SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
6-K
REPORT
OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER
PURSUANT
TO RULE 13a-16 or 15d-16 OF
THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Report
on Form 6-K dated August 4, 2008
_______________________________________
STMicroelectronics
N.V.
(Name of
Registrant)
39,
Chemin du Champ-des-Filles
1228
Plan-les-Ouates, Geneva, Switzerland
(Address
of Principal Executive Offices)
_______________________________________
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports under
cover of Form 20-F or Form 40-F:
Form 20-F
Q
Form 40-F £
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted
by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7):
Yes £ No Q
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant by furnishing the information contained in
this form is also thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant
to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934:
Yes £ No Q
If “Yes”
is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the registrant in
connection with Rule 12g3-2(b): 82- __________
Enclosure:
STMicroelectronics N.V.’s Second Quarter and First Half 2008:
· Operating
and Financial Review and Prospects;
· Unaudited
Interim Consolidated Statements of Income, Balance Sheets, Statements of Cash
Flow, and Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity and related Notes for
the three months and six months ended June 28, 2008; and
· Certifications
pursuant to Sections 302 (Exhibits 12.1 and 12.2) and 906 (Exhibit 13.1) of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, submitted to the Commission on a voluntary
basis.
OPERATING
AND FINANCIAL REVIEW AND PROSPECTS
Overview
The
following discussion should be read in conjunction with our Unaudited Interim
Consolidated Statements of Income, Balance Sheets, Statements of Cash Flow and
Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the three months and six
months ended June 28, 2008 and Notes thereto included elsewhere in this Form 6-K
and in our annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 as
filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission” or the
“SEC”) on March 3, 2008 (the “Form 20-F”). The following discussion contains
statements of future expectations and other forward-looking statements within
the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, or Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, each as amended, particularly in the sections
“Critical Accounting Policies Using Significant Estimates,” “Business Outlook”
and “Liquidity and Capital Resources—Financial Outlook.” Our actual results may
differ significantly from those projected in the forward-looking statements. For
a discussion of factors that might cause future actual results to differ
materially from our recent results or those projected in the forward-looking
statements in addition to the factors set forth below, see “Cautionary Note
Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and “Item 3. Key Information—Risk Factors”
included in the Form 20-F. We assume no obligation to update the
forward-looking statements or such risk factors.
Critical
Accounting Policies Using Significant Estimates
The
preparation of our Consolidated Financial Statements, in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S.
GAAP”), requires us to make estimates and assumptions that have a significant
impact on the results we report in our Consolidated Financial Statements, which
we discuss under the section “Results of Operations.” Some of our accounting
policies require us to make difficult and subjective judgments that can affect
the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial
statements and the reported amounts of net revenue and expenses during the
reporting period. The primary areas that require significant estimates and
judgments by management include, but are not limited to, sales returns and
allowances; reserves for price protection to certain distributor customers;
allowances for doubtful accounts; inventory reserves and normal manufacturing
loading thresholds to determine costs to be capitalized in inventory; accruals
for warranty costs, litigation and claims; assumptions used to discount monetary
assets expected to be recovered beyond one year; valuation of acquired
intangibles, goodwill, investments and tangible assets as well as the impairment
of their related carrying values; estimated values of the consideration to be
received and used as fair value for the asset group classified as assets held
for sale; evaluation of the fair value of marketable securities
available-for-sale for which no observable market price is obtainable and
assessment of any potential impairment; estimates relating to the valuation of
business transactions and relevant accounting considerations; restructuring
charges; other non-recurring special charges; assumptions used in calculating
pension obligations and share-based compensation including assessment of the
number of awards expected to vest upon future performance condition achievement;
assumptions used to measure and recognize a liability for the fair value of the
obligation we assume at the inception of a guarantee; assessment of hedge
effectiveness of derivative instruments; deferred income tax assets, including
required valuation allowances and liabilities; and provisions for specifically
identified income tax exposures and income tax uncertainties. We base our
estimates and assumptions on historical experience and on various other factors
such as market trends, market comparables, business plans and levels of
materiality that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the
results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values
of assets and liabilities. While we regularly evaluate our estimates and
assumptions, our actual results may differ materially and adversely from our
estimates. To the extent there are material differences between the actual
results and these estimates, our future results of operations could be
significantly affected.
We
believe the following critical accounting policies require us to make
significant judgments and estimates in the preparation of our Consolidated
Financial Statements:
· Revenue recognition. Our
policy is to recognize revenues from sales of products to our customers when all
of the following conditions have been met: (a) persuasive evidence of an
arrangement exists; (b)
delivery
has occurred; (c) the selling price is fixed or determinable; and (d)
collectibility is reasonably assured. This usually occurs at the time of
shipment.
Consistent
with standard business practice in the semiconductor industry, price protection
is granted to distributor customers on their existing inventory of our products
to compensate them for declines in market prices. The ultimate decision to
authorize a distributor refund remains fully within our control. We accrue a
provision for price protection based on a rolling historical price trend
computed on a monthly basis as a percentage of gross distributor sales. This
historical price trend represents differences in recent months between the
invoiced price and the final price to the distributor, adjusted if required, to
accommodate a significant move in the current market price. The short
outstanding inventory time period, visibility into the standard inventory
product pricing (as opposed to certain customized products) and long distributor
pricing history have enabled us to reliably estimate price protection provisions
at period-end. We record the accrued amounts as a deduction of revenue at the
time of the sale. If market conditions differ from our assumptions, this could
have an impact on future periods; in particular, if market conditions were to
deteriorate, net revenues could be reduced due to higher product returns and
price reductions at the time these adjustments occur.
Our
customers occasionally return our products from time to time for technical
reasons. Our standard terms and conditions of sale provide that if we determine
that products are non-conforming, we will repair or replace the non-conforming
products, or issue a credit or rebate of the purchase price. In certain cases,
when the products we have supplied have been proven to be defective, we have
agreed to compensate our customers for claimed damages in order to maintain and
enhance our business relationship. Quality returns are not related to any
technological obsolescence issues and are identified shortly after sale in
customer quality control testing. Quality returns are always associated with
end-user customers, not with distribution channels. We provide for such returns
when they are considered as probable and can be reasonably estimated. We record
the accrued amounts as a reduction of revenue.
Our
insurance policies relating to product liability only cover physical and other
direct damages caused by defective products. We do not carry insurance against
immaterial, non-consequential damages. We record a provision for warranty costs
as a charge against cost of sales based on historical trends of warranty costs
incurred as a percentage of sales which we have determined to be a reasonable
estimate of the probable losses to be incurred for warranty claims in a period.
Any potential warranty claims are subject to our determination that we are at
fault and liable for damages, and that such claims usually must be submitted
within a short period following the date of sale. This warranty is given in lieu
of all other warranties, conditions or terms expressed or implied by statute or
common law. Our contractual terms and conditions typically limit our liability
to the sales value of the products, which gave rise to the claims.
