Everforth, Inc. (EFOR) 2016 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to the On Assignment fourth-quarter 2016 earnings call. (Operator Instructions) And, as a reminder, this conference is being recorded.

各位女士、先生，感謝您稍候並參與，歡迎收聽 On Assignment 2016 年第四季財報電話會議。（接線員指示）另外提醒，本次會議將被錄音。

I will now turn the conference over to CFO Ed Pierce. Please go ahead, sir.

現在我將把會議交給財務長 Ed Pierce。先生，請開始。

Thank you. Good afternoon and thank you for joining us today. Before we get started, I would like to remind everyone that our presentation contains forward-looking statements representing our current judgment of what the future holds. Although we believe these statements are reasonable, they are subject to risks and uncertainties, and our actual results could differ materially from those statements. Some of the risks and uncertainties are described in today's press release and in our SEC filings. We do not assume any obligation to update statements made on this call.

謝謝。各位午安，感謝今天加入我們。在開始之前，我想提醒各位，我們的簡報包含前瞻性陳述，代表我們目前對未來的判斷。雖然我們相信這些陳述是合理的，但其仍受風險與不確定性影響，我們的實際結果可能與這些陳述有重大差異。部分風險與不確定性已在今日新聞稿及我們向 SEC 提交的文件中說明。我們不承擔更新本次電話會議中所作陳述的任何義務。

For your convenience, our prepared remarks can be found in our Investor Relations section of our website.

為方便各位，我們的預先準備講稿可在本公司網站的投資人關係（Investor Relations）專區查閱。

Please note that on this call we will be referencing certain non-GAAP measures such as adjusted EBITDA and adjusted net income. These non-GAAP measures are intended to supplement the comparable GAAP measures. Reconciliations between GAAP and non-GAAP measures are included in today's press release.

請注意，本次電話會議將引用若干非 GAAP 指標，例如調整後 EBITDA 與調整後淨利。這些非 GAAP 指標旨在補充可比較的 GAAP 指標。GAAP 與非 GAAP 指標之間的調節表已包含於今日新聞稿中。

I will now turn over the call to Peter Dameris, our CEO, who will provide an overview of our results for the quarter. Peter?

現在我將把電話會議交給我們的執行長 Peter Dameris，由他概述本季業績。Peter？

Thank you, Edward. I would like to welcome everyone to the On Assignment 2016 fourth-quarter earnings conference call. With Ed and me today are Ted Hanson, our new President of On Assignment, and Rand Blazer, President of Apex Systems.

謝謝你，Edward。我歡迎各位參與 On Assignment 2016 年第四季財報電話會議。今天與 Ed 和我一同出席的還有：On Assignment 新任總裁 Ted Hanson，以及 Apex Systems 總裁 Rand Blazer。

During our call today, I will give a review of the markets we serve and our operational highlights, followed by a discussion of the performance of our operating segments by Ted, Rand, and myself. I will then turn over the call to Ed for a more detailed review and discussion of our fourth-quarter results and our estimates for the first quarter of 2017. We will then open the call up for questions. Now on to the fourth-quarter results.

在今天的電話會議中，我將回顧我們服務的市場與營運重點，接著由 Ted、Rand 與我討論各營運部門的表現。之後我會把電話會議交給 Ed，請他更詳細回顧並討論我們第四季業績，以及我們對 2017 年第一季的估計。接著我們將開放提問。現在進入第四季業績。

Our results for the quarter exceeded the high end of our previously announced financial estimates for revenue and were within the range of our estimates for adjusted EBITDA. Revenues for the quarter were $620.9 million, up 7.5% year over year. This marked the 12th consecutive quarter that our Company grew above the IT staffing industry's projected annual growth rate since January 1 of 2013. Our growth rate reflected among other things the deepening of many new large customer relationships that we have established over the last three years.

本季業績在營收方面超出我們先前公布之財務預估區間的上緣，調整後 EBITDA 則落在預估區間內。本季營收為 6.209 億美元，年增 7.5%。這是自 2013 年 1 月 1 日以來，我們公司連續第 12 個季度的成長高於 IT 人力派遣產業預估的年度成長率。我們的成長率反映了多項因素，其中包括過去三年我們所建立的許多大型新客戶關係持續深化。

Virtually all of our divisions contributed to our strong fourth-quarter performance. Our size and service offerings, again, enabled us to grow faster than the published staffing industry growth rate of 4%, and we believe that we are well-positioned to generate solid above market revenue growth into the future. Revenue growth came from both our local, midmarket and large national accounts, reflecting strong customer demand. We believe based on current operating performance that this solid growth will continue into the first quarter.

幾乎我們所有事業部都對第四季的強勁表現有所貢獻。我們的規模與服務組合再次使我們得以快於已公布的人力派遣產業 4% 成長率，我們相信未來仍具備持續創造高於市場的穩健營收成長之有利位置。營收成長同時來自本地、中型市場與大型全國性客戶，反映客戶需求強勁。依據目前營運表現，我們相信這樣的穩健成長將延續至第一季。

Our IT business continues to see high demand from its customers, driven in part by greater adoption of staff augmentation as a viable alternative to outsourcing, offshoring, and consulting.

我們的 IT 業務持續看到客戶端的高度需求，部分原因在於客戶更廣泛採用人力增補（staff augmentation）作為外包、離岸外包（offshoring）與顧問服務的可行替代方案。

Wage inflation continues to be manageable. However, in certain large accounts, there is resistance to simultaneously passing along wage increases. Going forward, due to supply and demand imbalances in IT candidates, we believe our customers as they have always done will permit us to increase pay wages for our consultants and thereby increase our bill rates.

薪資通膨仍在可控範圍內。然而，在某些大型客戶中，對於同時轉嫁薪資上調存在阻力。展望未來，由於 IT 候選人才供需失衡，我們相信客戶一如既往將允許我們提高顧問薪資，並因此提高我們的計費費率（bill rates）。

With respect to recent production, our weekly assignment revenues which exclude conversions, billable expenses, and direct placement revenues averaged $46.5 million for the last two weeks, up 8.8% over the same period of 2016.

就近期產出而言，我們的每週派遣營收（不含轉換、可計費費用與直接安置營收）在最近兩週平均為 4,650 萬美元，較 2016 年同期成長 8.8%。

Adjusted EBITDA for the quarter was $70.7 million or 11.4% of revenues compared with $70.7 million or 12.2% of revenue in the fourth quarter of 2015. Cash generation continues to be at or above our expectations.

本季調整後 EBITDA 為 7,070 萬美元，占營收 11.4%；相較之下，2015 年第四季為 7,070 萬美元，占營收 12.2%。現金創造能力持續達到或高於我們的預期。

Since the closing of the Creative Circle acquisition on June 5, 2015, we have repaid $219 million of our debt. At 12/31/2016, our leverage ratio was 2.32 times trailing 12-month adjusted EBITDA. During the quarter, we repaid $19 million of our debt. We estimate our leverage ratio to be approximately 2.29 times by the end of the first quarter of 2017.

自 2015 年 6 月 5 日完成 Creative Circle 收購案交割以來，我們已償還 2.19 億美元的債務。截至 2016 年 12 月 31 日，我們的槓桿比率為過去 12 個月調整後 EBITDA 的 2.32 倍。本季我們償還了 1,900 萬美元債務。我們估計至 2017 年第一季末，我們的槓桿比率約為 2.29 倍。

As you will recall, we announced on June 13, 2016, that our Board of Directors authorized a new $150 million share repurchase program. Since inception, we have repurchased approximately 1,362,384 shares at an average price of $39.07. During the fourth quarter, we repurchased 525,642 shares at an average price of $39.04, and quarter to date we have purchased an additional 228,831 shares at an average price of $44.31. We intend to continue to execute our share repurchase program based on share price and market conditions.

各位應記得，我們於 2016 年 6 月 13 日宣布董事會核准一項新的 1.5 億美元庫藏股回購計畫。自計畫啟動以來，我們已以平均每股 39.07 美元回購約 1,362,384 股。第四季期間，我們以平均每股 39.04 美元回購 525,642 股；而截至本季迄今（quarter to date），我們另以平均每股 44.31 美元再買回 228,831 股。我們打算依股價與市場狀況持續執行庫藏股回購計畫。

We continue to see signs of the ongoing debate regarding the on-demand workforce or big economy is accelerating the usage of contract labor. Fractionalization of human capital by using the staffing industry services is the only way to avoid the risk of misclassification of employees as independent contractors. Our customers have and are realizing this, and that is why we believe that secular growth opportunities for the entire professional staffing industry are so attractive.

