美光科技 (MU) 2022 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to Micron Technology's Fiscal Third Quarter 2022 Post-Earnings Analyst Call. (Operator Instructions) I would now like to hand the call over to Farhan Ahmad, Vice President, Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

感謝您的支持，歡迎參加美光科技 2022 財年第三季度財報分析師電話會議。 （操作員說明）我現在想將電話轉給投資者關係副總裁 Farhan Ahmad。請繼續。

Thank you, Latif. Welcome to Micron Technology's Fiscal Third Quarter 2022 Sell-Side Analyst Callback. On the call with me today are Sumit Sadana, our Chief Business Officer; Manish Bhatia, our EVP of Global Operations; and Mark Murphy, our CFO.

謝謝你，拉蒂夫。歡迎來到美光科技 2022 財年第三季度賣方分析師回調。今天與我通話的是我們的首席商務官 Sumit Sadana； Manish Bhatia，我們的全球運營執行副總裁；和我們的首席財務官 Mark Murphy。

As a reminder, the matters we will be discussing today include forward-looking statements regarding market demand and supply, our expected results and other matters. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from the statements made today. We refer you to the documents we filed with the SEC, specifically our most recent Form 10-K and 10-Q for a discussion of the risks that may affect our future results. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. We are under no duty to update any of the forward-looking statements to conform these statements to actual results.

提醒一下，我們今天將討論的事項包括有關市場供需、我們的預期結果和其他事項的前瞻性陳述。這些前瞻性陳述受到風險和不確定性的影響，可能導致實際結果與今天的陳述存在重大差異。我們向您推薦我們向 SEC 提交的文件，特別是我們最近的 10-K 和 10-Q 表格，以討論可能影響我們未來結果的風險。儘管我們認為前瞻性陳述中反映的預期是合理的，但我們不能保證未來的結果、活動水平、業績或成就。我們沒有義務更新任何前瞻性陳述以使這些陳述符合實際結果。

Latif, you can now open the call for Q&A.

Latif，您現在可以打開問答電話。

(Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from Tom O'Malley of Barclays.

（操作員說明）我們的第一個問題來自 Barclays 的 Tom O'Malley。

I just wanted to ask, on the long-term, through-the-cycle model. You guys laid out 30% from an operating margin perspective. I understand that there are some China headwinds that are impacting, that I think are slightly more exacerbating this down cycle. But you are already, in the guidance, moving below that 30%. And it sounds like there may be some more weakening to come.

我只是想問一下，關於長期的、貫穿整個週期的模型。從營業利潤率的角度來看，你們安排了 30%。我知道有一些中國不利因素正在影響，我認為這會稍微加劇這個下行週期。但是，在指導中，您已經低於 30%。聽起來可能會有更多的削弱。

Can you just talk to if you think that 30% is still viable, now that you've seen these cuts? And just any of the moving parts as to how you think that, that can sustain through the cycle?

既然你已經看到了這些削減，如果你認為 30% 仍然可行，你能談談嗎？以及您認為可以維持整個週期的任何活動部分？

Tom, hey, Mark. I'll start. I mean it is a through-the-cycle model, so it's not intended to be a floor, it's not intended to be any point in time. So I think the way to look at it is we're not going to base any given quarter on where it stands relative to the long-term model because there are a lot of conditions that impact obviously the short-term results.

湯姆，嘿，馬克。我會開始的。我的意思是它是一個貫穿整個週期的模型，所以它不打算成為地板，也不打算成為任何時間點。所以我認為看待它的方式是，我們不會將任何給定的季度建立在它相對於長期模型的位置上，因為有很多條件會明顯影響短期結果。

We are -- we have entered a period where the market weakened considerably in a very short period of time, and we're just -- we've given a fourth quarter guide to reflect the best view we have at the moment and we'll update through the quarter.

我們 - 我們已經進入了一個市場在很短的時間內大幅走弱的時期，我們只是 - 我們已經提供了第四季度指南，以反映我們目前擁有的最佳觀點，我們'將在本季度更新。

Got you. I appreciate it. And then my follow-up is just, on the cost side, going into the quarter, you guys had talked about just limited cost reductions in both DRAM and NAND. Can you just give any color on just the reported quarter, on how costs kind of shook out between the 2 buckets?

得到你。我很感激。然後我的後續行動是，在成本方面，進入本季度，你們談到了 DRAM 和 NAND 的成本降低有限。您能否就報告的季度給出任何顏色，說明兩個桶之間的成本是如何變化的？

Yes. Well, on -- we do expect for the full year for our cost to still outpace industry costs. But in the third and the fourth quarter, improvements have been flattish, a little bit better on the front end because the leading node activities and those benefits, a little bit of inflation or -- inflation, but that inflation is more manifested in the back end, where -- and the net is that we end up with basically flattish costs down in the third and fourth quarter. Long term, we're still planning to be in line with industry cost trends.

是的。好吧，我們確實預計全年我們的成本仍將超過行業成本。但是在第三季度和第四季度，改善一直持平，在前端稍微好一點，因為領先的節點活動和那些好處，有點通貨膨脹或--通貨膨脹，但這種通貨膨脹更多地表現在後面最後，在哪裡 - 淨是我們最終在第三和第四季度的成本基本持平。從長遠來看，我們仍計劃與行業成本趨勢保持一致。

And I'll just -- Tom, I'll just add in there that a lot of that has -- the reported COGS obviously have a lot of mix adjustment. So when we have strong growth, record quarter in SSDs, we have strong new growth in some of these high-value solutions, obviously, the COGS number is mix-adjusted. But when we talk about outperforming the industry in terms of cost reduction for the year, we're talking about at the memory level where our technology leadership in 1 alpha and 176-layer has allowed us to outpace the industry this year and perform well at the front-end level.

我只是 - 湯姆，我將在那裡添加很多 - 報告的 COGS 顯然有很多混合調整。因此，當我們在 SSD 實現強勁增長、創紀錄的季度時，我們在其中一些高價值解決方案中實現了強勁的新增長，顯然，COGS 數字經過了混合調整。但是，當我們談到今年在降低成本方面跑贏行業時，我們指的是內存級別，我們在 1 alpha 和 176 層的技術領先地位使我們能夠在今年跑贏行業並在前端級別。

But obviously, mix of -- movement towards high-value solutions, and as that happens over the last quarter and this next quarter, those are impacting the all-in cost, but obviously providing higher margin as well or higher price.

但顯然，向高價值解決方案的轉變，以及在上個季度和下個季度發生的這種情況，這些都影響了總成本，但顯然也提供了更高的利潤或更高的價格。

Our next question comes from Joe Moore of Morgan Stanley.

我們的下一個問題來自摩根士丹利的喬摩爾。

I wonder if you could quantify at all the impact of the supply reduction that you guys are looking to do, the utilization impact of that. And I guess, is it -- can you compare it to what you did in 2019? Do you think it's something similar to that, more significant and not less significant than that? Just any color would be helpful.

我想知道你們是否可以量化你們想要做的供應減少的所有影響，以及對利用率的影響。我想，是嗎 - 你能把它和你在 2019 年做的比較嗎？您是否認為它與此類似，比這更重要而不是更重要？任何顏色都會有幫助。

And at this time, not really ready to compare it. We're still working to finalize what our plans are. As we mentioned, we're going to have a combination of trying to manage CapEx, manage utilization, particularly for some of our legacy nodes, and take a look at maybe less cost-effective nodes, how we can optimize those, how we can optimize the manufacturing footprint space as we condition to more advanced nodes. And we're going to be ramping our 1-beta and 232 technologies. We think it's very important to make sure that we continue to maintain leadership and launch those technologies so that we can have the product portfolio benefits from those as well as the cost benefits from those.

