萊迪思半導體 (LSCC) 2015 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Good afternoon.

My name is Katina and I will be your conference operator today.

At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Lattice Semiconductor second quarter 2015 conference call.

All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise.

After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question and answer session.

(Operator Instructions) Thank you.

Mr. Pasquale, you may begin your conference.

Thank you, Operator.

Welcome everyone to Lattice Semiconductor's 2Q 2015 results conference call.

Joining us from the company today are Mr. Darin Billerbeck, Lattice's President and CEO, and Mr. Joe Bedewi, Lattice's Chief Financial Officer.

Both executives will be available for Q&A after the prepared comments.

If you have not yet received a copy of today's results release, please email Global IR Partners using lscc@globalirpartners.com, or you can get a copy of the release off of the investor relations section of Lattice Semiconductor's website.

Before we begin the formal remarks, I will review the Safe Harbor statement.

It is our intention that this call will comply with the requirements of SEC regulation FD.

This call includes and constitutes the company's official guidance for the fiscal third quarter and full year 2015.

If at any time after this call we communicate any material changes to this guidance, we intend that such updates will be done using a public forum, such as a press release or publicly announced conference call.

The matters that we discuss today, other than historical information, include forward-looking statements relating to our future financial performance and other performance expectations.

Investors are cautioned that forward-looking statements are neither promises nor guarantees.

They involve risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements.

Some of those risks and uncertainties are detailed in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including our fiscal year 2014 Form 10-K and our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q.

The company disclaims any obligation to publicly update or revise any such forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that occur after this call.

Our prepared remarks will also be presented within the requirement of SEC Regulation G regarding generally accepted accounting principles or GAAP.

Some financial information presented by us during this call will be provided on both a GAAP and a non-GAAP basis.

By disclosing certain non-GAAP information, management intends to provide investors with additional information to permit further analysis of the company's performance for results and underlying trends.

Management uses non-GAAP measures to better assess operating performance and to establish operational goals.

Non-GAAP information should not be viewed by investors as a substitute for data prepared in accordance with GAAP.

If we use any non-GAAP financial measures during this call, you will find that the required presentation of and reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure is in the company's earnings press release.

At this time, I would like to now turn the call over to Mr. Darin Billerbeck.

Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, David.

And thanks to everyone for joining us on our call today.

Q2 revenue was the highest for the company in almost 15 years.

We continue to execute on our long-term growth opportunities while driving our integration ahead of schedule.

And while Q2 revenue was below our expectations, we don't believe this quarter reflects a potential for our revenue and the value growth we see going forward.

To put this in perspective, we remain firmly on track to achieve double digit revenue growth for the full year 2015.

This is consistent with the growth we have delivered since diversifying in the consumer market for the past three years.

Over the same period, there have been numerous variables in terms of customer programs ramping and macro driven fluctuation in end markets.

Even with these fluctuations and entering the consumer market, we've kept our gross margin steady in the mid-50%s.

Clearly the macro environment is weak and the headwinds are expected to continue into Q3.

The important takeaway is that at Lattice we are controlling the variables that we control.

We are leveraging our increased scale to drive non-GAAP operating income to our 20% target, even on the lower expected revenue.

We view this 20% target as both realistic and achievable.

In Q2 we saw the macro environment degrade in both Europe and China as we moved through the quarter, with particular weakness in the final weeks.

We were not alarmed moving through the quarter based on our discussions with our distribution partners and where we saw the quarter rolling up.

However, distribution did not rebound as it typically does late in the quarter, and the end result was almost half of our top distribution customers worldwide were impacted by the general slowdown in one way or another.

On the OEM side, we had a single communications customer inventory correction.

Both our [DCMS] and our OEM inventory correction were on FPGA products.

We still remain confident overall that we're well positioned in the right markets with the right customers.

We already have numerous potential growth opportunities in place.

These include already announced design wins with ZTE, Huawei, Letv, Google and others, along with some potential big opportunities at the big guys.

Finally, our integration of Silicon Image is running ahead of plan.

What got us excited about the transformational acquisition a few months ago is intact and still has potential ahead when we acquire the business.

We're also confident we will meet our target operational synergies of $42 million on an annualized basis as we exit 2015.

We've already realized $33 million in run rate synergies for the full year 2016 run rate.

Joe will touch on this more in a second, but we're not sitting back on our overall OpEx spending either.

In addition, as we are finalizing our strategic long range plan, we will evaluate all of our R&D programs.

Those programs that don't meet our ROI goals will be cut.

For other businesses that are not aligned with our strategic direction we'll pursue other strategies.

Importantly, all the actions that are driving increased efficiencies or reducing cost will not adversely impact our customers or our long-term revenue prospects.

That concludes my initial comments.

I will now turn the call over to Joe.

Joe?

Thanks, Darin.

Our Q2 financial results were impacted by a number of factors primarily related to the acquisition, including $8.9 million in amortization of acquired intangibles, $3.3 million of acquisition related charges primarily for legal and outside services, $4.1 million of restructuring charges as a the result of synergy actions already taken as we drive toward our targets, and $4.5 million related to GAAP purchase price accounting.

