Tag Archives: norway

REC Silicon’s (RNWEF) CEO Tore Torvund on Q3 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Executives Tore Torvund – President & CEO Francine Sullivan – Chief Legal Officer James May – CFO REC Silicon ASA ( OTCPK:RNWEF ) Q3 2015 Earnings Conference Call November 4, 2015 3:00 AM ET Operator So welcome all to you overview of this Q3 2015 presentation. To get in with me today I have friends in Francine Sullivan, Chief Legal Officer, he is the one who some has mainly worked with the trade dispute, mainly in the U.S. but also in China. He will give an update on where we are on that part of it. And then James May, our CFO will cover the more details financial numbers. This is the first time how been critical with a company now for almost more than six years and it for the first time we have a negative EBITDA in this company. Hopefully it will be the last time I will have to present these numbers. But we lost on EBITDA basis $14.1 million in Q3. The main reason was low prices space, basically there is low prices in the polysilicon market particularly for REC, it is the fact that we are now left out of the Chinese market due to the trade disputes, trade war between the U.S. and China. And that means that basically we have to discount the price of our polysilicon to find buyers outside China because only 20% of the total volume are traded outside China, 80% inside China. If you would like to look for some positives in these numbers, the fact that we were able to reduce our inventory by about 1000 metric tons is positive. Two reasons for that we sold more and we produced less due to the fact that we shut down part of our capacity in Moses Lake in July this year. The second positive is basically on the silicon gas side we improved the price by some 17% compared to Q2 and we are back to the level we were in Q1. The negative on the silicon gas side is that we sold 80 metric ton less than what was the guidance from our side. Because [indiscernible] key metrics I will cover the deviation on the cash cost, and I will cover also the deviation on the silicon gas in more detail. When you look through the production volume, it is almost on spot with the guidance we gave in July, but on the silicon then delivered for the semiconductor market we see that we have a deviation of some 15% negative and that is due to the fact that due to the general slowdown in the economy. There is less PC’s produce, there is less electronic gadgets produced and that makes demand for the polysilicon for the semiconductor market less than what it was used to be. There is also some inventory build, so also the semiconductor market is weak compared to what it used to be. As you remember we announced last quarter that we were going to reduce the capacity in Moses Lake due to the fact of the trade war. We did that by your July 25th, and we have been into an extended maintenance for the silicon three silent unit in Moses Lake. This unit is now undergoing maintenance and we do it this time with our own employees so we don’t need to lay off people. And we are not using contractors normally such an outage will last for four weeks. This time we will have more than three months to do it. And we have done it with our own employees to reduce the spending basically we now run the company where cash is king in terms of keeping the company in good health. Reduced capacity means higher production cost, we came in $13.80 which is not the real number because we had one off opportunity from property tax. So basically the cash cost is more equal to what we guided on $15.20. The polysilicon market is very weak. The reason is very simple, oversupply. There has been an inventory build in the spot market in China. Polysilicon has traded around $15 in this quarter. We have had to give a discount of about $2 to $2 per kg because basically we don’t get access to the Chinese market and that’s why we’re basically need to find customers outside and they know our situation and definitely we have to discount the price to be able to sell the volume. So basically weak market, together with the trade war means very low prices for our polysilicon. We see now that basically there is some strength in the market so far this quarter. It has been easier to find customers we don’t see price movements yet but basically in the value chain. It seems that the inventory has gone away and it’s a strong market going forward. Hopefully we will also enjoy some increases in prices due to this increased demand for polysilicon. On the silicon gas side we delivered 642 metric ton which was 80 ton less than what we guided on. We guided on 720, two main reason, one reason why we didn’t meet our guided number. There is still strong turbulence in the market due to the port issue or the port slowdown we had on the West Coast of the U.S. in first and second quarter. Some of our customers have decided or they decided to go for other suppliers because there was some fear that we were not able to deliver to our obligations due to the fact that we were not certain that we could be able to ship out of the U.S. The second reason is that we sold forward more than 900 metric ton all together in Q2. Some of this silent sold forward will be then distributed during Q3, Q4, and Q1 next year. So basically the sales will be in the impacted by this forward sale in the next two quarters as well. The positive sign is that we’ve got 17% higher price for the silicon gas and the underlying strength of the silicon gas is very good. The prices seems to be stable and we are able to defend our market share in this very interesting market as such. Then Francine I will ask you to give you an update on the trade dispute, as said. Francine has been the one who has dealt with this within polysilicon for the last two years. Francine Sullivan Okay. Good morning. My name is Francine Sullivan. I am the Chief Legal Officer at REC Silicon and I will give you a brief update on these trade matter because this potentially being some positive developments in this matter recently. Now you will recall that this trade war arose out of some tariffs that the U.S. government imposed on Chinese solar panels issuant to trade cases bought by SolarWorld against Chinese panel makers. Sometime ago back in 2012 in response to that the Chinese imposed retaliatory tariffs against U.S. polysilicon including REC silicon. Now recently in August 2015 SolarWorld and the Chinese panel makers managed to settle or reach an agreement on terms to settle the underlying dispute in relation to the panel trade case. Now that deal is a confidential deal, not much is known about the terms of that deal but we know that the withdrawals of the tariffs against Chinese solar panels and improves the market access for Chinese solar panels in the U.S. Now the issue that these parties have and that is SolarWorld and the Chinese panel makers is that they can’t make their deal effective on their own they need the U.S. government to consent and agree to this deal before this deal can be effective. Now the U.S. government have imposed a condition on agreeing on this deal and that condition is that China make a similar deal committing U.S. polysilicon makers to have reasonable market access once again in China. So what the U.S. government wants is a package solid deal. It will not implement the panel deal unless there is a deal for U.S. polysilicon makers and that is all U.S. polysilicon that permit U.S. polysilicon to have reasonable market access once again in the U.S. Now there hasn’t as I said, panel deal is confidential. There hasn’t been much information around about it. However you may have seen in the media last week that nine U.S. senators and six U.S. Congressman issued a letter to the Chinese Ambassador calling for a trade settlement on solar and in that letter they highlighted the fact that this panel deal was made, this panel deal on the table, it was available to the Chinese and it has a lot of benefits for the Chinese and that the U.S. government condition on implementing that deal is that a polysilicon deal must be made. Now in terms of bringing this package deal to fruition, the U.S. government and China have had a lot of discussions recently and those discussions intensified around the time of the Xi Jinping visit to the U.S. in late September. Now those discussions are still ongoing but the Chinese [indiscernible] polysilicon deal and that’s why we haven’t had an announcement to-date that’s why we haven’t got this global deal done because they are holding up the polysilicon pace because they want their cake and they want to eat it as well. They want the panels into the U.S. but they want the panels into the U.S. but they don’t want to make a polysilicon deal. So, just to run even though they drag [ph] in a free just to run you through, just kind of what it means for China. This global resolution package has a lot of benefits for China and hopefully that will lead to the global deal being a reality soon. Now those benefits accrue both on the panel side and on the polysilicon side. On the panel side, the deal gives improved market access, the Chinese panels in the U.S. and this is why they work so hard on the deal. I mean it took the negotiating with SolarWorld for well over a year and those negotiations intensified recently because 2016 is coming and most people connected with the solar industry know that the U.S. panel market will be a very, very attractive market in 2016. So that’s why the Chinese panel makers really want this deal done this year. Now even after 2016 the U.S. is a very valuable market for the Chinese and that’s because it’s a very large market and a diversified market so it’s a reliable market and it will be there for many years to come. Now these duties that are in place in the U.S. at the moment are costing the Chinese tens of millions of dollars a month because basically because of the tariff that they have to collect on top of that price. Now of course if they go forward with this deal those costs go away and those costs are expected to increase in 2016 because of the increased volumes of panels that will come into the U.S. Now in addition to this