而此時，還沒有真正準備好比較它。我們仍在努力最終確定我們的計劃。正如我們所提到的，我們將嘗試管理資本支出，管理利用率，特別是對於我們的一些遺留節點，並查看成本效益可能較低的節點，我們如何優化這些節點，我們如何隨著我們適應更先進的節點，優化製造空間。我們將增加我們的 1-beta 和 232 技術。我們認為確保我們繼續保持領先地位並推出這些技術非常重要，這樣我們才能從這些技術中獲得產品組合收益以及成本收益。

And then the other piece, of course, is managing inventory, as Mark was talking about on the call, so we'll kind of look at all those areas together to be able to determine what the right mix of supply bit growth, CapEx utilization and inventory is -- and cost reduction is for next year. And we'll provide more color, I think, on the next call.

然後，當然，另一部分是管理庫存，正如馬克在電話會議上所說的那樣，所以我們將共同研究所有這些領域，以確定供應位增長、資本支出利用率的正確組合庫存是 - 並且成本降低是明年的。我認為，我們將在下一次電話會議上提供更多顏色。

Our next question comes from Toshiya Hari of Goldman Sachs.

我們的下一個問題來自高盛的 Toshiya Hari。

I have one quick clarification and then one quick question. On the clarification, for the fiscal Q4 guide, based on your commentary, it seems like the sequential decline in revenue, that's mostly coming from bits, and pricing is perhaps down low singles or something like that based on sort of the strategy that you're taking. Is that a fair assumption?

我有一個快速的澄清，然後是一個快速的問題。澄清一下，根據您的評論，對於第四季度財報指南，收入似乎連續下降，這主要來自比特幣，而定價可能會下降到低單價或類似的價格，具體取決於您的策略。重新服用。這是一個公平的假設嗎？

Yes. If you do the math on things, you'll see that volume is roughly 2/3 sequential.

是的。如果您對事物進行數學運算，您會發現音量大約是連續的 2/3。

Got it. Okay. That's helpful. And then -- got it. And then as my question, this one is for you as well, probably, Mark. On OpEx, you talked about some of the initiatives having a bigger impact in fiscal '23. I guess last time, you were kind of in the ZIP Code from a revenue perspective. OpEx was kind of in the low $800 million dollars. And I realize there's been broad-based inflation. But how should we think about OpEx in the early part of fiscal '23 as you guys flex down?

知道了。好的。這很有幫助。然後——明白了。然後作為我的問題，這個問題也可能是給你的，馬克。關於 OpEx，您談到了一些在 23 財年產生更大影響的舉措。我想上次，從收入的角度來看，你有點在郵政編碼中。運營支出大約為 8 億美元。我意識到存在廣泛的通貨膨脹。但是，隨著你們的努力，我們應該如何看待 23 財年早期的運營支出？

Yes. I -- we -- you can back into OpEx long-term as a percent of sales through the model. I won't give you a number for OpEx in '23 because we haven't done our plans. We'll give guidance on that at a future call. I think the comments today were meant to reflect that it is an environment that's changed very quickly and the demand environment is weakened. And we've responded quickly across all major areas of spend.

是的。我——我們——你可以通過該模型以佔銷售額的百分比的形式長期回歸運營支出。我不會給你 23 年運營支出的數字，因為我們還沒有完成我們的計劃。我們將在未來的電話會議上就此提供指導。我認為今天的評論旨在反映這是一個變化非常迅速的環境，需求環境被削弱了。我們在所有主要支出領域都做出了快速響應。

And we are -- the OpEx number is down from what it was in our original forecast here. So that gives you a sense of we're already dealing with it. And our expectation is that as the market outlook becomes clearer, we will adjust our OpEx spend appropriately. Now it's not a -- this isn't a -- the company is in great position of leadership across technology products and manufacturing. So it's -- this is not a take a sledgehammer to OpEx. It's a scalpel exercise, and we work to get OpEx down and for an appropriate level for the conditions of the business.

而且我們 - 運營支出數字低於我們最初預測的數字。所以這讓你感覺我們已經在處理它。我們的預期是，隨著市場前景變得更加明朗，我們將適當調整我們的 OpEx 支出。現在它不是——這不是——該公司在技術產品和製造領域處於領先地位。所以它 - 這不是對 OpEx 的大錘。這是一個手術刀練習，我們努力降低運營支出並達到適合業務條件的水平。

And Mark, sorry, just to be clear, the sequential increase in OpEx this quarter, that's just timing of quals, as you guys noted on the call?

馬克，抱歉，為了清楚一點，本季度運營支出的連續增長，這只是資格的時機，正如你們在電話會議上所說的那樣？

Yes. We had -- in the third quarter, the OpEx was low. It was actually about $100 million off of the, I think, the guidance. And 2 major drivers, one, product and technology spend, as you talk about, and that was actually not due to sort of fewer programs, it was due to actually very good performance and fewer wafers required for technology qualification. That was the largest part of the variance.

是的。我們有 - 在第三季度，OpEx 很低。我認為，它實際上比指導方針少了大約 1 億美元。還有兩個主要驅動因素，一是產品和技術支出，正如你所說，這實際上並不是因為項目數量減少，而是因為實際上非常好的性能和技術認證所需的晶圓更少。這是最大的差異部分。

The next was just, as you can imagine, our forecast came way down. So the incentive comp was adjusted. And since we're this far in the year, it was a sizable accrual adjustment. So those 2 things were drivers. In the fourth quarter, of course, those benefits become headwinds for the fourth quarter. So we're kind of back up to this level, just over $1 billion, and sort of makes it look like more of a sequential decline. In reality, it is. And we'll just continue to work it in a disciplined way from here.

正如您可以想像的那樣，接下來就是我們的預測下降了。因此，激勵補償進行了調整。而且由於我們今年已經到了這麼遠，這是一個相當大的應計調整。所以這兩件事是驅動程序。當然，在第四季度，這些好處成為第四季度的不利因素。所以我們有點回到這個水平，剛剛超過 10 億美元，這讓它看起來更像是連續下降。事實上，確實如此。我們將繼續以有紀律的方式從這裡開始工作。

Our next question comes from C.J. Muse of Evercore.

我們的下一個問題來自 Evercore 的 C.J. Muse。

I wanted to just follow up on a prior question around cost-downs and whether you're contemplating any material kind of change to utilization rates and how we should think about that impacting cost-downs in the coming quarters?

我想就之前關於成本下降的問題進行跟進，您是否正在考慮對利用率進行任何重大改變，以及我們應該如何考慮在未來幾個季度影響成本下降？

Hi, C.J. So we are -- I think as I said, we are evaluating utilization. I would say that we're really -- with having technology leadership, we definitely believe that the inventory at the leading edge that we're generating is very cost-effective relative to the rest of the industry, relative to even what will be available for us in future quarters. So we're really, on the utilization front, focused on thinking about optimizing older nodes, legacy nodes, of course, keeping in mind the legacy demand that we have for certain customers as well.