We
maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for potential estimated losses
resulting from our customers’ inability to make required payments. We base our
estimates on historical collection trends and record a provision accordingly.
Furthermore, we are required to evaluate our customers’ credit ratings from time
to time and take an additional provision for any specific account that we
estimate as doubtful. In the first half of 2008, we did not record any new
material specific provision related to bankrupt customers in addition to our
standard provision of 1% of total receivables based on estimated historical
collection trends. If we receive information that the financial condition of our
customers has deteriorated, resulting in an impairment of their ability to make
payments, additional allowances could be required.
While the
majority of our sales agreements contain standard terms and conditions, we may,
from time to time, enter into agreements that contain multiple elements or
non-standard terms and conditions, which require revenue recognition judgments.
Where multiple elements exist in an arrangement, the arrangement is allocated to
the different elements based upon verifiable objective evidence of the fair
value of the elements, as governed under Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No.
00-21, Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables (“EITF
00-21”).
· Goodwill and purchased intangible
assets. The purchase method of accounting for acquisitions requires
extensive use of estimates and judgments to allocate the purchase price to the
fair value of the net tangible and intangible assets acquired, including
In-Process research and development, which is expensed
immediately.
Goodwill and intangible assets deemed to have indefinite lives are not amortized
but are instead subject to annual impairment tests. The amounts and useful lives
assigned to other intangible assets impact future amortization. If the
assumptions and estimates used to allocate the purchase price are not correct or
if business conditions change, purchase price adjustments or future asset
impairment charges could be required. At June 28, 2008, the value of goodwill
amounted to $315 million, of which $17 million was registered in the first half
of 2008 following the acquisition of Genesis Microchip Inc.
(“Genesis”).
· Impairment of goodwill.
Goodwill recognized in business combinations is not amortized and is instead
subject to an impairment test to be performed on an annual basis, or more
frequently if indicators of impairment exist, in order to assess the
recoverability of its carrying value. Goodwill subject to potential impairment
is tested at a reporting unit level, which represents a component of an
operating segment for which discrete financial information is available and is
subject to regular review by segment management. This impairment test determines
whether the fair value of each reporting unit for which goodwill is allocated is
lower than the total carrying amount of relevant net assets allocated to such
reporting unit, including its allocated goodwill. If lower, the implied fair
value of the reporting unit goodwill is then compared to the carrying value of
the goodwill and an impairment charge is recognized for any excess. In
determining the fair value of a reporting unit, we usually estimate the expected
discounted future cash flows associated with the reporting unit. Significant
management judgments and estimates are used in forecasting the future discounted
cash flows including: the applicable industry’s sales volume forecast and
selling price evolution; the reporting unit’s market penetration; the market
acceptance of certain new technologies and relevant cost structure; the discount
rates applied using a weighted average cost of capital; and the perpetuity rates
used in calculating cash flow terminal values. Our evaluations are based on
financial plans updated with the latest available projections of the
semiconductor market evolution, our sales expectations and our costs evaluation
and are consistent with the plans and estimates that we use to manage our
business. It is possible, however, that the plans and estimates used may be
incorrect, and future adverse changes in market conditions or operating results
of acquired businesses not in line with our estimates may require impairment of
certain goodwill. No impairment of goodwill charges were recorded in the first
half of 2008.
· Intangible assets subject to
amortization. Intangible assets subject to amortization include the cost
of technologies and licenses purchased from third parties, internally developed
software that is capitalized and purchased software. Intangible assets subject
to amortization are reflected net of any impairment losses. These are amortized
over a period ranging from three to seven years. The carrying value of
intangible assets subject to amortization is evaluated whenever changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. In
determining recoverability, we initially assess whether the carrying value
exceeds the undiscounted cash flows associated with the intangible assets. If
exceeded, we then evaluate whether an impairment charge is required by
determining if the asset’s carrying value also exceeds its fair value. An
impairment loss is recognized for the excess of the carrying amount over the
fair value. We normally estimate the fair value based on the projected
discounted future cash flows associated with the intangible assets. Significant
management judgments and estimates are required and used in the forecasts of
future operating results that are used in the discounted cash flow method of
valuation, including: the applicable industry’s sales volume forecast and
selling price evolution; our market penetration; the market acceptance of
certain new technologies; and the relevant cost structure. Our evaluations are
based on financial plans updated with the latest available projections of the
semiconductor market evolution and our sales expectations and are consistent
with the plans and estimates that we use to manage our business. It is possible,
however, that the plans and estimates used may be incorrect and that future
adverse changes in market conditions or operating results of businesses acquired
may not be in line with our estimates and may therefore require impairment of
certain intangible assets. We did not record any charges related to an
impairment of intangible assets subject to amortization in the first half of
2008. At June 28, 2008, the value of intangible assets subject to amortization
amounted to $309 million.
· Property, plant and
equipment. Our business requires substantial investments in
technologically advanced manufacturing facilities, which may become
significantly underutilized or obsolete as a result of rapid changes in demand
and ongoing technological evolution. We estimate the useful life for the
majority of our manufacturing equipment, which is the largest component of our
long-lived assets, to be six years, except for our 300-mm manufacturing
equipment as stated below. This estimate is based on our experience
with
using equipment over time. Depreciation expense is a major element of our
manufacturing cost structure. We begin to depreciate new equipment when it is
placed into service. In the first quarter of 2008 we launched our first
solely-owned 300-mm production facility in Crolles
(France). Consequently, we assessed the useful life of our 300-mm
manufacturing equipment based on relevant economic and technical factors. Our
conclusion was that the appropriate depreciation period for such 300-mm
equipment is 10 years. This policy was applied starting January 1,
2008.
We
evaluate each period when there is reason to suspect that the carrying value of
tangible assets or groups of assets might not be recoverable. Factors we
consider important which could trigger an impairment review include: significant
negative industry trends, significant underutilization of the assets or
available evidence of obsolescence of an asset, strategic management decisions
impacting production or an indication that its economic performance is, or will
be, worse than expected and a more likely than not expectation that assets will
be sold or disposed of prior to their estimated useful life. In determining the
recoverability of assets to be held and used, we initially assess whether the
carrying value exceeds the undiscounted cash flows associated with the tangible
assets or group of assets. If exceeded, we then evaluate whether an impairment
charge is required by determining if the asset’s carrying value also exceeds its
fair value. We normally estimate this fair value based on independent market
appraisals or the sum of discounted future cash flows, using market assumptions
such as the utilization of our fabrication facilities and the ability to upgrade
such facilities, change in the selling price and the adoption of new
technologies. We also evaluate the continued validity of an asset’s useful life
when impairment indicators are identified. Assets classified as held for sale
are reflected at the lower of their carrying amount or fair value less selling
costs and are not depreciated during the selling period. Selling costs include
incremental direct costs to transact the sale that we would not have incurred
except for the decision to sell.