because of the way the U.S. process works the tariffs against Chinese panels are reviewed every year. So they can go up or down every year and that creates additional problems for the Chinese of course because they have a limited pricing horizon. You know they don’t know what the tariff going to be in the next six months. So it’s difficult to price. The other risk that they face with these ongoing reviews is that if the tariff actually increase then the Chinese importers will be liable to some back pay the retrospective tariff because the way the process works is that it’s a look back so for example the next review will be announced at the end of 2015 and that will relate to panels that came into the U.S. jury during 2014. Now if the duties GD rates increase then the Chinese importers of record will need to collect those additional duties, so this is sort of like an ongoing liability risk with having these duties in place which the Chinese are pretty came to avoid – the Chinese panel makers pretty came to avoid. So if China moves forward with the global deal, all these problems for the panels go away. If they don’t these problems will be around years to come because these duties will be in place for several years to come if there is no deal. In addition to the benefits on the panel side, there’s actually a lot for China to gain on the polysilicon side if it goes for with a global deal and withdrawal the tariffs against U.S. polysilicon. Now Tori will talk to you a little bit later about how the polysilicon market is expected to tighten in coming years. Now that problem will be extenuated in China. If they have limited access to U.S. polysilicon. Recently we’ve seen high in China prices than outside China prices and we’ll see that again. Now that pricing differential of course creates a competitive disadvantage for the Chinese wafer makers and cuts into their margins and what is a very low margin business which you’re probably aware of. So these cost across the industry having his price differential this can run to 100s of millions of dollars across the Chinese industry and this will get worse for them. In addition to this problem with the wafer makers, I guess it’s a related problem and that is that China is creating an issue for itself in relation to wafer capacity additions. Now market analysts expect that there will be wafer capacity additions required shortly because wafer capacity has not kept pace with seller module capacity additions. And those investment decisions will be made very soon if expect PV demand is going to be met in the coming years. Now given this polysilicon problem that they have in China and the fact that these hits their margins in China. It’s more likely that these investments will be made outside of China and we’ll see wafer capacity and wafer demand come up outside of China as a result of this problem. Anyway, there is a number of reasons why this package deal provides a lot of economic benefits for China. There is benefits for the Chinese polysilicon makers if there is no deal, but on balance it seems to me there’s a lot more financial benefits to be had by China by moving forward with the deal. Now in terms of where we’re at actually one additional point on the deal. This is a very important diplomatic problem right now between China and the U.S. This has become a significant trade irritant recently between China and the U.S. and that’s what the letter from the U.S. Senators highlighted last week. Now this trade problem also relates to solar energy and both China and the U.S. are prioritizing solar energy in the lead up to the Paris Climate Change Summit. So there is a lot of diplomatic benefits for China and the U.S. to move forward with this deal. Okay, so in terms of timing and where we’re at there is no deadline, but the discussions are ongoing. And it’s uncertain as to when we will get a deal but as I said there are a lot of benefits for China to move forward with this deal. What we do know is that there is a lot of activity going play on in China right now, there is a lot of discussions basically around this and what this global deal means on balance for China and how they can move forward with this deal. So there’s this sort of this consensus building process going on in China right now. What we also know is that the Chinese minister recently in the last couple of weeks [indiscernible] to the U.S. trade ambassador that China are very interested in moving forward with this global deal. And that they’re working on it. So that has been reiterated diplomatically, so the other thing we know is that 2016 is looming. It’s coming up very soon and that was the impetus for the whole the event which caused this recent chain reaction and this resolution opportunity and that is this is the deal in principle between the Chinese panel makers and SolarWorld back in August. So, the timing is uncertain but there is a lot of reasons on balance why we could have a resolution on his matter. Tore Torvund I will [indiscernible] together with my Board last week and definitely just to add a little bit to Francine definitely this deal which is now on the table it is an advantage for definitely the panel makers in China. It is an advantage for SolarWorld which has moved into having an agreement. It is an advantage for the U.S. polysilicon like REC, the only one do not benefit is definitely the polysilicon makers in China and as you probably know the China is a very consensus oriented society basically what is now going on is that one try to make things work out for everybody. Definitely the panel makers in China is very, very in favor, the polysilicon makers against it and that’s the way it is. What will be the final resolution to it, hopefully for China, Inc. definitely this is a very good deal. But let’s say for the polysilicon that might be – it’s not hard understand that they are fighting against it, but that’s where we are. We are very hopeful. I think we have been able to moving very, very far by resolving the U.S. case. So now it just remains an issue in China. Just to give you an upshort update on the market outlook. We have together with GTM made an update on the demand for solar panels this year and also for the subsequent years, basically GTM think that this year there will be installed 58 gigawatt on a global basis, I think different analysis between 55 and 60 but it seems to be very consensus that is a huge increase from last year where we came in at 44, what remains then to be installed is about 17 gigawatt in Q4. China will install about 6 gigawatt when we meet with customers and analysts in China, it seems like everybody is bullish, that at least it will be 6 gigawatt as Francine alluded to the U.S. market is very strong for gigawatt very interesting definitely for the Chinese panel makers. Japan will be strong this year, it will not be strong next year because now they have restarted a lot of their nuclear capacity and new area which now is coming up is India where Prime Minster Modi’s ambition to install solar panels and solar energy has started to move into to reality. So basically 17 gigawatt in Q4, when you look for the longer term basically there is very bullish view on the market going forward. Basically the reason why, first of all solar is now very competitive compared to conventional ways to make an electricity like nuclear, like natural gas. Coal is definitely cheaper but more and more unacceptable in most areas due to the environmental issues. It is high electricity prices which support installation of solar and distributed solar or electricity generation. We also see that areas where we do not have access to electricity or very limited access to electricity like in Africa and India has been started to be important markets and definitely the cost of capital to support solar. You see that in U.S. you see it elsewhere, that the low cost of capital and all this new coal [ph] opportunities make solar very attractive. So basically we see a 20% increase in the market going forward. Well we do have a lot of insight is on the supply side. Basically we see that additional capacity coming on the coming years will be very limited. There is just one plant which was done as we know it takes about three to four years from an investment decision until you’re up and running and delivering polysilicon. A lot of the investment came in the period of 2008 to 2010 at the time where the EBITDA margin at least 50% plus and everybody believed that this was a huge opportunity to make a good rate of return, basically since 2011 no new investment has been launched and that means that you come to the end of the ramp up of these investments which was decided during that period of time. In 2016, those [indiscernible] facility in Tennessee, 25,000 metric ton which we believe will be up and running probably depend upon a solution to be trade and then it is mainly our JV in China which will add the capacity to this if you combine these two graphs. You will see that basically the access to the polysilicon will probably be what will limit the gross in the market from the second half of 2016 and onwards. So basically if things moves in the direction we believe there will be a tightness we already see the tightness coming up and definitely the limit or the limitation of the growth will then be the axis of polysilicon at least in the next two to three years. Then James for the financials. James May Good morning I’ll be discussing the financial results for the third quarter. First off, revenues decrease by about 6% from 93 million to 87.5 million the decrease was largely driven by lower silicon gas sales volumes, while polysilicon volumes were up. These increases were largely offset by decreases in prices. In terms of polysilicon sales we increased from 3817 metric tons to 4512 metric tons. However because of the liquidation of excess inventories and the uncertainty, the effects of the trade dispute combined to force prices down by about 13%. So revenues in that area were relatively neutral. Polysilicon production was down from 5771 to 3580 metric tons and that’s largely because we curtailed the production in our [indiscernible] facility