第一太陽能 (FSLR) 2026 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Good afternoon, and welcome to First Solar's third-quarter 2026 earnings conference call. This call is being webcast live on the Investors section of First Solar's website at investor.firstsolar.com. (Operator Instructions) And please note that today's call is being recorded.

下午好，歡迎參加 First Solar 2026 年第三季財報電話會議。本次會議將於 First Solar 網站投資人專區 investor.firstsolar.com 進行即時網路直播。（接線員指示）並請注意，今日會議將被錄音。

I would now like to turn the call over to your host, Byron Jeffers, Head of Investor Relations.

現在我想把電話交給本次會議主持人——投資人關係主管 Byron Jeffers。

Good afternoon, and thank you for joining us. With me today are Mark Widmar, Chief Executive Officer; and Alex Bradley, Chief Financial Officer. Mark will begin with an update on the business, followed by Alex with our financial results and outlook.

下午好，感謝各位加入。今天與我一同出席的有：執行長 Mark Widmar，以及財務長 Alex Bradley。Mark 將先就業務進展進行更新，接著由 Alex 說明我們的財務結果與展望。

Before we begin, today's discussion will include forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties. Additional information regarding these risks and uncertainties can be found in our earnings press release, other SEC filings and the earnings material available on our Investor Relations website at investor.firstsolar.com. We undertake no obligation to update any of these forward-looking statements as a result of new information or future events.

在開始之前，今日討論將包含前瞻性陳述，並可能受到風險與不確定性影響。關於這些風險與不確定性的更多資訊，請參閱我們的財報新聞稿、其他 SEC 申報文件，以及投資人關係網站 investor.firstsolar.com 上提供的財報資料。我們不承擔因新資訊或未來事件而更新任何前瞻性陳述之義務。

During today's call, we will also discuss certain non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliation of these measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures are provided in our earnings press release and accompanying presentation. We encourage investors to review those reconciliations as non-GAAP measures should not be considered in isolation or a substitute for financial information prepared in accordance with US GAAP.

在今日會議中，我們也將討論若干非 GAAP 財務衡量指標。這些指標與最直接可比之 GAAP 指標的調節表，已載於我們的財報新聞稿及隨附簡報中。我們鼓勵投資人檢視該等調節表，因非 GAAP 指標不應被單獨看待，亦不應取代依照美國 GAAP 編製的財務資訊。

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

接下來把時間交給 Mark。

Thank you, and good afternoon. Getting on slide 4. We continue to execute with discipline this past quarter advancing our U.S. manufacturing expansion, care deployment and perovskite R&D program while delivering strong financial results. We generated approximately $1.2 billion in net sales, expanded gross margin to approximately 58% and delivered adjusted EBITDA of $744 million.

謝謝，下午好。請看投影片第 4 頁。在過去一季，我們持續以嚴謹紀律執行，推進美國製造擴產、CuRe 部署以及鈣鈦礦研發計畫，同時交出強勁的財務成果。我們創造約 12 億美元的淨銷售額，毛利率擴大至約 58%，並達成 7.44 億美元的調整後 EBITDA。

Operationally, our continued CuRe deployment across the fleet is being executed through a disciplined learning-based approach that began with our Perrysburg Series 6 conversion in Q1 of this year. That approach now extends to our first Series 7 conversion in our India facility expected to begin in the first quarter of 2027, which marks the start of Series 7 CuRe replication across the fleet.

在營運方面，我們在整體產線持續推進 CuRe 部署，並以嚴謹、以學習為導向的方法執行；該方法始於今年第一季我們在 Perrysburg 的 Series 6 轉換。目前此方法也延伸至我們印度廠的首條 Series 7 轉換，預計於 2027 年第一季開始，這也標誌著 Series 7 CuRe 在整體產線的複製推進正式啟動。

Beginning in India allows us to first refine the deployment process in a low earnings impact environment before replicating across our US Series 7 fleet. During the subsequent U.S. conversions assuming a supportive trade environment, India front-end output is planned to be flexed to supply U.S. facilities, supporting US back-end throughput and preserving partial domestic content and Section 45x eligibility production during the transition.

從印度開始，讓我們能先在對獲利影響較低的環境中精煉部署流程，再複製到美國的 Series 7 產線。在後續美國轉換期間，假設貿易環境具支持性，我們規劃彈性調整印度前段產出以供應美國廠區，支撐美國後段產能吞吐，並在轉換期間維持部分國內含量以及符合第 45x 條資格的產量。

Accordingly, India's finished goods production in 2027 is expected to range from 2.2 gigawatts to 2.6 gigawatts. The pace in sequencing subsequent Series 7 US conversions will be informed by learnings from the India launch consistent with the disciplined learning-based approach we have taken across all periods of technology transition.

因此，2027 年印度的成品產量預期介於 2.2 吉瓦至 2.6 吉瓦。後續美國 Series 7 轉換的節奏與排序，將依據印度啟動的學習成果而定，並與我們在各次技術轉換期間所採取的嚴謹、以學習為導向的方法一致。

In South Carolina, our Series 6 finishing facility is being brought online in two phases as part of the integrated manufacturing flow from Vietnam. The first phase started production in Q3. Second phase is expected to reach commercial launch in mid-2027. As we previously shared, we delayed the second phase by approximately one quarter so that Secure could be incorporated at commercial launch. Together, these two phases are expected to result in 2027 South Carolina production of 2.2 to 2.5 gigawatts.

在南卡羅來納州，我們的 Series 6 後段製程（finishing）廠正以兩個階段上線，作為自越南整合製造流程的一部分。第一階段已於第三季開始生產；第二階段預計於 2027 年年中達到商業化投產。如我們先前所分享，我們將第二階段延後約一季，以便在商業化投產時納入 Secure。合計而言，這兩個階段預期將使 2027 年南卡羅來納州產量達到 2.2 至 2.5 吉瓦。

Beyond CuRe, we continue to advance our next-generation technology road map, our Ohio pilot line designed to produce Series 6 size perovskite modules remains on track to reach operational readiness in the first half of 2027. We expect this line will enable field deployment of modules to further capture learnings and validate the manufacturing performance and durability profile of this next-generation thin film technology before we undertake broader scaling decisions.

除 CuRe 之外，我們也持續推進下一代技術路線圖；我們位於俄亥俄州、用於生產 Series 6 尺寸鈣鈦礦模組的試產線，仍按計畫於 2027 年上半年達到可運作就緒狀態。我們預期該產線將使模組得以進行現場部署，以進一步累積學習並驗證此下一代薄膜技術的製造表現與耐久性特徵，之後再進行更大規模擴產決策。

Our licensing agreement with Cubic PV announced earlier today, together with our previously announced intellectual property agreement with Oxford PV, continues to support the development road map, providing access to foundational perovskite IP as we advance our technology road map.

我們今日稍早宣布與 Cubic PV 的授權協議，連同先前宣布與 Oxford PV 的智慧財產權協議，持續支援開發路線圖，並在我們推進技術路線圖的同時，提供對基礎鈣鈦礦 IP 的取得。

Turning to the market environment on slide 5. The Section 232 reclamation issued in August represents a meaningful shift for US solar manufacturing. And we believe First Solar is well positioned to benefit as the shift takes effect. Combined with fundamentals such as continued demand strength from load growth and data center expansions, we see a long-term opportunity to translate this position into earnings growth.

接著看投影片第 5 頁的市場環境。8 月發布的第 232 條追溯性措施（reclamation）代表美國太陽能製造業的一項重大轉變。我們相信 First Solar 已具備良好條件，可在此轉變發酵時受益。再加上負載成長與資料中心擴張所帶來的持續強勁需求等基本面，我們看到一個長期機會，可將此一定位轉化為獲利成長。

Section 232 represents a structural change in how the United States approaches solar manufacturing. As the US competes for global leadership in artificial intelligence, and the emerging low earth orbit economy, secure and affordable power will be foundational to both. The country cannot afford to depend on adversarial nations for technologies and supply chains increasingly central to our long-term economic prosperity and national security.

第 232 條代表美國在太陽能製造議題上的結構性改變。當美國競逐人工智慧以及新興近地軌道經濟的全球領導地位時，安全且可負擔的電力將是兩者的基礎。美國無法承受在日益成為長期經濟繁榮與國家安全核心的技術與供應鏈上，依賴敵對國家。

As a technology company and the only fully integrated utility scale solar manufacturer without dependency on a Chinese crystal silicon supply chain, we believe we are structurally positioned to benefit from this environment. Note, by 2027, nearly 80% of our global module manufacturing footprint will be located in the US.

作為一家科技公司，且是唯一一家不依賴中國晶體矽供應鏈、完全整合的公用事業級太陽能製造商，我們相信我們在結構上具備從此環境中受益的優勢。請注意，到 2027 年，我們全球模組製造版圖中將近 80% 會位於美國。

Long-term demand fundamentals also remained strong. AI-related infrastructure, electrification and the onshoring of US manufacturing are driving significant load growth. These customers need large-scale power quickly and solar plus storage remains one of the fastest and lowest cost solutions. They are increasingly focused on availability, delivery certainty, a bankable warranties and supply chain security attributes we have built our business around.

長期需求基本面亦維持強勁。與 AI 相關的基礎設施、電氣化，以及美國製造回流（onshoring）正推動顯著的負載成長。這些客戶需要快速取得大規模電力，而太陽能加儲能仍是最快且成本最低的解決方案之一。他們也愈來愈重視供應可得性、交付確定性、可被金融機構接受的保固，以及供應鏈安全——這些正是我們打造業務的核心屬性。

As it relates to bookings, we believe the market is working through a transition following the Section 232 announcement with significant influence from other key factors. As a reminder, a substantial portion of our existing backlog is comprised of multiyear framework agreements that are intended to supply customers with projects in various stages of development.

就接單（bookings）而言，我們認為市場在第 232 條公告後正處於轉換期，且同時受到其他關鍵因素的顯著影響。提醒各位，我們現有在手訂單（backlog）中有相當大一部分由多年期框架協議構成，旨在為客戶供應處於不同開發階段的專案。

While entering into these types of agreements has historically driven significant additions to our backlog, they can also be more challenging for us to plan for and allocate against because of the inherent delivery timing uncertainty associated with projects in early stage of development.

雖然簽訂此類協議在過去通常會帶來我們在手訂單的大幅增加，但由於早期開發專案本身存在交付時點不確定性，這類協議也可能使我們在規劃與產能/供貨配置上更具挑戰。

Over the course of this year, while not closing the door on framework agreements with appropriate contractual protections, our customer engagements have shifted more towards project-specific contracting with the five projects and delivery schedules. From our perspective, the enhanced certainty surrounding project-specific contracts allows us to optimize module allocation and delivery with a potential trade-off of slowing the pace of an extended multiyear contracted backlog.