In that $4.5 million, we have included $2.9 million associated with deferred revenue, and $1.6 million associated with the sell through of acquired inventory.

As part of our press release, we provided a detailed reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP financial measures, including these and other reconciling items.

For the fiscal second quarter of 2015, revenue was $106.5 million on a GAAP basis, and $109.4 million on a non-GAAP basis.

Gross margin for fiscal 2015, Q2 2015 was 54.6% on a GAAP basis, and 56.9% on a non-GAAP basis.

Non-GAAP operating expenses for the second quarter were $63.2 million, excluding $4.1 million in restructuring charges, $3.3 million in acquisition related expenses, $8.9 million in amortization of acquired intangibles, and $5 million in stock based compensation.

This compares to our guidance of approximately $65.2 million plus or minus 2% on a non-GAAP basis.

The sequential increase in non-GAAP expenses compared to Q1 was primarily due to the inclusion of a full quarter of Silicon Image spending for the acquisition.

As Darin noted, we're not sitting back on OpEx.

We intend to aggressively cut expenses on programs that are delivering less than required ROI.

We are finalizing our evaluation of all programs and will be taking action in Q3.

Based on our initial review, we're looking to cut an additional $10 million to $15 million from our OpEx on an annualized basis.

And as Darin pointed out, the actions we are taking are driving increased efficiencies at Lattice, and instilling a more disciplined approach to driving return on investment.

The integration of both companies necessitates the need to evaluate all ongoing programs for synergies and appropriate resource allocation.

Income tax expense for the quarter was $4.1 million.

Cash tax expense was approximately $2 million for the quarter.

We continue to expect our annual cash tax expense to be between $8 million and $9 million.

The annualized cash tax amount is largely dependent on the foreign withholding taxes associated with licensing revenue.

On a GAAP basis, reflecting the aggregate impact of the various items mentioned, we recorded a net loss for the second quarter of approximately $35.6 million, or a loss of $0.30 per basic and diluted share.

On a non-GAAP basis, net loss was $8.6 million, or $0.07 per basic and diluted share.

For the quarter, diluted share count was approximately 116.9 million shares.

Net cash used in operating activities was $15.1 million in Q2.

We ended the quarter with cash and investments of approximately $138.1 million.

Accounts receivable decreased to $76.9 million at the end of Q2 as compared to $80.8 million at the end of Q1.

Days sales outstanding improved to 66 days compared to 82 days last quarter.

The inventory at quarter end was $80.8 million compared to $80.6 million at the end of Q1.

Months of inventory stands at 5 months compared to 5.9 months at the end of Q1.

We spent approximately $4.2 million on capital expenditures and incurred $17.1 million in depreciation and amortization expense during the quarter compared to $2.9 million and $7.9 million respectively in Q1.

The interest expense for the quarter was $5.5 million.

This concludes the financial review portion of the call.

I'm going to turn it back over to Darin for the third quarter and full year 2015 business outlook.

Darin?

Thanks, Joe.

In terms of our specific expectations on a non-GAAP basis for third quarter of 2015, we expect revenues to approximately be flat to up 6% as compared to Q2 2015.

Q3 gross margins are expected to be approximately 56.5% plus or minus 2 (inaudible).

Total operating expenses are expected to be approximately $60 million plus or minus 2 points.

Q3 restructuring charges are expected to be approximately $7 million with acquisition related charges, including the amortization of acquired intangibles in Q3 expected to be approximately $9.5 million.

For the full year [2005] on a non-GAAP basis, based on macro weakness and softness in the communications markets, we are resetting our yearly guidance to be down approximately 10% from the $485 million.

We continue to expect gross margins to be approximately 56.5% plus or minus 2%.

This is unchanged from our prior guidance.

We expect total operating expenses in 2015 to be approximately $215 million plus or minus 2%, excluding restructuring and acquisition related charges.

This includes the positive impact of the synergy savings.

This is unchanged from our prior guidance but, as we noted earlier, we are revisiting our OpEx model so that it is aligned with the expected lower revenue level.

Restructuring charges for the full year 2015 are expected to be approximately $25 million with the acquisition related charges, including the amortization of acquired intangibles for the full year expected to be approximately $52 million.

This is also unchanged from our prior guidance.

Finally, our goal remains achieving 20% non-GAAP operating income at our expected lower revenue level.

This will allow us to achieve our goal of doubling our non-GAAP earnings per share on an annualized basis over the next two years.

We continue to view this as both realistic and achievable based on our track record of delivering double digit yearly growth, which we have delivered over the past three years.

In summary, while we expect headwinds in Q3 from the lingering macro weakness worldwide, we are executing against a robust sales pipeline and remain focused on winning an increased share in each of our end markets.

We will use the lower revenue to drive our OpEx spending down in addition to our already committed synergies, giving us more leverage as we grow.

We continue to be well positioned over the long term in the right markets, with the right customers.