嗨，C.J. 所以我們 - 我想正如我所說，我們正在評估利用率。我想說的是，我們真的 - 擁有技術領先地位，我們絕對相信，相對於行業的其他公司，我們產生的處於領先地位的庫存非常具有成本效益，甚至與可用的庫存相比為我們在未來幾個季度。因此，在利用率方面，我們確實專注於考慮優化舊節點、遺留節點，當然，還要記住我們對某些客戶的遺留需求。

But it's not as if I think we're at a position where, on the leading edge, we're going to be making significant action or drastic action and then -- and as I mentioned before, when -- previously, when I think Joe or Tom had asked about this, we're still planning on ramping our 1-beta and 232 technologies later this year. We think it's very important that we maintain the technology cadence and the learning and the -- drive the adoption of those technologies. And that will happen in fiscal year '23 as well.

但這並不是說我認為我們處於領先地位，我們將採取重大行動或激烈行動，然後 - 正如我之前提到的，當 - 以前，當我認為Joe 或 Tom 曾問過這個問題，我們仍計劃在今年晚些時候增加我們的 1-beta 和 232 技術。我們認為保持技術節奏和學習並推動這些技術的採用非常重要。這也將在 23 財年發生。

Very helpful. And I guess, just a quick follow-up. Are there any targets you have for inventory that you can share with us and in what kind of time frame?

非常有幫助。我想，只是一個快速的跟進。您是否有任何可以與我們分享的庫存目標以及在什麼樣的時間範圍內？

C. J., the only target that we can provide is the previous level of discomfort target, I guess, maybe you call it, the -- I think we would like to keep it below 150 days. We do think it will go up in the -- it will go up in the fourth quarter on DIO. I think I gave a number of a couple of weeks. And we'll just have to see where it goes from there. That's a function of market conditions, as you know.

C.J.，我們唯一可以提供的目標是之前的不適目標，我想，也許你稱之為——我認為我們希望將其保持在 150 天以下。我們確實認為它會在 - 它會在 DIO 的第四季度上升。我想我給了幾個星期。我們只需要看看它從那裡去哪裡。如您所知，這是市場條件的函數。

Our next question comes from Srini Pajjuri of SMBC Nikko.

我們的下一個問題來自 SMBC Nikko 的 Srini Pajjuri。

A couple from me as well. First, on the PC and smartphone weakness, you talked about inventory correction. Just curious, I mean, do you think it's a 1-quarter event? Meaning, do you think the inventories will -- customers will normalize after this quarter? Or do you see further potential for kind of a correction going forward, if assuming that demand kind of stabilizes this year? Then I have a follow-up.

我也有一對。首先，關於 PC 和智能手機的疲軟，您談到了庫存調整。只是好奇，我的意思是，你認為這是一個四分之一的事件嗎？意思是，你認為庫存會——本季度之後客戶會正常化嗎？或者，如果假設今年需求趨於穩定，您是否看到進一步的修正潛力？然後我有一個跟進。

Typically, we see that, in any given segment, when customers start to correct inventory, it is a couple of quarters worth of a process that takes several months to get down to their own internal target levels of inventory.

通常，我們看到，在任何給定的細分市場中，當客戶開始糾正庫存時，需要花費數月時間才能降低到他們自己的內部目標庫存水平的過程的價值四分之一。

That, of course, assumes a predictable macroeconomic environment and demand trends in their own segment. And so obviously, there is concern about the trajectory of the macroeconomic environment. So that can further create another vector of uncertainty that has to be dealt with. But typically, it takes a couple of quarters for the inventory to get normalized.

當然，這假設了可預測的宏觀經濟環境和各自細分市場的需求趨勢。顯然，人們對宏觀經濟環境的軌跡感到擔憂。因此，這可能會進一步產生另一個必須處理的不確定性向量。但通常情況下，庫存需要幾個季度才能正常化。

And we're talking both PC and smartphone, Sumit, that started this quarter, so we're talking 2 quarters basically from current quarter?

我們談論的是從本季度開始的 PC 和智能手機 Sumit，所以我們基本上是從當前季度開始談論 2 個季度？

Yes. I mean that's the reason we said that we see this playing out sort of in the second half of calendar '22 as the biggest portion of the impact of the lowered sell-through rates in the end markets in those segments as well as the inventory correction.

是的。我的意思是這就是我們說我們認為這種情況在 22 年下半年出現的原因，這是這些細分市場終端市場銷售率降低以及庫存修正影響的最大部分.

Okay. Got it. And then on your own balance sheet inventory, Mark, you talked about $150 million is kind of where you will start getting uncomfortable. But if I look at your historic inventory, I think it peaked out around 130s, in the mid-130s. So I'm just curious, what changed in the last, I guess, in a year or 2, that you are more comfortable even at $150 million, I guess? Why has that level gone higher?

好的。知道了。然後在你自己的資產負債表庫存中，馬克，你談到 1.5 億美元是你開始感到不舒服的地方。但是，如果我查看您的歷史庫存，我認為它在 130 年代左右達到頂峰，在 130 年代中期。所以我只是好奇，我想，在過去的一兩年內發生了什麼變化，即使是 1.5 億美元，你也會感到更舒服，我猜？為什麼這個水平越來越高了？

And then the other side of the question is that you did say that you want -- kind of you're going to maintain pricing discipline and also use your inventory to kind of supply into the market next year. So I guess, at some point, the inventory will come down as you lower your production growth. What is the minimum level that you're comfortable? I mean I'm looking at, I guess, a few quarters ago, you're in the low 90s. So I'm just curious, what is the minimum level that you're comfortable? And when do you have to ramp up production again, at what level?

然後問題的另一方面是你確實說過你想要 - 你將保持定價紀律，並使用你的庫存來為明年的市場供應。所以我想，在某個時候，隨著你降低產量增長，庫存會下降。你覺得舒服的最低水平是多少？我的意思是我在看，我猜，幾個季度前，你還處於 90 年代的低谷。所以我只是好奇，你覺得舒服的最低水平是多少？你什麼時候必須再次提高產量，在什麼水平？

Yes. So there is no news today on the call actually. It was more a validation of ranges that have been set before. I did comment on there are some headwinds in the sense of on DIO, around more complex processing and that the cycle time in the Fab would be longer and more [whipped]. There's more complex modules, and there's the associated components with those and assembly times and so forth.

是的。所以今天的電話實際上沒有消息。這更像是對之前設置的範圍的驗證。我確實評論過在 DIO 方面存在一些不利因素，圍繞更複雜的處理以及 Fab 中的周期時間會更長和更多[鞭打]。有更複雜的模塊，還有與這些相關的組件和組裝時間等等。

So I think all that is a headwind, but at the same time, the team is doing a lot of things to offset those. And so I was validating that the number that we've provided before of about $150 million is a maximum level. Normal levels have also been talked about before, around 100 days. So the number that you cited in the low 90s is a level that we would view as good, lean inventory levels for our business.

所以我認為所有這些都是逆風，但與此同時，團隊正在做很多事情來抵消這些。因此，我正在驗證我們之前提供的大約 1.5 億美元的數字是最高水平。之前也討論過正常水平，大約 100 天。因此，您在 90 年代低點引用的數字是我們認為對我們的業務來說良好、精益的庫存水平。

Yes. I'll just add one comment there, just -- Srini. I mean these things always are -- the trend in the industry, and it doesn't matter whether you look at the logic, in this logic side, or you look at memory, the trend is longer and longer processing time and cycle time in the fabs, right? So that's more Fab [whip].