在今年期間，在不排除具備適當合約保護條款的框架協議之前提下，我們與客戶的互動已更多轉向以特定專案為基礎的簽約，並明確對應專案與交付時程。從我們的角度來看，特定專案合約所帶來的更高確定性，使我們能最佳化模組配置與交付，但可能的取捨是：多年期延伸合約在手訂單的累積速度會放緩。

At the same time, customers are focused on advancing mid- and late-stage projects where modules have already been secured, while deferring procurement on early-stage projects requiring delivery later in the decade. We see several factors driving this behavior, including increased nimbyism among community residents and growing state and local government opposition.

同時，客戶正專注推進中後期專案——這些專案的模組已經取得保障——並延後對需要在本十年後期交付的早期專案進行採購。我們看到多項因素驅動此行為，包括社區居民的「鄰避效應」（NIMBYism）升高，以及州與地方政府反對聲浪增加。

In addition, the overall inflationary environment, together with the continuously evolving tariff landscape, have challenged near-term project economics and require greater strategic planning on behalf of our development customers to address system cost increases unrelated to module pricing.

此外，整體通膨環境，加上持續演變的關稅態勢，已對短期專案經濟性造成挑戰，並要求我們的開發客戶進行更周延的策略規劃，以因應與模組定價無關的系統成本上升。

As one example, in certain cases, surging battery prices is challenging both projects in construction as well as projects at the PPA bid stage. Lastly, an incomplete regulatory picture with regards to the final FIAT guidance as well as the potential for Section 232 tariffs to continue to evolve, particularly as it relates to minimum import prices and the effectiveness of anti-stocking measures has generated volatility in the module procurement market and inhibited customer clarity as it relates to module pricing discovery.

舉例而言，在某些情況下，電池價格飆升正同時對在建專案以及處於 PPA 投標階段的專案造成挑戰。最後，關於最終 FIAT 指引的監管圖景仍不完整，加上第 232 條關稅可能持續演變，特別是涉及最低進口價格與反囤貨措施有效性等議題，已在模組採購市場引發波動，並抑制客戶在模組定價發現方面的清晰度。

The impact of these current dynamics on recent bookings is most pronounced from our Malaysia facility. While Vietnam is expected to supply the semi-finished product for our South Carolina finishing facility, Malaysia retains the capacity to produce fully finished international modules. We continue to evaluate demand for this product based on core unit economics, tariffs and trade conditions and customer contracting terms.

這些當前動態對近期接單的影響，在我們馬來西亞廠最為明顯。雖然越南預期將為我們南卡羅來納州的後段加工廠供應半成品，但馬來西亞仍保有生產完整成品國際模組的產能。我們持續基於核心單位經濟性、關稅與貿易條件以及客戶簽約條款，評估此產品的需求。

We expect the operating decision regarding our Malaysia facility to be binary, resulting in either operations at full or near full capacity of 1.8 gigawatt annually or a shutdown of production with a decision expected in the first half of 2027.

我們預期針對馬來西亞廠的營運決策將是二選一：要麼以每年 1.8 吉瓦的滿載或接近滿載產能運作，要麼停產關閉；預計將於 2027 年上半年作出決定。

Given Malaysia's relatively small contribution to our manufacturing footprint, limited Series 6 blending opportunity in the US absent a Section 45x credits and freight and tariff burdens, we do not expect either outcome to materially impact our run rate earnings profile.

鑑於馬來西亞對我們製造版圖的貢獻相對較小、在美國若缺乏第 45X 條稅額抵免則 Series 6 的混配機會有限，以及運費與關稅負擔，我們不預期任何一種結果會對我們的常態化獲利能力輪廓造成重大影響。

Against this backdrop, we remain deliberate on bookings, and we are pleased with the results of this approach. Through today in the US, our largest market, we have booked approximately 4.9 gigawatts at approximately $0.36 per watt inclusive of ingesters. Moreover, our 44 gigawatt backlog gives us the ability to focus on contracting approaches on two strategic initiatives.

在此背景下，我們對接單仍保持審慎，且對此做法的成果感到滿意。截至今日，在我們最大的市場美國，我們已接單約 4.9 吉瓦，平均售價約為每瓦 0.36 美元（含 ingesters）。此外，我們 44 吉瓦的在手訂單使我們能將重點放在兩項策略性倡議的簽約方式上。

First, we seek to improve pricing on new module sales relative to our current backlog ASP, no pricing will continue to vary by product, Series 6 and Series 7 and by US versus internationally made. Second, we seek to improve contract structures to further mitigate the risk of cost increases beyond our control, strengthening credit support and payment terms and firm up product delivery schedules.

第一，我們希望相較於目前在手訂單的平均售價（ASP），提升新模組銷售的定價；定價仍將依產品而異，包括 Series 6 與 Series 7，以及美國製造與國際製造之別。第二，我們希望改善合約結構，以進一步降低超出我們控制範圍的成本上升風險，強化信用支持與付款條款，並使產品交付時程更為確定。

Our objective is to optimize across both upfront ASPs as well as long-term earnings profile through disciplined pricing, appropriate contractual protections, strong counterparties and alignment with our manufacturing and delivery strategy.

我們的目標是透過嚴謹定價、適當的合約保護、強健的交易對手，以及與我們的製造與交付策略一致，在前端 ASP 與長期獲利能力輪廓兩方面取得最佳化。

In summary, our focus on project specific versus framework agreements, customer focus on near-term project execution versus late data procurement, evolving market price discovery and our contracting discipline have moderated recent bookings on a volume basis. But on an economic basis, has generated improved pricing relative to our overall backlog.

總結而言，我們聚焦於專案別合約而非框架協議、客戶聚焦於近期專案執行而非較晚期的資料採購、持續演變的市場價格發現，以及我們的簽約紀律，使近期接單在量的層面有所放緩。但在經濟性層面，則帶來相較於整體在手訂單更佳的定價。

In addition, we remain focused on our ability to affect our contracting strategic initiatives and are confident in demand for our domestically produced product, particularly for [2029] and beyond when we have -- available supply.

此外，我們仍專注於推動簽約策略性倡議的能力，並對我們國內生產產品的需求充滿信心，特別是在 [2029] 年及以後，當我們將有——可用供給之時。

With that, I turn the call over to Alex to discuss our bookings, financial results and outlook.

接下來，我把電話交給 Alex，請他說明我們的接單、財務結果與展望。

Thanks, Mark. Turning to our bookings and backlog on slide 6. We ended the quarter with 44 gigawatts on to contract, representing approximately $13.5 billion contracted value, exclusive of technology adjusters with scheduled deliveries extending through 2030. Since our last earnings call, we recorded approximately 1.4 gigawatts of additional US gross bookings at an average selling price of approximately $0.36 per watt, inclusive of applicable technology adjusters.

謝謝，Mark。接著看投影片 6 的接單與在手訂單。本季結束時，我們有 44 吉瓦的已簽約在手訂單，代表約 135 億美元的合約價值（不含技術調整項），排定交付延伸至 2030 年。自上次法說會以來，我們新增約 1.4 吉瓦的美國總接單，平均售價約每瓦 0.36 美元，包含適用的技術調整項。

Importantly, substantially all the volume was contracted or in late-stage negotiations and pricing in terms are largely set ahead of the Section 232 announced. In addition, there remains approximately 4 gigawatts of variable volume associated with previously signed contracts, not currently part of the contracted backlog, but pricing reflective of the pre-Section 232 environment, which our customers have the ability to exercise as of the date start.

重要的是，幾乎所有量都已簽約或處於後期談判階段，且定價與條款大多在第 232 條宣布之前即已大致確定。此外，先前已簽署合約中仍有約 4 吉瓦的可變動量，目前未納入已簽約在手訂單，但其定價反映第 232 條之前的環境；客戶可自起始日（date start）起選擇行使。

Approximately half of this volume has a decision day within the next five months, with the other half spread across the remainder of 2027 and 2028. Should our customers elect to receive this volume, it will be recognized as incremental bookings time of such election.

其中約一半的量在未來五個月內有決定日，另一半則分布於 2027 年與 2028 年其餘期間。若客戶選擇接收該等數量，將於其作出選擇時認列為新增接單。

During the quarter, we also continued customer notifications related to contractual technology adjusters, aligned with our production plan and intended deployment sequence. These notifications represent a meaningful source of incremental backlog value as CuRe deployment advances across the fleet, with the majority of the adjusted value expected to be realized in 2027 and 2028.

本季期間，我們也持續向客戶發出與合約技術調整項相關的通知，並與我們的生產計畫及預期部署順序一致。隨著 CuRe 在整體產線（fleet）上的部署推進，這些通知將成為新增在手訂單價值的重要來源；多數調整後價值預期將於 2027 年與 2028 年實現。

In respect to adjust eligible volume, we would note that the ultimate realization of these adjustments is subject to the achievement of the underlying technology milestones, timing of future customer notifications and module delivery schedules and other contractual conditions. And therefore, the final value and timing may differ from the amounts and periods described.

就符合調整資格的數量而言，我們指出，這些調整最終能否實現，取決於底層技術里程碑的達成、未來客戶通知的時點、模組交付排程及其他合約條件。因此，最終價值與時點可能與上述所述金額與期間不同。

Of that potential adjusted value, approximately 20% is currently associated with 2027 deliveries with the remainder weighted to 2028 and beyond. As we continue to progress customer notifications associated with existing bookings tied to our CuRe deployment sequence, together with new bookings removing the adjusted concepts as we sell our CuRe product with the technology embedded in the base ASP the value of the adjusters will roll off over time.

在該等潛在調整價值中，約 20% 目前與 2027 年交付相關，其餘則偏重於 2028 年及以後。隨著我們持續推進與既有接單相關、依 CuRe 部署順序而進行的客戶通知，加上新接單在銷售 CuRe 產品時已將技術內嵌於基礎 ASP、因而移除調整概念，調整項的價值將隨時間逐步消退。

Turning to slide 7. Net sales for the third quarter were approximately $1.2 billion, a decrease of approximately 23% year-over-year. The decrease was primarily driven by lower module volumes sold to third parties compared to the prior year period. Gross margin was approximately 58%, up roughly 20 percentage points year-over-year. The year-over-year increase was driven primarily by a higher mix of US produced modules.