我們持續看到跡象顯示，圍繞隨需勞動力（on-demand workforce）或「零工經濟」（gig economy）的持續辯論，正加速合約勞動的使用。透過使用人力派遣產業服務來進行人力資本的碎片化（fractionalization），是避免將員工誤分類為獨立承攬人（independent contractors）之風險的唯一方式。我們的客戶已經並且正在意識到這一點，因此我們認為整個專業人力派遣產業的結構性（secular）成長機會非常具吸引力。

We also believe that we are well-positioned to service our IT customers' needs as technology rapidly evolves and is adopted.

我們也相信，隨著科技快速演進並被採用，我們具備良好條件來滿足 IT 客戶的需求。

On February 9, 2017, we announced the launch of a $50 million expansion for our revolving line of credit and an amendment to our existing Term Loan B to lower the pricing of the same. Throughout the year, we continue to benefit from further adoption of our development and deployment model, i.e. staff augmentation, and we continue to see solid demand from the end markets we serve.

2017 年 2 月 9 日，我們宣布將循環信用額度（revolving line of credit）擴增 5,000 萬美元，並修訂既有的 Term Loan B，以降低其定價。全年期間，我們持續受惠於我們開發與部署模式（即人力增補）的進一步採用，且我們所服務的終端市場需求依然穩健。

Ed will give you our first-quarter guidance shortly; however, I did want to comment on our profitability in the fourth quarter. While we exceeded our revenue growth estimate by approximately $3 million, on a reported basis we were below -- we were at the low-end of the estimated range for adjusted EBITDA. The lower adjusted EBITDA was attributable to the following expenses that are not reoccurring nor were they contemplated in our published estimates for the fourth quarter. $700,000 and a one-time retirement payment to Mike McGowan, $400,000 in negative currency translation expense related to an intercompany loan, and $5.6 million in higher than projected expenses for the cost of services at Apex.

Ed 稍後將提供第一季指引；不過，我確實想就第四季獲利能力做些評論。雖然我們的營收成長較預估高出約 300 萬美元，但在申報口徑（reported basis）下，我們低於——我們落在調整後 EBITDA 預估區間的下緣。調整後 EBITDA 較低，歸因於以下費用：這些費用並非經常性，也未納入我們已公布的第四季預估之中。包括：一次性支付給 Mike McGowan 的退休金 70 萬美元；與一筆公司間貸款相關的負 40 萬美元匯兌換算費用；以及 Apex 服務成本（cost of services）高於預期的 560 萬美元。

Finally, as you know from our previous announcements, Ted Hanson has been promoted to President of On Assignment. Ted will report directly to me and will be responsible for operations management. We'd like to now turn the call over to Ted who will review the operations of the segments and then over to Rand. Ted?

最後，如各位從我們先前公告所知，Ted Hanson 已晉升為 On Assignment 總裁。Ted 將直接向我報告，並負責營運管理。現在我們把電話會議交給 Ted，由他回顧各部門的營運，接著再交給 Rand。Ted？

Thanks, Peter. As Peter noted, fourth-quarter revenues from our Apex and Oxford segments grew collectively 7.5% or 9.8% on a same billable day basis. The Apex segment had another quarter of double-digit growth led by Apex Systems, our largest division, and Creative Circle, both of which Rand will address in his comments.

謝謝，Peter。如 Peter 所提，第四季我們 Apex 與 Oxford 兩個部門的營收合計成長 7.5%，若以相同可計費天數（same billable day）基礎則成長 9.8%。Apex 部門再度繳出雙位數成長的一季，主要由我們最大事業部 Apex Systems 與 Creative Circle 帶動，Rand 將在他的評論中說明。

While our Oxford segment grew year over year, its performance still trails our internal expectations. Our IT and creative digital marketing offerings continue to show the most strength in demand, and those end markets remain silent. Our life science and engineering offerings have shown less demand and, in turn, lower growth.

雖然我們的 Oxford 部門年增成長，但其表現仍落後於我們的內部預期。我們的 IT 與創意數位行銷（creative digital marketing）服務在需求面持續展現最強動能，而這些終端市場仍然沉寂。我們的生命科學與工程服務需求較弱，因此成長也較低。

Now on to the Oxford results. The Oxford segment is comprised of Oxford core, CyberCoders, our permanent placement business, and Life Sciences Europe. For the fourth quarter of 2016, Oxford segment revenues were $144.8 million, up 1.3% year over year on an as reported basis, while up 3.4% year over year on a same billable day basis. Oxford core revenues were up 3.8% year over year on an as reported basis, while up 6% year over year on a same billable day basis. Our Oxford European unit, together with our US healthcare IT practice, showed the most strength within Oxford core while we face challenges in growing our engineering, life sciences, and HIM practices.

接下來談牛津（Oxford）的業績。牛津事業部由 Oxford core、CyberCoders、我們的永久派遣（permanent placement）業務，以及 Life Sciences Europe 組成。2016 年第四季，牛津事業部營收為 1.448 億美元，以申報口徑（as reported）計年增 1.3%；以相同可計費天數（same billable day）基礎計年增 3.4%。Oxford core 營收以申報口徑計年增 3.8%；以相同可計費天數基礎計年增 6%。我們的 Oxford 歐洲單位與美國醫療保健 IT 業務一起，在 Oxford core 中展現最強勁的表現；同時，我們在工程、生命科學與 HIM 業務的成長上仍面臨挑戰。

CyberCoders, our permanent placement service offering, experienced lower revenue year over year due mostly to the same trends we have discussed in prior quarters related to the permanent placement market, as well as the seasonal nature of the business during the fourth quarter. Life Sciences Europe was up in revenues year over year on a same billable day basis, in line with the industry growth rate.

CyberCoders（我們的永久派遣服務）營收較去年同期下滑，主要原因是我們在前幾季已討論過、與永久派遣市場相關的相同趨勢，以及第四季業務的季節性因素。Life Sciences Europe 以相同可計費天數基礎計算的營收較去年同期成長，符合產業成長率。

Gross margin for the segment was 39.9%, down 280 basis points year over year, which was primarily due to a lower mix of permanent placement revenues, which was 13.1% of segment revenues for the quarter, down from 15.4% in the fourth quarter of 2015. While the Oxford segment had revenue growth year over year in the fourth quarter, the segment continues to be challenged in finding similar growth in adjusted EBITDA.

該事業部毛利率為 39.9%，較去年同期下降 280 個基點，主要原因是永久派遣營收占比下降；本季永久派遣營收占事業部營收的 13.1%，低於 2015 年第四季的 15.4%。雖然牛津事業部在 2016 年第四季的營收較去年同期成長，但該事業部在調整後 EBITDA 的同等成長方面仍持續面臨挑戰。

Over the last two quarters, we have been experiencing lower than historic growth rates and a lower gross margin with higher SG&A expenses. Our Oxford core business, which is the largest component of this segment, is growing at industry growth rates but below our internal expectations. Also, the lack of growth in CyberCoders permanent placement revenues against double-digit growth comparisons in the fourth quarter of 2015 is having a measurable impact on revenues and gross margin for the segment. Although some of the slowing in permanent placement is a market-based trend, our estimates for permanent placement revenue in the first quarter of 2017 show more stability versus the prior quarters.

過去兩季，我們的成長率低於歷史水準，毛利率也較低，同時 SG&A 費用較高。我們的 Oxford core 業務是該事業部最大的組成部分，其成長速度與產業成長率一致，但低於我們內部預期。此外，CyberCoders 的永久派遣營收未能成長，而 2015 年第四季的比較基期為兩位數成長，這對該事業部的營收與毛利率造成可衡量的影響。儘管永久派遣放緩部分屬於市場趨勢，我們對 2017 年第一季永久派遣營收的估計顯示，相較前幾季將更為穩定。

We are also being affected by lower gross margins due to business mix.

我們也受到業務組合影響，導致毛利率較低。

Our Oxford Healthcare Technology practice, which historically carries a slightly lower gross margin, grew faster during 2016 than other higher-margin Oxford practices. As we stated last quarter, many investments made in the Oxford core business in 2016 have not yet provided a return to adjusted EBITDA.

我們的 Oxford Healthcare Technology 業務（歷來毛利率略低）在 2016 年的成長速度快於其他毛利率較高的 Oxford 業務。正如我們上季所述，2016 年在 Oxford core 業務所做的多項投資，尚未對調整後 EBITDA 帶來回報。

In order to address this coming out of the quarter and into January, we are beginning to make some important changes within the Oxford core business. First, we are shifting certain leaders in skilled practices within the Oxford core in order to better leverage management and be more productive. Second, we have identified some areas where we can reduce expense to find a better return on remaining invested SG&A, which we believe will create opportunities for operating leverage in Oxford core during the course of 2017. We believe that as we implement these actions, together with experiencing a more stable permanent placement market, we can return to higher growth rates and EBITDA margins.