in Moses Lake beginning in August. At the same time inventories decreased by someone 1000 metric tons is [indiscernible] discuss and discuss the impacts of the cash – the cash flow impacts through this just in a minute. Silicon gas sales volumes dropped considerably about 35% from the high levels that we saw in Q2 is primarily because we executed several or two short term contracts to recapture market share significant discounts. During the second quarter earnings release we indicated that prices would return to near Q1 levels and that was the case we had about a 17% increase so that came to fruition. As Tore discussed we had EBITDA loss of 14.1 million that’s the first loss that either of us has seen and like Tore I hope that we don’t see another one, because of the lower sales prices as well as a higher unit cost caused by the curtailment of production capacity. Those are the primary drivers to push EBITDA down. In terms of cash flow we had positive cash flow from operations of about $8 million the majority of this was caused by some $24 million reduction and working capital investments. The change in working capital was decrease in inventories of about $14.7 million decrease in accounts receivable of about $8 million and higher accounts payable of a little over a $1 million dollars and then we had interest payments of about $2 million. The largest impact to cash flows was the transactions that we executed near the Q2 earnings release to raise cash with the resale of bonds held in treasury for about $10 million in the placement of 230 million shares that raise about $43 million. Resulted in an increase in cash of about $45.5 million and we ended the quarter with $95 million in cash. Terms of our liquidity situation, the nominal debt as it currently stands at $208 million. This is only about a $4.7 million despite the resale of the bonds. The increase in the bonds was about $10.4 million but it was offset by the impact of the strength in the U.S. dollar on our [indiscernible] which is stated in NOK [ph]. And then in terms of nominal net debt the largest impact there was the $45.5 million increase in cash that we discussed on the last slide as well as offset by the increase in the nominal debt of 4.7 million. Again there are no debt maturities in 2015. The next debt maturities will be the indemnity loan which is indemnity loan which is NOK200 million that we expect to mature sometime in 2016 depending on the closure of the wafer bankruptcy and RACO2 [ph] which is a NOK179.5 million that will mature in May of 2016. With that will I will turn it back Tore. Tore Torvund Thank you, James. Let me then just give short update on the Yulin JV, as I said the Board of REC Silicon went to China last week along this we visited the site in Yulin. We visited the [indiscernible] and we also had discussions with both local and central politicians in China. Basically on the Yulin we have started the construction, you see what we have started this is the dormitories, we built dormitories 800 people who is going to live on site and start working there in 2017. We have also now finalized all the applications so we will get the about between ’15 and ’16 Chinese coming to the U.S. for training starting out in January nest to next year. Basically the project is on schedule more than 50% of the packages has now been given to the lenders, 85% in China, about 15% will be fabricated outside China mainly it is critical equipment, IP sensitive will be fabricated outside China, but 85% will be done in China. So far we are tracking both time schedule, but also on the budget. In fact we have been able to be when we have awarded these contacts it has generally come in about 20% to 25% below what was anticipated and the reason why is that there is a very low activity in most of the suppliers in China for the moment we see large companies having limited activity and that’s why we have been able to get very good prices on major equipment for this development. On the other hand we will not reduce the overall budget of $1.25 billion yet. As we know I’ve said that’s between 4000 and 5000 people will be employed on site next summer. So it’s next summer we will start to see what the actual situation in the project. But basically so far we track where we want. We also negotiated deals with group in case there is a need financial need. If we could delay the installment as part of our equity into the JV as you remember it’s $50 million in 2016 and $154 million in 2017 and these negotiations are ongoing. Let me then turn into a more short term action plan and strategy and basically even though we are optimistic concerning the trade dispute. We planned for a situation where we don’t find a resolution to it, if we get a resolution to it that be an upside to the company. So we plan for a no resolution even though we are optimistic that we will be able to achieve within a decent time frame resolution to the trade. There is many reason why that should occur. First of all, let’s say REC silicon when we are at full capacity is by far the most cost effective way of making polysilicon. The reason why is that we have developed a technology [indiscernible] reactors which only consume about 10% of the power compared to the traditional Siemens reactors. And that’s the reason why even in the U.S. with U.S. wages we’re able to compete and in fact having lower cost than our Chinese competitors. And we are also even with our very strong U.S. dollar compared to both Korean and European currency. We are still in the lead in terms of cash cost this – this graph is updated with the latest currency exchange rates as well. We also have seen that our competitors do have a lot of issues to basically be able to move into this technology. We know that one of our major Chinese competitor has stated that they want to convert 25,000 metric tons of Siemens into FBR, so far that has not been materialized as far as we know and we know that one of our U.S., Korean competitors has not been able to restart their FBR plant, even though they have been now struggling for more than a year in doing. So basically it is not an easy technology to move into, REC now has five years of experience on commercial as ability to operate an FBR plan and there is no reason to believe that we will have that kind of issues when we are now also move into the Yulin JV in 2017. As I said about 80% of wafer makers are located in China basically just means that it only remains 20% and if you make the calculation that’s about 70 gigawatt of wafer capacity outside China. If you take let’s say 70 gigawatt that correspond to about 75,000 metric ton of polysilicon, remember we make about 20,000 metric ton. The 75,000 metric ton is a lot of this is occupied by long term. Take a pay contract. So we think there is about 50,000 metric ton available for us for our REC to compete towards other suppliers. So this is the main issue as Francine alluded to, there is now indication that some of the wafer makers in China want to move out of China, establish new capacity. The reason why is basically that China has higher wages and what you can find for example in Vietnam, in Malaysia and also there is a lot of government incentives to establish new activity in these countries and some of our customers in China are now looking into the opportunity to move some of their capacity out of China. That is the dynamic of this business, we also see that some of these customers ask for long term contracts. We’ve already seen as a supplier contracts for two to three years that could be attractive in one way. On the other hand definitely it will be at the low price and if we believe in an upside, if we enter into this kind of contract. We will not enjoy the upside if the market come back. On the other hand it gives some security for our cash flow if you were to enter into this these kind of engagement. No decision has been made, no negotiation has not been finalized but at least show the dynamics in what’s going on in the marketplace. The good thing basically from what we did in Q3 was that we were able to find customers outside China, in fact almost 3900 metric ton of polysilicon went to customers which is not located in China and we did only 1100 metric ton with China. For Q4 basically we continue to believe that China will be even less important for REC but we will be able to move even more material into non-Chinese customers also, what we call bricks tolling [ph] we have already made ingots which was not sold in Q3. Those ingots will be sold in Q4 and that’s why we have increased ingot from 65 to 390 in Q4. We’re satisfied with the fact that we were able to do this. This has been the main focus in the company and it has reduced our inventories, still inventory is at the almost record high level of 6500 metric ton. The reason why we’re able to reduce will start to increase the sale on reduced production. We anticipate that we will reduce another 1700 metric ton in between Q3 and Q4 and then gradually move down to what we think is a sustainable level which should be around 3000 metric ton of inventory. Relatively high inventory but the reason why is that there is a delivery time between our facilities in the U.S. and the market in China of about 60 days. So we need to have some inventory located in that region to be able to serve our customers. So that’s our plan and again other initiatives, we will then be able to keep our liquidity through 2016 with a good margin by reducing all our spending at the same time as we basically than improve our sales for our non-Chinese customers. We have already affected, we have already made the headcount reduction in our company. We used to be about 720, we will buy end of this month around 675 so we have a reduction about 45 mainly within the SG&A on the as a support services for operation. We will defer all the outages as I said, the fact that we took down Silicon Tree [ph] it has now been over three months period as it’s refurbished with our own employees, all our operators are still available in the company and we didn’t use external resources to do outage. We do defer all capital investments in the company, no