接著看投影片 7。第三季淨銷售額約為 12 億美元，年減約 23%。下降主要是因為相較去年同期，對第三方銷售的模組出貨量較低。毛利率約為 58%，年增約 20 個百分點。年增主要由美國製造模組占比提高所帶動。

Gross margin also benefited from lower sales rates and utilization costs, tariffs and duties, partially offset by lower termination related revenue. Operating expenses were approximately $167 million. Research and development expense was approximately $67 million, reflecting continued investment in our technology road map, including (inaudible) development.

毛利率亦受惠於較低的銷售費率與稼動成本、關稅與稅費，但部分被較低的終止相關收入所抵銷。營業費用約為 1.67 億美元。研發費用約為 6,700 萬美元，反映我們持續投資於技術路線圖，包括（聽不清）開發。

Net income was $571 million, up approximately 25% year-over-year. Adjusted EBITDA was $744 million, near the upper end of our previously communicated Q3 preview range, with an adjusted EBITDA margin of approximately 60%. Diluted earnings per share were $5.30 compared with $4.24 in the prior year period.

淨利為 5.71 億美元，年增約 25%。調整後 EBITDA 為 7.44 億美元，接近我們先前溝通之第三季預覽區間上緣，調整後 EBITDA 利潤率約為 60%。稀釋後每股盈餘為 5.30 美元，去年同期為 4.24 美元。

Turning to our balance sheet and capital allocation on slide 8. We ended the quarter with approximately $1.5 billion in net cash remaining within our long-term target net cash range of $1.5 billion to $2 billion. Our balance sheet and projected cash generation continues to provide substantial financial flexibility.

接著看投影片 8 的資產負債表與資本配置。本季結束時，我們的淨現金約為 15 億美元，仍在我們長期目標淨現金區間 15 億至 20 億美元之內。我們的資產負債表與預期現金創造能力持續提供相當可觀的財務彈性。

In February, we laid out our approach to capital structure and capital allocation is prioritized maintaining the aforementioned $1.5 billion to $2 billion of net cash to provide resiliency to cyclicality and industry volatility. And to use additional cash to focus on growth, technology deployment, innovation, R&D, technology road map advancements and M&A, especially related to complementary technology adjacent opportunities.

在 2 月，我們闡述了資本結構與資本配置的方法，優先事項是維持前述 15 億至 20 億美元的淨現金，以提升對景氣循環與產業波動的韌性。並運用額外現金聚焦於成長、技術部署、創新、研發、技術路線圖推進與併購（M&A），尤其是與互補性技術及相鄰機會相關者。

We further stated that we would evaluate applying cash generation in excess of the above capital priorities to share repurchases, pending clarity around third factors, including policy catalysts, new bookings volume and tax credit monetization.

我們也進一步表示，對於超出上述資本優先事項的現金創造，我們將在釐清第三方因素後評估用於股票回購，包括政策催化因素、新接單量以及稅額抵免變現（monetization）。

In line with this approach and following the Section 232 proclamation issued in Q3, our Board has authorized a share repurchase program of up to $500 million, effective immediately with no expiration date. This authorization reflects confidence in the long-term value of the business, while preserving our disciplined approach to capital allocation and ability to continue investing in technology development and growth.

依循此一方針，並在第三季發布第232條公告之後，我們的董事會已核准一項最高達5億美元的庫藏股回購計畫，即刻生效且無到期日。此項授權反映我們對公司長期價值的信心，同時維持我們在資本配置上的紀律作法，並保有持續投資於技術開發與成長的能力。

Turning to slide 9. Our full year 2026 guidance is updated to reflect a lower range of India domestic, international Series 6 and US finishing volumes sold, with an associated reduction in revenue and adjusted EBITDA. As we stated in our original guidance in February, we entered the year assuming our India facility would flex production as needed to match successfully priced India-based demand in an inherently short book-to-bill cycle market.

接著看第9頁投影片。我們更新了2026全年指引，以反映印度國內、國際Series 6以及美國後段加工（finishing）出貨量（銷售量）區間下修，並相應下調營收與調整後EBITDA。如同我們在2月原始指引中所述，我們在年初的假設是：在本質上訂單/出貨（book-to-bill）週期較短的市場中，我們的印度廠將視需要彈性調整產量，以配合能以成功定價達成的印度在地需求。

We've accordingly reduced our full year India domestic volume sold forecast by approximately 0.7 gigawatts. We also stated in February that we entered the year assuming limited in-year demand for our Series 6 international product and bookings activity for 2026 deliveries has remained consistent with that assumption.

因此，我們將全年印度國內銷售量預估下調約0.7吉瓦。我們也在2月表示，年初假設我們的Series 6國際產品在當年度的需求有限，而目前針對2026年交付的接單活動仍與該假設一致。

While the low end of our total US component volume sold forecast reflects a modest reduction based on reduced Series 6 WIP share products sold, our forecast range for fully domestic products sold remains unchanged. As we look forward to next year, subject to a supportive policy and trade environment, we expect to increase exports from our India facility to the US market to optimize the margin potential from this factory.

雖然我們對美國整體零組件銷售量預估區間的低端，反映了因Series 6在製品（WIP）占比產品銷售減少而做的小幅下修，但我們對完全國產產品（fully domestic products）銷售量的預估區間維持不變。展望明年，在政策與貿易環境支持的前提下，我們預期將增加自印度廠出口至美國市場，以最佳化該工廠的毛利潛力。

And as Mark discussed, we expect to make a decision on the long-term operating path for our Malaysia facility in the first half 2027. Core operating expenses primarily increased as a function of increased legal spend associated with defending our Topcon intellectual property position, which we believe has the potential to drive future revenue and earnings upside and increased R&D spend on perovskite development.

另外，如Mark所討論，我們預期將在2027年上半年就馬來西亞廠的長期營運路徑做出決策。核心營運費用主要因兩項因素而增加：一是為捍衛我們的Topcon智慧財產權地位而增加的法律支出；我們相信這有潛力帶來未來營收與獲利的上行空間；二是針對鈣鈦礦（perovskite）開發而增加的研發支出。

Note, our full year perovskite related spend originally forecasted approximately $100 million is now expected to total approximately $120 million. This forecast increased in 2027 as we seek to advance this next-generation advanced technology.

請注意，我們原先預估全年與鈣鈦礦相關的支出約為1億美元，現預期總額約為1.2億美元。隨著我們推進此一下一代先進技術，該預估在2027年將進一步增加。

Core OpEx increases were offset by a delay in certain start-up expenses of our South Carolina facility now expected in mid-2027, leaving our total 2026 operating expense guidance unchanged. Net cash guidance remains unchanged. The reduced cash inflows from volumes sold, offset by a reduction to forecasted CapEx.

核心OpEx的增加，部分被南卡羅來納州廠部分啟動（start-up）費用延後所抵銷；該費用目前預期在2027年年中發生，因此我們2026年總營運費用指引維持不變。淨現金指引亦維持不變。銷售量下降帶來的現金流入減少，將由資本支出（CapEx）預估下調所抵銷。

In summary, we remain well positioned as we close out 2026 and look forward to 2027, driven by US policy framework supporting true domestic manufacturing, continued lower growth as the United States compete to lead in AI and utility scale solar ambition to meet the cost and speed to power requirements of a rapidly modernizing US economy.

總結而言，在2026年收官並展望2027年之際，我們仍處於有利位置，動能來自美國政策架構對真正國內製造的支持、在美國競逐AI領先地位之下持續的負載成長，以及公用事業級太陽能為滿足快速現代化的美國經濟對電力成本與供電速度要求所展現的企圖心。

The drivers align well with our 44 gigawatts contracted backlog for mostly near-term deliveries and greater module supply availability in the 2028 beyond time frame, which we expect further improvements in pricing and contractual terms relative to our existing backlog. We continue to invest in our future, including our stage CuRe technology replication across the fleet, and increased perovskite spend in R&D, IP partnerships and our Perrysburg pilot line. Our strong balance sheet allows us continued investment in the business while concurrently enabling capital return to shareholders.

這些驅動因素與我們44吉瓦的已簽約在手訂單（contracted backlog）高度契合，且多數為近期交付；同時在2028年以後的時間框架中，模組供給可得性將更高，我們預期相較於現有在手訂單，價格與合約條款將進一步改善。我們持續投資未來，包括在整體產線（fleet）推動我們分階段CuRe技術的複製導入，以及增加鈣鈦礦在研發、IP合作夥伴關係與我們Perrysburg試點產線上的投入。我們強健的資產負債表，使我們得以持續投資業務，同時也能向股東回饋資本。

And with that operator, please open the line for questions.

以上，接線員，請開放提問。

(Operator Instructions)

（接線員指示）

Moses Sutton, BNP Paribas.

BNP Paribas的Moses Sutton。

Thanks for taking my question. Thanks for all the color. Maybe you could like elaborate on what seems like literally zero urgency for developers to book '29 volumes. I sort of get the point on there's nimbyism there's positive economics, there's tariffs, but we also hear from developers they expect to really do a lot of safe harbor volume in (technical difficulty) Panel prices will structurally go up 50%. They don't have inventory that extends that far out, even if they do for the next two years.

謝謝讓我提問。也謝謝提供這麼多細節。或許你們可以多談談，為什麼開發商在預訂2029年出貨量這件事上，看起來幾乎完全沒有急迫性。我大概理解你們提到的點：有鄰避效應（nimbyism）、有正向經濟性、有關稅；但我們也聽到開發商說，他們預期會做很多「安全港」（safe harbor）量在（技術困難）面板價格結構性上升50%。他們並沒有能延伸到那麼遠的庫存，即便他們對未來兩年有庫存也是如此。

So -- sorry for the long question, but would there be a strategy change that's necessary? Would you cut price to $0.34, $0.35 and book the rest of the decade? It would seem that a little more agency for '29 than there used to be, maybe can elaborate a little more, because we do still expect at least 10 gigawatts of TAM each year in '29 and '30?

所以——抱歉問題有點長——是否需要改變策略？你們會不會把價格降到0.34、0.35美元，然後把這十年剩下的量都先簽下來？看起來對2029年的掌控度（agency）比以前更高一些；也許可以再多說一點，因為我們仍預期在2029與2030年每年至少有10吉瓦的TAM（可服務市場總量）？

Yes. Well, look, I think the first thing I think we just need to maybe step back and reflect on is that everyone obviously is evaluating the execution against their development pipeline. And there's near-term initiatives and areas of focus that they're concentrated on right now and disruptions at certain times, as we indicated even as it relates to whether it's battery costs or other component costs, I mean, or the impact of tariffs that are swinging various projects around, people are all trying to work through that. They're trying to secure their financing. There's still interconnection challenges that people are working through.