Our
evaluations are based on financial plans updated with the latest projections of
the semiconductor market evolution and of our sales expectations, from which we
derive the future production needs and loading of our manufacturing facilities,
and which are consistent with the plans and estimates that we use to manage our
business. These plans are highly variable due to the high volatility of the
semiconductor business and therefore are subject to continuous modifications. If
the future evolution differs from the basis of our plans, both in terms of
market evolution and production allocation to our manufacturing plants, this
could require a further review of the carrying amount of our tangible assets
resulting in a potential impairment loss.
· Inventory. Inventory is
stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Cost is based on the
weighted average cost by adjusting standard cost to approximate actual
manufacturing costs on a quarterly basis; the cost is therefore dependent on our
manufacturing performance. In the case of underutilization of our manufacturing
facilities, we estimate the costs associated with the excess capacity; these
costs are not included in the valuation of inventories but are charged directly
to cost of sales. Net realizable value is the estimated selling price in the
ordinary course of business less applicable variable selling
expenses.
The
valuation of inventory requires us to estimate obsolete or excess inventory as
well as inventory that is not of saleable quality. Provisions for obsolescence
are estimated for excess uncommitted inventories based on the previous quarter
sales, order backlog and production plans. To the extent that future negative
market conditions generate order backlog cancellations and declining sales, or
if future conditions are less favorable than the projected revenue assumptions,
we could be required to record additional inventory provisions, which would have
a negative impact on our gross margin.
· Asset disposal. On March 30,
2008 we closed the deal for the creation of the Numonyx venture in partnership
with Intel and Francisco Partners. We contributed our flash memory business
(“FMG”) to the newly created entity on such date. FMG deconsolidation was
reported as a first quarter 2008 event. Thus, our consolidated
statements of income for the first half of 2008 contain only one quarter of FMG
activity. As a result of changes to the terms of the transaction from
those expected at December 31, 2007 and an updated market value of comparable
companies, we incurred in the first half of 2008 an additional impairment loss
of $189 million and $12 million of restructuring and other related closure
charges. The total loss recognized from the FMG business disposal amounted to
$1,295 million plus $18 million of other costs.
In April
2008 we adopted a plan to pursue the sale of our fab in Phoenix as a business
concern instead of continuing its progressive phase out. At that date, all of
the conditions for treating the assets to be sold as “Assets held for sale” in
our consolidated financial statements were satisfied. Upon movement of the
assets to be sold, which consisted primarily of fixed assets and inventory, to
“Assets held for sale,” the relevant amortization charges were stopped under
Statement of Financial Standards No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets (“FAS 144”). Furthermore, FAS 144 requires an
impairment analysis when assets are moved to “Assets held for sale” based on the
difference between the net book value and the fair value, less costs to sell, of
the group of assets (and liabilities) to be sold. As a result of this review, we
registered a loss of $114 million in the second quarter of 2008. Fair value less
costs to sell was based on the estimated net consideration to be received upon
the sale of the Phoenix fab.
· Restructuring charges. We
have undertaken, and we may continue to undertake, significant restructuring
initiatives, which have required us, or may require us in the future, to develop
formalized plans for exiting any of our existing activities. We recognize the
fair value of a liability for costs associated with exiting an activity when a
probable liability exists and it can be reasonably estimated. We record
estimated charges for non-voluntary termination benefit arrangements such as
severance and outplacement costs meeting the criteria for a liability as
described above. Given the significance of and the timing of the execution of
such activities, the process is complex and involves periodic reviews of
estimates made at the time the original decisions were taken. As we operate in a
highly cyclical industry, we monitor and evaluate business conditions on a
regular basis. If broader or newer initiatives, which could include production
curtailment or closure of other manufacturing facilities, were to be taken, we
may be required to incur additional charges as well as to change estimates of
amounts previously recorded. The potential impact of these changes could be
material and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations
or financial condition. In the first half of 2008, the net amount of
restructuring charges and other related closure costs amounted to $66 million
before taxes. See Note 7 to our Unaudited Interim Consolidated Financial
Statements.
· Share-based compensation. We
are required to expense our employees’ share-based compensation awards for
financial reporting purposes. We measure our share-based compensation cost based
on the fair value on the grant date of each award. This cost is recognized over
the period during which an employee is required to provide service in exchange
for the award or the requisite service period, usually the vesting period, and
is adjusted for actual forfeitures that occur before vesting. Our share-based
compensation plans may award shares contingent on the achievement of certain
financial objectives, including market performance and financial results. In
order to assess the fair value of this share-based compensation, we are required
to estimate certain items, including the probability of meeting the market
performance and financial results targets, the forfeitures and the service
period of our employees. As a result, in relation to our Unvested Stock Award
Plan, we recorded a total pre-tax expense of $49 million in the first half of
2008, out of which $1 million was related to the 2005 plan; $12 million to the
2006 plan; $34 million to the 2007 plan; and $2 million to the 2008
plan.
· Income taxes. We are required
to make estimates and judgments in determining income tax expense for financial
statement purposes. These estimates and judgments also occur in the calculation
of certain tax assets and liabilities and provisions. Furthermore, the adoption
of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Interpretation No. 48, Accounting
for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an Interpretation of FASB Statement No.
109 (“FIN 48”) requires an evaluation of the probability of any tax
uncertainties and the booking of the relevant charges.
We are
also required to assess the likelihood of recovery of our deferred tax assets.
If recovery is not likely, we are required to record a valuation allowance
against the deferred tax assets that we estimate will not ultimately be
recoverable, which would increase our provision for income taxes. As of June 28,
2008, we believed that all of the deferred tax assets, net of valuation
allowances, as recorded on our consolidated balance sheet, would ultimately be
recovered. However, should there be a change in our ability to recover our
deferred tax assets (in our estimates of the valuation allowance) or a change in
the tax rates applicable in the various jurisdictions, this could have an impact
on our future tax provision in the periods in which these changes could
occur.
· Patent and other intellectual
property litigation or claims. As is the case with many companies in the
semiconductor industry, we have from time to time received, and may in the
future receive, communications alleging possible infringement of patents and
other intellectual property rights of others. Furthermore, we may become
involved in costly litigation brought against us regarding patents, mask works,
copyrights, trademarks or trade secrets. In the event that the outcome of any
litigation would be unfavorable to us, we may be required to take a license to
the underlying intellectual property right upon economically unfavorable terms
and conditions, and possibly pay damages for prior use, and/or face an
injunction, all of which singly or in the aggregate could have a material
adverse effect on our results of operations and ability to compete. See “Item 3.
Key Information—Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Operations—We depend on
patents to protect our rights to our technology” included in the Form 20-F, as
may be updated from time to time in our public filing.