為了因應本季結束並進入 1 月後的情況，我們開始在 Oxford core 業務內推動一些重要變革。第一，我們將調整 Oxford core 中部分專業領域（skilled practices）的領導配置，以更有效運用管理資源並提升生產力。第二，我們已找出可降低費用的領域，以在保留的 SG&A 投入上取得更佳回報；我們相信這將在 2017 年期間為 Oxford core 創造營運槓桿的機會。我們相信，隨著這些措施的落實，加上永久派遣市場趨於穩定，我們可回到更高的成長率與 EBITDA 利潤率。

I will now turn the call over to Rand Blazer. Rand?

接下來我把電話交給 Rand Blazer。Rand？

Alright, Ted. Thank you. The Apex segment, which consists of Apex Systems, Apex Life Sciences, which was the old US Lab Support and Valesta business that has now been rebranded to Apex Life Sciences effective in January 2017. So Apex Systems, Apex Life Sciences, and Creative Circle business units make up the segment and reported strong results for the quarter. Revenues for the segment were $476.1 million, up 9.6% year over year on an as reported basis, but up 12% year over year on a same billable day basis. Apex Systems, which accounts for 74% of the segment's revenues, were up 9.6% year over year on the as reported basis and certainly paced the segments year-over-year growth rate on a same billable day basis as stated earlier.

好的，Ted，謝謝。Apex 事業部由 Apex Systems、Apex Life Sciences（原 US Lab Support 與 Valesta 業務，並已自 2017 年 1 月起重新品牌為 Apex Life Sciences）所組成。因此，Apex Systems、Apex Life Sciences 與 Creative Circle 這些業務單位構成該事業部，並在本季繳出強勁表現。該事業部營收為 4.761 億美元，以申報口徑計年增 9.6%；以相同可計費天數基礎計年增 12%。Apex Systems 占該事業部營收的 74%，以申報口徑計年增 9.6%，並如先前所述，在相同可計費天數基礎下確實帶動了該事業部的年增成長率。

Apex Systems performance is particularly noteworthy considering the growth rate was 17.5% in the fourth quarter of 2015, so obviously two quarters back to back year over year that were very strong.

Apex Systems 的表現尤其值得注意，因為 2015 年第四季的成長率為 17.5%，顯然連續兩個季度的年增表現都非常強勁。

Apex Life Sciences revenue growth was flat in the fourth quarter of 2016 on a year-over-year basis with Creative Circle reporting revenue growth outpacing the growth rate for the segment.

Apex Life Sciences 在 2016 年第四季的營收成長以年對年計算持平，而 Creative Circle 的營收成長速度則超過該事業部的成長率。

Our Creative Circle unit continues to perform well with year-over-year growth rate for the quarter continuing at a high rate consistent with our expectations when we purchased them in June 2015. Overall, for the full year of 2016, pro forma growth and revenues for the Apex segment was 14.4%, and for Apex Systems, the year-over-year growth rate was 15% for the year.

我們的 Creative Circle 單位持續表現良好，本季年對年成長率維持在高檔，符合我們於 2015 年 6 月收購時的預期。整體而言，2016 年全年 Apex 事業部的擬制（pro forma）成長與營收為 14.4%，而 Apex Systems 全年年對年成長率為 15%。

Gross margin for the segment were 29.5%, which was slightly below our estimates. While pricing for the quarter remains stable in our end markets with bill pay spreads increasing slightly from the previous quarter in both Apex and Apex Life Sciences, our gross margin for the quarter was adversely affected by out of period adjustments of $5.6 million related to cost of service at Apex Systems.

該事業部毛利率為 29.5%，略低於我們的估計。雖然本季在終端市場的定價仍維持穩定，且 Apex 與 Apex Life Sciences 的 bill pay spreads（帳單與薪酬價差）相較前一季略有擴大，但本季毛利率受到 Apex Systems 與服務成本（cost of service）相關、跨期調整（out of period adjustments）5,600 萬美元的不利影響。

Excluding these out of period adjustments, the gross margin for the Apex segment would have been 30.7% or approximately 120 basis points higher than our reported results. Later on this call, Ed will make a brief comment on these adjustments.

若排除這些跨期調整，Apex 事業部毛利率將為 30.7%，或較申報結果高約 120 個基點。稍後在本次電話會議中，Ed 會就這些調整做簡短說明。

Our segment's contribution in terms of EBITDA remains strong with solid conversion of gross profit to EBITDA paced by increasing productivity in our sales and delivery teams and despite the out of costs of services referred to previously.

就 EBITDA 而言，我們事業部的貢獻仍然強勁；在銷售與交付團隊生產力提升的帶動下，毛利轉換為 EBITDA 的表現穩健，儘管先前提及的服務成本超支仍然存在。

With respect and a little more color on Apex Systems growth, our IT systems division, revenue growth was propelled by a number of factors, including we achieve growth in four of our seven industry verticals with double-digit revenue growth in aerospace and defense, financial services, and healthcare accounts, and single-digit growth in the consumer industrial industry accounts. Business services, technology, and telecommunications industry accounts exhibited slight negative growth year over year, although the technology and business services industry revenue growth in the fourth quarter of 2015 were our highest growth industry verticals.

關於 Apex Systems 的成長再補充一些說明：在我們的 IT 系統事業部，營收成長由多項因素推動，包括我們在七個產業垂直領域中的四個實現成長；其中航太與國防、金融服務與醫療保健客戶的營收呈現兩位數成長，消費與工業類客戶則為個位數成長。商業服務、科技與電信產業客戶的營收年對年略為下滑；然而，科技與商業服務在 2015 年第四季曾是我們成長最高的產業垂直領域。

Apex revenue growth continued to be paced by strong revenue growth primarily in top accounts. Local, midmarket, or branch accounts also grew and grew at a slightly higher rate than in the third quarter of 2016.

Apex 的營收成長仍主要由前幾大客戶（top accounts）的強勁成長所帶動。地方型、中型市場或分公司客戶（local、midmarket 或 branch accounts）也有成長，且成長率較 2016 年第三季略有提升。

Finally as mentioned, field productivity continued strong in the quarter, supporting Apex's revenue performance and conversion rates.

最後，如前所述，本季前線生產力持續強勁，支撐了 Apex 的營收表現與轉換率。

The Apex Life Sciences and Creative Circle units continue to see good opportunities for growth with the market, as Peter mentioned earlier, with creative marketing skillsets remaining strong, as well as the overall market environment for our units. Overall the Apex segment had another strong quarter with revenue and earnings growth continuing on a year-over-year basis.

Apex Life Sciences 與 Creative Circle 單位持續在市場中看到良好的成長機會；如 Peter 先前提到，創意行銷技能組合（creative marketing skillsets）仍然強勁，同時我們各單位所處的整體市場環境也有利。整體而言，Apex 事業部本季再度表現強勁，營收與獲利年對年持續成長。

And with that, I will turn it over to Ed Pierce.

接下來我把電話交給 Ed Pierce。

Thanks, Rand. Peter mentioned revenues for the quarter exceeded the high end of our previously announced estimates. Our revenue growth rate for the quarter was 7.5%, which was 2.5 percentage points or 50% higher than the published IT industry growth rate. Using the same number of billable days as Q4 last year, revenues on the same billable databases were up 9.8% year over year. Assignment revenues were $592 million, are up 8.6% year over year, and permanent placement revenues were $28.9 million, down 11.4% year over year. The effect of year-over-year fluctuations in foreign exchange rates will be minimal.

謝謝，Rand。Peter 提到本季營收超過我們先前公布預估區間的上緣。本季營收成長率為 7.5%，較公布的 IT 產業成長率高出 2.5 個百分點，亦即高出 50%。在可計費天數與去年第四季相同的情況下，以相同可計費天數基礎計算的營收年對年成長 9.8%。派遣（assignment）營收為 5.92 億美元，年對年成長 8.6%；永久派遣營收為 2,890 萬美元，年對年下降 11.4%。外匯匯率年對年波動的影響將很小。

Gross margin for the quarter was 31.9%, which was below the low end of our previously announced estimates and down 150 basis points year over year due to two things: first, a lower mix of permanent placement revenues, which was 4.7% of revenues, down 1 percentage point from 5.7% of revenues in Q4 of last year; and second, out of period adjustments totaling $5.6 million to correct the under accrual costs of services of Apex Systems. Excluding the effect of the out of period adjustments, our consolidated gross profit would have been $203.8 million, and our consolidated gross margin would have been 32.8% or 90 basis points higher than what we reported. The effect of these out of period adjustments was immaterial to to all prior periods. Approximately one-half related to 2015 and the remainder to the first nine months of 2016. The system and process issues that caused the understatement of cost of services have been evaluated, and the necessary corrections have been made. SG&A expenses were $142.6 million or 23% of revenues.