是的。我將在此處添加一條評論，就-- 斯里尼。我的意思是這些東西總是——行業的趨勢，不管你看邏輯，在這個邏輯方面，或者你看內存，趨勢是越來越長的處理時間和周期時間晶圓廠，對吧？所以這更像是 Fab [whip]。

For us specifically then, you add in the fact that we're transforming more of our business and in general, more industry demand moving towards high-value solutions, like SSDs, like data center DRAM modules. These things have longer cycle time in the back end as well as more component inventory required to be held for the back end as well.

具體而言，對於我們來說，您補充說我們正在改變我們更多的業務，總的來說，更多的行業需求轉向高價值解決方案，如 SSD，如數據中心 DRAM 模塊。這些東西在後端具有更長的周期時間，並且還需要為後端保留更多的組件庫存。

So when you think about all of those things, all of these, whether you're talking about the lean inventory range or the max comfortable inventory range, those are things that, generally across this industry as technology becomes more complex and products become more complex, are going to continue to keep going up over time.

因此，當您考慮所有這些事情時，所有這些，無論您是在談論精益庫存範圍還是最大舒適庫存範圍，隨著技術變得更加複雜和產品變得更加複雜，這些都是整個行業的事情, 將隨著時間的推移繼續上升。

And the other thing, just to keep in mind, and we talked about this at our Investor Day, is one of the trends in the industry over the last several years now, again speaking about memory, it's helpful to allow us to hold more inventories. The cost declines are lower now than they were a decade ago from technology transition.

另一件事，請記住，我們在投資者日討論過這一點，這是過去幾年行業的趨勢之一，再次談到內存，允許我們持有更多庫存是有幫助的.由於技術轉型，現在的成本下降低於十年前。

So that's another one of the areas where we're able to hold more inventory because we have very good cost-effective inventory, especially being at the leading edge now of the industry, and we expect that inventory to continue to be cost-effective through the next -- through this next period while we're working down our inventories.

所以這是我們能夠持有更多庫存的另一個領域，因為我們擁有非常好的成本效益庫存，尤其是目前處於行業領先地位，我們預計庫存將繼續具有成本效益下一個 - 通過下一個時期，我們正在減少庫存。

Our next question comes from Steven Fox of Fox Advisors.

我們的下一個問題來自 Fox Advisors 的 Steven Fox。

2 questions. First, on the gross margin guidance for the quarter. I think you're guiding down about 500 basis points roughly quarter-over-quarter. Can you sort of break that out between -- I assume a bulk of that is just sheer volume, but anything you can provide color on how much is related to mix, pricing, et cetera? And then I had a follow-up.

2個問題。首先，關於本季度的毛利率指導。我認為你指導的季度環比下降了大約 500 個基點。您能否在兩者之間進行分類-我假設其中大部分只是數量，但是您可以提供的任何顏色都與混合，定價等有關嗎？然後我進行了跟進。

Yes. I won't go into the details, but the sequential decline, third to fourth, is just driven by market trends or dynamics in the market. The second quarter to the third quarter was driven by a higher mix of NAND, that decline. Third quarter, fourth quarter -- go ahead.

是的。我不會詳細介紹，但從第三到第四的連續下降只是由市場趨勢或市場動態驅動的。第二季度到第三季度是由更高的 NAND 組合推動的，即下降。第三季度，第四季度——繼續。

Got it. And then in terms of -- third quarter from second quarter, yes. I got it -- got that. And then...

知道了。然後從第二季度到第三季度，是的。我明白了——明白了。接著...

No, I was just -- I'm sorry, just one thing to add. So beyond the fourth quarter, as we've talked about as these inventories are elevated and the market works through this period, we would expect that to weigh on gross margins. So I just want to make sure that's clear.

不，我只是 - 對不起，我要補充一件事。因此，在第四季度之後，正如我們所討論的那樣，隨著這些庫存的增加以及市場在此期間的運作，我們預計這將對毛利率造成壓力。所以我只是想確保這一點很清楚。

That's helpful. And then just on the long-term agreements, I mean, I understand this is unusual times. But I mean, you just spent the last several quarters putting some long-term agreements into place and they seem, as soon as things got tough, to unravel a bit.

這很有幫助。然後就長期協議而言，我的意思是，我理解這是不尋常的時代。但我的意思是，你只是在過去幾個季度裡制定了一些長期協議，一旦事情變得艱難，它們似乎就會瓦解一點。

So I guess, you would -- it sounded like you were kind of describing some benefits that are still coming through from the long-term agreements even as demand slows here. I'm just not clear on what those are. So can you maybe talk to the, I guess, that comment in the question I just put out there?

所以我想，你會 - 聽起來你在描述一些長期協議仍然帶來的好處，即使這裡的需求放緩。我只是不清楚那些是什麼。那麼，您能否談談我剛才提出的問題中的評論？

Sure. So in terms of the long-term agreements, we have been working on these for several years, used to be just over 10% of our revenue under long-term agreements 5 years ago and it's now 75% of our revenue in the long-term agreements. So substantially, all of our large customers are under long-term agreements in terms of purchases.

當然。因此，就長期協議而言，我們已經研究了好幾年，過去 5 年前根據長期協議，我們的收入剛剛超過 10%，現在是我們長期收入的 75%。期限協議。因此，基本上，我們所有的大客戶都簽訂了長期的採購協議。

And I have mentioned this in the past, that these agreements were never structured to be take-or-pay agreements, that our customers would buy the volume come hell or high water. It's more like a very strong good level of planning between our customers and us to ensure that we are driving alignment between their demand, our supply, allocation of bits to different customers, different segments and the mechanism to drive share dynamics and different customers in different segments.

我過去曾提到過，這些協議從來都不是照付不議的協議，我們的客戶會在地獄或高水位購買數量。這更像是我們的客戶和我們之間的一個非常好的計劃，以確保我們在他們的需求、我們的供應、向不同客戶、不同細分市場的比特分配以及驅動共享動態和不同客戶的機制之間保持一致。段。

So our goal with these agreements is really to use these as a mechanism to drive the portfolio mix to where we want it to be. And we have mentioned in the past that our goal is to keep our supply bit share consistent over time, in both DRAM and NAND, and strive for a bigger and bigger portion of the industry profit pull-through moves in our product portfolio and mix.

因此，我們達成這些協議的目標實際上是利用這些作為一種機制，將投資組合組合推向我們想要的位置。我們過去曾提到，我們的目標是隨著時間的推移在 DRAM 和 NAND 中保持我們的供應位份額一致，並在我們的產品組合和組合中爭取越來越多的行業利潤拉動。

And that's where we have had tremendous success, not just in improving our product portfolio, but also using these agreements to drive our product portfolio mix into a place which gives us better profitability and improved stability. One example is that in the auto, industrial, networking, graphics type of segments, the margin stability through the cycle is much better compared to other segments of the market.

這就是我們取得巨大成功的地方，不僅是在改進我們的產品組合方面，而且還利用這些協議將我們的產品組合組合推向了一個能給我們帶來更好盈利能力和更高穩定性的地方。一個例子是，在汽車、工業、網絡、圖形類型的細分市場中，與市場的其他細分市場相比，整個週期的利潤率穩定性要好得多。

And so our goal has been to drive higher share in those segments and these long-term agreements become critical over time in driving that share. Now that does not mean that we don't work with customers to have them purchase and that is consistent with these long-term agreements. Of course, we do. But I think, to be fair to our customers as well, when these kinds of significant macro events occur, it's not like that is a feasible outcome.