investment has been undertaken lately and we will save money wherever it’s possible. At the same time, we anticipate that it will be a gradual let’s say improvement of the ASP for solar grade material, not very significant, but still somewhat high what we enjoyed in Q3 and given all this we also then anticipate that we would start with full capacity in beginning of January 2016 lower the cash cost towards between $11 and $12 a kg and then outcompete our competitors in the non-Chinese market. So by doing this, we should have enough liquidity, our cash flow should be sufficient to cover all our obligations for 2016 with good margin even though there is no resolution to the trade dispute. If we find a resolution to it definitely that’s a bonus which will add on to our cash flow. So, for the guidance for Q4, basically you can read the numbers. There is no – that’s a shocking number here. Just want to pinpoint that even with all the difficulties we have had in 2016 our average cash cost of FBR will be $12.40 which is still way lower than what is achieved by our competitors. So that’s just underline how competitive our FBR technology is and that’s why we really believe that there is a great future for the company. And that’s it. Any questions? I think you have to use the mike since we on the web Question-and-Answer Session Operator [Operator Instructions] Unidentified Analyst Just two question if I may, one is you’re right on the final slide there that you expect to turn on again full capacity in January, you’re right it depends on the trade war and the market balance if I phrase a question like this, if there is no resolution to the trade war by January and marketing conditions remain the same but you manage to achieve your Q4 sales guidance in terms of volume, will you still be turning on full capacity? Tore Torvund We decided that we will – let’s say we have the capability to do that, the unit will be ready, our people are ready. But we have decided together with the Board that we will review the situation in mid-December and make a final decision at that time. Definitely it depends very much about the trade, it depends about what is the general market situation. But as we see today, we think that’s a likely scenario because for the company the only way we can really compete is to have a full capacity and then out compete our competitors by the ability to deliver, polysilicon good quality polysilicon at the low cost. So that’s the idea behind it. But we are going to review this by mid-December and make a final decision at that time. Unidentified Analyst And then the second question is related to the PV tolling. If you could add some more color to why expected to increase in Q4, what’s the status on that? Tore Torvund We have made as I said ingots out of our polysilicon that’s what we are looking there. So these quantity is already available in the company. We’re going to find customers and sell it during Q4. On the other hand if the market condition improves, this is not our business. We are polysilicon maker, we’re not an ingot maker and there’s [indiscernible] something we saw as an opportunity now as we see the market strengthen. We probably will not continue to do more calling in the company because that’s not our expertise. Unidentified Analyst A few questions from me as well, starting with the trade war. Just trying to see if I can understand this right in and try playing a bit with the numbers, if we assume that China takes about 2 gigawatts of the U.S. market and resume about 5.5% EBITDA margin for the module makers, it should make roughly $55 million for the module makers. If we assume $2 lower prices on polysilicon in China that should assume 300 million less profit for the polysilicon makers in China, isn’t that really the reason why they don’t do anything? I have never heard about Chinese do anything for one single year of profit so it just seems a bit strange. Francine Sullivan Well. I mean as I said it’s not just 2016, that’s interesting for the Chinese and the U.S. It will be – it is a very large market and it will continue to be a very large market even after 2016 because it is diversified, so it’s reliable, it’s not just dependent on one set of government subsidies because there are so many states and so many different incentive programs. So that’s really why they see it. You know that this is really why they work so hard to get it done. I can’t verify the figures that you’ve just quoted me. I understand the value of this deal is a lot more than that to these guys and that’s why they’re anxious to get it. In addition they do have these other downsides with not having his deal in place and that is this constant pricing uncertainty and this risk of the tariffs going up. Now as the volume of Chinese [indiscernible] coming into the U.S. increase, there is a fear that the tariffs will go up as a result of that and they’ll be faced in 18 months’ time with an obligation to pay additional duties to the U.S. government because a tariff for increase for panels that they’re sending in now and collecting a 30% tariff on. Tore Torvund The total import of panels to the U.S. from China was 1.2 billion, and add-on 25% on top of that which is the duty they have to pay. On the other side, silicon exported from the U.S. to China was about $400 million to $500 million, so less than half of that. That’s the numbers we have we have signed up. And that’s why we think it’s attractive to the Chinese. Unidentified Analyst That’s on the revenue side, the problem is what is China as a country left with when you’re looking at everything? And then on the demand side in which we’ve had a uncertain or we’ve had our disputed in the past. First and foremost 17 gigawatt in Q4, if that was to take place shouldn’t we have seen the prices started to increase long time ago because in December you’re not making any wafers any more than you’re installing the modules. Secondly, your demand outlook going forward I don’t know so much about the rest of the world but I can at least tell you that Europe going from 13 gigawatt to 36 gigawatt this year to 2020 I just wonder where do you see those installments being done? Tore Torvund So we can argue about it, that’s the nice thing about this business. What we know is that basically it has least increased year-over-year and I think this year is definitely much higher than last year, that’s 44 towards 57, concerning the margins we seen now that basically the prices of sales and modules wafers start to increase, hopefully it will also happen in the polysilicon side. The future is uncertain, that’s not only this business but also other businesses but at least we see a very, very attractive market out there. Okay. No more questions? Unidentified Analyst Just a quick one on the supply side here on the slide 15, you mentioned that the Samsung e-MMC hasn’t stopped producing yet and also the Wacker plant is probably not going to produce full capacity until maybe Q3 ’16 according to the company. Where have you put them in in your overview of supply additions in ’15 and ’16? Tore Torvund The Samsung? Unidentified Analyst Yes and the Wacker, Tennessee. Tore Torvund Wacker, we anticipate that there will be up and running full capacity next year as I think they have stated they’re going to make some 5000 this year up towards 20,000 next year so that’s what you see basically in the rest of the world. Here in ’16 concerning the Sun Edison plant in Korea, it is uncertain. What we see is that there is no production material from the Sun Edison out in the marketplace and also we have indications that they are not able to supply, there is a long term contract between Sun Edison and Sun Edison semi-conductor and it seems that Sun Edison semiconductor is out for quoting [ph] because they don’t get what anticipated to get from their plant in Korea. So that’s the reason why we believe that it would be limited quantities from the Sun Edison plant in Korea, at least in 2016. Unidentified Analyst You said that you had to discount prices by some $2 to $3 per kilo in Q3. Can you just say something about how that discount is now and is there something maybe about the price trajectory you’re seeing for your cheap prices throughout this quarter? Tore Torvund Yes. It is very early in the quarter you know basically in this business, most of the transaction will happen through last week for the quarter. What we see is that there is much more willingness to ask for quotes for the moment. As I said we don’t see any major price increases so far. But that’s quite, quite normal that will happen more towards the end of the quarter. In our cash flow analysis for how we are going to meet our obligation for 2016, we have relatively limited price increases as basis for this at least for the first nine months. So we don’t expect it will move very, very fast, basically what we have experienced earlier is that you get about $0.50 per months when you start to improve, that’s the rule of thumb that increase by some 58% per month when it start to be shortage of raw material. Unidentified Analyst How much new wafer capacity do you see coming outside China in 2016 and 2017? Tore Torvund We do not have any firm estimate on that, as I said we’re having some discussions with potential wafer makers in China who would like to do it in outside China. What I could say is basically that, a decision is made until a plant is up and running. You have to count six months plus minus typical investments in $100 million. So it is not a huge investment to get it out if they want to move outside China. Unidentified Analyst Do you see any competitors shutting down capacity? Tore Torvund Very limited. Yet, we believe that in China there will be a major – the smaller players will definitely have an incentive to shut down. Just waiting for what is the final decision on the trade dispute. We have seen some minor reduction but not a lot so far. Unidentified Company Representative That’s all the questions from the web. Tore Torvund Okay. Thank you very much for coming. Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS. If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com . Thank you!