本季毛利率為31.9%，低於我們先前公布之預估區間下緣，且年減150個基點，原因有二：第一，永久派遣（permanent placement）營收占比下降，僅占營收的4.7%，較去年第四季的5.7%下降1個百分點；第二，為更正Apex Systems服務成本提列不足，進行合計560萬美元的跨期調整（out of period adjustments）。若排除跨期調整之影響，我們的合併毛利將為2.038億美元，合併毛利率將為32.8%，較我們所報告數字高出90個基點。這些跨期調整對所有先前期間的影響並不重大。約一半與2015年相關，其餘與2016年前九個月相關。造成服務成本低估的系統與流程問題已完成評估，且必要的更正已完成。SG&A費用為1.426億美元，約占營收的23%。

After adjusting for $1.6 million in acquisition and integration expenses which were not in our financial estimates, SG&A expenses were in line with our previously announced estimates. SG&A expenses also included two other items totaling $2.1 million that were not in our estimates.

在調整160萬美元的併購與整合費用（該費用未納入我們的財務預估）後，SG&A費用與我們先前公布的預估一致。SG&A費用亦包含另外兩項合計210萬美元、未納入我們預估的項目。

The first item was $1.7 million in expenses related to retirement of the program at Oxford, and this included $1 million in stock-based compensation. The second item was a foreign exchange loss of $0.4 million on an intercompany note.

第一項為與Oxford專案退場相關的170萬美元費用，其中包含100萬美元的股票基礎給付（stock-based compensation）。第二項為公司間票據（intercompany note）產生的40萬美元外匯損失。

Net income for the quarter was $24 million or $0.45 per share on a diluted basis, up from $19.3 million or $0.36 per share in the fourth quarter last year. Net income for the quarter was burdened with the after-tax effects of the $5.6 million in out of period adjustments and $3.7 million in SG&A expenses not included in our financial estimates. On an after-tax basis, these expenses totaled $5.6 million or $0.10 per diluted share.

本季淨利為2,400萬美元，稀釋後每股盈餘為0.45美元，高於去年第四季的1,930萬美元或稀釋後每股0.36美元。本季淨利受到560萬美元跨期調整的稅後影響，以及未納入我們財務預估的370萬美元SG&A費用之影響。以稅後計，這些費用合計為560萬美元，或稀釋後每股0.10美元。

Adjusted EBITDA for the quarter was [$70.7] million or 11.4% of revenues compared with $70.7 million or 12.2% of revenues in the fourth-quarter 2015. Adjusted EBITDA for the quarter was burdened with the out of period adjustments, the cash portion of the two SG&A expense items mentioned earlier, and if you exclude these items, adjusted EBITDA would have been $6.7 million higher and above the high-end of our financial estimates.

本季調整後EBITDA為[70.7]百萬美元，約占營收的11.4%，相較於2015年第四季的70.7百萬美元或占營收12.2%。本季調整後EBITDA受到跨期調整、前述兩項SG&A費用項目中的現金部分之影響；若排除這些項目，調整後EBITDA將高出670萬美元，並將超過我們財務預估的上緣。

Cash flows for -- cash flows from operating activities were $55.9 million, and capital expenditures were $6.6 million. As Peter mentioned, during the quarter, we pegged down $19 million of our long-term debt, which reduced our leverage ratio to 2.32 to 1 at the end of the year. For the full year of 2016, we generated adjusted EBITDA of $285 million, cash flows from operating activities of $196.3 million, and free cash flow, which is a non-GAAP measure, of $169.1 million. This reflected a conversion rate of adjusted EBITDA into free cash flow of 59.3%. The reconciliations of the non-GAAP measures to the comparable GAAP measurements are included in today's press release.

現金流方面——營業活動現金流入為5,590萬美元，資本支出為660萬美元。如Peter所提，本季我們償還了1,900萬美元的長期負債，使得年底槓桿比率降至2.32比1。2016年全年，我們產生調整後EBITDA 2.85億美元、營業活動現金流入1.963億美元，以及自由現金流（非GAAP衡量）1.691億美元。這反映調整後EBITDA轉換為自由現金流的比率為59.3%。非GAAP衡量與可比GAAP衡量之調節表已載於今日新聞稿。

Now turning to our financial estimates for the first quarter of 2017, we are estimating revenues of $614 million to $624 million, net income of $21.5 million to $23.4 million or $0.41 to $0.44 per diluted share, and adjusted EBITDA, a non-GAAP measure, of $62.5 million to $65.5 million. These estimates do not include any acquisition or integration costs.

接著談2017年第一季的財務預估：我們預估營收為6.14億至6.24億美元，淨利為2,150萬至2,340萬美元，或稀釋後每股0.41至0.44美元；以及調整後EBITDA（非GAAP衡量）為6,250萬至6,550萬美元。上述預估未包含任何併購或整合成本。

Now after adjusting for fewer billable days in the quarter, the above estimates imply year-over-year growth between 6% and 8%. The growth rate for the quarter reflects a more difficult comparable as the year-over-year growth rate for Q1 of 2016 was 17.7%, which was the highest growth rate quarter over the last eight quarters. Our revenue estimates also include the estimated effects of inclement weather in the quarter.

在調整本季可計費天數較少的因素後，上述預估意味著年增率約介於6%至8%。本季成長率反映較具挑戰的比較基期，因為2016年第一季的年增率為17.7%，為過去八個季度中成長率最高的一季。我們的營收預估亦包含本季惡劣天候的估計影響。

Our estimates include the effects of the -- [halo] effects resale, which occurs at the beginning of each year. This reset results in an estimated sequential increase in payroll taxes of approximately $11.6 million or approximately 1.9% of revenues, of which $7.4 million relates to cost of services and the remainder to SG&A expenses.

我們的預估包含——[halo] effects resale 的影響，該情況會在每年年初發生。此重設將導致預估薪資稅（payroll taxes）季增約1,160萬美元，約占營收的1.9%；其中740萬美元歸屬於服務成本，其餘歸屬於SG&A費用。

I will now turn the call back over to Peter for some closing remarks.

我現在把電話交回給Peter做一些結語。

Thank you, Ed. We continue to believe our size, scale, and breadth of services has us well-positioned to take advantage of what we believe will be historic secular growth for the entire staffing industry and dynamic changes in the technology world as it moves more into the digital one. While the entire On Assignment team is very proud of our performance, we remain focused on continuing to profitably grow our business and increase our rate of growth. We would like to once again thank our many loyal, dedicated, and talented employees whose efforts have allowed us to progress to where we are today.

謝謝你，Ed。我們持續相信，憑藉我們的規模、量體與服務廣度，我們已處於有利位置，可把握我們認為整個人力派遣產業將迎來的歷史性長期結構性成長，以及科技世界在邁向更數位化過程中的動態變化。雖然On Assignment全體團隊對我們的表現深感自豪，我們仍專注於持續以獲利方式成長業務並提升成長速度。我們也要再次感謝眾多忠誠、敬業且才華洋溢的員工，正是他們的努力讓我們得以走到今天。

Operator, I would like to now open up the call to participants for questions.

接線員，我想現在開放讓與會者提問。

(Operator Instructions) Gary Bisbee, RBC Capital.

（接線員指示）Gary Bisbee，RBC Capital。

I guess the first question, why do you expect a more stable perm result in Q1? Was there anything driving that statement?

我想第一個問題是，為什麼你們預期第一季的永久派遣（perm）結果會更穩定？有什麼因素驅動你們做出這樣的說法嗎？

Gary, it's just, one, we are further away from the stagnation of 2016. There are some animal spirits that are going on in corporate America, and some of the things that were specific to us related to our technology-enabled sales outreach being our -- more of our exclusive sales function has been adjusted, and we have a full-time sales force. So those three things combine to show us current activity that gives us the belief of a better operating environment for 2017.

Gary，主要是三點：第一，我們已經離2016年的停滯期更遠了。第二，美國企業界出現了一些「動物精神」（animal spirits）。第三，對我們而言，一些特定因素與我們以科技賦能的銷售外展有關——我們原本較偏向獨家銷售職能的部分已做了調整，並且我們擁有全職的銷售團隊。這三點結合起來，讓我們從目前的活動狀況中相信2017年的營運環境會更好。

Okay. And then more broadly, within the Oxford business, anymore color you can give on strategies you are taking to try to resuscitate the growth in that business in aggregate? Thank you.