因此，我們的目標一直是在這些細分市場中推動更高的份額，而這些長期協議隨著時間的推移對於推動這一份額變得至關重要。現在這並不意味著我們不與客戶合作讓他們購買，這與這些長期協議是一致的。當然，我們這樣做。但我認為，為了公平對待我們的客戶，當這些重大宏觀事件發生時，這並不是一個可行的結果。

So I think we use these in a way that meets our overall company goals in a very effective manner, recognizing what the limitations are of these agreements and what they are meant to do and what they're not meant to do. So hopefully, that helps.

因此，我認為我們以一種非常有效的方式使用這些協議，以一種非常有效的方式滿足我們公司的整體目標，認識到這些協議的局限性以及它們的用途和不應該做的事情。所以希望，這會有所幫助。

Our next question comes from Vijay Rakesh of Mizuho.

我們的下一個問題來自瑞穗的 Vijay Rakesh。

Just a quick question here. I know you mentioned inventories are high on PC, handsets and I think people are seeing that. But I was wondering if you could give us some way of quantifying that. What are the inventory levels on the PC, handset and on the cloud side now and versus what are normal levels?

這裡只是一個簡單的問題。我知道你提到個人電腦、手機的庫存很高，我認為人們已經看到了這一點。但我想知道你是否可以給我們一些量化的方法。現在 PC、手機和雲端的庫存水平是多少，與正常水平相比是多少？

Yes. So I think in terms of PC and smartphones and then you look at cloud, I think it's a generalized comment across the industry that as the industry over the last -- semiconductor industry, and this goes beyond memory and storage. As the industry went through a significant shortage in semiconductors, definitely, that was one driver of customers wanting to have higher levels of inventory.

是的。所以我認為就個人電腦和智能手機而言，然後你看看雲，我認為這是整個行業的普遍評論，作為最後一個行業 - 半導體行業，這超出了內存和存儲。隨著該行業經歷半導體的嚴重短缺，這無疑是客戶希望擁有更高水平庫存的驅動因素之一。

Another was all of the geopolitical risks in terms of impact to shipments. And then the last piece was shutdowns happening in different parts of the world due to COVID-related restrictions being put by individual, local and federal governments around the world. So all of these conspired to cause customers to feel like they need to have a better level of inventory and customers who couldn't get to those inventory levels. And one good example of that is automotive companies. You can see the significant impact on revenue that those segments and those companies have suffered as a result of not having adequate inventory.

另一個是對運輸的影響方面的所有地緣政治風險。最後一件是由於世界各地的個人、地方和聯邦政府施加的與 COVID 相關的限制，世界不同地區發生了停工。因此，所有這些共同導致客戶覺得他們需要擁有更好的庫存水平以及無法達到這些庫存水平的客戶。汽車公司就是一個很好的例子。您可以看到這些細分市場和這些公司因庫存不足而遭受的重大收入影響。

So I think, across several segments, there has been a higher level of inventory than what was -- what existed pre-COVID. And the question is how will that trajectory of inventory in terms of weeks of sales change over time especially as the industry gets to a phase -- the whole semiconductor industry gets to a phase where fewer and fewer components are in short supply. So I think that thought is different customers and different parts of the market will make their own determination on these things.

因此，我認為，在幾個細分市場中，庫存水平都高於 COVID 之前的水平。問題是，以銷售週數計算的庫存軌跡將如何隨著時間的推移而變化，特別是隨著行業進入一個階段——整個半導體行業進入一個供應短缺的組件越來越少的階段。所以我認為想法是不同的客戶和不同的市場部分會在這些事情上做出自己的決定。

But coming specifically to the PC and smartphone portion of the business, the volumes in each of these in terms of TAM for '22 are down roughly 10% from the expectations for '22 at the start of this calendar year. So with that degradation in sell-through expectations, obviously, the inventory levels, consequently, from weeks of sales perspective, appears even bigger. And so there is a need for that adjustment.

但具體到業務的 PC 和智能手機部分，就 22 年的 TAM 而言，每一項的交易量都比今年年初對 22 年的預期下降了大約 10%。因此，隨著銷售預期的下降，顯然，從幾週的銷售角度來看，庫存水平似乎更大。因此，有必要進行這種調整。

So I think those were some of the catalysts that created that impact on our Q4 and what we have projected for the rest of the calendar year this year in terms of when we expect the inventory correction to sort of play out in those segments.

因此，我認為這些是對我們的第四季度產生影響的一些催化劑，以及我們對今年剩餘時間的預測，即我們預計庫存修正何時會在這些領域發揮作用。

Got it. And so it looks like you're talking more to a 10% discrepancy, but -- and is there -- if -- are you seeing a higher inventory level on the DRAM side or the NAND side? If you can give a little bit of color around that, then that's it.

知道了。所以看起來你更多地談論的是 10% 的差異，但是 - 是否存在 - 如果 - 你看到 DRAM 方面或 NAND 方面的庫存水平更高嗎？如果你可以給它一點顏色，那就是它。

So just for clarity, right, that 10% was a number -- it was the number of units that are lower in the TAM expectation for calendar '22 for PC and smartphone global unit sales versus expectations from 6 months ago. And the impact on our revenue, of course, is not just on the reduction and demand sell-through, but also on top of that, the inventory reduction, right? So I just wanted to clarify that the inventory reduction is on top of the reduction on the end market weakness. So I just wanted to make sure that it's not just that 10%.

因此，為了清楚起見，對，10% 是一個數字——這是 TAM 對 22 日曆 PC 和智能手機全球銷量的預期低於 6 個月前的預期的單位數量。當然，對我們收入的影響不僅是減少和需求銷售，而且最重要的是庫存減少，對嗎？所以我只是想澄清一下，庫存減少是在終端市場疲軟的減少之上。所以我只是想確保它不僅僅是那 10%。

Yes. And 10% is for the full year, I guess, then back to us in the second half is more.

是的。我猜 10% 是全年的，那麼下半年還給我們更多。

Yes.

是的。

As we said in the call.

正如我們在電話中所說的那樣。

Yes, that's a very good, very important point that, for us, most of the impact of the full year is going to occur in the second half of the calendar year.

是的，這是非常好的非常重要的一點，對我們來說，全年的大部分影響將發生在日曆年的下半年。

Our next question comes from Sidney Ho of Deutsche Bank.

我們的下一個問題來自德意志銀行的 Sidney Ho。

So in terms of the demand side of things, you talked a lot about PC and smartphones, but you also made a comment that enterprise OEMs are adjusting the memory and storage inventory because of shortages in nonmemory components and macro. I want to see if you can give us a little more color and any precedence that you can point to, to see how long this correction could play out and maybe the magnitude of those kind of adjustments in the past. And I have a follow-up question.

所以在需求方面，你談了很多關於個人電腦和智能手機的事情，但你也發表了評論說，由於非內存組件和宏的短缺，企業 OEM 正在調整內存和存儲庫存。我想看看你是否可以給我們更多的顏色和你可以指出的任何優先級，看看這種修正能持續多久，以及過去這些調整的幅度。我有一個後續問題。

Yes. I think the issue on that side is different than the issue on the PC and smartphone side. So whereas in PC and smartphones, the end demand trends are clearly weak and the sell-through is clearly weak, and there has been a substantial degradation in expectations for this year's TAM from 6 months ago to now. The -- by contrast, the server business and the trends of end demand, even an enterprise server on our OEM customers in that space, are healthy. And our customers continue to report robust backlog and good server demand.