We are confident we will rebound as the broader market health improves.

That concludes our prepared remarks.

Operator, we would now be happy to take any questions.

(Operator Instructions) We'll pause for just a moment to compile the Q&A roster.

Your first question comes from Tristan Gerra with Baird.

Hi.

Good afternoon.

Could you talk a little bit about the what are the opportunities coming from Silicon Image in terms of the various technologies now that they're coming on the [signing] side and are ramping?

What's the potential and what's the timing of those various ramps?

Yes, we still have a lot of products that are coming in the pipeline.

Some of them are the HDMI products that we have.

Some of them are superMHL products that we have.

And some of those are just the port processors and other ones are the high performance high bandwidth video products, right.

So we still have all of those, the service, the TV markets and the AVR markets and things like that.

In addition to that, we have a Snap technology which is really our second wireless technology that comes online.

And Snap is, for everyone online, is really the wireless USB type solution.

So it's really kind of a 6 to 10 gigabits per second solution that's 60 gigahertz.

And so that technology, you're not going to expect giant revenue in 2016, but we do expect to start building a design win funnel for that as we move from 2016 to 2017.

So 2016 we'll see some material revenue, albeit you know not -- it'll probably in the low double digit kind of space.

But what we will be selling a lot of is the YHD, which is really the wireless HDMI solution, which is a 1080P uncompressed, and it will be different if you do some compression techniques.

So that's been shipping.

It will ship almost double digits at this year, in 2015, and we expect that to be a little bit stronger growth for 2016.

Okay.

And then could you give us an update on your outlook in digital TVs and specifically I think you've talked in the past about a second half ramp at your -- what used to be your large customer in digital TV related to 4K TVs.

Yes, I mean we see those design wins kind of moving through the pipeline.

Some of the stuff, some of the higher end stuff gets integrated, as you guys know.

You know, some of the SOC actually does take away and then we continue to introduce new products.

So we still have a couple of products that are coming along the line that are higher performance port processor, but I think the one that's going to drive a lot of the higher growth will be our superMHL products, which are more high end 4K and high end 8K televisions, which are all the highest bandwidth products available in the market today, bar none.

So those particular products I think are taping out later this year, early next year, and we expect those to be second half of next year and then through 2017.

Okay.

And then you talked about a correction in distribution, also a communication OEM I'm assuming in China.

Are you seeing a [steadization] in the second half and into Q4, notably in communication and the wireless infrastructure?

And what's your view of the inventories that are left in the China [base] station market currently?

And then any commentary about [this year] as well.

Yeah, let me talk about -- let's talk about China first and our specific OEM.

And I know that Xilinx alluded to this also on their call.

So there's a situation where the company, it created a lot of inventory in that particular channel.

We assumed that our revenue at that customer would be down.

I think Altera said -- or Xilinx said the same thing.

We already had discounted that revenue fairly significantly, and they took it down even further.

So when we look at Q3 and Q4 at the comms, we're not assuming that they're going to get back to Q1 levels at any time during Q3 or Q4.

And we may be a little bit conservative there, but we're assuming that they're going to bleed off inventory in Q3, which means we'll go up maybe $1 million or $2 million in revenue from that particular OEM.

And then we assume kind of the same thing in Q4.

So we're not being overly aggressive.

In fact we may be too conservative on the China comms.

And again, China Mobile seems to be, you know, slowing down a little bit.

China Unicom and others seem to be taking up the slack from what we can tell on the licenses.

So we're not calling a big snap back in the communication markets.

We are calling one customer to come back a little bit.

And when we talk about coming back, we're coming back to just over half of what they shipped in Q1.

So I mean we're still kind of trying to be conservative there.

On the distribution deal, I mean this was kind of a crazy one because, you know, as we looked at it as we were going through this, it's like 14 of the 20 of our top customers -- and that's just the one that we track, you can't track, you know, a mile wide and an inch deep -- 14 of the 20 were down.

And when you go back and look at each one of them, they're all being a little bit cautious on their end market demand, which means that the end market customers aren't selling through.

So I think that's just going to ripple through.

And so we've tried to be somewhat conservative on our distribution.

We actually have distribution in Q3 going down slightly.

So we're not calling distribution up in Q3 either.

So we're making up a lot of the ground on the new initiatives we talked about, Tristan, over the last couple of years, which is t-cons and some of the other new initiatives that we have that are starting to pile in.

So we're not expecting (inaudible) to snap back in Q3 and we're not expecting a huge snap back in communications.

Great.

Thank you.

All right.

Your next question comes from Christopher Rolland with FBR Capital Markets.

Hey guys, this is Joe on for Chris.

Thanks for letting me ask a question.

Hey, Joe.

Hey.

So it seems like more and more people are coming up with a 3.1 ASIC solution.

Are these guys replacing your solutions?

And has or will the market mature enough for FPGAs to be designed out?

Well, I mean the good news is I think with you guys on the acquisition to begin with, we said hey, one of the first movers that we're going to convert FPGAs into ASIC.