了解。那更廣泛來看，在Oxford業務方面，你們能否再多提供一些資訊，說明你們正在採取哪些策略，試圖讓該業務整體的成長重新振作？謝謝。

Yes, so I'm going to make one comment, and then I'm going to turn it over to Ted. Look, we are not -- as we said in our prepared remarks, I think a lot of companies that have already reported in this cycle would love to have had the growth rate that Oxford had. But it is not acceptable to us or what we think the division can do, and we have made some changes that we think will assist, and Ted, why don't you give them a little bit of color?

好的，我先說一點，然後把問題交給Ted。你看，我們並不是——正如我們在事先準備的發言中所說，我想在這一輪已經公布財報的許多公司，會很希望能有Oxford那樣的成長率。但這對我們而言不可接受，也不符合我們認為該事業部能做到的水準；我們已做出一些我們認為會有幫助的調整。Ted，你何不再多補充一些細節？

Thanks, Peter. Gary, we have got a recruiting driven model there that clearly is a differentiator in the marketplace, and we think by making a few tweaks to our go-to-market approach and our sales strategy we can better represent that to our clients. So we definitely think there's an opportunity there to take our sales strategy forward. And then on the expense side, there are some expenses that -- some things we invested in last year that didn't quite show the return we expected. So we have taken the opportunity to react to that and make a change, and some of the things we did I think are going to help our business growing forward. So I think we've got a little bit of all three of those things going on as it relates to the sales strategy and expenses within Oxford.

謝謝，Peter。Gary，我們那邊採用以招募為驅動的模式，這在市場上顯然是一項差異化優勢；我們認為透過對市場進入（go-to-market）方式與銷售策略做一些微調，就能更好地向客戶呈現這個優勢。因此我們確實認為，在推進銷售策略方面存在機會。另一方面在費用端，有些費用——我們去年投入的一些項目，回報並未如我們預期。因此我們把握機會做出回應並進行調整；我認為我們做的一些事情將有助於未來業務成長。所以就Oxford的銷售策略與費用而言，我想我們同時在這三個面向都有所作為。

Great. Thanks.

太好了。謝謝。

Jeff Silber, BMO Capital.

Jeff Silber，BMO Capital。

Thank you so much. I want to go back to those out of period adjustments. In plain English, are these worker's comp accrual, or is there something else going on?

非常感謝。我想回到那些跨期調整。用白話來說，這些是勞工補償（workers' comp）的應計費用，還是另有其他情況？

No, it is cost of service, Jeff, and it was a software configuration issue that we have corrected that didn't capture the expense timely. As we've stated in our prepared remarks, they were immaterial and less than 1% of cost of services for Apex.

不是的，Jeff，那是服務成本（cost of service），而且是我們已經修正的軟體設定問題，導致費用未能及時入帳。正如我們在事先準備的發言中所述，這些金額並不重大，且低於 Apex 服務成本的 1%。

Okay. And going forward, do you think this issue has been solved? It's not something we have to worry about going forward?

好的。那往後看，你認為這個問題已經解決了嗎？也就是說，未來不需要再擔心這件事？

That is correct.

沒錯。

Okay. Great. Just wanted to clarify that. And also, you mentioned at the beginning of your remarks, Peter, about a potential lag of wage inflation versus billing rate increases. Typically how long does it take for you to recoup wage inflation from customers?

好的。太好了。只是想釐清一下。另外，你在一開始的發言中提到，Peter，薪資通膨相對於計費費率上調可能會有落後。一般而言，你們通常需要多久才能從客戶那邊回收（轉嫁）薪資通膨？

Jeff, it really is on a case-by-case basis. Depending on the urgency of the project, depending on the level of the skillset, depending on the annual spend of the customer, some customers hold firm to an annual rate card renewal, and they are willing to take longer times to fill. Others are willing to react, but we say a quarter or two.

Jeff，這真的要視個案而定。取決於專案的急迫性、所需技能層級、以及客戶的年度支出規模。有些客戶會堅持一年才更新一次費率表（rate card renewal），也願意接受較長的補人時間；其他客戶則願意更快反應。我們通常說大概一到兩個季度。

Okay. And if I can just sneak one more in, I've been getting a lot of questions about potential H1B visa reform impact on your business and others in the industry. If you can just comment on that, that will be great.

好的。如果我再偷問一個，我最近收到很多關於 H1B 簽證改革可能對你們業務以及產業其他公司影響的問題。若你能簡單評論一下就太好了。

Yes, so there has been a lot written about it, and there have been abuses of the H1B visa system. Part of the abuse is the fact that, when it was written, it was not inflation indexed, and $60,000 many, many years ago -- over 22 years ago -- was a lot of money. But today, people with Master's degrees don't make $60,000. And the Indian offshores and not us, but some staffing firms, flood the lottery system, and they get the H1Bs in. They use cheap labor to perform work that could be performed with US domestic labor.

好的，關於這件事已經有很多報導，也確實存在對 H1B 簽證制度的濫用。濫用的一部分在於，當初制度設計時沒有隨通膨調整，很多很多年前——超過 22 年前——6 萬美元是一筆很大的錢。但今天，擁有碩士學位的人不會只拿 6 萬美元。而印度離岸公司——不是我們，但有些人力派遣公司——大量灌入抽籤系統，取得 H1B 名額。他們用低廉勞力去做原本可以由美國本土勞力完成的工作。

That is going to get shut down as it should. They are probably going to raise the minimum wage to $100,000 to $130,000. The most recent article that was in the Wall Street Journal said that Silicon Valley is not going to carry the water for these offshore companies, and they are going to be arguing to keep the 85,000 H1B visas but raise the salary from $60,000 to $100,000 to $130,000 so that we can have access to really talented, bright minded people who are doing drug discovery and new technology discovery and development, not doing helpdesk administration and code maintenance.

這種情況會被關掉，而且也應該被關掉。他們很可能會把最低薪資門檻提高到 10 萬到 13 萬美元。最近《華爾街日報》的一篇文章提到，矽谷不會替這些離岸公司背書，他們會主張保留 8.5 萬個 H1B 名額，但把薪資從 6 萬提高到 10 萬到 13 萬美元，讓我們能接觸到真正有才華、思維敏捷的人才，去做藥物研發與新技術的發現與開發，而不是做服務台管理和程式碼維護。

And so I think you are definitely going to see something, because both Republicans and Democrats acknowledge that there has been abuse in that area. And for us, we think it's a net positive on two fronts. One, it makes domestic resources more valuable, and two, this cheap labor that has been used to -- on the front end to offshore stuff to be done also on the backend is not going to be able to -- they are not going to be able to do that. They're going to have to use domestic labor on the front end and then still be able to do some stuff with foreign labor offshore on the backend.

所以我認為你一定會看到一些變化，因為共和黨與民主黨都承認這個領域存在濫用。對我們而言，我們認為這在兩個面向上是淨利多。第一，讓本土資源更有價值；第二，過去用來——前端把工作外包到離岸、後端也同樣離岸處理——的這種低廉勞力模式將無法繼續——他們將無法這麼做。他們必須在前端使用本土勞力，而後端仍可能可以在海外用一些外國勞力做部分工作。

Chris, I think you'll see this -- something happen in 2017, and Silicon Valley is going to support reform because they know there has been abuses. And it hasn't been Silicon Valley, by the way, that has been abusing the system.

Chris，我想你會看到——在 2017 年會有些事情發生，而矽谷會支持改革，因為他們知道確實存在濫用。順帶一提，濫用制度的並不是矽谷。

Okay. Appreciate the color. Thanks so much.

好的。感謝提供這些背景。非常謝謝。

George Tong, Piper Jaffray.

George Tong，Piper Jaffray。

Pete, you indicated with some large accounts, there is resistance to passing along wage increases. Can you talk a bit more about how you expect bill pay spreads to evolve over time?

Pete，你提到在一些大型客戶那裡，將薪資上漲轉嫁出去會遇到阻力。你能再多談談你預期計費與薪資之間的價差（bill-pay spreads）會如何隨時間演變嗎？

Yes, stable, and I think when you adjust for the ins and outs that we had this quarter, we reported pretty much stable gross margins. And what I -- in my prepared remarks, George, I said simultaneously pass along wage increases and bill rate increases. So they always do allow us to adjust the bill rate, it's just sometimes it's not simultaneously. So we still stick to our position that we are operating in a stable gross margin environment saving except lower perm contribution or certain practices that carry a lower gross margin growing faster than other high-margin practices.

可以，會維持穩定。我認為如果把本季的進出因素調整掉，我們報告的毛利率基本上是穩定的。而我——在我事先準備的發言中，George，我說的是同時轉嫁薪資上漲與計費費率上調。所以他們總是允許我們調整計費費率，只是有時候不是同步進行。因此我們仍維持我們的看法：我們處於毛利率穩定的環境，除非是永久職缺（perm）貢獻較低，或某些毛利率較低的業務實務（practices）成長速度快於其他高毛利實務。

Got it. That's helpful. To improve growth rates within Oxford, you have indicated that you will be shifting some leaders and skill practices. Can you discuss which areas you will be deemphasizing and which areas you plan to be over-indexing?