是的。我認為那方面的問題與 PC 和智能手機方面的問題不同。因此，儘管在 PC 和智能手機中，終端需求趨勢明顯疲軟，銷售明顯疲軟，從 6 個月前到現在，對今年 TAM 的預期大幅下降。相比之下，服務器業務和終端需求趨勢，甚至是我們在該領域的 OEM 客戶上的企業服務器，都是健康的。我們的客戶繼續報告強勁的積壓和良好的服務器需求。

I think the concern is that some of them are obviously data center, generally, across cloud and enterprise and including small and medium businesses. The builds of servers are not being able to be completed to the extent of the end demand because of shortages of certain parts that are still persisting, including, for example, network interface cards as one example and then there are others. So that's one factor that's preventing them from completing bills and meeting end demand.

我認為值得關注的是，其中一些顯然是數據中心，一般來說，跨雲和企業，包括中小型企業。由於某些仍然存在的部分的短缺，服務器的構建無法完成到最終需求的程度，例如網絡接口卡作為一個例子，然後還有其他的。因此，這是阻止他們完成賬單和滿足最終需求的因素之一。

And then the other factor is just the general cautiousness that is creeping in driven by some of these macroeconomic factors. But I just -- we are trying to just be extremely transparent and lay out what we see and what we hear very openly because that caution is happening, causing them to reduce some of their inventories or wanting to reduce their inventories in spite of, at least today, what is clearly robust demand on the end customer side.

然後另一個因素只是由這些宏觀經濟因素中的一些因素驅動的普遍謹慎態度。但我只是——我們正試圖保持非常透明，並非常公開地展示我們所看到和聽到的內容，因為這種謹慎正在發生，導致他們減少一些庫存或希望減少庫存，儘管，在至少在今天，最終客戶方面的需求明顯強勁。

Okay. That's helpful. Maybe a follow-up question is, Mark, I wanted to elaborate on the comment earlier, that you said beyond fiscal fourth quarter, that the planned inventory build will weigh on gross margin. But I thought it would actually help your gross margin because you keep your utilization higher than the current demand indicates.

好的。這很有幫助。也許後續問題是，馬克，我想詳細說明之前的評論，你在第四財季之後說過，計劃的庫存增加將影響毛利率。但我認為這實際上會幫助您的毛利率，因為您的利用率高於當前需求。

But the other question I have, is there a framework that we can use to help understand where gross margin is going to bottom, then when is the -- any kind of inflection point when you think about -- obviously, pricing is the big factor here, but are there things that are within your control, whether it is technology transitions, or maybe utilization starts to improve?

但我的另一個問題是，是否有一個框架可以幫助我們了解毛利率在哪裡觸底，那麼當你考慮時——任何類型的拐點——顯然，定價是主要因素在這裡，但是否有一些事情在您的控制範圍內，無論是技術轉型，還是利用率開始提高？

Yes. Yes, there's no comment about the -- and we're not guiding the quarter. Mine was just a market commentary that the market has gotten weak, and these conditions of the market will continue to weigh on margins. That was the only comment. It's not a guide, and I'm certainly not going to comment on the -- anything beyond that.

是的。是的，沒有關於 - 我們沒有指導這個季度的評論。我只是對市場變得疲軟的市場評論，這些市場狀況將繼續對利潤率造成壓力。那是唯一的評論。這不是一個指南，我當然不會評論——除此之外的任何事情。

It was more a comment on inventory in the market, the customer inventory adjustments, and that environment continuing rather than anything about RMA.

它更多的是對市場庫存、客戶庫存調整以及環境持續的評論，而不是關於 RMA 的任何評論。

Yes.

是的。

Our next question comes from Raji Gill of Needham & Company.

我們的下一個問題來自 Needham & Company 的 Raji Gill。

Yes. And this question is kind of a follow-up on the sequential decline. So if you look at the August decline, it's 17% down sequentially. That's the biggest decline sequentially for August and kind of recent kind of company history. And you talked about an abrupt change to demand, a considerable change of demand. So I just wanted to see if you could compare and contrast what you're seeing with this level of abrupt change to demand versus, say, when revenue declined pretty significantly back in kind of February of '19 or May of '19, when we were in the middle of the trade war with China and there are sanctions against China.

是的。這個問題是對連續下降的跟進。因此，如果您查看 8 月份的跌幅，則環比下降了 17%。這是 8 月份的最大環比跌幅，也是近期公司歷史上的最大跌幅。你談到了需求的突然變化，需求的巨大變化。因此，我只是想看看您是否可以將您所看到的與需求的這種突然變化水平進行比較和對比，例如，在 19 年 2 月或 19 年 5 月收入大幅下降時，當我們當時正處於與中國的貿易戰之中，並對中國實施制裁。

Is it similar in terms of certain dynamics, in terms of a significant cut in inventory that you're seeing from your customers? Is it more concentrated? It seems to be more concentrated on mobile and PC versus, say, last time, but I'm just curious how you're thinking about that because we've had a few of these very abrupt macro impacts to demand.

就某些動態而言，就您從客戶那裡看到的庫存大幅減少而言，它是否相似？是不是更集中？與上次相比，它似乎更集中在移動和 PC 上，但我只是好奇你是怎麼想的，因為我們已經對需求產生了一些非常突然的宏觀影響。

Yes. I mean I think if we look at the environment, and I understand the desire to use the framework from past declines, but if you look at the 2019 environment, that was the time that we have been seeing some weakness in the demand trend, on the backs of 7 or 8 quarters of extraordinarily high increases in DRAM pricing that had caused DRAM margins to become unsustainably high and the pricing to become unsustainably high due to significant shortage in the market.

是的。我的意思是我認為，如果我們看看環境，我理解使用過去下降框架的願望，但如果你看看 2019 年的環境，那是我們看到需求趨勢疲軟的時候，在DRAM 價格在 7 或 8 個季度大幅上漲，導致 DRAM 利潤率變得不可持續的高位，並且由於市場嚴重短缺，價格變得不可持續的高位。

So I think that environment was entirely different, and the motivations of customers and the actions of the customers were also pretty different. And so each environment brings with it its own sets of unique issues. And so I think the way to think about the FQ4 number, yes, I mean, definitely, the environment worsened quickly late in our FQ3.

所以我認為環境完全不同，客戶的動機和客戶的行為也有很大不同。因此，每個環境都帶來了自己的一系列獨特問題。所以我認為考慮 FQ4 數字的方式，是的，我的意思是，毫無疑問，我們的 FQ3 後期環境迅速惡化。

And we have had, primarily, the consumer portions of the market, the PC, smartphone and consumer segments channel, et cetera, be the ones that are driving a lot of this weakness, especially in our FQ4. I will call out that within that context, we spoke about it in the Q&A in the -- earlier today, the impact of China has been pretty significant. The weakness in China is very pronounced.

我們主要是市場的消費者部分、個人電腦、智能手機和消費者細分渠道等，是導致這種弱點的主要因素，尤其是在我們的 FQ4 中。我要指出，在這種情況下，我們在今天早些時候的問答中談到了它——中國的影響非常顯著。中國的弱點非常明顯。

We spoke about the trajectory we were on, that we believe we were on, a quarter ago for FQ4 versus our current guide for China revenue. Our China revenue is down 30% approximately, from that trajectory, to our latest forecast. And that itself has impacted our consolidated revenue by approximately 10%.