And guess what, in some cases that doesn't happen because they want the flexibility of the FPGA, so we're going to displace it with Sabre.

So we're going to displace ourselves with ourselves, which was the whole plan, right.

It's win early and defend longer.

So we expect Saber to probably be the lion's share of the revenues through 2016, right.

So 2015, all our shipments will be, USB, will be on FPGA.

And the type of wins that we have on that, when you kind of take a step back and say well who are all the customers you're winning, it's like Cellcom, Microsoft, Nokia, you know a bunch of Taiwanese guys, there's some HP stuff in there.

So some of those will ship as FPGAs, but in 2016, when they want the cost lower, they'll convert to Sabre, which is our ASSP solution.

Awesome.

Thanks for the color there.

And then on the Chinese consumer ramp, it appears to be going a little bit slow.

Do you guys like your content there, you know with IG, you have BBK and [content Napo] mobile devices as well?

Is there any other design wins we should be aware of and what are your general thoughts on that market?

Yes, I mean what's interesting if you'd asked me this a year ago I would have said man, we're killing it, you know how many design wins that we have in China, like we killed it.

The problem is they're just not winning.

And, you know, I think Huawei, and I said this before on the other phones, Huawei, it's great.

We have, I don't know, five design wins in Huawei right now.

And Huawei seems to be doing the best of anyone.

But you've got ZTE, you got HTC, you got LG, you got all these other guys, right, that we're in, they're just not winning against, you know, really Apple.

I think Apple's struggling, and I think Samsung -- or Apple's struggling but still winning.

Samsung is struggling.

You saw the mobile thing, I think it was today or yesterday, I don't remember the days anymore, but Samsung was struggling big time.

So yes.

I mean we're confident and we have a lot of design wins.

The issue is are they really going to ship these things in volume.

Awesome.

Thanks, guys.

Yep.

Your next question comes from Richard Shannon with Craig-Hallum.

Hey, Richard.

Good afternoon, Joe and Darin.

How you guys doing?

Good.

Good.

[Let's hear] a few questions for you.

I noticed in your guidance for the third quarter you got the gross margins coming up here a little bit.

Can you help us understand that?

I assume it's related to mix somehow, but maybe help us how you're seeing the revenue pieces within your total number transitioning in the quarter?

Yeah, it's absolutely mix related.

And it's just some cross savings that we've gotten are coming through and some volumes that were increasing, so we got some good news flowing through there.

It's a slight pop, but it's kind of where we're heading, and we're just ticking things up as we get firmer knowledge on it.

Okay.

All right, fair enough.

Joe, can you help us with kind of the math on the OpEx, how you expect to end the year and the run rate, or I guess maybe more first quarter of next year on a pro forma basis?

I don't know if you want to do that adding in the potential $10 million to $15 million of additional stuff that you're contemplating, but can you help us with that number?

Yes, we're still working through additional cuts.

And those cuts will be program related.

So the synergy cuts are going to be baked in, and that would have had us at a run rate getting close to this 20% OpInc number that we were targeting, based on our pro forma model.

And we're going to go take that down some depending upon where revenue is, and depending upon our review of programs.

So the program review's ongoing right now.

And it will involve looking at timing of programs as well as effectiveness in terms of utilization of cash.

So I don't really have solid numbers that I'd like to talk to now, but coming out of the year it will be better than we had targeted with the savings.

Yes, and, Richard, let me comment a little bit on these programs because I don't want people to get the wrong opinion when I say hey, we're going to go look at the ROIs.

Lattice does rigorous ROIs on everything that we do.

Silicon Image did not, right.

So as we're walking through this, it's really pulling Silicon Image through the Lattice process to ensure that everything that we do has an ROI that then gives us that benefit that we expect over time.

And so I don't want that -- you know, people confusing when Joe talks about, you know, killing programs or pushing programs and these other things out there, it's all based on the fact that we have a pretty rigorous system for return on investment and we expect to hit those on all of our programs.

And beyond that, we're part of the integration was a review of all programs and a look at the synergistic revenue opportunities going forward.

We baked nothing into our forecast when we talked earlier about synergistic revenue.

So we're melding that together as we go through our strategic long range plan right now.

Okay.

Fair enough.

Maybe just a couple more questions from me.

Darin, I think you got asked this on the last quarterly conference call but I wanted to see if you had any updates after Intel having a formal offer for Altera and any potential benefits that may flow through Lattice over time.

Yeah, $8 million to date.

So 2015 we're going to make $8 million off of that acquisition because we've already been designed in, and are shipping, a product that used to be serviced by Altera.

And so we're going to continue to do that.

You know, our goal is probably triple that, maybe quadruple that, right.

It's going to take time because each one of those things is a design win.

And we had a customer that basically said, I'm not going to support this, and they designed them out.

So we've put in one of our products.

It was an ECP3 product that displaced one of Altera's products.

I won't tell you the application because I don't want them walking back in and trying to do something, right.

But that's the kind of thing that we would have expected.