Norsk Hydro’s (NHYDY) CEO Svein Richard Brandtzaeg on Q3 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Executives Pal Kildemo – Head, IR Svein Richard Brandtzaeg – CEO Eivind Kallevik – CFO Analysts Dominic O’Kane – JP Morgan Cazenove Jatinder Goel – Citigroup Menno Sanderse – Morgan Stanley Hjalmar Ahlberg – Kepler Cheuvreux Christian Kopfer – Nordea Markets Norsk Hydro ASA ADR ( OTCQX:NHYDY ) Q3 2015 Earnings Conference Call October 21, 2015 10:00 AM ET Operator Good day. And welcome to the Norsk Hydro ASA Third Quarter conference call. Today’s conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Pal Kildemo. Please go ahead, sir. Pal Kildemo Thank you. Good afternoon. And welcome to Hydro’s third quarter 2015 conference call. We will start today with a short introduction by President and CEO, Svein Richard Brandtzaeg followed by a Q&A session where also CFO, Eivind Kallevik will join. For those that did not see this morning’s webcast of the results presentation this is available on hydro.com. And with that, I leave the word to you Svein Richard. Svein Richard Brandtzaeg Thank you, Pal, and good afternoon everybody. Underlying EBIT for the third quarter of this year was NOK 2.2 billion which is down NOK 0.5 billion from second quarter and up NOK 0.7 billion from the third quarter last year. If we start with the bauxite and alumina, I’m happy to recall a historical low and [provide] alumina cost of [$217] on the back of [indiscernible] as well as increased alumina production at Alunorte and record high production of bauxite at Paragominas which is now at level of 10.9 million tones annualized. This effect was somewhat offset by lower realized alumina prices. In Primary Metal, the falling all-in prices continue of the following — influencing the earnings negatively, but also here a weakening knock at the [isle] against US dollar, US dollar benefit us. Last quarter, we talked about the record downstream results and also the third quarter is seasonally weaker in the downstream segments. The results actually increased in the rolled products area which is a strong development. In Energy, we saw an increase in results due to high production as the delayed [soft] snowmelt came [indiscernible] effect in the third quarter. This was roughly offset by lower energy prices. I am also pleased to announce that we have signed a Letter of Intent with Vale for their 40% stake in the first quarter MRN bauxite mine. We will now take due diligence and see if we will follow through with the construction. [indiscernible] comes to the market, the increasing supply in China and the weakening demand growth in and outside China continues resulting and as stated on [indiscernible] this is in global primary outlet from around 5% to 4%. An increasing [expects] or supply to around 1 billion tonnes this year. The Chinese oversupply continues increasing while the undersupply outside China remains stable. And Chinese exports of semis has declined significantly and are now at levels 10% below the levels we saw last year positively reflecting with the used arbitrage opportunities for export in semis where we have been focused. As we end the final quarter this year, our improvement focus remains high on the agenda. Through the third quarter, we have demonstrated that we are in control of the [indiscernible]. Like for example, bauxite production which is running at close to 11 million tonnes in annualized speed at Paragominas. As we said last quarter, we have managed to lift production at Alunorte but with 5.5 million tonnes, we still have some left to get to nameplate of Alunorte. We are stabilizing and continuing with this production. At the same time, we are delivering operational and commercial improvements. We saw the leasing operating capital and other items would be placed high on agenda they lost to [indiscernible] after the buildup in the first quarter. The lease of 2.1 billion is of course largely related to falling prices, but also [soft inventory] release. We are continuing to deliver some very interesting downstream growth projects, including the automotive body in white line in Grevenbroich, as well as the UBC recycling facility in Rheinwerk, which will be delivered on time and on budget. At the same time, we announced the divestment of a non-core lower margin operation in Italy and a combination of these efforts contributes towards the high grading of portfolio in the current markets which can be described as challenging. Pal Kildemo Thank you Svein Richard. Operator, we are now ready for questions. Question-and-Answer Session Operator [Operator Instructions]. We will now take our first question from Dominic O’Kane from JP Morgan. Please go ahead, your line is open. Dominic O’Kane Hello all. Two questions from me. Just firstly on CapEx, the CapEx reduction that we’ve seen so far in 2015, could you maybe give a bit more details on where and what those optimizations are? And then should we expect a deferral of that NOK 1 billion into next year or will some of that come out of the post — you’ve simply said that not be spent. And my second question is on, again just on the timing of the LME versus index alumina contracts. Could you maybe just help us with a modeling for the next say four quarters? Svein Richard Brandtzaeg Okay, Dominic. On CapEx, firstly the billing has split in two, so roughly NOK 200 million driven by [price retention] where we hope whether it would be around $1, all the facility [indiscernible], and that’s partially offset by the euro development, in fact maybe the investments that we did in Germany. Of the NOK 800 million which we [then named] CapEx optimization performance, a bit part of that comes from the Brazilian operations and it has to do with, I would think it’s the timing of the [indiscernible] that we’re doing at Alunorte and the new [indiscernible] we’re doing at [over the investment] to a large extent we’ll respond into 2016 and partly after 2017. Smaller parts will probably disappear and we kind of fix it, but the bigger part is more [tiniest] than anything else. And then LME to index contracts, we are at roughly [1730] this year and then that will continue to increase in the next couple of years and then in 2018 we will get more to 1820 rule. And in ’16/’17 roughly 60% to 70% will be towards index and then it’s hard to guide you on quarterly basis because it all depends on shipping [province] and so on, [but we are sure we’ll have this one] from an annual perspective. Dominic O’Kane Okay. So for 2016, 60% to 70% will be LME-linked? Svein Richard Brandtzaeg It will be, yeah. Dominic O’Kane Second? Svein Richard Brandtzaeg It will be on the index. And I’m sure about 80%. Dominic O’Kane Thank you. Operator We will now take our next question from Jatinder Goel from Citigroup. Please go ahead, your line is open. Jatinder Goel Good afternoon. A couple of questions, firstly on MRN, what happens if you don’t buy it out, is there a mandate because it doesn’t appear that there is any put option in the hands of Vale as they had for Paragominas, so do you have an option not to buy it and continue with the volumes or is there CapEx which needs to be spend in the mine for which you need to actually get involved as an owner rather than on [stake] partner? And secondly, just on the rolled product divestment, what kind of unit profitability uptake do you see after the divestment and are there any other assets within rolled products or anywhere else in the portfolio which you think are non-core or low margin which you probably want to divest going forward? Thank you. Svein Richard Brandtzaeg Okay, thank you, Jatinder. With regards to MRN, not the buyout, it’s first of all an option depending on what comes out on the due diligence, but the reason why we want — and are looking at acquiring this mine is, the fact that we have got 5% ownership today. We have the stake of 45% in total. So we will have [indiscernible] stronger voice of course with 45% ownership. We will take care more actions with regard to improvements, development of the mine, of course also taking responsibility of possessing any CapEx going forward, but also we will benefit from the income flow which has been the difference between the sales price of bauxite and the cost and production of bauxite. So all in all, we feel that this will be a good fit with us. And this is the first quarter from a [cost scale]. A very efficient mine, it has a very good [strip] ratio and with high quality bauxite, so I think it fits very well with our strategy and oil prices in Brazil. The fact that we also have 2.5 billion to 3.5 billion tonnes surplus of [indiscernible] market, it’s one point there, but also the fact that the majority of this bauxite goes into the [rolled biggest refinery] not there which also needs [sourcing from hammer]. With regard to [Slim], this is, I would say, a commodity standard rolling mill which has been operating in Italy in a low margin market for [indiscernible] with utilization of capacity, the capacity is 92,000 tonnes and the production has been between 50,000 and 70,000 tonnes during the last year. So this is defined as non-core and we’re now divesting it. There are no other rolling mills that are defined as non-core, of course, there are different market segments that we’re serving probably different rolling mills, but we continue to [high grade] the product portfolio in the rolling mills that we have still step up at level of strategic development for rolled products going forward. Jatinder Goel Okay. So if I could just quickly follow-up on the rolling side, would you say, your overall EBIT in absolute terms doesn’t change post the divestment, and just on MRN, is the amount you paid for Paragominas for the remaining 40%, 20% you have already paid and 20% you’re supposed to pay, a good guide for the valuation of MRN, or you think these are two very different assets and need to be looked independently under the light of current market conditions for valuation? Eivind Kallevik Hi, Jatinder, it’s Eivind Kallevik, here. On the rolling side, we don’t have specifics on the margin side and [individual parts], but as Svein has indicated, a rolling part has been operating [indiscernible] capacity and it’s also developed in these kind of products, so it’s fair to assume that it’s been below the average margin as we like in rolled products, and rolled products are fine, and I don’t expect this to have a significant impact on the EBIT performance [with the material] going forward. Svein Richard Brandtzaeg Then it comes to the acquisition part of MRN, I don’t think we will give any further comment and guidance on the acquisition part. We have completed the due diligence and we see the results of that and we’ve probably reviewed it up in a normal fashion. Jatinder Goel Okay, great. Look forward to CMD then if you might have more comments, and thank you. Svein Richard Brandtzaeg Okay, see you there. Operator [Operator Instructions]. We will now take our next question from Menno Sanderse from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead, your