是的。嗯，首先我想我們需要先退一步回頭看：顯然每個人都在評估其開發管線的執行狀況。他們目前正專注於一些短期的倡議與重點領域，而在某些時點也會出現干擾；正如我們所提到的，不論是電池成本或其他零組件成本，或是關稅影響導致各個專案在不同方案間擺動，大家都在努力消化與處理。他們也在設法確保融資。此外，大家仍在處理併網（interconnection）方面的挑戰。

And then probably the biggest issue that people are continuing to struggle with right now is just the challenges that are continuing to happen in local communities even at the state level, in particular, from a government standpoint and trying to push back on deployment of data centers, as we indicated and maybe as a comment that we had in our prepared remarks.

而目前大家持續面臨、可能也是最大的問題，是地方社區、甚至州層級仍在發生的挑戰，特別是政府層面對資料中心部署的反彈；我們在事先準備的發言中也提到過，或許也曾作為評論指出。

So there's a lot that they got going on right now. So engagements that we are having right now with customers. And we are starting to book pipeline of opportunities that are going out into that horizon and some even beyond '29 going into '30 and beyond as well. But everyone is kind of like I got all these near-term things I'm focused on at this point in time.

所以他們現在同時有很多事情在進行。就我們目前與客戶的互動而言，我們也開始為延伸到那個時間點、甚至超過2029、進入2030及更遠的機會管線進行簽約（book）。但每個人都像是：我現在有一堆短期事項要先專注處理。

I've got to work through these, get everything addressed I'm still trying to digest the implications of what happens with the full implementation around 232. People are still trying to think through the Fiat guidance is going to come out sometime either later this year or beginning of next year. And so I think there's clarity that everybody is looking for at that point in time.

我得先把這些問題逐一解決、把所有事項處理到位；我也還在消化第232條全面落實後的影響。大家也仍在思考Fiat指引將在今年稍晚或明年初某個時間點發布。因此，我認為大家在那個時間點都在尋求更明確的方向。

So I think it's just a matter of just the timing of letting some of this work its way through and where their near-term priorities are to then think through the balance of the decade and what they still need to do. I mean everyone is really concerned now meeting their 48 safe harbor requirements, which these products have to be safe harbored by and completed and commissioned by the end of 2028. And there's not as much focus going further out into the horizon, and that's largely what we're seeing from customers.

所以我認為這主要只是時間點問題：讓部分事情逐步發酵、推進，並看他們短期優先事項在哪裡，之後再去思考這十年剩餘期間的平衡，以及他們還需要做什麼。我的意思是，大家現在非常關切如何滿足其48E安全港要求；這些產品必須完成安全港，並在2028年底前完工與併網（commissioned）。相較之下，對更遠期的關注度就沒那麼高，而這大致就是我們從客戶端看到的情況。

Just a couple of other comments. So we said on the call that we were seeing this year challenges in near-term book-to-bill on our international volume. And if that ties into what we said before, we don't want to be in the spot market. That's a challenging place for us to be. But if you look at our contracted backlog, we're still booked out a couple of years in advance.

再補充幾點。我們在電話會議中提到，今年我們在國際出貨量的短期訂單/出貨（book-to-bill）方面看到一些挑戰。而若這與我們先前所說的相呼應，我們不希望落入現貨市場（spot market）。那對我們而言是個具挑戰性的處境。但如果你看我們的已簽約在手訂單，我們仍然已提前預訂到未來幾年。

So when you talk about urgency around booking 2029, obviously, we'd like to see bookings momentum. We're open for business, but I don't think we have a desperate urgency to be booking in that horizon right now. And we also talked on the call in the prepared remarks around how we're thinking about contracting. And we're looking increasingly at individual projects versus large frameworks. And we're happy to take framework deals with the right set of structural protections within them.

所以當你談到關於預訂 2029 年的急迫性時，顯然我們希望看到預訂動能。我們隨時可以承接業務，但我不認為我們現在對於在那個時間跨度上進行預訂有那種迫切到「非做不可」的急迫性。我們也在電話會議的事先準備講稿中談到我們如何看待簽約。而我們越來越多地在看單一專案，而不是大型框架協議。而且只要框架協議內含有適當的一套結構性保護條款，我們也樂於接受框架型交易。

But we see more and more customers actually looking at individual project deals, and we've been looking at that. And generally speaking, that's going to give you shorter-term visibility relative to 2029. So if it's trying to book specific projects, that the amount of clarity you have for 2029 is a lot less than if you're looking at framework horizon. So there's that piece to factor in as well.

但我們看到越來越多客戶其實在看單一專案的交易，我們也一直在研究這一點。一般來說，這相較於 2029 年會給你更短期的能見度。所以如果是試圖預訂特定專案，那你對 2029 年的明確程度會比看框架期程要低得多。所以這也是需要納入考量的一部分。

Yes. And one thing I should have mentioned, too, just I think it's just a really good example to highlight kind of the dynamics that are going on, right? Now we are in negotiations with the customer for 2 gigawatt procurement decision that was largely into final negotiations and documentation associated around the agreement and the particular state that this project was being developed put a moratorium in place.

是的。另外我也應該提一下，我覺得這是一個非常好的例子，用來凸顯目前正在發生的各種動態，對吧？現在我們正與客戶就一項 2 吉瓦的採購決策進行談判，原本大致已進入最後的談判階段，以及與協議相關的文件作業；但由於該專案開發所在的特定州對此設置了暫停令（moratorium）。

And the whole project stopped, right? And this has happened after the announcement of the 232. So customers are just uncertain and when that level of uncertainty does happen, then they're not going to be making commitments until they get better clarity.

結果整個專案就停了，對吧？而且這是在 232 公告之後發生的。所以客戶就是不確定；當不確定性達到那種程度時，在獲得更清楚的資訊之前，他們不會做出承諾。

Very helpful. Thank you.

非常有幫助。謝謝。

Joseph Osha with Guggenheim.

Guggenheim 的 Joseph Osha。

Thanks very much. Following a little bit on Moses' question. Alex, you mentioned that bookings we're seeing now reflect conversations that were undertaken prior to 232. Can you maybe give us a little bit of a preview on where conversations are landing for conversations that commence post 232? Thank you.

非常感謝。延續一下 Moses 的問題。Alex，你提到我們現在看到的預訂反映的是 232 之前就已展開的對話。你能否稍微讓我們預覽一下，對於 232 之後才開始的對話，目前大概會落在什麼樣的結果？謝謝。

Yes, maybe I'll add a little bit color around that. Since the announcement of 232, we have revised and increased our pricing. In some cases, they were deals that were still in the early stage of negotiations. So we have increased pricing in those negotiations with customers. It -- and if it's a new opportunity that's come in our way that wasn't even in any form of conversation prior to the 232, then those prices have gone up relative to what we would have been indicating previously.

是的，我可以補充一些背景說明。自從 232 公告之後，我們已經調整並提高了我們的定價。在某些情況下，那些交易仍處於談判的早期階段。因此我們在與客戶的談判中提高了價格。而且——如果是新的機會找上門，甚至在 232 之前完全沒有任何形式的對話，那麼這些價格相較於我們先前可能給出的指引也已經上調。

We still have to work through all those issues, right? And I think we're -- anytime you get through here in an environment of rising prices, there's a lot of price discovery that's going to get done. Everyone want to go out and they want to evaluate all other options and sort of discover where they think the pricing can be for different dynamics and whether they need the domestic content or how much of the domestic content from a point standpoint do they need. So they're going to do a lot of heavy lifting to sort of figure out and triangulate what makes the most sense.

我們仍然必須把所有這些問題逐一處理，對吧？我認為——任何時候在一個價格上升的環境中推進，都會有大量的價格發現（price discovery）要完成。每個人都會想出去評估所有其他選項，並在不同的情境下摸索他們認為合理的價格區間，以及他們是否需要國產含量，或從積分（point）角度來看需要多少國產含量。所以他們會做很多繁重的工作，去釐清並交叉驗證什麼才是最合理的選擇。

Partly because they also have to, in most cases, go back and get approval through their boards. And when you see a price point in the market that was there previously and now that, that price point has increased significantly, then everybody has to then sort of do the due diligence around that. So what I would say is the deals that -- some of the deals that we have announced in this quarter were priced before the 232 in cases where we were in earlier negotiations with customers after the 232, we have looked to try to increase that and then clearly, any new opportunities that kind of informed the more comprehensive view of what we think the pricing environment is like today. But like I said, the price discovery is going to take a while before you'll start to see that volume being executed.

部分原因是，在多數情況下，他們也必須回去取得董事會的核准。當你看到市場上原本存在的價格點，而現在那個價格點大幅上升時，所有人就都必須對此進行盡職調查。所以我要說的是——我們本季公告的一些交易，在我們與客戶於 232 之後仍處於較早期談判的情況下，部分是以 232 之前的價格定的；我們已嘗試在那些談判中提高價格；而且很明顯，任何新的機會也會讓我們對於今日定價環境形成更全面的看法。但如我所說，在你開始看到那些量被實際執行之前，價格發現還需要一段時間。

Philip Shen, ROTH Capital.

ROTH Capital 的 Philip Shen。

Thanks for taking the questions. In terms of price, just to continue with the conversation, the price discovery may take some time. It sounds like you are -- you have 4 gigawatts, of which maybe 2 gigawatts needs to be decided on in the next five months. And so just curious where -- what are we talking about now in terms of where pricing could go to in the crystalline silicon world, we've quantified it as pricing has gone up $0.10 to $0.20 a lot depending on the product and maybe timing. And so that's a big move, and I understand the price discovery patients or timing that people need because they have to process kind of this upside shock to their economics. And so I was wondering if you can share with us a little bit of where do you think -- what could you book in the next quarter and then what kind of price do you think you might get? Thanks.

謝謝讓我提問。就價格而言，延續剛才的討論，價格發現可能需要一些時間。聽起來你們有 4 吉瓦，其中可能有 2 吉瓦需要在接下來五個月內做出決定。所以我想了解——就目前晶體矽領域而言，我們量化的結果是價格上漲了 0.10 到 0.20 美元，幅度很大，取決於產品以及可能的時點。這是很大的變動；我也理解大家需要時間與耐心來進行價格發現，因為他們必須消化這種對經濟性的上行衝擊。因此我想請你們分享一下，你們認為下一季可能可以預訂多少？以及你們覺得可能拿到什麼樣的價格？謝謝。

Yes. Phil, the one thing on price, too, I just want to make sure that we've highlighted this before, it does vary by -- we have it in our prepared remarks as well. I mean the price for us -- for our Series 6 product is different than our Series 7 products. Our domestic -- high content domestic content product is different than a fully international imported module.