我們談到了我們所處的軌跡，我們相信我們在一個季度前 FQ4 與我們目前的中國收入指南相比。從這一軌跡到我們的最新預測，我們在中國的收入大約下降了 30%。這本身對我們的綜合收入產生了大約 10% 的影響。

So very significant impact coming from China. And then, of course, we mentioned some inventory correction here and there in the other segments that we mentioned in our prepared remarks, with enterprise OEM. So we're -- so that's sort of the big picture that we just wanted to highlight now. Now like we said, every environment is different and how this plays out, you're -- I'm sure you'll be watching for trends when other companies report to try and triangulate where this is going.

來自中國的影響非常重大。然後，當然，我們在準備好的評論中提到的其他部分中，與企業 OEM 一起提到了一些庫存修正。所以我們 - 所以這就是我們現在想強調的大局。現在就像我們說的那樣，每個環境都是不同的，以及它是如何發揮作用的，你 - 我相信當其他公司報告試圖三角測量它的發展方向時，你會關注趨勢。

Yes. That's super helpful. And just to follow up on that. Sizing up the China impact was -- it was important to understand that. Any kind of fresh data points or insights now that China has reversed the lockdowns? Because this appears to be primarily a China lockdown situation, combined with some of the other factors you talked about. The China lockdown reversed. Are there any indications that, that region is stabilizing? Or is it still to be determined?

是的。這非常有幫助。只是為了跟進。評估中國的影響是——理解這一點很重要。現在中國已經取消了封鎖，有什麼新的數據點或見解嗎？因為這似乎主要是中國的封鎖情況，再加上你談到的其他一些因素。中國的封鎖逆轉了。是否有跡象表明該地區正在穩定？還是還有待確定？

I think the recent data points from the last month on smartphone sales in China still continue to be pretty weak. And so a lot of the consumer spending remains to be seen how it actually starts to improve towards electronics and those type of items versus pent-up demand for travel and things like that.

我認為上個月中國智能手機銷售的最新數據點仍然相當疲軟。因此，許多消費者支出實際上如何開始向電子產品和那些類型的物品改善，而不是對旅行等被壓抑的需求，還有待觀察。

So it's not just about the overall consumer spending. It's also about the categories of those spending, where consumers are choosing to shift their dollars, and a lot of inflation out there, just like everywhere else. So I think there is a lot of that. But also, just keep in mind, that the China economy and its weakness was a lot more pronounced than most parts of the world. And they proliferate beyond just the consumer segment of the market, right?

因此，這不僅僅是關於整體消費者支出。這也與那些支出的類別有關，消費者選擇轉移他們的美元，以及那裡的大量通貨膨脹，就像其他地方一樣。所以我認為有很多。但請記住，中國經濟及其疲軟比世界大部分地區更為明顯。而且它們的擴散範圍超出了市場的消費部分，對嗎？

So the weakness in China was a broader economic weakness when the shutdown just shut down all economic activity, right? Much of the economic activity gets shut down. And so that has been pretty damaging. And even though everyone sort of intellectually knows and understands that, that is happening, this is, probably, is one of the first few data points to understand the magnitude of some of these impacts.

因此，當停工只是關閉了所有經濟活動時，中國的疲軟是更廣泛的經濟疲軟，對嗎？大部分經濟活動被關閉。所以這非常具有破壞性。儘管每個人都在理智上知道並理解這種情況正在發生，但這可能是了解其中一些影響程度的前幾個數據點之一。

Our next question comes from Nik Todorov of Longbow Research.

我們的下一個問題來自 Longbow Research 的 Nik Todorov。

2 questions on inventory, and that, Sumit, you touched on one of them. When you speak to your customers, in those conversations, where are they trying to land in terms of inventory on their shelves? Do you anticipate the inventory downstream to normalize to pre-COVID levels? Or do you think there's going to be a new normal?

關於庫存的 2 個問題，Sumit，您談到了其中一個問題。當您與客戶交談時，在這些對話中，他們試圖將貨架上的庫存放在哪裡？您是否預計下游庫存將正常化到 COVID 之前的水平？或者你認為會有一個新的常態？

We think that the inventory will normalize to a level that is higher than where the pre-COVID levels were. I don't think enough distance has been put between the shortages. And the experiences and memories are still very raw of that time. So I would be surprised that the inventories went all the way down to pre-COVID levels.

我們認為庫存將正常化到高於 COVID 之前水平的水平。我認為短缺之間沒有足夠的距離。那個時候的經歷和記憶仍然很原始。因此，我會驚訝於庫存一路下降到 COVID 之前的水平。

There is still uncertainty around, for example, China's COVID -- zero-COVID policies and what that means in case more COVID cases come up in different parts of China. So those kind of uncertainties will probably cause customers to have, even after they rationalize the inventory, a higher level of stable base, at least in the near term to medium term, compared to pre-COVID levels at a little bit higher levels.

例如，中國的新冠肺炎（COVID-19）零新冠政策以及如果中國不同地區出現更多新冠肺炎病例這意味著什麼，仍然存在不確定性。因此，與新冠疫情前的水平相比，即使在庫存合理化之後，這些不確定性可能會導致客戶擁有更高水平的穩定基數，至少在短期到中期是這樣。

But then again, how all of this transpires, I mean, this is just something we'll have to see. We are working very closely with customers. And as things improve, sell-through improve over time, China may decide to stimulate the economy in a significant way and that can improve in demand. So those kind of trends then can quickly eat up the inventory once the sell-through improves, right?

但話又說回來，這一切是如何發生的，我的意思是，這只是我們必須看到的。我們正在與客戶密切合作。隨著情況的好轉，銷售量隨著時間的推移而改善，中國可能會決定以顯著的方式刺激經濟，這可以改善需求。因此，一旦銷售率提高，這些趨勢就會迅速消耗庫存，對嗎？

So these are all very dynamic numbers. They have their individual weeks of sales targets. But then the absolute value of the inventory is heavily determined by the trajectory of the future sales expectations. And that's really where a change in that trajectory improvement in expectations of future sales can quickly cause things to improve. But again, there is the environment of the macroeconomic weakness that everyone's focused on. So it will take some time.

所以這些都是非常動態的數字。他們有各自的銷售目標週數。但是，庫存的絕對值在很大程度上取決於未來銷售預期的軌跡。這就是對未來銷售預期的軌跡改善的變化可以迅速導致事情改善的地方。但同樣，每個人都關注宏觀經濟疲軟的環境。所以需要一些時間。

Yes. Makes sense. And second question is, can you talk about the inventory levels between DRAM and NAND, maybe both internally, in the channel and then the customers? Are there any meaningful differences between the 2?

是的。說得通。第二個問題是，您能否談談 DRAM 和 NAND 之間的庫存水平，可能是內部的，渠道中的，然後是客戶的？兩者之間有什麼有意義的區別嗎？

I mean our inventory levels are higher in NAND than in DRAM. So I think if you look at the impact in terms of the TAM, on all of these changes in unit forecast for PC, smartphones, consumer markets, obviously, that's being felt in both DRAM and NAND markets. But internally, our own inventory is lower in the DRAM segment.

我的意思是我們的 NAND 庫存水平高於 DRAM。所以我認為，如果你從 TAM 的角度來看，對 PC、智能手機、消費市場的所有這些單位預測變化的影響，顯然，DRAM 和 NAND 市場都會感受到這種影響。但在內部，我們自己的 DRAM 部分庫存較低。

Okay. And then customers, is it fairly similar? Or do you think that there's more NAND again?