line is open. Menno Sanderse Yeah, thank you. Two questions, please. The first is on rolling and on downstream clearly there may be a [indiscernible] position to make in that area in the next couple of quarters. Has anything changed in terms of your views on that business, that clearly had a decent quarter, but that just could be cyclical, so just interested to hear where you see that business and its lifecycle, I don’t know if you have altered your views fundamentally? And then second and third a few smaller ones, the €40 million to €50 million of costs that the company highlights related to the Slim assets, is that all non-cash or are there some cash related losses in that. And finally, the working cap, is the company confident it can hold on through this working capital inflow in the fourth quarter, so should we assume that that really helps to reduce net debt for the year? Svein Richard Brandtzaeg Thank you, Menno. I’ll take the first question related to the rolling and downstream. I would say that, it is encouraging that we are approving the results in rolled products, but that hasn’t changed the view because we are continuing as [indiscernible] company and we see the benefit of managing the total value chain, and that’s also customers are really appreciating that what we do as a company for downstream products and we have the control of the full value chain. So we are not [sure on] all mines particularly, of course, encouraging to see the record results in the second quarter and [indiscernible] in the third quarter. Eivind, you can answer the other questions. Eivind Kallevik Okay. Let me go through the €45 million to €55 million amount of the EBIT loss or impact on the sale of Slim [top], better than non-cash on metal. And on the net debt, in terms of net operating capital, I think there is a large [level] that we will be able to keep that towards the end of the year. And also like I said optimizing working capital is [filing] the agenda for the management, so we continue to work to [file] more than as we saw this quarter. So we can read as being quite closer to that that we will be able keep that and now we’d be able to do more. Menno Sanderse Okay. And the [2.1] was largely you said price related, so am I fair to assume 80% or so? Eivind Kallevik It’s a split that’s partly fiscal and that’s how it is probably coming down and it’s probably [positive]. Menno Sanderse Okay. Thanks a lot. Operator We will now take our next question from Hjalmar Ahlberg from Kepler Cheuvreux. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Hjalmar Ahlberg So you had quite high bauxite [trips] in this quarter, and I guess you’re selling more of this on the split market. Can you say something on the development on the prices on bauxite that you’re selling [on spot]? Svein Richard Brandtzaeg Hey, Hjalmar. We did not file bauxite production, but of course, we have some of the MRN volumes that we produced and it’ll be exported out for sale to our bauxite customers. I think on average for a year, we have about 3 million tonnes, that would be half of the [position] that we sell, and that of course will [swing] for us from quarter-to-quarter depending on the production levels. Hjalmar Ahlberg Did it have any material impact on the [indiscernible] this quarter in earnings? Eivind Kallevik Not really, no. Not so much to find any significant barriers in the future to give you the difference. Hjalmar Ahlberg And just on the question on CapEx, you said you deferred onto [2016], could you say some new guidance on what kind of levels we should expect for the fixed [income] higher at which 2016 or in line or so? Eivind Kallevik I think we’ve guided in the past, you all know that, also 2016 and also 2017, there is still — that’s an investment that we’ve done and it’ll have quite modern effect on areas in [indiscernible] and then of course it also depends on how we decide on that [file option]. Svein Richard Brandtzaeg So I think we will, in terms of specific guidance of that we will come back on Capital Markets Day, but the guidance will have relative effect on CapEx levels in 2016. Hjalmar Ahlberg And then lastly, have you made the last payment for the Paragominas mine now or is that still to be made? Svein Richard Brandtzaeg This is still be made, the put call option is really a 2016 discussion, and then of course there is a put call between the two parties in 2016. Eivind Kallevik From a CapEx perspective, you will not see that on the [indiscernible] because that’s already been booked as investment, but of course you will see the [cash head backhaul], all the cash development. Hjalmar Ahlberg Yeah, alright. Thank you. Operator [Operator Instructions]. We will now take our next question from Christian Kopfer from Nordea Markets. Please go ahead. Your line is open. Christian Kopfer Okay, thanks operator. Good afternoon. Just a follow-up on the market pricing dynamics, I mean, looking at the LME price [churn] in that premium prices are basically at the same level at the beginning of the century, and obviously you showed the graph today, showing some 20 million out of 60 million tonnes and the market is running at losses, that you have seen this rescaling for some actions and I mean rationally the Chinese — I mean from my perspective at least they are dumping material on the global market, I mean, what is your reasoning on possible anti-dumping measures in Europe? Thanks. Svein Richard Brandtzaeg Well, thank you for the question, Christian. In this call we deal with market pricing dynamics, as I said, this is all about a supply demand game and it’s right, Chinese overall production is [whatnot] we’ll have issues related to this. At the same time as we see that [50%] capacity in the world, as it now below 60% to 70%, but this is in China. So why doesn’t China react which would be quite logical anticipation or that’s the case in Europe, that is two criteria that has to be fulfilled. One is that, some [indiscernible] that are selling below cost of production, and that is a possible period, but we know that the Chinese companies, what we’re seeing out there, they are still excellent. The second criteria that has to be fulfilled is related to that this is a [damage] for the industry. And also [closures] during the last year, obviously no is that it would be difficult for the moment to prove that this is [damaging] industry. It is of course using the prices but that is not enough, we have to prove that this is also really damaging [indiscernible] eventually, so again it could be more difficult in Europe than in US. It goes with US after dry fall [duties] against China, so we remain to be same, but of course the main price signal and the fact that companies are losing money every day. We should call for some action, but we don’t have any control of this, of course and we have to [leave] that to our competitors. Christian Kopfer Okay, thanks. Operator No further questions in the phone queue at this time. Pal Kildemo Okay, as there seems to be no further questions, I suggest we end this quarter’s call. From all of us in Oslo, I would like to thank you for your attention today. If you have any follow-up questions, please do not hesitate to contact us. Have a nice evening and hopefully we’ll see you at our Capital Markets Day on the start of December at the London Stock Exchange. Thank you. Operator That will conclude today’s conference call. Thank you ladies and gentlemen. You may now disconnect. Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS. If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com . Thank you!

Akastor’s (AKKVF) CEO Frank Reite on Q2 2015 Results – Earnings Call Transcript

Executives Tore Langballe – Head of Corporate Communications and Investor Relations Frank Reite – Chief Executive Officer Leif Borge – Chief Financial Officer Analysts Frederik Lunde – Carnegie Eirik Mathisen – DNB Eivind Tønnessen – Swedbank Haakon Amundsen – ABG Akastor ASA ( OTCPK:AKKVF ) Q2 2015 Earnings Conference Call July 15, 2015 3:00 AM ET Tore Langballe Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the presentation of the Second Quarter Results and the First-Half Results of Akastor ASA. My name is Tore Langballe, I am responsible for Corporate Communications and Investor Relations in Akastor. The presentation this morning is being webcasted and we also have a conference call running in parallel. You are free to submit questions online on the webcast and of course ask questions on the conference call. We cannot guarantee that we’re going to be able to answer all the questions though. [Operator Instructions]. For the audience present in the auditorium here, I’d like you to use the microphone and state your name and company when asking questions please. The presentation this morning will be given by CEO, Frank Reite and Leif Borge, CEO and CFO respectively. And then we’re ready to start. I’ll give the floor to Frank Reite. Frank Reite Thank you Tore and good morning, everyone. As you probably have seen from a separate release this morning Kristian Røkke will take over as CEO in Akastor from August. I will move on to Aker as their new CFO. Aker will then propose to the nomination committee that I should be elected as the Chairman of Akastor. So I will be quite involved in Akastor also going forward. Then let’s focus on Akastor today. The second quarter for Akastor can be summarized as followed. We see a challenging market environment for the oil services sector. However there are also interesting opportunities in the market. And I am very proud that most of our portfolio companies are delivering quite good performance through first-half of 2015. However, we see that MHWirth is significantly impacted by the rig market. But I can assure you that we are taking necessary actions in all our portfolio companies to adapt to the current market situation and that we go after all opportunities that is out there. If we look into second quarter, from a perspective at Akastor as an investment company, we have taken actions to focus on our operational improvements and have done a lot of cost savings and unfortunately we have to reduce the workforce. We expect that reduction to be around 1,500 people by the end of the year. As an investment company, one of our duties is to make sure that we have the right management teams in our portfolio companies. We have used first-half of 2015 to strengthen the teams and add necessary resources to attack the market and environment we are operating in. We’re going to continue to focus on long-term value creation for our shareholders and going to develop our current portfolio, we’re going to explore the opportunities we see in the market and we’re going to keep our financial flexibility. After the close of second quarter we have divested one property in Norway for around 28 million equal to book value. If we look into the numbers, if we add back one-offs to our EBITDA, we arrive at 173 million that’s in line with first quarter. However revenues are down with approximately 