移植一些網絡和計算解決方案以及存儲解決方案。但現在，你正在銷售半導體，你的一些大客戶，你提到的，谷歌、Facebook 或谷歌、亞馬遜、微軟，使用你的芯片構建他們自己的盒子。我想，大多數 CA 的客戶都不會這樣做。那麼，您打算如何將您的半導體產品移植給這些新客戶，而不需要進入盒子？或者你在想這個嗎？或者你認為他們會開始這樣的努力來開始移植？所以我想我不明白如果沒有某種中介或白盒人員之類的東西，您現有的產品將如何移植到這些新客戶。也許我有點困惑，但如果你能解釋一下，我將不勝感激。

Sure. I think that's a very, very insightful question you came out with, and you're right 100%. One, we're not interested in going to the boxes, you got that right, or systems. We don't need to do that. But we have the key ingredients. We have the chips, the engine. So you take a box, be it in the industry that you're out to, any of those things. Where -- and we have the software. Or if you want to sum up all of these end users now, and you're probably aware of that and to some extent, some of the big operators now are starting to want to build their own data centers and they have come to us and asked us to enable them to build their own data centers. And what -- that's very similar. And these guys are very, very aware of how the cloud guy is doing. The cloud guys use our own silicon engine -- our own merchant silicon. In many cases, some of our initial -- our software, SDK, by -- in many cases, they even write their own software and they then go to ODMs, the ODMs in Taiwan, in China, anywhere else, to put a box to build a system, a box. We have to enable that. Obviously, we have to. And the cloud guys do it. There's no reason why an operator like AT&T with Domain 2.0 cannot and is, in fact, executing on that basis or any other large enterprise users who build -- who had to build out on their own scale fairly substantial data centers, why they can't even do that on their own because as Tom had said, the core IP, the core technology, which is the engine, the software. Everything else ties together, and there are lots of ODMs out there. You call that white boxes, I believe, and they have a choice of doing that or continuing to buy from their traditional sources. What we are able to do now with our direct access to CA customers is establish strategic and strong engagements with those end users, and substantial end-user enterprises or end users, who would want to start doing it themselves in order to not just do it at low economics, but in order to access directly the latest, call it, leading-edge silicon software products, technology, which will enable them to build data centers just as leading-edge as what's available in the cloud. But we have seen that requirement, that request coming in, and we are basically responding to it. This is not a pipe dream.

當然。我認為你提出的問題非常非常有洞察力，而且你是 100% 正確的。第一，我們對進入盒子或系統不感興趣，你說得對。我們不需要這樣做。但我們有關鍵成分。我們有芯片、引擎。所以你拿一個盒子，無論是在你從事的行業，還是任何這些東西。哪裡——我們有軟件。或者，如果您現在想總結所有這些最終用戶，並且您可能已經意識到這一點，並且在某種程度上，一些大型運營商現在開始想要建立自己的數據中心，他們已經來找我們並要求我們幫助他們建立自己的數據中心。這非常相似。這些人非常非常了解雲計算人員的做法。雲專家使用我們自己的芯片引擎——我們自己的商業芯片。在很多情況下，我們的一些最初的——我們的軟件、SDK——在很多情況下，他們甚至編寫自己的軟件，然後他們去ODM，台灣、中國或其他任何地方的ODM，把一個盒子放在一個盒子裡。構建一個系統，一個盒子。我們必須實現這一點。顯然，我們必須這樣做。雲計算人員就這麼做了。像 AT&T 這樣擁有 Domain 2.0 的運營商沒有理由不能並且實際上正在在此基礎上執行，或者任何其他構建的大型企業用戶 - 他們必須在自己的規模上構建相當大的數據中心，為什麼他們可以”甚至他們自己也無法做到這一點，因為正如湯姆所說，核心IP、核心技術，即引擎、軟件。其他一切都相互聯繫在一起，而且有很多 ODM。我相信，你稱之為白盒，他們可以選擇這樣做或繼續從傳統來源購買。現在，通過直接接觸 CA 客戶，我們能夠做的是與這些最終用戶以及大量最終用戶企業或最終用戶建立戰略性和強有力的合作，他們希望自己開始做，而不是僅僅這樣做經濟性較低，但為了直接訪問最新的、稱之為前沿的矽軟件產品和技術，這將使他們能夠構建與雲中可用的技術一樣前沿的數據中心。但我們已經看到了這樣的要求，我們基本上正在回應它。這不是白日夢。

Our last question will come from the line of Romit Shah with Nomura Instinet.

我們的最後一個問題將來自 Romit Shah 和 Nomura Instinet 的線路。

I definitely appreciate that you guys think very strategically about the deals you do, but if I just go back and think about your M&A track record over the last several years, it just struck me as being financial deals, first and foremost. And Hock, the playbook has been, at least my impression has been, you'd slash SG&A by a significant amount, you'd cut R&D while basically raising prices at the same time. And CA, given the kind of legacy nature of their technology, has a lot of people believing that this business may turn out to not be as sticky if you take the same approach. So could you just comment on that, please?