是的，Phil，關於價格我也想再補充一點，確保我們之前已經強調過：價格會因為——我們在事先準備講稿裡也有提到。我的意思是，對我們而言——我們的 Series 6 產品價格與 Series 7 產品不同。我們的國產——高國產含量產品，也不同於完全國際進口的模組。

So there's going to be a distribution of what that pricing could look like. And so if I'm selling something that's being imported from Malaysia as an example. That's going to be at the low end of that continuum. And if I'm selling our Series 7 product that's domestically manufactured here in the US, and that's going to be at the high end. So there's going to be a continuum around pricing.

因此那個定價會呈現一個分布。如果我賣的是例如從馬來西亞進口的產品。那會落在那個區間的低端。如果我賣的是我們在美國本土製造的 Series 7 產品，那會落在高端。所以定價會是一個連續的區間。

As it relates to -- we just announced, again, I think, another quarter at $0.36 or something like that is what our -- since the last call, Con call, I think it was around $0.36. And we have deals and that's an average deals that are above that, and that's a momentum that we'd like to continue to carry on -- carry forward.

至於——我們剛宣布的，我想又是一季大約 0.36 美元左右，這是我們——自上次電話會議以來，我記得大概是 0.36 美元。我們也有一些交易的平均價格高於這個水準，而這是我們希望能持續延續——延續下去的動能。

But I also want to be careful of, we've got to pre-marker out there with so much that still is as fluid and still evolving. I don't want to give an indication of what that price realization could be. We're just going to work to try to see how we can engage the market and capture the highest value relative to competitive alternatives. And Christmas and silicon stays in the range that you referenced and then that gives us quite a bit of opportunity to improve pricing dynamics for our technology, but a lot of work still to go to get there.

但我也想謹慎一點：市場上仍有太多事情非常不穩定、仍在演變。我不想去暗示我們最終能實現的價格會是多少。我們只會努力看看如何與市場互動，並相對於競爭替代方案去捕捉最高價值。而如果晶體矽維持在你所提到的區間，那就會給我們相當多的機會去改善我們技術的定價動態，但要走到那一步仍有很多工作要做。

So maybe just two other comments. As it relates to the volume that we already have that may get elected by customers, that's going to range from somewhere close to current backlog average or somewhere close to where we're pricing now. So you're going to see a variety in that. But it's going to be between what we see historically and what we're seeing currently.

所以我再補充兩點。就那些我們已經有、可能會被客戶選擇的量而言，它會落在接近目前積壓訂單（backlog）平均值，或接近我們現在的定價水準之間。所以你會看到其中有各種不同。但它會介於我們歷史上看到的水準與我們目前看到的水準之間。

And then as you think about future pricing, Christmas silicon pricing is still most likely for deals in the next 12 to 24 months. And I don't think there's a good market for that price point when you get out into the late '28, 2029, 2030 time frame, which is when we have most available product to sell.

接著，當你思考未來定價時，聖誕節檔期的矽料定價在未來 12 到 24 個月內仍然最有可能出現在交易中。但我不認為當你走到 2028 年末、2029、2030 這個時間區間（也就是我們可供銷售的產品最充裕的時候），那個價位會有一個良好的市場。

So one of the reasons I think customers are still doing price discovery is they don't necessarily have a good benchmark that far out, that's reliable or trustworthy. And so we're still working through our pricing relative to where we think the market is and customers trying to understand our pricing relative to where they think that market point will be.

所以我認為客戶仍在進行價格探索（price discovery）的原因之一，是他們在那麼遠的時間點上，未必有一個可靠或值得信賴的良好基準。因此，我們仍在釐清我們的定價相對於我們認為市場所在的位置，而客戶也在試圖理解我們的定價相對於他們認為市場價格點將落在何處。

Yes. And I think the other point maybe I'll highlight as well, Phil, is that, look, we still have a little bit of time before we get to full implementation on the 232. And what I will say is, I'm very happy to hear the kind of enforcement focus that the commerce has to address stockpiling. The problem is, there's such an aggressive posture and risk-taking that people are willing to do in order to get a module into the US at some pre-32 MIP.

是的。我想我也要再強調另一點，Phil：你看，在 232 完全落實之前，我們仍然還有一點時間。我要說的是，我很高興聽到商務部在執法上聚焦於處理囤貨（stockpiling）。問題在於，人們為了在某個「232 前」的 MIP（最低進口價格）水準把模組送進美國，願意採取非常激進的姿態並承擔風險。

And so we're in a lot of stories of to what extent people are going to in order to try to get product into the market, whether it's a set the cell level or whether it's at the module level and just aggressively pushing the envelope. And I know commerce is doing a great job of trying to enforce that and to prevent that from happening and stopping that. But the onsite of this stuff is coming from every angle.

因此，我們聽到很多案例，說人們為了把產品導入市場到底會做到什麼程度——不論是在電池片（cell）層級，或是在模組（module）層級——都在非常激進地挑戰界線。我知道商務部在努力執法、試圖強力落實並防止這種事情發生、阻止它。但這些事情的端倪正從各個角度冒出來。

And so I think there's also that piece that people are waiting for. Let's -- maybe there'll be a lot more product that does make it into the market somehow. And a customer may say, I'm willing to take some, we buy some time because maybe I can get an opportunity to get some pre-32 volume that's been imported into the market at some increasingly low price.

所以我認為也有這一塊是人們在觀望的。就是——也許會有更多產品不知怎麼地進入市場。客戶可能會說，我願意先買一些、爭取一些時間，因為也許我有機會以愈來愈低的價格，拿到一些已經以「232 前」量被進口到市場的貨。

And that's informing their decision or at least create a willingness to wait, and we obviously are there to encourage commerce to do whatever they can to ensure that enforcement of preventing that stock filing. But that's not stopping the activities. People are willing to take a lot of risk, and it's very aggressive, and we'll have to see how effective commerce could be. So far, we applaud them for their efforts, there's no doubt about that.

這在影響他們的決策，或至少讓他們更願意等待；而我們當然也會鼓勵商務部盡其所能，確保執法以防止那種囤貨。但這並沒有讓那些活動停止。人們願意承擔很大的風險，行為非常激進，我們得看看商務部能有多有效。到目前為止，我們肯定要為他們的努力喝采，這點毫無疑問。

Yes. So far, they blocked, I think we've learned about 60 importers blocked that up until about two weeks ago, and that's out of an importer count of, I think, 400 -- pre-232, we learned that 200. And then post-232, that jumped up to 400. They've locked at least close to 60. So it looks like they're working -- the enforcement is pretty aggressive. Any thoughts on that? And then how much higher MIPs could go up and what kind of timing that could be? Thanks.

是的。到目前為止，他們已經封鎖了——我想我們得知——大約 60 家進口商，這是截至大約兩週前的數字；而進口商總數我想是 400 家——在 232 之前，我們得知是 200 家。而在 232 之後，這個數字跳到 400。他們至少鎖定了接近 60 家。所以看起來他們正在運作——執法相當強勢。對此你有什麼看法？另外，MIP 可能會上調到多高、以及可能的時間點會是什麼？謝謝。

Yes. I think on the enforcement, I mean, I -- some of you may know that we did our ribbon-cutting for our new factory in South Carolina and (inaudible) members of his team were there. So it gives us a great opportunity to talk with them and to sort of continue to emphasize the importance of this enforcement, and they're 100% committed on the enforcement side and to do everything they can to prevent those types of things from happening.

是的。我想在執法方面，我是說——你們有些人可能知道，我們在南卡羅來納州為我們的新工廠舉行了剪綵儀式，（聽不清）以及他團隊的成員也在場。這讓我們有很好的機會與他們交流，並持續強調這項執法的重要性；他們在執法面是 100% 承諾，會盡一切所能防止那類事情發生。

And where we can, we are sharing insights with them and things we think could be helpful from that standpoint. And just to your point, I mean, the risk tolerance and that people are willing to take knowing that there's going to be that level of enforcement is not slowing some things down very much. I mean, yes, you can get 60 out of the -- if the number of importers of record went up from 200 to 400. And it's great that we caught 60 of them, but there remains another 140 that potentially are still getting around the current enforcement levels, right?

在我們能做到的地方，我們也會與他們分享洞見，以及我們認為從那個角度可能有幫助的事情。而且就像你說的——人們在明知會有那種程度的執法下仍願意承擔的風險容忍度，並沒有讓某些事情放慢太多。我的意思是，是的，如果記錄在案的進口商數量從 200 增加到 400，你可以抓到其中 60 家。抓到 60 家很棒，但仍然還有另外 140 家可能仍在繞過目前的執法強度，對吧？

So -- and then as it relates to the MIP, look, I think is very clear if you haven't seen remarks at our ribbon cutting, I think you just ought to watch it. There's a couple of videos that are out there, and he's 100% clear the strategic intent of what we're trying to do here, which is to create US manufacturing, US jobs, US supply chain, US technology and things that can help enable energy independence and national security.

所以——然後就 MIP 而言，你看，我認為非常清楚：如果你還沒看過他在我們剪綵儀式上的談話，我覺得你應該去看一下。外面有幾段影片，他把我們在這裡想做的策略意圖講得 100% 清楚：也就是建立美國製造、美國就業、美國供應鏈、美國技術，以及能夠幫助實現能源獨立與國家安全的各種能力。

And so they're going to enforce this and they're going to put the right requirements in place of ensuring the domestic manufacturing can thrive and then put as many incentives as possible to encourage people to manufacture more here in the US, which I think is great.

因此，他們會執行這件事，並會設下正確的要求，以確保國內製造能夠茁壯，並提供盡可能多的誘因，鼓勵人們在美國本土製造更多產品——我認為這很棒。

Brian Lee, Goldman Sachs.

高盛（Goldman Sachs）的 Brian Lee。

Hey, guys. Thanks for taking my question. I know we're kind of dancing around the same topic, so I'll try my best as well. But it sounds like you guys are moving from being a contract go-to-market strategy to more of a spot market go-to-market strategy, which I think most of your peers do and now is the case even for First Solar a few cycles ago.