Albeit $8 million is small, but that's what we're going to go do, right.

We're going to go in piece, by piece, by piece and we're going to find these opportunities.

Okay.

Sounds great.

Last question for me and I'll jump out of line.

Darin, I think -- you went through the prepared script a little fast, but I think you were mentioning some potential larger sizeable opportunities in the second half of the year.

I wonder if you could clarify what you were referring to, what segments, what products, et cetera?

I just want to make sure I understand the scope of that comment.

Yes, so for the second half of this year, you're really talking about some communication -- a little bit of communications comes back.

We talked about (inaudible).

For this quarter, it will be down.

I would expect Q4 for it to finally kind of come back a little bit.

And then with consumer mobile, we expect to get some small uptick, albeit from a lot of programs that we've already been working on, right.

So there are a lot of peripheral devices.

So even when people say, hey, you're out of the S6, there's a lot of derivative products that we're not out of.

And so, you know, some of that stuff has a little bit of a snap back but not anything to write home for.

What I was alluding to is that we're continuing to have some pretty deep discussions with the big guys about FPGA technologies and how they benefit them for some of the new technologies and capabilities they want to put in the hardware side of their phones.

I'm not going to tell you all the features because I'm not supposed to, but there's a ton of features now that are starting to open up where you need that hardware acceleration, you need that instant on, right.

So we call it always on, always listening, and it's more than just voice.

You know, so it's those types of applications that we're working on.

And we're working with the big guys, so we're always engaged with those guys.

And as I said, one of those things changes our trajectory pretty quick.

Okay.

It sounds something along the lines of sensor fusion stuff.

Am I in the right area there?

No.

Yes, let's not call it -- yes, you're talking about fusion, the sensor fusion stuff and all that stuff.

Yes.

We don't go head-to-head with micros.

What we do is we do features that the micro guys can't do, right.

And granted, some of the features get integrated over time and some of them don't, right.

Because if it's a high performance feature they haven't put on their phone or it's new to their phone, a lot of times they'll embrace us to solve that for them because, you know, in that development stage there are a lot of things that an FPGA can do that an ASIC can't, right.

And then later on they'll try to integrate it years down the line.

And that's what happened -- you know that's what happens all through the Silicon Image consumer programs and the Lattice consumer programs, is you win, you try to hold them for two to three years, and you got to win the next one.

And that's just the nature of the beast.

Yes.

Right.

Okay, I'll jump out of line, guys.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Your next question comes from Christopher Longiaru with Sidoti & Company.

Hi, Christopher.

Hey guys, thanks for taking my question.

So just the gross margins are holding up really well.

How much of that is integration?

Are you getting any synergies there?

Can you talk a little bit to what's going on with the gross margins and why they're holding up?

They're holding up because we had been driving some significant cost reductions.

We're starting to see some potential synergies moving forward, but those won't come clear until later.

So this has been a mix issue and the fact that we've already driven significant reductions in our portfolio to maintain the mid-50%s that we had on FPGAs.

The products coming from Silicon Image have slightly better combined margins due to the licensing revenue and the IP.

And so this is basically Lattice proper before Silicon Image.

The improvements came there and, you know, when you talk about further improvements on the Silicon Image side, you expect those later?

Those are separate from what's going --

Correct.

Okay.

And then how much -- can you comment how much licensing revenue Silicon Image had?

I think it was 15% to 20% of their business tended to be licensing revenue, pretty high gross margin.

Can you just comment as to how that is trending now?

Yes.

Put it this way, it's not trending down, if that's what your question is, right.

I mean I think it's a healthy run rate.

As we move through, I think the challenge that we have -- you know, the challenge that we have right now is that there was a mix -- they kind of mixed stuff up from IP cores, IP licenses, and then there was some other things.

And so we kind of look at it as it's like, you know, it's probably 10% of I mean - I'm looking at Joe.

Rough and dirty.

Okay.

And we should just kind of think about that as kind of just hanging out around that level.

Is that fair?

Yes.

And they had it a little higher than that in their original run rate because of some of the deals they cut and some other things that were done in 2014.

We think a standard run rate right now is about 10%.

I mean that's a good rule of thumb for modeling.

Okay.

And just, you had talked about some chips that you guys were stacking last quarter, some Silicon Image chips and some Lattice chips.

Can you comment on any progress there and also maybe future integration of those functions into one?

Yes.

I mean most of the things -- so think of what we're doing -- I'll simplify it.

So USB 3.1, we came in with an FPJ and then we figured everything that we needed to figure out and then we hardened a lot of that stuff both on ASIC, called it Sabre, and we'll ship that into that in 2016.

That's kind of the plan.

For stacking, most of the stacks that we see today would be like an FPJ with a Bluetooth radio, or these things.

So we didn't mean to insinuate -- if we said that, that's probably not what we were targeting.

Now we could because we have the stacking capability, stack a lot of our products.

Let's say, for instance, you wanted a high speed video with some flexibility on the I/Os, you could stack a Silicon Image product right on top of an FPJ, right.