了解，這很有幫助。為了提升 Oxford 的成長率，你們表示會調整一些領導者與技能實務的配置。你能談談哪些領域你們會降低比重、哪些領域你們計畫加大投入比重嗎？

Yes, I will let Ted respond to that, but I don't think we said deemphasizing. Ted, why don't you walk them through a little bit of what you all started to do.

好的，我讓 Ted 來回答，不過我不認為我們說過要降低比重。Ted，你不妨帶大家稍微走一遍你們已經開始做的事情。

Yes, I think that we are really settled and satisfied with our skill disciplines and offerings. I think the comment was more we can combine and leverage some of our best management, and certainly we've started to do some of that. And then there are some practices that, just based on demand, are naturally experiencing more growth than others right now, and those are places where we should invest, and we're not going to leave our other skill practices, but we will certainly tilt our investments towards ones that are having the most growth right now based on customer demand.

好的，我認為我們對我們的技能領域與服務內容其實已經很穩定、也很滿意。我想那個評論更多是指，我們可以整合並槓桿運用一些最好的管理人才，而我們確實已經開始做一些這方面的工作。另外，基於需求，有些實務目前自然比其他實務成長更快，這些就是我們應該投資的地方；我們不會放棄其他技能實務，但我們會把投資傾斜到目前依客戶需求成長最快的那些領域。

Got it. And then lastly on Oxford, you had indicated before that there were some areas where you could reduce expenses. Can you elaborate on which areas you plan to dial back expenses?

了解。最後一題關於 Oxford，你之前提到有些領域可以降低費用。你能更具體說明你們打算在哪些領域縮減支出嗎？

Ed, you can qualitatively share some stuff with them.

Ed，你可以用定性方式跟他們分享一些內容。

Yes, I think this is less about headcount and more about investment in certain compensation programs, and we made some investments in certain programs last year thinking that we were going to get an increase in productivity and we didn't see it. So I think that we're going to take those investment dollars and point them at other opportunities, if you will, to get a better return on our invested SG&A.

好的，我認為這與人頭數關係較小，更多是關於對某些薪酬方案的投資。我們去年在某些方案上做了一些投資，原本以為會帶來生產力提升，但我們沒有看到。因此我認為我們會把那些投資資金轉向其他機會，以便讓我們投入的 SG&A（銷售、一般及行政費用）取得更好的報酬。

Very helpful. Thank you.

非常有幫助。謝謝。

Tim McHugh, William Blair and Company.

Tim McHugh，William Blair and Company。

I guess, Peter, are you hearing from clients about the potential for changes to H1Bs and immigration? It's obviously in the news. Are clients talking to you guys yet about it, or is it still something they are going to wait to see how it plays out before they even think about how to change their business activity?

我想問，Peter，你是否有聽到客戶在談 H1B 與移民政策可能變動的事？這顯然在新聞上很熱。客戶已經開始跟你們談了嗎？還是他們仍在觀望事態如何發展，甚至還沒開始思考要如何調整他們的業務活動？

The answer is yes, and it has been longer than just the last three or four months. Over the last 14 months, as our larger, more sophisticated customers become more reliant on our deployment delivery model staff aug and viewing it competitively against project consulting and offshoring, they have been deciding to spend more of their annual budgets on staff aug than offshoring, especially with the uncertainty of that immigration reform.

答案是有，而且不只是最近三、四個月。過去 14 個月，隨著我們較大型、較成熟的客戶越來越依賴我們的部署交付模式——人力增補（staff aug）——並把它與專案顧問與離岸外包做競爭性比較，他們已經在決定把更多年度預算花在人力增補上，而不是離岸外包，尤其是在移民改革不確定性的情況下。

You've got to remember that these bills have been introduced both by the Democratic members of the House, as well as the Republicans, and so this is something they can probably agree to. So what we've seen early on is, even before there's any change in the law, that certain customers are hedging their bets and not being as dependent on newer projects being executed on those deployment models versus domestic deployment models.

你必須記得，這些法案不僅由眾議院的民主黨成員提出，共和黨也有提出，所以這可能是他們能夠達成共識的事情。因此我們早期看到的是，即使法律尚未有任何變更，某些客戶已經在分散風險，不再那麼依賴用那些部署模式來執行新專案，而是更偏向本土的部署模式。

And then just two numbers. One, Ed, could you give us the billing days for the year at this point that you are expecting, and secondly, could you give any specific growth rate for Creative?

另外兩個數字。第一，Ed，你能否提供截至目前你預期今年的計費天數（billing days）？第二，你能否提供 Creative 的任何具體成長率？

For the fourth quarter of 2017?

針對2017年第四季？

Yes, fourth quarter.

是的，第四季。

We said it exceeded the growth rate of this segment. It was almost identical to what we said the Apex Systems was, which was about 15%.

我們說過它超過了該細分市場的成長率。幾乎與我們對 Apex Systems 所說的相同，大約是15%。

We are anticipating or estimating 249.4 billable days. And one thing I will point you to is, if you look at our recent investor presentations which you could find on our website, we actually do now have a page that shows that information. Not only for the year but also by quarter.

我們預期或估計可計費天數為249.4天。我想提醒你注意的一點是，如果你查看我們近期的投資人簡報（你可以在我們網站上找到），我們現在確實有一頁展示該資訊。不僅是全年，也按季度呈現。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Tobey Sommer, SunTrust.

Tobey Sommer，SunTrust。

I had a question for you about the financial services vertical. With the prospects for rising net interest margin, the banks and a little bit less regulation for financial services broadly, are you hearing from customers that they may uncork some additional projects as they maybe can grow a little bit more and are more profitable going forward?

我想請教你們關於金融服務垂直領域的問題。隨著淨利差（net interest margin）上升的前景、銀行業以及更廣泛金融服務領域的監管稍微減少，你們是否聽到客戶表示，他們可能會啟動一些額外的專案，因為他們或許能成長得更快、未來獲利能力也更強？

I'm going to let Rand answer that more fully, but Tobey, they have been all through 2016, engaging with us in a very productive way. And I think we stated in our prepared remarks that the financial services grew double digits.

我會讓 Rand 更完整地回答，不過 Tobey，他們在整個2016年都以非常具建設性的方式與我們合作。我想我們在事先準備的發言中也提到，金融服務業務是雙位數成長。

So Rand, what would you add?

所以 Rand，你會補充什麼？

I think you said it right. It has been going on for a while, and they are spending money, good IT money to improve themselves, and we've been growing double digits for quite some time now.

我覺得你說得很對。這已經持續一段時間了，他們一直在花錢，投入優質的IT預算來提升自己，而我們也已經雙位數成長相當長一段時間。

Okay. Understand that the growth has been double-digit, and I understood that. But the prospects for net interest margin are more recent than that and they may extend in the future. Should we think of these as catalysts for additional growth?

好的。我理解成長是雙位數，我也理解。但淨利差的前景是比較近期才出現的，而且可能會延續到未來。我們是否應該把這些視為帶動額外成長的催化劑？

Yes, I think for continued constructive execution of their budgets, I think that the budgets weren't constrained in 2016 the way they were in 2015, and the discussions we are having about 2017 are on a more normalized spend that isn't constrained because of outsized litigation expenses or settlements.

是的，我認為這有助於他們持續以建設性的方式執行其預算。我認為2016年的預算不像2015年那樣受限，而我們目前對2017年的討論，是在較為正常化的支出水準上進行，不再因為過高的訴訟費用或和解支出而受到限制。

So yes, what we're trying to communicate, I apologize, is that we find the financial services industry to continue to be a productive area. And, as you know, they are classically the fastest spenders and the biggest spenders on technology for our particular deployment model, staff augmentation.

所以是的，我們想傳達的是（抱歉剛才表達不夠清楚），我們認為金融服務產業仍然是一個很有成效的領域。而且如你所知，就我們這種部署模式（人力增補，staff augmentation）而言，他們一向是技術支出最快、也是支出最大的客群。

Okay. Your headcount additions for 2017, what kind of staffing consulting growth rate should we look for?

好的。你們2017年的新增人頭數，對應的人力派遣/顧問（staffing consulting）成長率大概應該看多少？

About -- I think for the full year of 2016, it was about 11%. And for 2017, I think it's steady-state unless we really have accelerated growth, which would be somewhere in the 5%, 6%, 7% range.