嗨，各位。謝謝讓我提問。我知道我們有點在繞同一個主題打轉，所以我也會盡量。但聽起來你們正從「合約式」的上市/銷售策略（go-to-market strategy）轉向更偏「現貨市場」的上市/銷售策略；我想你們多數同業都是這樣做的，而 First Solar 在幾個週期前也已經是這種情況。

So maybe, as you said, Mark, the bookings cadence moderates here with all the uncertainties, but the bookings cadence can potentially be more fluid on a quarter-to-quarter basis. I guess, is that fair? And are you equipped, I guess, from a sales force perspective to be able to manage through that?

所以也許如你所說，Mark，在各種不確定性之下，接單（bookings）的節奏在這裡會放緩，但接單節奏也可能在每一季之間更具流動性。我想問，這樣理解公平嗎？另外，從銷售團隊的角度，你們是否具備能力去管理並因應這種情況？

And then again, on the pricing entitlement side of things that you keep referring to developers and all the uncertainties that they're having to grapple with. I guess what are you tasking your sales force with in terms of this price discovery process post 232? I would imagine they're not going to go anywhere lower than what you've been looking at recently, which is $0.36. But, is it a range of like $0.36 to $0.40, $0.40 plus? Like what are the puts and takes around kind of what they're going out to market with?

然後再一次，關於你們一直提到的、在定價權利（pricing entitlement）這一側，開發商以及他們必須面對的各種不確定性。我想問，你們在 232 之後的價格探索流程中，交付給銷售團隊的任務是什麼？我猜他們不會比你們最近看到的 $0.36 更低。但會是一個像 $0.36 到 $0.40 的區間，還是 $0.40 以上？也就是說，他們帶著什麼樣的利弊權衡（puts and takes）去跟市場溝通？

Yes. So I think what we were trying to say, Brian, just as it relates to, a lot of the deals that we announced going back three or four years ago when we built our contract backlog. A lot of these were multiyear framework agreements that have indicative delivery schedules associated with them. And then as we said before, they had certain rights -- annual ship rights or quarterly ship rights, things could move around from that contracted schedule, but it wasn't tied to a specific project.

是的。所以我想我們想表達的是，Brian，就這點而言：我們在三、四年前宣布的許多交易，當時我們建立了合約在手訂單（contract backlog）。其中很多是多年期的框架協議，並附帶指示性的交付時程。然後如我們之前所說，這些協議也有某些權利——年度出貨權或季度出貨權——因此事情可以相對於合約時程有所調整，但它並沒有綁定到某一個特定專案。

And what's happened when we do that is the volatility of our customers' development pipeline for various reasons is just whip stuff all over the place, right, in terms of, hey, this is what the contract was -- and now this is what the current requirements are given the state of their development portfolio of projects and what have you.

而當我們這樣做時，客戶開發管線因各種原因產生的波動性，會把事情搞得四處亂飛，對吧？也就是說，「嘿，合約原本是這樣」——但在他們的專案開發組合與各種情況的影響下，「現在的實際需求」又變成另一種樣子。

And what we're trying to do now a little bit and not that we won't get back to that, we've got a couple of very large deals where there'd be more of that legacy kind of framework agreement, strategic partnerships. And we'll clearly do those. But near term, what we're seeing more is that everybody is like, I got a particular project, and I want to negotiate this particular project.

而我們現在想做的，是稍微往那個方向靠一點，但並不是說我們不會再回到那種模式；我們手上有幾筆非常大型的交易，會更偏向那種傳統的框架協議、策略合作夥伴關係。而我們也會很明確地去做那些。但就短期來看，我們看到更多的是每個人都像是：我有一個特定專案，我想就這個特定專案來談判。

And that gives us better clarity and uncertainty of the project where it sits in its permitting process where it sits in its interconnection process where it is in its financing, if it's approaching that or at least we know what the time line and the profile looks like and gives us a better clarity of the timing of when the shipments need to occur.

這讓我們能更清楚、也更確定該專案目前在許可審批流程、併網流程、融資進度（如果已接近那一步）的所在位置；或者至少我們知道時間表與輪廓長什麼樣子，並讓我們更清楚掌握出貨需要發生的時間點。

So that's where the near-term focus is on that. But what I would say is that after this price discovery kind of it's better understood. I think we may see some customers moving into that other direction to say, I really want to lock in and secure my project pipeline going out into '29, '30. And I said, we have some customers that are even wanting to start having some conversations that go beyond 2030.

所以短期的重點會放在這裡。但我想說的是，在這種價格發現的過程被更好地理解之後，我認為我們可能會看到一些客戶往另一個方向移動，表示：我真的想把價格鎖定，並確保我到2029、2030年的專案管線。而且我也說過，我們有些客戶甚至希望開始談一些超過2030年的合作。

So as it relates to the sales force, I somewhat alluded to that, first off, from a capacity standpoint, I don't think it's an issue with our capabilities of our sales team to handle that pivot, right, to more product-specific versus framework structures. But as I somewhat alluded to, is we have gone and we've repriced deals that were in the early negotiation phase and any deals that have come to us now are obviously reflected of what we believe the current market pricing should be.

至於銷售團隊，我先前多少提到過；首先，從產能/承載量的角度，我不認為我們銷售團隊的能力會是問題，無論是要轉向更偏產品/專案特定的模式、而不是框架式結構。但如我先前暗示的，我們已經把仍在早期談判階段的交易重新定價；而現在送到我們這裡的任何交易，顯然都反映了我們認為目前市場價格應該在的水準。

So I'm not going to give you an indication of what that looks like. But we have recalibrated and I think the market fully understands that. But I also want to continue to go back. I mean there is a continuum of what those prices are going to be in near term, and I think if you alluded to this in prior calls, what we have right now available to book is more Malaysia finished good module coming into the US or an India product coming into the US.

所以我不會給你一個具體指引說那看起來會是什麼樣子。但我們已經重新校準，我認為市場也完全理解這點。不過我也想再回到一點：短期內價格會落在哪裡其實是一個連續區間；而且我想如果你在之前的電話會議有提到，我們目前可供接單的，更多是馬來西亞完工模組進口到美國，或是印度產品進口到美國。

And so that profile in terms of ASP entitlement is going to be on the lower end of that continuum, as I indicated, the lowest price point we would have for a module will be for that international product coming fully finished international product coming into the US and then the highest will be kind of 100% domestically manufactured Series 7.

因此，就ASP（平均售價）可取得的水準而言，這種組合會落在我所說那個區間的較低端：如我所示，我們模組最低的價格點，會是那種在海外完全製造完成、再進口到美國的國際產品；而最高的則會是那種100%美國本土製造的Series 7。

So it can move around that average is reflected in the numbers that we've been giving you. But in any particular quarter, if I'm heavy on maybe international modules coming to the US, that would drive that average ASP down and clearly, we'll provide color around that. But yes, I mean, pricing is reestablishing itself at a higher point than it has been historically, and we'll continue to see how price discovery works through.

所以它會在那個區間內變動，而我們給你的數字反映的是那個平均值。但在任何特定季度，如果我的組合更偏向國際模組進口到美國，那就會把平均ASP往下拉；當然，我們也會就此提供更多說明。但沒錯，我的意思是，定價正在重新建立在一個比過去歷史更高的水準上，而我們會持續觀察價格發現如何推進。

Brian, just one follow-on point to that framework discussion. And one of the challenges that we've talked about over the last couple of years now is the period cost that we've been incurring around the amount of inventory we have to keep, the storage cost at a entry overall sales rate. If you think about when there's an ability to move volume around or when customers need to do that because the timing of their projects shift.

Brian，針對那個框架協議的討論，我再補充一點。而我們過去幾年一直談到的其中一個挑戰，是我們因為必須維持一定庫存量而產生的期間成本，包括在整體銷售速率下的倉儲成本。如果你想想看，當有能力在不同時點間調整出貨量，或客戶因為專案時程變動而需要這麼做時。

I have to keep inventories to make sure I can see is all the available contracts for the house. That generally means my -- at my overall inventory position as well as the working capital position is worse. At the same time then, if that product all does move to the right from a schedule perspective, now I end up having the warehouse materially more volume than I expected.

我就必須維持庫存，以確保我能履行所有可用合約。這通常意味著我的整體庫存水位以及營運資金部位都會更差。同時，如果那些產品在排程上又都往右移（延後），那我最後就會發現倉庫裡的量實質上比我原先預期的多很多。

So generally speaking, it's become harder for us to plan around that, and we're seeing a significant financial impact from that. If we move to more of a project-based model where there's a certainty around an individual project, the timing of that project and delivery schedule that allows me to plan on the operational side, much more efficiency, reduce working capital and reduce storage costs as well. So provides that operational financial efficiency that we're looking for.

所以一般來說，這讓我們更難去做規劃，而我們也看到這對財務造成顯著影響。如果我們轉向更以專案為基礎的模式，對單一專案、其時程與交付排程有更高的確定性，就能讓我在營運端做更有效率的規劃、降低營運資金占用，也降低倉儲成本。因此能帶來我們所追求的營運與財務效率。

Jon Windham, UBS.

Jon Windham，瑞銀（UBS）。

Perfect. Mark, I appreciate you taking the questions. We'll get on to the exciting topic of filing your taxes. So in the presentation, you note there's $1.9 billion of government grant receivables. My understanding is that's payable two to three months after you file your annual returns. Can you just give us an indication of how your planning is for that cash actually going to your balance sheet and then into your bank account? And then any comments around the liquidity in the secondhand market if you were to decide to try to monetize those early? Thanks again.

太好了。Mark，感謝你回答問題。我們來聊一個令人興奮的主題：申報你的稅。所以在簡報中，你提到有19億美元的政府補助應收款。我的理解是，那是在你提交年度報稅表後兩到三個月支付。你能否給我們一些指引，說你們如何規劃這筆現金實際進到資產負債表、然後進到銀行帳戶的時間點？另外，如果你們決定嘗試提前變現，二級市場的流動性方面有什麼看法？再次感謝。

Yes. So you're right. On the balance sheet, there's about $1.9 billion. About $100 million of that is related to India. So you got about $1.8 billion in the US. And then part of that $1.8 billion relates to credits that were generated last year and we have yet to file -- yet we have just filed our tax return we get to receive refundability for those.

是的，你說得對。在資產負債表上大約是19億美元。其中約1億美元與印度相關。所以美國部分大約是18億美元。而這18億美元中的一部分，與去年產生、但我們尚未申報的抵免有關——我們剛剛提交了報稅表，接下來就能就那些抵免收到可退還的款項。

But if you look at this year's credit generation, the forecast is about $2.1 billion of credit to be generated this year. If you look at the 2024 credits, we sold most of those. We did keep a portion of them to file our 2025 tax return in October of 2025, and we received refund for what was about $120 million in about three months' time.