We record
a provision when we believe that it is probable that a liability has been
incurred and when the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. We
regularly evaluate losses and claims with the support of our outside counsel to
determine whether they need to be adjusted based on the current information
available to us. Legal costs associated with claims are expensed as incurred. In
the event of litigation that is adversely determined with respect to our
interests, or in the event that we need to change our evaluation of a potential
third-party claim based on new evidence or communications, this could have a
material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition at
the time it were to materialize. We are in discussion with several parties with
respect to claims against us relating to possible infringements of patents and
similar intellectual property rights of others.
As of
June 28, 2008, based on our assessment, we did not record any provisions in our
financial statements relating to legal proceedings, because we had not
identified any risk of probable loss that is likely to arise out of the
proceedings. There can be no assurance, however, that we will be successful in
resolving these proceedings. If we are unsuccessful, or if the outcome of any
litigation or claim were to be unfavorable to us, we may incur monetary damages,
or an injunction. Furthermore, our products as well as the products of our
customers which incorporate our products may be excluded from entry into U.S.
territory pursuant to an exclusion order.
· Pension and Post Retirement
Benefits. Our results of operations and our consolidated balance sheet
include the impact of pension and post retirement benefits that are measured
using actuarial valuations. At June 28, 2008, our pension obligations amounted
to $304 million based on the assumption that our employees will work with us
until they reach the age of retirement. These valuations are based on key
assumptions, including discount rates, expected long-term rates of return on
funds and salary increase rates. These assumptions are updated on an annual
basis at the beginning of each fiscal year or more frequently upon the
occurrence of significant events. Any changes in the pension schemes or in the
above assumptions can have an impact on our valuations.
· Other claims. We are subject
to the possibility of loss contingencies arising in the ordinary course of
business. These include, but are not limited to: warranty costs on our products
not covered by insurance, breach of contract claims, tax claims and provisions
for specifically identified income tax exposures as well as claims for
environmental damages. In determining loss contingencies, we consider the
likelihood of a loss of an asset or the incurrence of a liability, as well as
our ability to reasonably estimate the amount of such loss or liability. An
estimated loss is recorded when we believe that it is probable that a liability
has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. We
regularly reevaluate any losses and claims and determine whether our provisions
need to be adjusted based on the current information available to us. In the
event we are unable to estimate in a correct and timely manner the amount of
such loss, this could have a material adverse effect on our results of
operations or financial condition at the time such loss were to
materialize.
Fiscal
Year
Under
Article 35 of our Articles of Association, our financial year extends from
January 1 to December 31, which is the period end of each fiscal year. The first
quarter of 2008 ended on March 30, 2008. The second quarter of 2008
ended on
June 28, 2008 and the third quarter of 2008 will end on September 27, 2008.
The fourth quarter of 2008 will end on December 31, 2008. Based on our
fiscal calendar, the distribution of our revenues and expenses by quarter may be
unbalanced due to a different number of days in the various quarters of the
fiscal year.
Business
Overview
The total
available market is defined as the “TAM,” while the serviceable available
market, the “SAM,” is defined as the market for products produced by us (which
consists of the TAM and excludes PC motherboard major devices such as
microprocessors (“MPU”), dynamic random access memories (“DRAM”), and
optoelectronics devices). In light of the closing of the Numonyx
transaction, SAM will also now exclude Flash Memory products.
Despite
the difficult conditions in the global economy, in the first half of 2008 the
semiconductor industry registered a good performance compared to the equivalent
period in 2007. Based on most recently published estimates, semiconductor
industry revenues in the first half of 2008 increased year-over-year by 5.4% for
the TAM and 10.2% for the SAM to reach approximately $128 billion and $78
billion, respectively, on a year-to-date basis.
After the
deconsolidation of our FMG segment, which was completed on March 30, 2008, our
operating results are no longer directly comparable to previous periods.
Accordingly, in order to provide a more accurate comparison to prior periods, we
have excluded the Flash segment.
Excluding
the Flash segment, our growth in revenues was 13.2%, which was above the TAM and
the comparable SAM. Such performance reflected double digit growth in all main
market applications except for Automotive which had more moderate
growth.
On a
year-over-year basis, our second quarter 2008 net revenues excluding Flash
increased by 14.6%, driven by all market applications and again outperforming
the SAM which increased by 11.5%.
On a
sequential basis, our revenues increased 9.7% excluding Flash, driven by good
performance in our Telecom, Industrial & Others and Consumer sectors.
Sequentially, we registered an increase significantly higher than the TAM and
the SAM which had an estimated growth rate of 3.0% and 3.9%,
respectively.
In the
first half of 2008, our effective exchange rate was $1.51 for €1.00, which
reflects current exchange rate levels and the impact of certain hedging
contracts, compared to an effective exchange rate of $1.31 for €1.00 in the
first half of 2007. In the second quarter of 2008 our effective exchange rate
was $1.55, while in the first quarter of 2008 and in the second quarter of 2007
our effective exchange rate was $1.47 and $1.33, respectively, for €1.00. For a
more detailed discussion of our hedging arrangements and the impact of
fluctuations in exchange rates, see “Impact of Changes in Exchange Rates”
below.
Our gross
margin for the first half of 2008 increased to 36.5%, compared to 34.6% in the
first half of 2007 despite the negative impact of the weakening U.S. dollar and
declining selling prices, primarily due to our good performance in sales and our
enhanced manufacturing efficiencies. Excluding Flash, our gross margin would
have been 37.2% in the first half of 2008 and 37.4% in the first half of
2007.
On a
year-over-year basis, our second quarter gross margin experienced a similar
trend, increasing from 34.7% to 36.8%. Excluding Flash, our second quarter of
2007 gross margin would have been 37.8%.
On a
sequential basis, our gross margin increased from 36.3% in the first quarter of
2008 to 36.8%, despite declining sales prices, as a result of the combined
effect of our good performance in sales and our improved manufacturing
efficiencies. Our second quarter of 2008 performance was in line with the
guidance that indicated a gross margin of approximately 37% plus or minus 1
percentage point.
Our
operating expenses, comprising selling, general and administrative expenses and
research and development, increased in the first half of 2008 compared to
previous periods due to several specific factors: the significantly unfavorable
U.S. dollar impact; additional charges following the acquisition of Genesis and
a 3G wireless design team, as well as some one time charges such as higher
share-based compensation costs for our employees and members and professionals
of the Supervisory Board; and charges in the amount of $21 million that were
booked as
a
write-off of In-Process R&D related to Genesis purchase accounting. R&D
expenses in the first half of 2008 were net of $73 million of tax credits
associated with our on-going programs following the amendment of a law in one of
our jurisdictions.