我非常感謝你們對自己所做的交易進行了非常戰略性的思考，但如果我回顧一下你們過去幾年的併購記錄，我會發現這首先是金融交易。霍克的策略是，至少我的印像是，你會大幅削減SG&A，你會削減研發，同時基本上提高價格。鑑於 CA 技術的遺留性質，很多人相信，如果採取相同的方法，這項業務可能會變得不那麼具有粘性。那麼您能對此發表評論嗎？

Absolutely. That's a question that's wrong on so many fronts, I don't know where to begin. Let me start, let me try. Number one, we acquire -- we have a history of acquisitions and integrating very, very well. Those are not financial deals. They end up, as I say, as great financial returns. They're not -- we operate them under a single umbrella. We operate them, I hate to say, very, very well, but we also operate them very, very focused. And when you're focused, as I said before, you don't overinvest in R&D. When you're focused, you don't overinvest in even selling. When you run your company in a business model that is simple, you don't need a huge amount of SG&A. As already mentioned, it's not about cutting SG&A, it's about simplifying a business process with very strong -- a portfolio of very strong businesses, where you focus your spending on R&D to enable you to keep being ahead of the pack. And that's really our business -- our model, it's a business model and that we have executed over the last 6 years through multiple acquisitions. And it's also, as I mentioned in an earlier response, how well we integrate into the model, which ties to being very focused on what you pick as core businesses you want to keep investing in and divesting. You can't cut a business that you don't have. Businesses that you do not see as being sustainable, part of it being sustainable is really a chance of them in franchise. When we buy companies over the last 5, 6 years, just as many companies and businesses we are in. If you look at the finer print and we have that data, we divest as many businesses out there. We just let it go because those are businesses that we believe are not sustainable, are not strong, are commoditized and where you don't have an advantage for whatever reasons that comes into play. So in that sense, you might call that financial. I don't. I call it a very strategic focus on businesses you can win. And that's how we look at even looking towards CA, which is an interesting part of what you say because, Romit, the mainframe business is very alive and well. Investments are still continuing in the mainframe business. And to put it in simple terms, transactions, online transactions, a lot of them in the largest enterprises in the world cannot run without mainframe, with hardware or the software tools that drive it. So that's basically all I say to that. But obviously, ours is an operating model and a business model, and the financials is what comes out of a very strong, sustainable and secure business model.

絕對地。這個問題在很多方面都是錯誤的，我不知道從哪裡開始。讓我開始，讓我嘗試。第一，我們收購——我們有非常非常好的收購和整合的歷史。這些不是金融交易。正如我所說，它們最終帶來了巨大的財務回報。它們不是——我們在一個統一的保護傘下運營它們。我不想說，我們對它們的運營非常非常好，但我們也非常非常專注地運營它們。正如我之前所說，當你專注時，你就不會過度投資研發。當你專注時，你甚至不會在銷售上過度投資。當您以簡單的商業模式運營公司時，您不需要大量的銷售及管理費用。正如已經提到的，這並不是要削減SG&A，而是要通過非常強大的業務組合來簡化業務流程，其中您可以將支出集中在研發上，以使您能夠保持領先地位。這確實是我們的業務——我們的模式，這是一種商業模式，我們在過去 6 年里通過多次收購執行了這一模式。正如我在之前的回復中提到的，這也是我們融入該模式的程度，這與非常專注於您選擇的核心業務、您想要繼續投資和剝離的業務有關。你不能削減你沒有的業務。你認為不可持續的企業，其中一部分是可持續的，這實際上是他們獲得特許經營權的機會。當我們在過去 5、6 年裡購買公司時，我們所投資的公司和企業數量與我們購買的公司和企業一樣多。如果你看一下細則，我們有這些數據，我們就會剝離盡可能多的業務。我們只是放棄它，因為我們認為這些業務不可持續、不強大、商品化，並且無論出於何種原因，你都沒有優勢。所以從這個意義上說，你可以稱之為財務。我不。我稱之為非常戰略性地關注您可以贏得的業務。這就是我們對 CA 的看法，這是你所說的一個有趣的部分，因為 Romit，大型機業務非常活躍且發展良好。大型機業務的投資仍在繼續。簡單來說，交易、在線交易，世界上最大的企業中的很多交易都離不開大型機、硬件或驅動它的軟件工具。這基本上就是我所說的全部內容。但顯然，我們的模式是一種運營模式和商業模式，而財務則是來自非常強大、可持續和安全的商業模式。

Okay. Thank you, everybody, for participating in today's earnings call.

好的。感謝大家參加今天的財報電話會議。

Thank you.

謝謝。

That concludes Broadcom's conference call for today. You may now disconnect.

博通今天的電話會議到此結束。您現在可以斷開連接。