但如果你看今年的抵免產生量，預測今年大約會產生21億美元的抵免。如果你看2024年的抵免，我們賣掉了其中大部分。我們確實保留了一部分，用於在2025年10月申報我們的2025年度報稅表；而我們在大約三個月內就收到了約1.2億美元的退稅。

And importantly, even within that three months, the government was actually shut down for about a month of that. So the turnaround time from filing to receiving the cash relatively short. As it relates to this year, we haven't made a decision yet. We've not made any assumption around a reduction in the carrying value of those credits if we were to sell them.

而且很重要的是，即使在那三個月期間，政府實際上有大約一個月是停擺的。所以從申報到收到現金的周轉時間相對很短。至於今年，我們還沒有做出決定。如果我們要出售這些抵免，我們也尚未對其帳面價值可能需要下調做任何假設。

We've seen that the market through the first half of this year, I think, was a little softer to credit sale value. That's picked up pretty significantly towards the back end of the year as large corporates have better position and understanding of the tax position coming into year-end and looking for tax planning actually. So we're seeing a lot more how reach and interest around those credits.

我們看到今年上半年市場對抵免出售價格（價值）我認為稍微疲弱一些。但到了下半年後段，隨著大型企業在年末前對自身稅務狀況有更好的掌握與理解、並進行稅務規劃，這已經明顯回升。因此我們看到對這些抵免的觸及度與興趣都高了很多。

We're in some discussions around potential sales there. But we'll look to balance how much we would like to sell to pull some liquidity forward versus how much we're comfortable filing for fundability for because then you're not taking a discount on that sale. So it's a balancing after we're in discussions around those as well.

我們也在就潛在出售進行一些討論。但我們會在「想賣多少以把部分流動性提前拉回」與「有多少我們願意走可退還申報（refundability）因而不必在出售時承受折價」之間做平衡。所以我們也正在就這些進行權衡與討論。

David Arcaro, Morgan Stanley.

David Arcaro，摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）。

Hey, thanks for taking my question. I was wondering with the shift towards individual project booking, typically, what's the time frame for how far in advance you would end up getting that order into your backlog relative to, I guess, the timing of the project? And I think you had suggested that the decision on Malaysia could be made in the first half of 2027. Are you thinking that we'll get enough kind of visibility by that time that you'll be able to make that call on what to do with that capacity?

嗨，謝謝讓我提問。我想請教，隨著轉向以單一專案來下單/入帳（booking），一般而言，您通常會在專案時程之前多早把該筆訂單納入你們的在手訂單（backlog）？另外，我記得你們曾提到，關於馬來西亞的決策可能會在2027年上半年做出。你們是否認為到那個時間點，我們會有足夠的能見度，讓你們能夠就那部分產能該如何處置做出決定？

Yes, I'll take the first one and I'll let Alex take the Malaysian comment. So yes, so basically, what happens on a -- if we're being specific to a project. Again, modules use at the forefront of your procurement-led decision, you want to secure that technology because it also drives your design of the factory, right, or the sign of the project, excuse me.

好的，我先回答第一個問題，然後讓Alex來回應馬來西亞的部分。所以，是的，基本上，如果我們具體談到某一個專案會發生什麼。同樣地，模組在你以採購為主導的決策中是最前端的，你會想先把那項技術鎖定，因為它也會驅動你工廠的設計，對，或是說專案的設計，不好意思。

So crystalline silicon and [Catell] design your factory and your plant, excuse me differently. There's different string count, different voltage and other parameters, which you would want to optimize for. Generally, we don't have the same constraints as it relates to the tracking -- backtracking requirements because we don't deal with the same efforts impact of shade or defuse light and those types of things.

所以，晶矽（crystalline silicon）和[Catell]會讓你以不同方式來設計你的工廠與電站，不好意思。串列數（string count）、電壓以及其他參數都不同，而你會希望針對這些做最佳化。一般而言，就追蹤系統（tracking）—回溯（backtracking）的需求來說，我們沒有同樣的限制，因為我們不會面臨同樣程度的遮蔭或漫射光等因素對發電的影響。

So there's a lot that has to be done early on. And so you're going to want to source that module and lock that up so you can be unencumbered now to figure out do you want to design and optimize at the project level.

所以有很多事情必須在早期就完成。因此你會想先把模組來源確定並鎖定，這樣你接下來就能不受掣肘地去思考：是否要在專案層級進行設計與最佳化。

So it could be 18 months, two years before the first delivery would start to happen or at least for sure until the project would be commissioned. So it doesn't really -- it shortens your time line a little bit from a visibility standpoint, but it doesn't really significantly shorten it.

所以，可能會是在第一次交付開始之前的18個月、兩年，或至少肯定是在專案併網/投運（commissioned）之前。因此，從能見度的角度來看，它確實會讓你的時間軸稍微縮短一些，但並不會大幅縮短。

But it gives you better certainty. -- there's no doubt about that. People would be willing to go out into 2030 in a framework kind of construct. And projects normally would be commitments that would go out into '28 or into early '29 is probably not as far out as they would want to go, but still more than enough visibility to properly understand the project and price it appropriately.

但它能帶來更高的確定性。——這點毫無疑問。在某種框架式安排下，人們願意把時間拉到2030年。而專案通常的承諾會延伸到2028年或2029年初；這可能不是他們理想中想拉到那麼遠的程度，但仍然提供了足夠的能見度，讓他們能正確理解專案並做出適當定價。

And David, as it relates to Malaysia, yes, I do believe we have enough visibility going into the first half of next year. We've effectively been carrying that asset running at very low throughput for the whole of this year. And we've done that deliberately, we could thought the and the utilization costs associated with that was worth the option value of having the ability to run what would be up to about 1.8 gigawatts of international volume.

David，至於馬來西亞，是的，我確實相信我們在明年上半年之前會有足夠的能見度。我們今年整年基本上都讓那項資產以非常低的產出在運轉。我們是刻意這麼做的；我們認為，與其相關的利用率成本是值得的，因為它帶來一種選擇權價值（option value）：讓我們有能力去運行最多約1.8GW的國際出貨量。

As we look through the 232 announcement, as Mark said, the customer base the transition fully understanding what that looks like and trying to work through what their need is going to be. We want to make sure we have the optionality in Malaysia in the event of that significant demand does materialize. We've also said that we have an order of how we want to make sure our factories sell.

在我們消化232公告的過程中，如Mark所說，客戶群正在轉換並充分理解那會是什麼樣子，並嘗試釐清他們的需求會是什麼。我們希望確保在馬來西亞保有彈性，以防確實出現顯著需求。我們也說過，我們對於要如何確保我們的工廠產品被售出，有一個既定的優先順序。

So first, we look to make sure our US content is sold. Secondly, we look to make sure we're selling our finishing line production of our utility in South Carolina. And then after that, the full international product. We're also going to be bringing more volume from India over into the US next year, subject to the trade and tariff environment that makes sense. So I think we'll have the understanding of the marketplace that we'll need by the first half of next year, and we're still looking at that as an option value and seeing how the effect of the 232 plays out.

所以第一，我們會先確保我們的美國本土含量（US content）產品被售出。第二，我們會確保我們在南卡羅來納州的公用事業級（utility）成品線（finishing line）產出能夠售出。然後在那之後，才是完整的國際產品。我們也將在明年把更多產量從印度轉到美國，前提是貿易與關稅環境允許且合理。所以我認為，到明年上半年我們會具備所需的市場理解；我們仍把這視為一種選擇權價值，並觀察232的影響如何發展。

Vikram Bagri, Citi.

Vikram Bagri，花旗。

Good evening, everyone. Apologize for another question on pricing, but this is important. On this call itself, you've heard pricing either go down by a couple of cents or go up by $0.20. So Mark fully appreciate the lack of clarity about the environment we are in. But for CD7, is there a construct you can provide for pricing that we should keep in mind. So if pricing for silicon-based panels move higher, we should assume a certain discount to that, which some people will characterize as quality discount.

各位晚上好。抱歉又問一個關於定價的問題，但這很重要。光是在這通電話裡，你們就提到價格可能下降幾美分，或上升0.20美元。所以Mark，我完全理解我們所處環境的不確定性。但針對CD7，你能否提供一個我們在思考定價時應該記住的框架？也就是說，如果矽基面板的價格走高，我們是否應假設相對於它會有某個折價，而有些人會把這稱為「品質折價」。

And I imagine pricing also depends on several of the factors, project and contractors, but all else being equal, is there a construct where pricing for silicon-based panels moved higher than $0.47 or $0.45, we should assume a certain fixed discount for CD7 -- UA CD7.

我也想像定價會取決於多個因素、專案與承包商等，但在其他條件相同的情況下，是否存在一個框架：當矽基面板價格高於0.47或0.45美元時，我們應對CD7——美國（UA）CD7——假設一個固定的折價？

And then related to that, Mark, you talked about a number of items, limiting the ability of developers to make long-term plans. Is competition in panel manufacturing is also one of the factors, which is sort of like prohibiting them from committing to supply of panels. Do you think the lack of urgency to book 2029 is also a function of new capacity coming online potentially in the US from other suppliers of panels? Or how do you see the competition evolve over the next couple of years in the sector? Thank you.

另外相關地，Mark，你談到許多項目會限制開發商做長期規劃的能力。面板製造端的競爭是否也是其中一個因素，某種程度上使他們無法承諾面板供應？你認為對於預訂2029年產能缺乏急迫性，是否也與其他面板供應商可能在美國新增產能上線有關？或者你如何看待未來幾年這個產業的競爭演變？謝謝。

Yes. So I'll talk on the -- so if you take S7 as an example, just one thing to make clear, you made a comment about quality discount. I don't know if you're familiar with how energy predictions are done for crystalline silicon technology, they actually have a quality factor that they use, which would basically reduces the energy profile of the technology as part of the energy prediction on which that does not apply at all to First Solar's technology.

是的。那我先談定價這部分——以S7為例，先澄清一點：你提到「品質折價」。我不確定你是否熟悉晶矽技術的發電量預測是怎麼做的；他們其實會使用一個品質係數（quality factor），也就是在做發電量預測時，會把該技術的能量曲線/發電表現做折減；而這一點完全不適用於First Solar的技術。

So we don't have any quality factors that are assumed in the energy predictions that are underwritten by and supported by (inaudible) the banks. So I'm not sure what your point is around that, but crystalline silicon clearly does. They have a meaningful quality factor that is being used when they do the energy prediction for that technology.