In the
first half of 2008, in connection with the FMG deal closure and some changes in
certain terms of the transaction, we registered an additional impairment loss of
$189 million and other related closure costs of $12 million. Furthermore, upon
the receipt of certain offers from third parties we are planning to sell our fab
in Phoenix, which we had previously scheduled to close; consequently, we
registered an impairment loss of $114 million which is the difference between
the book value of the assets we plan to sell and their estimated fair
value. This loss is mostly in anticipation of non cash impairment of
cash restructuring charges to be incurred in the following quarters under the
phase-out plan.
Our other
income and expenses improved significantly in the first half of 2008, supported
by an increase in R&D funding, a favorable result in our currency exchange
transactions and lower start-up costs. In the first half of 2008 we
registered income of $39 million compared to a loss of $3 million in the
equivalent period in 2007.
Our
operating result in the first half of 2008 was negative largely due to
additional impairment charges; however, it improved compared to the first half
of 2007, which included an $857 million impairment loss mainly related to the
FMG deconsolidation.
Due to
variations in our impairment and other restructuring charges, and the
deconsolidation of the FMG segment, we believe that our operating results are no
longer directly comparable to previous periods. Accordingly, in order
to provide a more accurate comparison to prior periods, we believe the Flash
segment, and impairment and restructuring charges, should be
excluded. If you were to exclude impairment and other restructuring charges, as
well as the FMG segment, our operating results were $239 million in the first
half of 2008, slightly decreasing compared to the $250 million registered in the
same prior year period. This weaker operating performance was primarily due to
the negative impact of the U.S. dollar exchange rate (for an estimated amount of
$243 million) and declining selling prices, both of which were largely offset by
the improved performance registered in our sales and manufacturing activities,
as well as our improved product mix.
The
valuation of the fair-value of our Auction Rate Securities – purchased in our
account by Credit Suisse Securities LLC contrary to our instruction – required
recording an additional other-than-temporary impairment charge of $69 million in
the first half of 2008, of which $39 million were recorded in the second quarter
of 2008.
Interest
income was generated by the high level of cash, cash equivalents and marketable
securities held by us and also benefited from $4 million received on the
long-term subordinated notes from Numonyx.
In
summary, our profitability during the first half of 2008 was negatively impacted
by the following factors:
· Negative
pricing trends;
· The
weakening of the U.S. dollar exchange rate;
· The
additional impairment loss booked in relation to the deconsolidation of the FMG
business;
· The
higher level of operating expenses;
· The
impairment loss recorded in relation to our plan to sell our fab in Phoenix;
and
· The
other-than-temporary loss on Auction Rate Securities investments.
The
factors above were partially offset by the following favorable
elements:
· Sales
performance compared to the first half of 2007, which benefited from an improved
product mix; and
· Continuous
improvement in our manufacturing performances, including the suspension of
depreciation on our FMG assets.
Our
revenue performance in the second quarter clearly demonstrates significant
improvements in our product portfolio, leading to gains in market share for
us. Moreover, we believe that we will continue to experience these gains as we
move through the remainder of 2008.
In
addition to strong revenue results, our gross margin and operating expenses were
essentially in-line with our initial expectations. This led to a sequential
improvement in our operating performance and in diluted earnings-per-share when
excluding impairment and restructuring charges and other than temporary
impairment charges.
Due to
the continued and substantial decline of the U.S. dollar, our profitability
improvements continued to be significantly offset by negative currency
fluctuations. We estimate that on a year-over-year basis, our operating profit
was adversely affected by approximately $134 million.
Business
Outlook
Despite
the current macroeconomic situation, we expect our sequential net revenue
evolution to be in the range of (1)% to 6%, which represents year-over-year
growth of between 7% and 14%. Our third quarter 2008 gross margin is expected to
be the same as our second quarter result of 36.8%, plus or minus one percentage
point. Such an outlook is based on an assumed currency exchange rate
of approximately $1.57 to €1.00 for the third
quarter of 2008, which reflects current exchange rate levels and our existing
hedging contracts. Additionally, this outlook is provided for our company as
currently configured and does not take into account the potential impact of our
wireless joint venture with NXP, which closed on July 28, 2008 and will start
operations on August 2, 2008. Our third quarter 2008 result will also include
our pro rata portion of Numonyx’s second quarter 2008 financial performance in
the income statement line “earnings (loss) on equity investments,” reflecting an
anticipated one quarter delay in reporting.
These
are forward-looking statements that are subject to known and unknown risks and
uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially; in
particular, refer to those known risks and uncertainties described in
“Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” herein and “Item 3. Key
Information—Risk Factors” in our Form 20-F as may be updated from time to time
in our SEC filings.
Other
Developments in the First Half of 2008
On
January 15, 2008, we announced that the following individuals had been appointed
as new executive officers, all reporting to President and Chief Executive
Officer Carlo Bozotti: Orio Bellezza, as Executive Vice President and General
Manager, Front-End Manufacturing; Jean-Marc Chery, as Executive Vice President
and Chief Technology Officer; Executive Vice President Andrea Cuomo, as
Executive Vice President and General Manager of our Europe Region, who will also
maintain his responsibility for the Advanced System Technology organization;
Loïc Lietar, as Corporate Vice President, Corporate Business Development; and
Pierre Ollivier, as Corporate Vice President and General Counsel. In addition,
we announced the hiring and appointment of Alisia Grenville as Corporate Vice
President, Chief Compliance Officer, and the retirement of both Laurent Bosson,
as Executive Vice President for Front-End Technology and Manufacturing, and
Enrico Villa, as Executive Vice President and General Manager of our Europe
Region.
On
January 17, 2008, we acquired effective control of Genesis under the terms of a
tender offer announced on December 11, 2007. On January 25, 2008, we acquired
the remaining common shares of Genesis that had not been acquired through the
original tender by offering the right to receive the same $8.65 per share price
paid in the original tender offer. Payment of approximately $340 million for the
acquired shares was made through a wholly-owned subsidiary that was merged with
and into Genesis promptly thereafter. Additional direct costs associated with
the acquisition are estimated to be approximately $8 million and have been
accrued as at June 28, 2008. On closing, Genesis became part of our Home
Entertainment & Displays business activity which is part of the Application
Specific Product Groups segment. The purchase price allocation resulted in the
recognition of: $11 million in marketable securities; $14 million in property,
plant and equipment; $44 million on deferred tax assets and
intangible
assets including $44 million of core technologies; $27 million related to
customer relationships, $2 million in trademarks, $17 million of goodwill and $2
million of liabilities net of other current assets. We also recorded in the
first quarter of 2008 $21 million of In-Process research and development that we
immediately wrote-off. Such In-Process research and development charge was
recorded on the line “Research and development expenses” in our consolidated
statements of income for the first quarter of 2008.