So we could do that today.

Right now we're focusing most of our synergies -- most of our synergies are in that win early and defend longer.

We still have a whole program right now on how do we put these things together.

And I'll give you a prime example.

So USB 3.0 that nobody really talks about anymore because everyone's into 3.1 Type C, we used to have a design win with Cypress where Cypress provided the frontend and we provided the backend of 3.1 solution.

We now do that internally with a Silicon Image product and an FPJ from Lattice.

So that's one example of displace some of the other guys.

And that may have been where you said, oh, they're probably stacking that.

We don't need to stack it because there's usually board space on a 3.0 solution.

There's not board space on a 3.1 type space because the [form factors] are really tiny.

Got it.

Okay.

Yes, that's super helpful.

And just kind of diving into the inventory a little bit more.

I know there's a lot of China inventory in comms.

Your inventory was up a little bit.

Was the majority of that internal inventory bump comms?

Yes.

Okay.

And nothing else in that inventory bump (multiple speakers)?

No.

Nothing significant.

Nothing of a significant change.

So, like we said, there was one customer who did not pull DMI into the quarter, so their DMI inventory sits there, we own it.

Okay.

And I'm sorry if I missed this, how many 10% customers did you have in the quarter?

One.

One.

One?

Uno mas.

Okay, great.

Thank you, guys.

I appreciate it.

Your next question comes from Sundeep Bajikar with Jefferies.

Hey, Sundeep.

Hi guys, thanks for taking the question.

Hi.

First, if you could just give us an update on customer revenue timelines around China smartphone.

How should we think of the second half over first half revenue growth from new smartphone design wins overall in China as well as non-China combined?

Okay.

So Q3 and Q4 you're going to see ramps, the bigger ramps from Huawei and Letv, okay, because those are both pretty big deals.

Huawei, you guys know the features because we stuck it in the (inaudible).

Letv, it's a YHD solution.

If you guys haven't seen that, it's pretty cool.

You can take a smartphone and you could project a 1080P off of a smartphone wirelessly into your TV using an HCMI port and a module that does that.

You can also do gaming because it's YHD and it's superfast response.

That turns out to be one of the killer products out there, and that's ramping pretty quick.

So those two alone, along with, and let's not forget, you know the Samsung derivatives that we are in.

So a lot of the things that are derivatives to like the Galaxy S6, we still play in those and that's our plan, right.

So we'll grow some of that modestly through Q3 and Q4, albeit not like the big win the S6 or S5 or S4 would be, but we'll start to see that grow.

Okay, that's great to hear.

And then just following up, you know if you could give us more color quantitatively in terms of what is driving the lower expectations.

For example, how much of the cut in your expectations for the year came from core Lattice versus the acquired business from Silicon Image?

So the majority of it, probably at least 50% of the cut is just distribution, right.

Distribution was down quite a bit lower than what we thought for this quarter.

And again, remember, our expectations were that distribution would grow throughout the year, right, which is how we get to the $485 million.

Distribution looks like it's pretty, you know, heavily affected by the macro.

So we've tried to be conservative and pull a lot of that.

About half of the drop is just distribution in general, right.

And then the other half is just softness in a lot of the OEMs that we're predicting through the second half downturn, right.

Now some of it could be DTVs, right, because we're trying to take a slant that says, hey, if we're starting to see this macro event occur, then we wouldn't expect that these OEMs to have this robust ramp (inaudible).

So we've tried to take more of a holistic view of this thing, so not just say, oh just he's down but everyone else would be up.

We took (inaudible) down and we looked at all of the OEMs and we pushed them down also, trying to be realistic about what that macro impact would have.

So it does affect some Silicon Image products in the DTV space, and it does affect the overall mobile.

You know, we've already had mobile go down.

In Q3 and Q4, it will probably come back because it was so low in Q2.

But TVs we would expect, AVRs we would expect, all those things to be hit by the macro.

You know, so we're predicting it.

If it doesn't happen, it's upside.

Okay, great.

That's very, very helpful.

And then just as a follow-up on that, as we think about the full year 2015, how should we think of revenue performance across the different segments, particularly communications and industrials?

Should we assume both down significantly for the year?

For consumer it's kind of a little -- it's a little cloudy because we're going to throw in Silicon Image, which then makes consumer look like it's doing great, right.

And it is doing well if you look at it from the 365 to the 4, you know a number that we're at today, you know it looks like it's a great growth rate.

But in reality a lot of that's from the acquisition which we expect.

I think industrial, Joe's looking at the numbers today.

They're pretty much flat year-on-year.

Slightly down in comms from last year because comms was a heavy frontend year.

So you got comms down, but industrial is fairly well flat year-on-year.

Yes, and we would have predicted in the $485 million number that industrial would have grown.

Communications we knew was going to be down slightly but we were expecting consumer to be higher, at least in the original analysis that we did.

Okay.

That's very helpful.

Thanks so much.

Okay.

(Operator Instructions) Your next question comes from Bill Dezellem with Tieton Capital Management.