20% and activity in MHWirth explains basically also of the decline in the revenues. The net capital employed is stable, and MHWirth and AKOFS makes up close to 80% of the capital employed. The working capital has stabilized around 3.1 billion and if you summarize the remaining portfolio companies except MHWirth those are zero. Our order backlog is 18.7 billion; it’s down 1.3 during the quarter. Net interest bearing debt 6.1 basically at the same level as first quarter. If we look into the floater market, the utilization is around 87%, it’s the lowest level in more than 10 years. There are supply and demand gap around 39 floaters with additional 84 in the order book. However, we don’t expect that all the floaters that are in the order book will be delivered. The good thing here is that the market mechanism are working, so we have seen no new orders for floaters signed in first-half of 2015. And so far in the current down cycle there being announced removal scrapping of 36 floaters as of end of June and as yesterday there was one more announced. We see that rig owners are delaying deliveries of rigs and the yards are postponing the completion of the rigs. That is impacting us through our revenues or getting moved out in time and also require of more working capital than they like. The good thing at MHWirth is that lifecycle business and aftermarket the service business is performing very well. Revenues of 1.4 billion first-half is exactly the same as last year. And it continues to deliver a good margin with a slight decline compared to last year, but it’s still about 20% margin on the lifecycle. And as you all know the lifecycle business is very important going forward. We have initiated significant cost improvements program and we expect the workforce to be reduced with at least a 1,000 people by the end of the year. Definitely we’ll have a contract with Jurong for delivering of seven complete drill packages for drill ships going to Brazil. The progress has been we have slowdown the progress in agreement with Jurong and we are awaiting the final outcome of the refinancing of certain. However, the signals are quite clear that all the seven units from Jurong will be completed. However the timing is a bit uncertain. Based on this we also expect weak results for MHWirth in second half of 2015. If we look into MHWirth going forward, with short-term they need to execute on the backlog continue to secure the lifecycle business. The lifecycle business is basically their license to operate and it’s also what’s bringing us closer to our customers. The feedback I am getting from MHWirth customers is that they are more and more happy with the lifecycle services from MHWirth. Continue to run after all the costs, cut costs and do operational improvements. They need to bring down their CapEx and going to complete the plant in Brazil when that one is completed we’ll bring down CapEx to bear minimum and we need to reduce the working capital level. Going forward we need to be willing to invest into the future. We could probably cut cost more than what we are doing, but we will like to keep the competence in MHWirth. We will the company to be ready, to sit around the table and compete when the new drilling contract will be signed in the future. So therefore, we are willing to invest in resources and technology throughout this down cycle. If we take a look at AKOFS Offshore, Skandi Santos is back in operation after five years classing was back in mid of April, has performed very well, AKOFS was back in operation and also in April it started on its second five years agreement with Petrobras. The Wayfarer have had excellent operation, a 100% utilization in first-half and we were able to extend the contract of vessel around throughout October this year. Then it will go to the West Coast or Norway and be prepared for a five years contract in Brazil starting second half of 2016. The Seafarer was idle during the quarter. We are continuing to cut cost and we’ll cut the cost to a bare minimum when it’s at the dock. There are challenging market situation, but AKOFS are running at after whatever opportunities there are in the market. So for AKOFS going forward, we can divide the business into two, there is the long-term business in Brazil, we will have two vessels on good contracts on five year terms in Brazil and AKOFS need to secure work for the Seafarer. If you look into our remaining portfolio companies and the second quarter highlights for them Frontica has steady operation. They have been performing very well to adjust their cost base towards that activity and they’re delivering a decent margin and the really good thing is that they won two strategic important niche contracts during the quarter. These contracts are not significant when it comes to revenues but this will important customers and that it shows that Frontica are competitive in their business landscape. Fjords process secured three different contracts related to the U.S. oil field; it’s really good to show that they’re competitive in the international market. The management team of Fjords has done a great job to adjust their operating model and they’re improving their competitive position. There are solid prospect list for Fjords, they are involved in quite significant bids but the timing of awards are uncertain. Then I need to congratulate Gordon and his team in Singapore, they’re delivering a record margin of 23% in the quarter. They have taken a lot of actions, they have increased efficiency as it plan significantly, they have been able to cut raw material cost, they have reduced a number of employees at the factory of around 100, and even with that they have increased the capacity of the factory. And they have renewed a very important strategic contract and they’re going into new markets. And then we divested a property as I said, in the beginning of the presentation. So, what are we doing, well, we are attacking the challenges. We see oil, we see a weak oil price, reduced spending and we started the year with cost base that reflects that higher activity level than what the current situation could support. So, we have taken immediate cost cutting actions and we are continuing to ramming after costs. We are maintaining our financial flexibilities with increased financing lines. We are strengthening the teams and the management teams in the portfolio companies. We are continuing to focus on long-term value creation for our shareholders and we are pursuing opportunities that we see in the market, both for our portfolio of companies but also for cost store as an investment of company. Then Leif will walk through the numbers for you. Leif Borge Good morning. As you have probably already seen from the figures of revenues 3.7 billion in the second quarter dropped to 39% compared with last year. However, the second quarter last year was — especially strong quarter with regards to revenue, so year-to-date revenues went down 25% compared with last year. It’s especially the revenues and MHWirth that has declined and we expect now revenue level to level out going forward. The EBITDA are 141 million, it’s impacted by around 20 million on restructuring cost in MHWirth and 12 million in negative result from hedges not qualifying for hedging accounting. So the more recurring EBITDA in the quarter was around 173 million. Net financial items negative 183 million includes 100 million negative effects from the impairment of the extra shares due to the drop in the share price during the quarter. Pure interest cost was around 44 million in the quarter and the financial lease on the vessel Wayfarer was 72 million in the quarter. The tax rates was only 8%, but this is explained by some of the losses like extra shares in did not have tax effect. So based on these figures the net result ended on minus 298 million in the second quarter. Also as we have seen in the net capital employed, how the investment portfolio remain on same level as seen in the first quarter, just below 15 billion. And net working capital increase slightly and we invested around 270 million in the quarter, mainly in MHWrith and AKOFS offshore. With regards to the capital structure, net interest bearing debt increase is around 200 million to 6.1 billion in the quarter. Cash flow from operations was around zero, while as mentioned investments are around 270 million. The liquidity reserve at the end of June was around NOK1.35 billion including cash of 850 million and undrawn credit facilities of 500 million. Then let’s have a look at the portfolio companies, starting with MHWrith revenue level went down to 1.6 billion in the second quarter. For the first-half of the year service revenues are more or less spot-on the level of 2014. So the decline in revenue comes from the projects and single equipment. The explanation is of course low order intake during last year. However it’s also due to the reduced progress on the year on contracts which is in line with what we’ve agreed with the clients. There are no further cancellation of contracts in the second quarter of this year. The EBITDA of 3 million then is impacted by another 20 million our restructuring costs these cost relates to the second round layoffs that was executed in the second quarter which will impact around 250 people. The implemented workforce adjustments will reduce the total workforce in MHWirth during the year with close to 1,000 people. We see some effect of this in the second quarter numbers, but we will not have full effect of the cost cutting before the end of the year. Thus we expect weak results in MHWirth also in the second half of the year. Order intake in MHWirth was 932 million and backlog ended on 7.1 billion. AKOFS Offshore had revenues of 186 million; Santos was in full operation from mid April after the five year classing. Wayfarer was into operation through the quarter, while AKOFS Seafarer was idle for the total quarter. In the third quarter both Santos and Wayfarer will be in full operation as the contract for Wayfarer was extended throughout October. In regards to AKOFS Seafarer, we hope to get some work but the market for stock work is very challenging. AKOFS is not taking down the burn rate on AKOFS Seafarer from around $50,000 a day to roughly half that level by the end of this year. This is the standby OpEx rate for the vessel being ready to operate as a third vessel, but it will take longer than to mobilize divestment to do deep water well intervention services. Frontica business solutions have the revenues of 1.3 billion, declining 12% compared with the second quarter last year. This reflects lower activity level of the key clients especially then Aker Solutions, Kvaerner, MHWirth. This also impact margins on what the EBITDA margin was 4.5% in the second quarter. During the quarter, Frontica has implemented downsizing around 130 staff which will have somewhat positive effect on the margin going forward. The order intake was relatively weak with 804 million in the quarter. However this is explained by the reassessment of