On March
30, 2008, we, together with Intel and Francisco Partners announced the closing
of our previously announced Numonyx joint venture transaction. At the closing,
we contributed our flash memory assets and businesses in NOR and NAND, including
our Phase Change Memory (“PCM”) resources and NAND joint venture interest, to
Numonyx in exchange for a 48.6% equity ownership stake in common stock and
$155.6 million in long-term subordinated notes. These long-term notes yield
interest at appropriate market rates at inception. Intel contributed its NOR
assets and certain assets related to PCM resources, while Francisco Partners
L.P., a private equity firm, invested $150 million in cash. Intel and Francisco
Partners’ equity ownership interests in Numonyx are 45.1% in common shares and
6.3% in convertible preferred stock, respectively. The convertible stock of
Francisco Partners includes preferential payout rights. In addition, Intel and
Francisco Partners received long-term subordinated notes of $144.4 million and
$20.2 million, respectively. In liquidation events in which proceeds are
insufficient to pay off the term loan, revolving credit facility and
the Francisco Partners’ preferential payout rights, the subordinated notes will
be deemed to have been retired. Also at the closing, Numonyx entered into
financing arrangements for a $450 million term loan and a $100 million committed
revolving credit facility from Intesa Sanpaolo S.p.A. and Unicredit Banca
d’Impresa S.p.A. The loans have a four-year term and we and Intel have each
granted in favor of Numonyx a 50% guarantee not joint and several, for
indebtedness. At close, Numonyx had a cash position of about $585 million. The
closing of the transaction also includes certain supply agreements and
transition service agreements for administrative functions between Numonyx and
us. The transition service agreements have terms up to one year with fixed
monthly or usage based payments.
On April
10, 2008, we announced our agreement with NXP, an independent semiconductor
company founded by Philips, to combine our respective key wireless operations to
form a joint venture company with strong relationships with all major handset
manufacturers. The new company will have the scale to better meet customer needs
in 2G, 2.5G, 3G, multimedia, connectivity and all future wireless technologies.
The combined venture will be created from successful businesses that together
generated approximately $3 billion in revenue in 2007 and will own thousands of
important communication and multimedia patents. We will take an 80% stake in the
joint venture. NXP will receive $1.55 billion from us, including a control
premium, to be funded from outstanding cash. The new organization will be
fabless and is designed to be in a very healthy financial position, without
debt, and able to grow its business with all of the leading cellular handset
manufacturers. We have also agreed on a future exit mechanism for NXP’s ongoing
20% stake, which involves put and call options, exercisable beginning three
years from the formation of the joint venture or earlier under certain
conditions, at a strike price based on actual future financial results, with a
15% spread. The new company will be incorporated and headquartered in
Switzerland with approximately 7,500 employees worldwide. The joint venture will
operate its own competitive assembly and test facilities in Calamba, Philippines
and Muar, Malaysia. NXP’s Calamba site as a whole will be transferred to the
joint venture. In addition, part of our back-end operations in Muar will be
separated from our existing facility in the area and transferred to the joint
venture. The transaction closed on July 28, 2008 and the joint venture company,
which is named ST-NXP Wireless, will start operations on August 2, 2008. At
closing, we received an 80% stake in the joint venture and paid NXP $1,550
million, including a control premium, that was funded from outstanding cash. NXP
will continue to own a 20% interest in the venture; however, we and NXP have
agreed on a future exit mechanism for NXP’s interest, which involves put and
call options based on the financial results of the business that are exercisable
starting three years from the formation of the joint venture, or earlier under
certain conditions. We will consolidate the joint venture; however, the purchase
price has not yet been allocated.
At our
annual general meeting of shareholders held on May 14, 2008, our shareholders
approved the following proposals of our Managing Board upon the recommendation
of our Supervisory Board:
|
·
|
The
reappointment for a three-year term, expiring at the 2011 Annual General
Meeting, of Carlo Bozotti as the sole member of the Managing Board and the
Company’s President and Chief Executive
Officer;
|
|
·
|
The
reappointment for a three-year term, expiring at the 2011 Annual General
Meeting, for the following members of the Supervisory Board: Mr. Gérald
Arbola, Mr. Tom de Waard, Mr. Didier Lombard and Mr. Bruno
Steve;
|
|
·
|
The
appointment for a three-year term, expiring at the 2011 Annual General
Meeting, as a member of the Supervisory Board of Mr. Antonino
Turicchi;
|
|
·
|
The
distribution of a cash dividend of $0.36 per share, to be paid
in four equal quarterly installments to shareholders of record
in the month of each quarterly payment (our shares traded ex-dividend on
May 19, 2008, and will trade ex-dividend on August 18, 2008, November 24,
2008 and February 23, 2009; and
|
|
·
|
Authorization
to repurchase up to 30 million shares of common stock under certain
limitations and in accordance with applicable
law.
|
On June
9, 2008, we and WD renewed our cooperation in the hard disk drive field by
extending an already existing license agreement. In addition, WD
hired one of our HDD controller design teams comprised of 41
people.
Results
of Operations
Segment
Information
We
operate in two business areas: Semiconductors and Subsystems.
In the
semiconductors business area, we design, develop, manufacture and market a broad
range of products, including discrete and standard commodity components,
application-specific integrated circuits (“ASICs”), full-custom devices and
semi-custom devices and application-specific standard products (“ASSPs”) for
analog, digital and mixed-signal applications. In addition, we further
participate in the manufacturing value chain of Smart card products through our
divisions, which include the production and sale of both silicon chips and Smart
cards.
Since
January 1, 2007, we report our semiconductor sales and operating income in the
following three product segments:
|
·
|
Application
Specific Groups (“ASG”), comprised of four product lines: Home
Entertainment & Displays Group (“HED”), Mobile, Multimedia &
Communications Group (“MMC”), Automotive Products (“APG”) and Computer
Peripherals (“CPG”);
|
|
·
|
Industrial
and Multisegment Sector (“IMS”), comprised of the former Micro, Power,
Analog (“MPA”) segment, non-Flash memory and Smart Card products and
Micro-Electro-Mechanical Systems (“MEMS”);
and
|
|
·
|
Flash
Memories Group (“FMG”). As of March 31, 2008, following the creation with
Intel of Numonyx, a new independent semiconductor company from the key
assets of our and Intel’s Flash memory business (“FMG deconsolidation”),
we ceased reporting under the FMG
segment.
|
Our
principal investment and resource allocation decisions in the semiconductor
business area are for expenditures on research and development and capital
investments in front-end and back-end manufacturing facilities. These decisions
are not made by product segments, but on the basis of the semiconductor business
area. All these product segments share common research and development for
process technology and manufacturing capacity for most of their
products.
In the
subsystems business area, we design, develop, manufacture and market subsystems
and modules for the telecommunications, automotive and industrial markets
including mobile phone accessories, battery chargers, ISDN power supplies and
in-vehicle equipment for electronic toll payment. Based on its immateriality to
our business as a whole, the Subsystems segment does not meet the requirements
for a reportable segment as defined in Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 131, Disclosures
about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information (“FAS
131”).