好的。然後是客戶，是不是很相似？還是您認為又有更多的NAND？

I can't see too many differences between DRAM and NAND. When customers go into this inventory reduction mode, they tend to reduce all semiconductor inventory of parts that they feel are readily available. So when different parts, even beyond memory and storage, are not in shortage across the semiconductor space, they tend to go up and down, sort of, in a similar trajectory.

我看不出 DRAM 和 NAND 之間有太多區別。當客戶進入這種庫存減少模式時，他們傾向於減少他們認為隨時可用的所有半導體庫存。因此，當不同的部分，甚至超出內存和存儲，在整個半導體領域並不短缺時，它們往往會以類似的軌跡上下波動。

Now the inventory of products at customers may be at different levels, different customers may have different levels of inventory of different semiconductor products. But generally, when they go into inventory reduction mode, it's a pretty broad-based approach.

現在客戶的產品庫存可能處於不同的水平，不同的客戶可能對不同的半導體產品有不同的庫存水平。但一般來說，當他們進入庫存減少模式時，這是一種相當廣泛的方法。

Our next question comes from Timothy Arcuri of UBS.

我們的下一個問題來自瑞銀的蒂莫西·阿庫裡。

I just wanted to go back to this issue of LTAs. And I guess, I'm a little surprised that customers would be able to reduce demand this quickly, unless you're getting something out of it. I mean I certainly understand that it provides you the visibility and it helps you plan CapEx.

我只是想回到這個長期協議問題。我想，我有點驚訝客戶能夠如此迅速地減少需求，除非你從中得到一些東西。我的意思是我當然明白它為您提供可見性並幫助您規劃資本支出。

But is there something that you're in a better position today versus if the same thing happened 3 or so years ago when you had less on LTA. Are you selling at a higher price, maybe in August, than you otherwise would have if you didn't have these LTAs? I'm just trying to -- because people will say, well, what good are these LTAs if customers can stop buying to this magnitude. And then I had a second question, too.

但是，如果同樣的事情發生在大約 3 年前，當您在 LTA 上的資金較少時，您今天是否處於更好的位置。如果您沒有這些長期協議，您是否以更高的價格（可能在八月）出售？我只是想——因為人們會說，好吧，如果客戶可以停止購買到這麼大的數量，這些長期協議有什麼好處。然後我還有第二個問題。

Sure. Yes. I mean I think if you look at customers, in the past, going back 5 years, there would be situations where customers would not be very clear or specific as to how much they intend to purchase from each of the suppliers. And the end result could, in many cases, be that the amount of bits that these suppliers are targeting to produce for any given customer is 110% or 120% of the customer's TAM.

當然。是的。我的意思是我認為，如果您回顧過去 5 年的客戶，會出現客戶不會非常清楚或具體說明他們打算從每個供應商那裡購買多少的情況。在許多情況下，最終結果可能是這些供應商為任何給定客戶生產的比特數量是客戶 TAM 的 110% 或 120%。

So when -- and there are these LTAs that are used pretty pervasively in the industry now, it definitely helps to rationalize and bring supply and demand into a better balance from a planning perspective. And the reason I say from a planning perspective is, of course, actuals can deviate from plans when these kinds of macro events occur.

因此，當這些 LTA 現在在行業中被廣泛使用時，從規劃的角度來看，它肯定有助於合理化供需並使供需達到更好的平衡。我從計劃的角度說的原因當然是，當這些宏觀事件發生時，實際情況可能會偏離計劃。

But when they occur, and these LTAs provide us with a very good basis to better understand how our customers are thinking, not just about the next quarter, but about multiple quarters, it just gives us a mechanism to have a dialogue for longer visibility into how they expect things to proceed.

但是當它們發生時，這些長期協議為我們提供了一個很好的基礎，可以更好地了解我們的客戶的想法，不僅僅是關於下一個季度，而是關於多個季度，它只是為我們提供了一種對話機制，以便更長時間地了解他們期望事情如何進行。

And as you can expect, when we think about our own supply, you think about making changes to our CapEx plans, our supply plans. Any changes that we make have an impact several months out, right? I mean these cycle times are pretty long. And consequently, we need those longer views from our customers in order to understand exactly how best to create a better balance between supply and demand in the industry.

正如你所料，當我們考慮我們自己的供應時，你會考慮改變我們的資本支出計劃，我們的供應計劃。我們所做的任何改變都會在幾個月後產生影響，對吧？我的意思是這些週期時間很長。因此，我們需要客戶提供更長遠的觀點，以便準確了解如何最好地在行業供需之間建立更好的平衡。

So I understand your concern that, okay, if they're not going to buy based on the LTA volume, what good are these LTAs. And we have repeatedly said that these LTAs are never meant to be take-or-pay agreements. That was not the goal for which they were set up. And there is no pricing in these agreements either. They are more a volume-based agreement, and the price is negotiated every quarter or every month, depending on what kind of customer arrangements there are.

所以我理解你的擔憂，好吧，如果他們不打算根據長期協議數量購買，那麼這些長期協議有什麼好處。我們一再表示，這些長期協議絕不是照付不議的協議。這不是他們成立的目標。這些協議中也沒有定價。它們更多是基於數量的協議，價格每季度或每月協商一次，具體取決於有什麼樣的客戶安排。

And so I think the way to think about it is it's a very useful mechanism to drive alignment between supply and demand over the medium term, to drive our portfolio direction, share gains and things of that nature and reduce in the parent level of customer -- suppliers targeting 110%, 120% of a customer's TAM because the customer will have LTAs with pretty much all the suppliers. So more difficult to do that in a normal environment.

因此，我認為考慮它的方式是，它是一種非常有用的機制，可以在中期推動供需之間的協調，推動我們的投資組合方向，分享收益和類似性質的東西，並減少客戶的父級 - - 供應商瞄準客戶 TAM 的 110%、120%，因為客戶將與幾乎所有供應商簽訂長期協議。所以在正常環境下更難做到這一點。

Can I just follow up on that? So in this case, if a PC and a smartphone customer is taking bits down by -- I mean, they have to be at least 40%, 50% sequentially. If they're doing that, they pay the exact same price that they would have if they took what they said they would. There's no -- there's not even like a little bit of a price-kicker you get if these were down 40%, 50% sequentially for a customer?

我可以跟進嗎？因此，在這種情況下，如果 PC 和智能手機客戶減少了——我的意思是，他們必須依次減少 40% 和 50%。如果他們這樣做，他們付出的代價與他們採取他們所說的那樣。沒有——如果客戶連續下降 40% 或 50%，你甚至不會得到一點點價格提升？

Well, there are things that happen on the pricing front, which I can't get into, but those are all things that we discuss with customers based on what their needs are and how it deviates from the LTA and so on. So what exactly we do with these customers when those kind of situations occur, I'm not at liberty to discuss in this call.

好吧，在定價方面發生了一些事情，我無法進入，但這些都是我們根據客戶的需求以及它如何偏離 LTA 等與客戶討論的所有事情。因此，當這種情況發生時，我們究竟如何處理這些客戶，我無權在這次電話會議中討論。

But clearly, the intent is that if there are things that are happening that are outside the control of our own customers, we work with them to come to a resolution that both sides can feel good about. So that's what we do. So the details of that and how it changes with price, et cetera, is not something I can address here.

但顯然，其意圖是，如果發生的事情超出了我們自己的客戶的控制範圍，我們會與他們合作，達成雙方都感覺良好的解決方案。這就是我們所做的。因此，關於它的細節以及它如何隨價格等發生變化，我在這裡無法解決。

Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

女士們先生們，今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝您的參與。您現在可以斷開連接。