Hi, Bill.

Good afternoon.

A group of questions here for you.

You had mentioned that you're going to be cutting $10 million to $15 million out of your operating expenses and yet you've also said that you have achieved $33 million of your $42 million synergy goal.

Correct.

If my math is right, that's only a 9% incremental difference, which is less than the $10 million to $15 million OpEx cut you're planning.

Would you reconcile those numbers for us?

Is that $10 million to $15 million in addition to the synergy savings, or is there some double counting?

No, it's in addition to the synergy savings.

The way we look at the synergy savings, that's an infrastructural savings, meaning I put the two companies together, I have savings related to infrastructure.

I can take those cuts.

Those are long-term real cuts.

The additional cuts are driven by business environment.

So the business environment looks less than robust moving forward.

We're evaluating programs and looking at where we can best utilize our cash.

That's going to result in an additional savings beyond the $42 million.

That is helpful.

And then continuing down that path, given that you are already approaching the $42 million, would it be reasonable to think that number might be conservative and will ultimately end up being higher?

It's possible.

We're in the middle of the evaluation, Bill.

No, we're not going to come off the synergy numbers of $42 million.

And then the other number is an initial first pass related to where we're at on the programs, related to our SLRP projects today.

So SLRP is still -- our SLRP -- strategic long range plan -- still in process, but we think we've got savings related there.

Yes, but Bill, let's be straight up here, right.

There's only a certain amount of synergies you get before they're actually restructuring, right.

And so there's the point where we know what we're going to get out of the synergies, and there's upsides and then there's stuff that we're like hey, wow, we didn't see this, right.

And so you're going to push those synergies as hard as you can for the efficiencies (inaudible).

After that though, as Joe alluded to, you're going to start killing programs and you're going to start saying, look, I'm not going to do this, and I'm not going to do that, and what's the impact on revenue and can I afford to do that.

If we're really at a lower number, then we're going to have to look not at synergy increases but at OpEx reductions.

And we have the benefit of being able to fold the two companies together.

And there is some revenue related synergies out there that we haven't taken into account, and that translates into potential reduction in R&D because we'll synergize the way we run that program.

So there's good news there, so we're not necessarily killing programs specifically, we may be rolling them in, extending the timeframe, that kind of stuff.

That's actually a great segue to my next question, which is R&D being around 37% of revenues.

Would you talk to just in a broader sense about how you are viewing where R&D ultimately should be in your model, and the degree to which programs that maybe previously made sense under the Lattice solo heading no longer do because they get crowded out by better competing projects from the Silicon Image side?

Yes.

I mean if you look at the model, R&D should be roughly around 18% to 20%, depending on where you are and what you're doing, right.

I mean that's the bottom line.

And so that's what Joe and I have put in our models as we walk through it.

And the rest of this stuff, you make up the rest with SG&A and everything else, right.

But the bottom line that we look at is that there's going to be opportunities where -- there's always opportunities in consumer that outweigh the revenue opportunities because of their speed and their size and these other things, that operate your baseline, like an FPJ baseline in industrial and consumer.

So you can't just go, oh, let's go all in in consumer because you're trying to build that base of products within industrial and communications, albeit they take longer to grow, they're not as fast, but they're also what pays your bills every day when the lumpiness of consumer comes in and out.

So what we're trying to do is we're trying to position the company where we're structured for our baseline revenue plus a little bit of consumer.

And then when these big hits come in, it's a big deal but you're not adding resources to support those because those come from your basic R&D capabilities and the products.

Now on the consumer side, the products are typically less expensive than the products that you're going to build on the communication side, which is why three years ago we said the last product that we're going to build on the communications for a while will be ECP5, right, a cost reduction, a small product.

In the industrial front, the nice thing about that is you don't have to build Silicon for industrial, we basically layer IP onto existing Silicon from the other markets.

So we can develop a strategy where you spend 40%, 50% of your R&D dollars in consumer, the rest of it has to be layered through industrial and communications so that you always have that baseline that you can fall back on.

And we're in a good position, right, because we've driven XO2 and XO3 products to the market.

They're new products that are out there in the market and ramping very well.

EC3, EC5, still very solid in the comm space.

So we've got a sweet spot right now as we go forward in terms of spending.

But we're going to allocate resources to those core products also because we're not giving up on industrial, we're not giving up on communications.

Right.

And to be specific on XO2, XO2 was available in production in 2011.

And in 2011, and it just passed XO in revenue shipments this last quarter.

So that gives you an idea.

You put this big investment in there and now it takes you this long just to ramp those products up, but it's good because it's stable and it's a long-term growth and it has very solid margin.

That is really helpful.

And if you would allow one more question that I don't think was specifically addressed earlier with any questions.

And we're hoping you will embellish and discuss the quote in the press release relative to the many high potential growth opportunities that you already have in place.

Yes.

I mean those are all the ones that we always talk about.

Remember we started, it used to be like one big win at one customer.

And now there's multiple types of those size wins at multiple customers.

And I'm not going to comment the specifics.