expected volume from the existing frame agreements for the next 12 months. Fjords Processing had revenues of 475 million in the second quarter with an EBITDA of 16 million. The margin is still not on an acceptable level, however at least we’re now further losses from the project that destroy the numbers in 2014. So that has been stable on last two quarters. Order intake of 500 million brings the backlog up to 1.2 billion. KOP had a strong quarter profit wise, revenue actually dropped around 7% in real terms because this is a U.S. dollar business. However due to the fact that this or the translation effect and the U.S. dollar has strengthened compared to Norwegian crowns the reported revenues in our numbers show some increase of 17%. KOP delivered a record high margin as presented by Frank 23%. This is explained by favorable product mix, strong aftermarket services with high margin in the second quarter. But management of KOP has also done a good job working on the cost specs. During the quarter, around 100 people they are laid off that plant in Burton. The order intake was weak with 138 million reflecting a weak market in Asia and the key clients are reducing their inventories rather than ordering new surface for the time being. This will of course also impact the revenue level going forward. In regards to the margin, you should not expect the second quarter level going forward, but we hope that KOP can maintain a relatively good margin also in the coming quarters even with somewhat lower revenue levels. Finally real-estates and other holdings, negative EBITDA of 25 million of which 12 million is the negative effect from hedges, not qualifying for hedging accounting. The real-estate portfolio delivered 15 million in a quarter, while the two portfolio companies First Geo and Step Oiltools had total EBITDA of 5 million, slightly better than previous quarters and the rest of the result is in this segment comes from corporate and some separation cost of the IT infrastructure. And so that concludes my presentation and I guess we open up for the Q&A session. Tore Langballe Then we open up for questions both from the audience here and we’ll later take questions from the conference call and from the web. Do you have any questions here to kick off? Question-and-Answer Session Q – Frederik Lunde Frederik Lunde, Carnegie. You mentioned that you expect some of these floaters and the construction not to be delivered, is that a reference to contrast in your backlog or more for competitors? Frank Reite Through this opposite ratio, there are 29 of sectors in the backlog worldwide. We expect all the seven, but we’re going to deliver equipment to be deliver, but I think the indication from Brazil, is that there on 15 of the 29 will be concluded. So, that’s some more — it seems like our backlog is pretty robust, but there will be delays or postponement. But at end of the day, I expect them, to be delivered. Frederik Lunde Do you expect any contracts for new projects in MSWrith for the next year to? Frank Reite Yes, all of these speculative projects out there and they’ve been there, for a while and none of them materialized, but suddenly there will be something. But I don’t think, we expect — just have a look on that, there might be one or two, time we saw. Frederik Lunde But no equity investment from your side in those projects? Frank Reite I think, we’re willing to participate with favorable terms to facilitate some projects. But I don’t see us as a significant equity investment into any of the projects. But we might be willing to be flexible in payment terms, especially on amounts of to our margin in these kind of projects. Eirik Mathisen Eirik Mathisen, DNB. When should we expect working capital in MHWrith to come downwards again and what is the risk for impairments to the working capital in MHWrith? Frank Reite The working capital there is two folded, approximately 1.5 billion is tied up into the service in after market. And that’s an investment into that business. I think you will see a reduction of the working capital when we start to release some of the projects and we have finance deliveries from the project execution. Eirik Mathisen Then on Brazil, is there any risk for lower day rates on the vessels, you have on long-term charter contracts in Brazil? Frank Reite Well, I think we have received same lesser stuff a lot of other players but as long as Santos is some performing as well at it is. I think we have a — I think, we’ll basically maintain the same level. Eivind Tønnessen Eivind Tønnessen, Swedbank. Obviously you’re talking about MSWrith being soft in second half. Would you elaborate a bit on the numbers in terms of EBITDA? I mean, you had a break even first half, could we see this type of similar level in second half or should we see some improvements, any color? Frank Reite We expect to see gradual improvements in the numbers as the cost savings comes through. I mean, we have now concluded two rounds of layoffs. We’re up to 1,000 people, around 600 people of those have left the company by June and the remaining will leave during the second half of the year. So as I said, gradually improvement in the results. And revenue level was 1.6 billion are in the second quarter, most likely we will also see a revenue level, on that level going forward, little bit depend on what happens for the year on projects? Eivind Tønnessen And just follow up on the Songa and Cat D rigs, I mean there seems some turmoil between Songa and DSME now recently. Can you just describe your potential exposure with MHWrith with the remaining key packages and how much working capital is tied to those three? Frank Reite I think Leif can go more into the details but the first Cat D rig was delivered right before end of second quarter and first week of July we received significant payments from DSME on that one. Leif Borge I mean that we have delivered all the equipments on those rigs, what remains of cost for MHWirth is on the final commissioning on the last three ones. There typically remains 10% to 15% of the contract value in the late phase like that. So yes there is some remaining payments and some working capital still in the Cat D rigs. So far the client has paid say as planned, but as in all projects, at all of this discussions on variation orders that at the end of the project. So that will also probably be the case for some of the remaining rigs here. Eivind Tønnessen Just the final from me, do you have any leads now on long-term contract for the Seafarer or are you focusing on spot working to serve marketplaces only? Frank Reite Realistically we’re focused on the spot market. However, there are dialogues with oil companies also more long-term projects. But I don’t expect any of those to materialize this year. Unidentified Analyst This is [indiscernible]. Is it possible to get some more split on the Brazilian, what went through as revenues in the quarter from MH? Frank Reite Revenues from the Brazilian — from the Jurong project? I mean in the slide on MHWirth we have shown the split of the revenue on services, on projects and on products. And you can easily calculate that revenues from the projects around 500 million, 600 million in the quarter roughly 50% of that comes from the Jurong project and roughly 50% of it comes from other projects as a guideline. Unidentified Analyst And then you’re able to hold capital relatively stable due to some offsetting from the other projects instead how we should view that? Frank Reite The working capital in MHWirth was quite stable from first quarter to the second quarter. There has been progress on the Jurong project; there I spent money on the project. We’ve also received money from Jurong from the client, but not everything that we should ever see according to the regional contract. So there has been some of the increase in working capital tied up in those projects. However, the Jurong project is still cash positive meaning that the working capital on the project is negative. So of course the working capital has increased somewhat on that project, it has reduced on some of other projects. Unidentified Analyst [Indiscernible] Securities. I was just wondering could we expect any further restructuring charges in the second half of the year? And can you provide some guidance on that? Frank Reite No or to put it this way, you shouldn’t expect any further restructuring costs linked to the initiatives that we have already made. We may of course see that we have to do further cost adjustments in some of the portfolio companies and that could trigger researching cost. Unidentified Analyst And then just on the second question on AKOFS, on the Wayfarer, on the extension has the day rate come down to what you guided at your CMD? Frank Reite No, it’s a same day rate. Tore Langballe Then I think we open up for — we have one more question here before we take questions from the conference call. One more question. Haakon Amundsen Haakon Amundsen from ABG. Just a question on the aftermarket in MH it’s holding off in H1 despite quite big cost reductions announced by the drillers. Can you put some color on that maybe on the profitability and the outlook for H2? Frank Reite I think we are chasing cost as well. So I think basically we have seen some reduction in the prices towards the driller, but MHWirth has been able basically to push it such supplier and I think we also have a more efficient operation than we had last year. Haakon Amundsen And H2 any indications? Frank Reite Currently it seems like it’s going very well. Haakon Amundsen And just to put you on the spot on H2 for MH is the underlying result for Q1 with slight improvement, what we should expect? Frank Reite Yes. Tore Langballe Then we have one more questions from the conference call. Operator can you please assist us . Operator Thank you. [Operator Instructions]. At the moment, we have no questions in the queue. I’d like to turn the call back to you for additional comments. Tore Langballe If there are any additional — I have one additional question in conference room. Eivind Tønnessen Yes, Eivind Tønnessen, Swedbank again. Just on your interest coverage ratio covenant of above 4, do you see any risk of that being breached by year-end and if so do you see any problems renegotiating or receiving waivers from your banks should that be the case? Frank Reite I think, it’s fair to say that yes, it’s a risk that we could be in breach by the end of this year or beginning of this year of course depending on how the results end up in the third and fourth quarter, that’s of course something that the people have a dialogue with the banks, I will be surprised if it will not get the waiver but it’s probably always price discussion. Tore Langballe Then we thank you all for participating at this morning and have a nice summer going forward. Thank you. Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY’S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS. If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: transcripts@seekingalpha.com . Thank you!