所以，在由（聽不清）銀行承作（underwritten）並支持的發電量預測中，我們不需要假設任何品質係數。因此我不太確定你在那點上想表達的是什麼，但晶矽顯然是有的。他們在對該技術做發電量預測時，確實會使用一個具實質影響的品質係數。

What I would say, if you take a Series 7 CuRe product and you compare it from an energy profile because again, energy to what our customers pay for. And what the value of that product would be relative to a PERC technology, it would be an advantage to PERC, so there would be no discount to PERC. It would also vary with where it is because obviously, our technology does not have what CuRe will have better bifaciality than our QED product is our bifaciality is lower than crystalline silicon.

我會這麼說：如果你拿Series 7 CuRe產品，從能量/發電表現（energy profile）的角度來比較——因為我們的客戶付費買的是能量，而不是別的。若比較其相對於PERC技術的產品價值，它會相對PERC更有優勢，因此不會對PERC有任何折價。當然也會因地點而異，因為很明顯，我們的技術不像CuRe那樣具備更好的雙面率（bifaciality）；相較之下，我們的QED產品雙面率較低，而晶矽的雙面率較高。

So if you were to go further North East where you get a better impact of bifaciality, then you'll see a different outcome. If you go to the other Southwest or to the Southeast and more hot and human hot climates or hot human climates, you're going to see a better outcome for our technology.

所以如果你往更偏東北的地區，那裡雙面率的效益更明顯，你會看到不同的結果。如果你到西南或東南等更炎熱且潮濕的氣候、或高溫潮濕的環境，你會看到我們的技術有更好的結果。

And then if you compare us to Topcon, which again, the vast majority of anyone producing or selling a Topcon products in the US is a prince on our IP, which we will stand by and completely enforce that, then you'll have a slightly different outcome. We would actually be average slightly disadvantaged to Topcon of a few pays. So it depends. I mean you've got different situations, different geographies, different terrains. A lot of different things factor into that and determine the relative competitiveness of the technology.

然後如果你把我們和Topcon相比——同樣地，在美國生產或銷售Topcon產品的絕大多數廠商，都在侵犯我們的智慧財產權（IP）；我們會堅持立場並徹底執行維權——那你會得到稍微不同的結果。相對Topcon，我們平均而言可能會略微處於劣勢，差距大概是幾個百分點（pays）。所以要看情況。我的意思是，你會遇到不同情境、不同地理位置、不同地形。很多不同因素都會影響並決定該技術的相對競爭力。

So, but I would say general rule thumb, Series 7 going to be advantaged against PERC and disadvantaged by relative to Topcon. As it relates to the competition and how that all plays out, you have to think through how much are you willing to -- first off, is the competition in the manufacturing that's coming in the US, truly (inaudible) free, truly unencumbered by any dependency from the Chinese, whether it's the supply chain, whether it's the tools and the manufacturing equipment, whether it's the IP, right?

所以，不過我會說一般經驗法則是，Series 7 相較於 PERC 會更具優勢，而相較於 Topcon 則處於劣勢。至於競爭以及整體如何發展，你必須思考你願意承擔多少——首先，在美國新進入的製造端競爭者，是否真的（聽不清）不受限制、是否真的不受任何來自中國的依賴所牽制，無論是供應鏈、工具與製造設備，還是智慧財產權（IP），對吧？

A lot of our customers do their own subjective analysis and have concluded that there is a substantial risk still that these entities are not [Fiat]-free, and they don't want to take on that risk. That puts us in a much better position. There's no doubt about that, and that's also why I think you're going to find customers leaning into developing partnerships with First Solar that go longer dated.

我們許多客戶會做他們自己的主觀分析，並得出結論：這些實體仍然存在相當大的風險，並非不含「Fiat」，而且他們不想承擔那個風險。這讓我們處於更有利的位置。這點毫無疑問，而這也是為什麼我認為你會看到客戶更傾向於與 First Solar 建立期限更長的合作夥伴關係。

I believe I remember reading one of the filings recently for one of the US manufacturers, and I believe almost 100% of the sales that they're generating this year is to a related party, and I understand that related party to be a Chinese counterparty.

我記得我最近讀到某一家美國製造商的一份申報文件，我相信他們今年幾乎 100% 的銷售都是賣給關係人，而據我了解，那個關係人是一家中國交易對手。

So I mean it tells you just looking at that as an example, that in certain situations, customers are not willing to take on that risk. And we still don't have full clarity around Fiat yet, and I think that's why people are being a little gun shy.

所以我的意思是，光看這個例子就能告訴你，在某些情況下，客戶不願意承擔那個風險。而且我們對於 Fiat 目前仍未完全明朗，我想這也是為什麼大家會有點畏首畏尾。

Dimple Gosai, Piper Sandler

Dimple Gosai，Piper Sandler

Thank you very much. Good evening, everyone. My question is regarding just December 4 in terms of outcomes and what you're hearing. I mean there's been a lot of news recently, T1 recently filed for a waiver around cell imports. We're hearing a lot about lobbying for exclusions. And we also know utilities are pretty price sensitive here. So are we -- in your view, is there a risk to the upside or downside just in terms of the outcome there.

非常感謝。各位晚上好。我的問題是關於 12 月 4 日，就結果以及你們聽到的情況而言。我的意思是，最近有很多新聞，T1 最近就電池進口申請了豁免。我們也聽到很多關於遊說爭取排除適用的消息。而且我們也知道公用事業公司在這裡對價格相當敏感。所以在你看來，就那個結果而言，上行或下行的風險是否存在？

And then separately, just kind of talking about some of the news that we're hearing about is also news on Swift Current low suit that's been in the news. Is there anything you can speak about here? Is there any merit to that? Is there a size associated with it? And any merit really? Thank you.

另外，談到我們聽到的一些消息，還有關於 Swift Current 的訴訟（low suit）也出現在新聞中。你能否就此談談？那件事有任何依據嗎？是否涉及某個金額規模？以及到底有沒有道理？謝謝。

Yes. As it relates to the exclusions, look, I do believe because, again, the program incent and motivation is to try to ensure manufacturing here, reshoring of manufacturing, true manufacturing, truly unencumbered by Chinese or adversarial countries dependencies. Each one of those will be determined on a circumstances basis and work through with commerce to say is their true substance to this. And then in general, the focus with commerce is to limit the period of time at which that exclusion would be provided.

是的。關於排除適用（exclusions），你看，我確實相信，因為再說一次，該計畫的激勵與動機是要確保在本地製造、製造回流，是真正的製造，而且確實不受中國或對立國家依賴的牽制。每一項都會依具體情況來判定，並與商務部協作，去確認這是否具有真正的實質內容。而且一般而言，商務部的重點是限制提供該排除適用的期間長度。

I don't stay on top of it. I don't know. My team may have better insights than I do in terms of how any exclusion been granted at this point in time. It's not clear to me that there have been any granted exclusions. I know there's been some representation of statements that have been made, but I don't believe there's any actual exclusions that have been communicated publicly at this point in time. But that's something that we're going to have to, to stay close to and understand.

我沒有一直密切追蹤。我不知道。就目前是否已核准任何排除適用而言，我的團隊可能比我更有洞見。我不清楚目前是否有任何已核准的排除適用。我知道外界有一些對外陳述或聲明的說法，但我不認為截至目前有任何實際的排除適用已對外公開傳達。不過這是我們必須保持密切關注並加以理解的事情。

I'm perfectly fine though competing. We've always said US manufacturing on a level playing field First Solar is more than happy to compete on our own merits and our technology and the competitiveness of our manufacturing process in our supply chain. So some of that does happen then it will evolve, and that will create the domestic industry that I do believe still is a strategic thread that's important for us as a country.

不過我完全不介意競爭。我們一直都說，在公平競爭的環境下進行美國製造，First Solar 非常樂意憑藉我們自身的實力、技術，以及我們製造流程與供應鏈的競爭力來競爭。所以如果其中一些事情真的發生了，那就會演進，而我確實相信這將創造出國內產業；這仍是一條對我們國家而言很重要的戰略主線。

Assuming we do it right, right, assuming it truly is US technology, US manufacture and US supply chains, right? Creating American, US jobs and supporting American families. There's no doubt about that. That's absolutely critical from that standpoint.

前提是我們把事情做對，對吧——前提是它確實是美國技術、美國製造與美國供應鏈，對吧？創造美國的工作機會，支持美國家庭。這點毫無疑問。從這個角度來看，這絕對至關重要。

As it relates to the lawsuit, I really can't comment much of anything around that. We actually will be filing our response here shortly for the required time line. And I think there'll be better clarity around the issues in the allegations that have been raised during that part of that lawsuit. What I will say is that we have always -- even with the engagement with Swift as we've always said we will stand by and we will support under the parameters of our limited liability warranty, the obligations that we have.

至於訴訟，我真的無法就此多做評論。我們其實很快就會在規定時程內提交回應。我想在訴訟進行到那個階段時，對於所提出指控中的爭點會有更清楚的釐清。我能說的是，我們一直以來——即使在與 Swift 的互動中——都一再表示，我們會在有限責任保固（limited liability warranty）的範圍與參數下，履行並支持我們所承擔的義務。

Again, that largely is reflective and relates to the Series 7 initial product launch that we had indicated that there was a couple of issues that came out as part of that launch that resulted in an initial stabilization of that technology to be below expectations.

再說一次，這在很大程度上反映並關聯到 Series 7 的初期產品上市；我們當時已指出，上市過程中出現了幾個問題，導致該技術在初期穩定化後的表現低於預期。

And then underneath that program we put in place. We said we would remedy those issues with customers. And we engaged even with Swift to have that have that conversation. I think where the challenge comes in is where people are asking for revenues that are outside the parameters of the warranty. And that's just -- that's not something that we will do.

而在那個計畫之下，我們採取了相應措施。我們說過會為客戶補救那些問題。我們也與 Swift 進行接觸，來進行那樣的對話。我認為挑戰在於，有人要求的收入補償超出了保固條款的範圍。而那就是——那不是我們會做的事。

But we will be more than -- we'll stand behind the technology, and we have that conversation with Swift in this case and they chose to try to pursue a different approach where they think they could be successful. And again, you should see our response in our filing coming out here in the next several weeks.

但我們會完全——我們會為這項技術背書；在這個案例中，我們也與 Swift 進行了對話，而他們選擇採取不同的方式，認為那樣他們可能會成功。同樣地，你們應該會在接下來幾週看到我們提交的回應文件。

We have reached the end of the Q&A session. This concludes today's call. Thank you for attending. You may now disconnect.

問答環節到此結束。今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝各位參與。您現在可以掛線。