You guys know who we chase, right.

We're chasing the S7, just like everybody else on the planet is.

And we chase every other giant phone guy out there.

The nice thing is we have a lot of good discussions with them.

And as we look through this, we have a lot more opportunities today than we ever had in the past.

Thank you both.

Yes.

Your next question comes from Mike Cahill with Crispin Capital.

Joe, thanks for letting me ask a question.

When I look at your third quarter guidance and then the full year guidance, and I kind of back out the implied fourth quarter, the OpEx is down to about $46 million, which is a big step down from the third quarter $60 million, and that drives a very profitable fourth quarter.

I'm just wondering how confident are you in that $46 million of OpEx for the fourth quarter.

So it's based on the synergies that we're recognizing and the timing of those synergies as they roll through.

So we're pretty confident.

Okay.

So that gives you a decent run rate as you exit the year in earnings.

So that's kind of a good run rate to use going forward?

Yes, there's variability in that obviously because there's assets come in and assets are a couple million bucks a pop.

So I think you want to keep it somewhere between 45 and 50.

Okay.

Well, if you keep growing the revenue, that will be fine.

Thank you.

Appreciate that.

Thanks, Mike.

(Operator Instructions) Your next question comes from Todd Morgan with Jefferies.

Thank you.

Just two clarifications, if I may.

You talked about the around $215 million the midpoint of your OpEx for the year.

I think you're saying that a potential $10 million to $15 million or so of run rate OpEx cuts that you're investigating would be a reduction to that number, whatever you'd actually realize in the period.

Is that correct?

The $42 million in synergies is something that we've targeted before.

Any other reduction, the $10 million to $15 million above that, is above that.

Is that the question?

I think that's right, yes.

Okay, good.

That's what it is.

Okay.

So we're going to hit the $42 million, above that is program driven type cuts and operational spending cuts based on revenue.

Okay.

Great.

And then secondly, I think if we go back a quarter or so, you certainly talked about your expected pick up from FPGAs going to smartphones in China in the second half of this year.

And I was just actually, if you kind of look back at some of your comments here, I was just trying to understand if you were thinking at this point that that original outlook is potentially a little bit different, panning out a little different than you seen or if you're still kind of on track for the kind of type of growth that you'd anticipated earlier in this year.

Yes, the design wins, we hit the mark on all the design wins.

The issue is that a lot of the customers that we got designed into haven't done particularly well in the market.

And I think that's an artifact of Apple, and you know some of the other big OEMs really winning more share than these guys.

I mean our highlights for the thing are two highlights that I alluded to earlier, really Huawei and Letv, which one is a wireless YHD solution that we have and the other one we've got five or six different design wins in those.

Both of those are material in Q3 and Q4.

And there's some other ones sprinkled in there that aren't as big, obviously, as those.

So we did hit the mark all the way on the design end.

We have not hit the mark on the revenue because they just haven't -- our end customers haven't done as well as we thought they would do.

So that's one of the reasons why you know we took some of the revenue down in Q3 and Q4 from the original 45, the consumer mobile uptick in revenue didn't occur as fast as we thought because they didn't do as well in the market.

Okay, that's helpful then.

Thanks.

Good luck.

Yes.

(Operator Instructions) At this time, there are no questions.

Okay.

So I'm going to go ahead and close this.

So when I look back at where we are today versus where we were beginning 2012, it feels about the same and it really shouldn't.

As we started 2012 we forecast $67 million in revenue and we just bought SiliconBlue.

The only capabilities we had were FPGA capabilities and we were a distant third place horse in a two-horse FPGA race.

Our only hope was to grow in a market they ignored called consumer.

Now after the Silicon Image acquisition, we almost doubled our revenue and quadrupled our capabilities.

From FPGAs to video IP standard expertise to DTV and AVR leadership products, to millimeter wave technologies.

Not to mention one of the leaders in IP sales while collecting reoccurring royalties on HDMI and MHL.

All these capabilities enable us to have broader, deeper discussions with our existing customers, while opening up new opportunities at new customers.

In 2012 we were focused on one big win at one big customer.

Now we have multiple big opportunities at multiple customers.

Each one by themselves making a significant difference in our growth trajectory.

That's the beauty of having the right products for the consumer market, all the while keeping your baseline revenue growing over time.

Structure for the downturn, leverage during the upturn.

We continue to be keenly aware and actively confronting the challenge presented by the fact that our revenue is lower than we expected at the beginning of this acquisition.

Our plan is pretty simple.

Structure the company to achieve 20% operating income at the new lower base and create more leverage as we grow.

We've already actioned $33 million in run rate synergies in 2016, which equates to about 2/3 of the EPS we achieved in 2014, and there's more to do.

We expect to meet the $42 million synergy target.

What does all that mean?

We're solidly focused on doubling our EPS in the next two years, just like we said.

The only difference, we're going to do that at a lower top line in the near term, but we still expect to grow in the long term.

Thanks for your support through this process.

Thank you for participating in today's conference.

You may now disconnect.