The
following tables present our consolidated net revenues and consolidated
operating income by semiconductor product group segment. For the computation of
the segments’ internal financial measurements, we use certain
internal
rules of allocation for the costs not directly chargeable to the segments,
including cost of sales, selling, general and administrative expenses and a
significant part of research and development expenses. Additionally, in
compliance with our internal policies, certain cost items are not charged to the
segments, including impairment, restructuring charges and other related closure
costs, start-up costs of new manufacturing facilities, some strategic and
special research and development programs or other corporate-sponsored
initiatives, including certain corporate level operating expenses, acquired
In-Process R&D and certain other miscellaneous charges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Net
revenues by product segments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Specific Groups (ASG)
|
|
$ |
1,511 |
|
|
$ |
1,303 |
|
|
$ |
2,904 |
|
|
$ |
2,524 |
|
Industrial
and Multisegment Sector (IMS)
|
|
|
865 |
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
1,637 |
|
|
|
1,488 |
|
Others(1)
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Net
revenues excluding Flash Memories Group (FMG)
|
|
|
2,391 |
|
|
|
2,087 |
|
|
|
4,570 |
|
|
|
4,039 |
|
Flash
Memories Group (FMG)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
654 |
|
Total
consolidated net revenues
|
|
$ |
2,391 |
|
|
$ |
2,418 |
|
|
$ |
4,869 |
|
|
$ |
4,693 |
|
(1) Includes
revenues from the sale of subsystems and other products not allocated to product
segments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Operating
income (loss) by product segments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Specific Groups (ASG)
|
|
$ |
35 |
|
|
$ |
53 |
|
|
$ |
42 |
|
|
$ |
52 |
|
Industrial
and Multisegment Sector (IMS)
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
210 |
|
Operating
income of product segments excluding FMG
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
264 |
|
|
|
262 |
|
Others(1)
|
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
|
(903 |
) |
|
|
(394 |
) |
|
|
(930 |
) |
Operating
loss excluding FMG
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(747 |
) |
|
|
(130 |
) |
|
|
(668 |
) |
Flash
Memories Group (FMG)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
Total
consolidated operating loss
|
|
$ |
(26 |
) |
|
$ |
(772 |
) |
|
$ |
(114 |
) |
|
$ |
(710 |
) |
(1) Operating
income (loss) of “Others” includes items such as impairment, restructuring
charges and other related closure costs, start-up costs, and other unallocated
expenses such as: strategic or special research and development programs,
acquired In-Process R&D, certain corporate level operating expenses, certain
patent claims and litigation, and other costs that are not allocated to the
product segments, as well as operating earnings or losses of the Subsystems and
Other Products Group, including, beginning in the second quarter of 2008, the
remaining FMG costs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
as percentage of net revenues)
|
|
Operating
income (loss) by product segments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Specific Groups (ASG)
(1)
|
|
|
2.3 |
% |
|
|
4.1 |
% |
|
|
1.4 |
% |
|
|
2.1 |
% |
Industrial
and Multisegment Sector (IMS)
(1)
|
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
|
13.4 |
|
|
|
13.6 |
|
|
|
14.1 |
|
Others(2)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Flash
Memories Group (FMG)
(1)
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(7.6 |
) |
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
|
(6.4 |
) |
Total consolidated operating
loss(3)
|
|
|
(1.1 |
)% |
|
|
(31.9 |
)% |
|
|
(2.3 |
)% |
|
|
(15.1 |
)% |
(1) As
a percentage of net revenues per product group.
(2) As
a percentage of total net revenues. Includes operating income (loss) from sales
of subsystems and other income (costs) not allocated to product
segments.
(3) As
a percentage of total net revenues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Reconciliation
to consolidated operating loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
income of product segments excluding FMG
|
|
$ |
167 |
|
|
$ |
156 |
|
|
$ |
264 |
|
|
$ |
262 |
|
Operating
income (loss) of FMG
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
Strategic
and other research and development programs
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Acquired
In-Process R&D
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Start-up
costs
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
(185 |
) |
|
|
(906 |
) |
|
|
(369 |
) |
|
|
(918 |
) |
Other
non-allocated provisions(1)
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Total
operating loss Others(2)
|
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
|
(903 |
) |
|
|
(394 |
) |
|
|
(930 |
) |
Total
consolidated operating loss
|
|
$ |
(26 |
) |
|
$ |
(772 |
) |
|
$ |
(114 |
) |
|
$ |
(710 |
) |
(1) Includes
unallocated income and expenses such as certain corporate level operating
expenses and other costs that are not allocated to the product
segments.
(2) Operating
income (loss) of “Others” includes items such as impairment, restructuring
charges and other related closure costs, start-up costs, and other unallocated
expenses such as: strategic or special research and development programs,
acquired In-Process R&D, certain corporate level operating expenses, certain
patent claims and litigation, and other costs that are not allocated to the
product segments, as well as operating earnings or losses of the Subsystems and
Other Products Group, including, beginning in the second quarter of 2008, the
remaining FMG costs.
Net
revenues by location of order shipment and by market segment
The table
below sets forth information on our net revenues by location of order shipment,
excluding the FMG segment, which is reported on a separate line for
reconciliation purposes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Net
Revenues by Location of Order Shipment:(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
$ |
696 |
|
|
$ |
692 |
|
|
$ |
1,335 |
|
|
$ |
1,349 |
|
North
America(2)
|
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
523 |
|
Asia
Pacific
|
|
|
496 |
|
|
|
349 |
|
|
|
959 |
|
|
|
703 |
|
Greater
China
|
|
|
617 |
|
|
|
575 |
|
|
|
1,173 |
|
|
|
1,064 |
|
Japan
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
Emerging
Markets(1)(2)
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
304 |
|
|
|
237 |
|
FMG
segment
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
654 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
2,391 |
|
|
$ |
2,418 |
|
|
$ |
4,869 |
|
|
$ |
4,693 |
|
(1) Net
revenues by location of order shipment are classified by location of customer
invoiced. For example, products ordered by U.S.-based companies to be invoiced
to Asia Pacific affiliates are classified as Asia Pacific revenues. Furthermore,
the comparison among the different periods may be affected by shifts in order
shipment from one location to another, as requested by our
customers.
(2) Emerging
Markets include markets such as India, Latin America, the Middle East and
Africa, Europe (non-EU and non-EFTA) and Russia.