大約——我想2016年全年大概是11%。而2017年我認為會回到穩態，除非我們真的出現加速成長；在那種情況下，可能會落在5%、6%、7%的區間。

Okay. And -- last question for me, relative to your capital deployment and balance sheet, the stock market seems to be discounting an elongated cycle and a refresh on growth. How do you think about your repurchase and debt repayment versus deploying suppressed capital and acquisitions at this point?

好的。最後一個問題，關於你們的資本配置與資產負債表，股市似乎在反映一個拉長的景氣循環以及成長的再加速。此時你們如何看待股票回購與償還債務，相較於投入閒置資本以及進行併購？

Well, if we could find it, which we will, but if we could find the right acquisition candidate, we would do that first. Second, at this stage of our leverage and our cost of debt, which is going down again hopefully, it would be share repurchases. And third, it would be the continued deleveraging of the business. We balanced deleveraging and share repurchases through 2016, and we did both. We could have just done share repurchases, but we elected to do both. And I think because we did both, that put us in a position to continue to drive pricing of our debt down.

嗯，如果我們能找到——而我們會找到——合適的併購標的，我們會優先做併購。第二，在目前的槓桿水準以及我們的負債成本（希望能再次下降）的情況下，會是股票回購。第三，則是持續降低槓桿（deleveraging）。我們在2016年平衡了降槓桿與股票回購，兩者都做了。我們本可以只做股票回購，但我們選擇兩者並行。我認為正因為兩者都做了，才讓我們能夠持續把債務的定價（利率）往下壓。

Okay. Thank you very much.

好的。非常感謝。

Randy Reece, Avondale.

Randy Reece，Avondale。

I was wondering if you could give the underlying change in staffing gross margins that is implied in the Q1 guidance?

我想請問，你們能否提供第一季指引所隱含的人力派遣毛利率（staffing gross margins）底層變動？

Is that possible, Ed?

Ed，這有可能嗎？

Well, it's in the estimate. I'm not sure I'm following, Randy. Because one of the things we include in our financial estimates is a range --

嗯，這在估算裡。我不太確定我是否理解你的意思，Randy。因為我們在財務估算中包含的其中一項是區間——

I guess he means by division.

我猜他是指按事業部。

Temporary staffing --

臨時派遣——

We don't get that granular in the guidance, but I think Randy, you should assume, but for the annual reset of taxes and but for lower contribution of perm placement versus the historical level, that we stick to our public statement that we think we are in a stable gross margin environment.

我們在指引中不會細到那種程度，但我想 Randy，你應該假設：除了年度薪資稅重置（reset of taxes），以及永久職缺媒合（perm placement）貢獻低於歷史水準之外，我們仍維持我們公開的說法，也就是我們認為毛利率環境是穩定的。

All right.

好。

And, Randy, the reset on payroll taxes we are estimating had -- it is going to have about a 1.2 percentage point of sequential impact on gross margin in Q1.

另外，Randy，我們估計薪資稅的重置——它將在第一季對毛利率造成約1.2個百分點的季比影響。

Versus a normalized Q4 gross margin?

是相對於正常化的第四季毛利率？

Versus a normalized Q4. And so, if you normalize Q4, you would get roughly -- for the out of period, you get roughly [32.8].

相對於正常化的第四季。所以，如果你把第四季正常化，大概——就跨期（out of period）的部分，你大概會得到約[32.8]。

And within the Apex mix, is there anything particularly unusual going on in the life sciences or lab support end market? We have heard some concerns about activity levels in that vertical.

在 Apex 的組合裡，生命科學或實驗室支援的終端市場是否有任何特別不尋常的情況？我們聽到一些對該垂直領域活動水準的擔憂。

From others?

從其他人那裡？

Yes.

是的。

Ted respond and then I will follow up.

先請 Ted 回應，然後我再補充。

So, Randy, that unit has been growing a little slower although in line with the industry growth rates, both in the Apex segment and in the Oxford segment as it relates to life science skillsets. So I guess if you are trying to put that in perspective of the rest of the business from an IP perspective, we are obviously seeing a lot more growth there, but I guess that's what we're seeing right now within the life science skillset.

所以，Randy，那個單位的成長稍微慢一些，不過仍與產業成長率一致；無論是在 Apex 事業群或 Oxford 事業群，就生命科學技能組合（skillsets）而言都是如此。所以我想，如果你是想把它放在整體業務的脈絡中、從 IP 的角度來看，我們顯然在那裡看到更多成長；但就生命科學技能組合而言，這就是我們目前看到的情況。

All right. Very good. Thank you.

好的。非常好。謝謝。

Mark Marcon, R.W. Baird.

Mark Marcon，R.W. Baird。

On the Oxford side, how long do you think it would take before your initiatives in terms of changing the Oxford core would really take effect and where the results would be visible?

在 Oxford 這邊，你認為你們在調整 Oxford 核心方面的各項措施，需要多久才會真正發揮效果、並且讓成果可被看見？

Well, I'm going to let Ted address that, but what we are doing is not so novel that it's got a high risk of on execution. This is some stuff that is best practices, and Ted, why don't you walk them through your expectations?

嗯，我會讓 Ted 來說明，但我們正在做的事情並不新奇到會有很高的執行風險。這些是一些最佳實務。Ted，你不如帶大家走一下你的預期？

Yes, I think on the expense side, we will see that sooner, although that will be a smaller part of the total return in the future, the sales strategy, some small tweak there, as Peter put it, not wholesale change, if you will, but some tweaks around that will take a little bit longer to institutionalize and see the return on. So I think the expense side over the next couple of quarters and on the sales side in the back half of the year and into 2018.

是的，我認為在費用端，我們會更快看到成效，雖然那會是未來總回報中較小的一部分。至於銷售策略方面，正如 Peter 所說，不是全面性的改變，但會做一些小幅調整；這需要更長時間才能制度化並看到回報。所以我認為費用端在接下來幾個季度，銷售端則在下半年並延伸到2018年。

Great. And then with regards to the perm business, when you think about CyberCoders, when you said stable, does that mean like a deceleration in the rate of decline, or does it basically mean we're going to be flat year over year, or does it mean on a sequential seasonally adjusted basis we are flattening out? How should we interpret those comments?

很好。接著關於永久職缺（perm）業務，談到 CyberCoders 時，你說「穩定」，這是指下滑速度放緩？還是基本上代表年對年持平？或是指在經季節性調整的季比基礎上趨於持平？我們應該如何解讀這些評論？

Yes, good question. I think you should interpret it that we don't have any sort of change in economic activity just the way things are right now because of the results in 2016. We would hope to be up low mid single digits year over year on an absolute basis.

是的，問得好。我認為你應該把它解讀為：就2016年的結果來看，在目前的狀況下，我們沒有看到經濟活動出現任何變化。我們希望在絕對值上，年對年能有低到中個位數的成長。

Oh, that's great. And you are starting to see some improvement there?

喔，那很棒。你們開始看到一些改善了嗎？

The word we used was stability, yes. And I would point out, again, Mark, as the year is now over, CyberCoders actually did an admirable job. We had budgeted for them to be down on revenues and basically flat year over year on EBITDA, and they pretty much hit that budget. And some of the changes that they have made and the hard work that they have done, I think that they can grow 3%, 4%, 6% this year.

我們用的詞是「穩定」，是的。另外我也要再指出，Mark，現在一年已經結束，CyberCoders 其實做得相當不錯。我們原本預算是他們營收會下滑，而 EBITDA 基本上年對年持平，他們幾乎達成了該預算。基於他們做出的一些改變以及投入的努力，我認為他們今年可以成長3%、4%、6%。

Great. And then within Apex, when we take a look at the detail in terms of the industry verticals that are both growing, as well as those that are contracting a little bit, would you expect that with the better economic environment, the verticals that have been going up against tough comps and so it's slightly negative this past quarter, that those could start bouncing back relatively soon? Is that built into the expectations, or how should we think about that?

很好。接著在 Apex 內部，當我們從產業垂直領域的細節來看——哪些在成長、哪些略有收縮——您是否預期在較佳的經濟環境下，那些先前面臨較高比較基期、因此本季略為負成長的垂直領域，可能會相對很快開始反彈？這是否已納入預期之中，或我們應該如何看待？

Well, I don't mean this to sound defensive, but I think that what we've been trying to communicate on a very grounded basis is that we see a productive marketplace. And based on my recollection, we've grown 1000 basis points faster than anybody else that has reported in this cycle organically.

嗯，我無意讓這聽起來像是在辯解，但我認為我們一直試圖以非常務實、腳踏實地的方式傳達的是：我們看到的是一個具生產力的市場。依我記憶，在這一輪週期中，就有機成長而言，我們的成長速度比任何其他已公布的同業快了 1000 個基點。

So I point that out just to say we continue to believe because of our size and our positioning that we will continue to have very attractive growth prospects in 2017.

我提這點只是想說，基於我們的規模與市場定位，我們仍然相信在 2017 年我們將持續擁有非常具吸引力的成長前景。

Now the spend in telecom and technology right now wasn't as strong as it was in financial services and health care and that may switch and probably will if there is some tax reform, but all-in-all, we feel fortunate that our positioning permits us to grow fairly significantly. And we're excited about that opportunity to continue to grow.

目前電信與科技領域的支出不如金融服務與醫療保健強勁；若有稅改，這種情況可能會改變，而且很可能會改變。但總體而言，我們很幸運，因為我們的定位讓我們得以相當顯著地成長。我們也對持續成長的機會感到興奮。

Yes and, Peter, if it came across as if I was diminishing the execution, as well as the productivity there, that wasn't what I meant. Because --

是的，而且，Peter，如果我的說法讓人覺得我在淡化執行力以及那邊的生產力，那並非我的本意。因為——

No, no, no, I didn't take it that way. I just -- I think it is lost that on a same billable day basis, this Company grew 9.8%.

不，不，不，我沒有那樣理解。我只是——我認為大家忽略了一點：以相同可計費天數（same billable day）為基礎，這家公司成長了 9.8%。

I think that is coming across loud and clear. I guess the question was more along the lines of you are going up against -- you do have tough comps because you have been doing well, but would you -- do you think it's possible that some of those verticals that recently shrunk, that those could come back now that there's a little bit more in the way of animal spirits, or is that something that -- and, therefore, there could be some acceleration, or do you think, hey, there's a couple of things that are going on specific to those verticals that -- they are probably -- it's probably going to take a little while before those kick back in?

我覺得這點已經非常清楚地傳達出來了。我想問題比較是：你們確實面臨——因為你們表現一直很好，所以比較基期很高；但你是否認為，現在市場「動物精神」稍微回來一些，那些近期縮小的垂直領域有可能回升？因此可能出現一些加速？還是你認為，嘿，那些垂直領域有幾個特定因素在發生——可能還需要一點時間才會回到正軌？

Let me address it this way. The only time we have really called out a vertical was in healthcare IT because of the stimulus dollars going away, and then in the financial services, we called out ebbs and flows in the third and fourth quarter of 2015.

我這樣回應。唯一我們真正特別點名過的垂直領域，是醫療保健 IT，因為刺激方案資金逐步退場；另外在金融服務方面，我們曾提到 2015 年第三季與第四季的起伏變化。

But as it relates to spend and telecom and then technology, that may be just a collection of our customers and something like that. But we feel good about the continued rate of adoption of staff augmentation vis-a-vis other delivery and deployment models. We feel very good about our positioning, and we continue to believe that we can be a net market share gainer and grow -- even though we grew faster in 2016 than the statement discloses, we still think we can grow 200 to 300 basis points faster than the stated industry growth rate. And if we continue to do that, we will create real value. So we are feeling as if a company -- and it is operating in an industry that is relatively productive and healthy, and so it's our job to go execute.

但就電信與科技的支出而言，那可能只是我們客戶組合的結果或類似因素。不過，我們對人力派遣（staff augmentation）相較於其他交付與部署模式的持續採用速度感到樂觀。我們對自身定位非常有信心，並且仍相信我們可以成為淨市占率的取得者並持續成長——即便我們 2016 年的成長其實比財報揭露的數字更快，我們仍認為可以比產業所宣稱的成長率快 200 到 300 個基點。若我們能持續做到這點，就能創造真正的價值。因此我們的感受是：作為一家公司——而且是在一個相對具生產力且健康的產業中運作——我們的工作就是把執行做好。

Great. Thank you.

很好。謝謝。

Kevin McVeigh, Deutsche Bank.

Kevin McVeigh，德意志銀行。

Hey, any thoughts in terms of the boost to the revolver, in terms of the $50 million? Does that give you additional flexibility from a buyback perspective, or just any thoughts on you were able to amend the covenants of more flexibility on that, or just any thoughts on what drove the increase?

嗨，關於循環信貸額度（revolver）增加 5,000 萬美元這件事，有什麼想法嗎？這是否讓你們在回購方面有更多彈性？或是你們能夠修訂契約條款（covenants）以取得更大彈性？另外，能否談談是什麼原因促成這次額度增加？

Yes, the increases just give us greater flexibility. The real change, which Kevin is not apparent is, when we have an annual reset and we file our results with the banks that refreshes our restricted payment basket, so we have used a fair amount of our capacity to buy shares, and that has all gotten replenished and sent back down to levels where we could execute the remaining availability under the $150 million repurchase with the refresh of our baskets.

是的，增加額度只是讓我們有更大的彈性。真正的變化——Kevin 可能不太明顯——是當我們每年重設一次並向銀行提交業績時，會更新我們的受限支付籃子（restricted payment basket）。我們已用掉相當一部分的額度來回購股票，而這些在籃子更新後都已補回，並回到較低的使用水位，使我們能在籃子刷新後，執行 1.5 億美元回購計畫中剩餘的可用額度。

So yes, we have plenty of capacity. And if we want to do an accelerated repurchase, we could draw on the revolver if we felt that was the most prudent thing to do.

所以是的，我們有充足的額度。如果我們想做加速回購（accelerated repurchase），且我們認為那是最審慎的作法，我們也可以動用循環信貸。

Got it. And then, Peter, it was very helpful laying out the costs in terms of the quarter. Is there any way to think about what the EPS impact was of those in terms of overall --

了解。接著，Peter，你把本季的成本拆解得很有幫助。有沒有辦法從整體角度來看，這些成本對 EPS 的影響大概是多少——

So it was kind of on a GAAP EPS basis. It was $0.10. And on an adjusted EPS basis, it was about $0.09. So based on my calculations, if you accept the adjustments, we would have reported about $0.73 versus $0.64 on an adjusted basis. And on a -- earning on an absolute GAAP basis, we would have reported $0.55 versus $0.45, which is well above consensus, high end of analysts guidance, or at the high end of our range.

所以以 GAAP EPS 來看是 0.10 美元；以調整後 EPS 來看大約是 0.09 美元。依我的計算，如果你接受這些調整，我們本來在調整後基礎上會報告約 0.73 美元，而不是 0.64 美元。至於在絕對 GAAP 基礎下，我們本來會報告 0.55 美元，而不是 0.45 美元；這明顯高於市場共識、也高於分析師指引區間的高端，或在我們自身區間的高端。

You would have come in at $0.73 as opposed to -- that's a great job. And then just my last question, if I could, is, from a servicing perspective on the IT side, we've been getting a fair amount of questions given how tight demand is. Are you comfortable with the mix of producers versus sourcers within the business? I know we were pretty aggressive with the hiring last year, and that is paying dividends. Are you comfortable with the way production versus sourcing is set right now, Peter, or does that equilibrium need to change at all?

你們本來會是 0.73 美元，而不是——這做得很棒。那我最後一個問題是，從 IT 端的服務交付角度來看，鑑於需求非常緊俏，我們收到不少問題。你對業務中「產出端」（producers）與「尋才端」（sourcers）的配置比例感到滿意嗎？我知道你們去年在招募上相當積極，而且已開始帶來成效。Peter，你對目前產出與尋才的配置平衡感到滿意嗎？還是這個均衡需要做任何調整？

I think that's a real compliment to the divisional leadership. The reason we have been able to grow 1000 basis points faster than others is because we were able to fill the orders -- find the people to fill the orders. And so I think they've done an appropriate balance of sales and fulfillment. And I think that has been a core competency of our Company and I think it will continue.

我認為這是對事業部領導團隊的高度肯定。我們之所以能比其他人快 1000 個基點成長，是因為我們能夠把訂單填滿——找到人來填補這些需求。因此我認為他們在銷售與履約（fulfillment）之間做了恰當的平衡。我也認為這一直是我們公司的核心能力，而且會持續如此。

Great. Thanks, again. Nice job.

很好。再次感謝。做得很棒。

(Operator Instructions) Gentlemen, we have no further questions. Please go ahead with any closing remarks.

（接線員指示）各位先生，我們沒有其他問題了。請繼續進行任何結語。

We greatly appreciate your attention and look forward to speaking to you on our first-quarter conference call.

非常感謝各位的關注，並期待在第一季法說會上再與各位交流。

Thank you, and ladies and gentlemen, the does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for your participation and for using AT&T Executive Teleconference. You may now disconnect.

謝謝各位女士、先生，今天的會議到此結束。感謝各位的參與，並使用 AT&T 高階主管電話會議服務。您現在可以掛線。