The table
below shows our net revenues by location of order shipment and market segment
application in percentage of net revenues (for comparison purposes, we restated
June 2007 data by excluding the FMG segment, as well as data for the first half
of 2008, which also exclude FMG):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
as percentage of net revenues)
|
|
Net
Revenues by Location of Order Shipment:(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
29.1 |
% |
|
|
33.1 |
% |
|
|
29.2 |
% |
|
|
33.4 |
% |
North
America
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
12.7 |
|
|
|
12.8 |
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
Asia
Pacific
|
|
|
20.8 |
|
|
|
16.7 |
|
|
|
21.0 |
|
|
|
17.4 |
|
Greater
China
|
|
|
25.8 |
|
|
|
27.7 |
|
|
|
25.7 |
|
|
|
26.3 |
|
Japan
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
Emerging
Markets(2)(3)
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
Total
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Net
Revenues by Market Segment Application:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Automotive
|
|
|
16.6 |
% |
|
|
17.8 |
% |
|
|
17.0 |
% |
|
|
18.0 |
% |
Consumer
|
|
|
17.3 |
|
|
|
17.7 |
|
|
|
17.1 |
|
|
|
17.4 |
|
Computer
|
|
|
15.8 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
|
|
|
16.5 |
|
|
|
17.0 |
|
Telecom
|
|
|
32.5 |
|
|
|
31.3 |
|
|
|
31.9 |
|
|
|
30.8 |
|
Industrial
and Other
|
|
|
17.8 |
|
|
|
17.0 |
|
|
|
17.5 |
|
|
|
16.8 |
|
Total
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
(1) Net
revenues by location of order shipment are classified by location of customer
invoiced. For example, products ordered by U.S.-based companies to be invoiced
to Asia Pacific affiliates are classified as Asia Pacific revenues. Furthermore,
the comparison among the different periods may be affected by shifts in order
shipment from one location to another, as requested by our
customers.
(2) Emerging
Markets include markets such as India, Latin America, the Middle East and
Africa, Europe (non-EU and non-EFTA) and Russia.
(3) The
above table estimates, within a variance of 5% to 10% in the absolute dollar
amount, the relative weighting of each of our target segments.
The
following table sets forth certain financial data from our Consolidated
Statements of Income, expressed in each case as a percentage of net
revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
as percentage of net revenues)
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
|
99.5 |
% |
|
|
99.6 |
% |
|
|
99.4 |
% |
|
|
99.7 |
% |
Other
revenues
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
Net
revenues
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
(63.2 |
) |
|
|
(65.3 |
) |
|
|
(63.5 |
) |
|
|
(65.4 |
) |
Gross
profit
|
|
|
36.8 |
|
|
|
34.7 |
|
|
|
36.5 |
|
|
|
34.6 |
|
Selling,
general and administrative
|
|
|
(11.8 |
) |
|
|
(11.2 |
) |
|
|
(12.0 |
) |
|
|
(11.3 |
) |
Research
and development
|
|
|
(19.6 |
) |
|
|
(18.4 |
) |
|
|
(20.1 |
) |
|
|
(18.8 |
) |
Other
income and expenses, net
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
(7.8 |
) |
|
|
(37.5 |
) |
|
|
(7.6 |
) |
|
|
(19.5 |
) |
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
(31.9 |
) |
|
|
(2.3 |
) |
|
|
(15.1 |
) |
Other-than-temporary
impairment charge on financial assets
|
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(1.4 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
Interest
income, net
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
Earnings
(loss) on equity investments
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
0.2 |
|
Loss
before income taxes and minority interests
|
|
|
(2.1 |
) |
|
|
(31.1 |
) |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
(14.2 |
) |
Income
tax (expense) benefit
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
Loss
before minority interests
|
|
|
(1.9 |
) |
|
|
(31.2 |
) |
|
|
(2.6 |
) |
|
|
(14.6 |
) |
Minority
interests
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
Net
Loss
|
|
|
(2.0 |
)% |
|
|
(31.4 |
)% |
|
|
(2.7 |
)% |
|
|
(14.6 |
)% |
Second
Quarter of 2008 vs. Second Quarter of 2007 and First Quarter of
2008
Net
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
$ |
2,379 |
|
|
$ |
2,461 |
|
|
$ |
2,409 |
|
|
|
(3.3 |
)% |
|
|
(1.2 |
)% |
Other
revenues
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Net
revenues
|
|
$ |
2,391 |
|
|
$ |
2,478 |
|
|
$ |
2,418 |
|
|
|
(3.5 |
)% |
|
|
(1.1 |
)% |
Net
revenues, excluding FMG
|
|
$ |
2,391 |
|
|
$ |
2,179 |
|
|
$ |
2,087 |
|
|
|
9.7 |
% |
|
|
14.6 |
% |
Year-over-year
comparison
Our
second quarter 2008 net revenues decreased due to the deconsolidation of the FMG
segment. On a comparable basis, excluding FMG, our revenues increased by 14.6%
which is a result of an increase of approximately 10% in units sold and 4.6% in
selling prices. Average selling prices increased thanks to a more favorable
product mix, which exceeded the pure price decline. Additionally, net sales
benefited by $30 million from the integration of Genesis’ accounts.
Both of
our product segments, ASG and IMS, registered double-digit revenue growth. ASG
registered growth of 15.9%, mainly in Wireless products (Imaging, Connectivity
and Digital Baseband), Automotive and Digital Consumer. IMS’ revenue growth was
12.8%, mainly associated with MEMS and SmartCard products.
All
market segment applications contributed to the positive year-over-year
variation, with Industrial & Others and Telecom achieving a growth rate of
approximately 20%.
By
location of order shipment, excluding FMG, all regions experienced double digit
growth except Greater China and Europe, which experienced more moderate growth.
The growth of Asia Pacific by approximately 42%, Emerging Markets by 33.3% and
Japan by 32.6%, were the main contributors. We had several large customers, with
the largest one, the Nokia group of companies, accounting for approximately 18%
of our second quarter 2008 net revenues, which was lower than the approximate
20% it accounted for during the second quarter of 2007.
Sequential
comparison
Our
second quarter 2008 revenues decreased sequentially due to the deconsolidation
of the FMG segment. Excluding FMG, our net revenues increased by 9.7% as a
result of an approximate 7.5% increase in units sold while average selling
prices increased 2.2%, thanks to our improved product mix, which was higher than
the pure pricing decline. Both product group segments registered a strong
performance in net revenues as a result of higher sales volume and an improved
product mix. ASG increased by 8.4%, mainly in Telecom and Automotive, while the
growth rate of IMS was 11.9%, driven primarily by MEMS, but with almost all of
its product families registering a solid performance.
Excluding
FMG, all market segment applications registered a sequential increase,
particularly in Telecom, Industrial & Others and Consumer.
By
location of order shipment, excluding FMG, revenues increased in all regions,
with the main contributors being Emerging Markets, Japan, America and Greater
China, which increased by 12.4%, 12.0%, 10.8% and 10.7%, respectively. In
comparison, Europe and Greater China were more moderate, with an increase of
9.0% and 7.4%, respectively. In the second quarter of 2008, we had several large
customers, with the largest one, the Nokia group of companies, accounting for
approximately 18% of our net revenues, decreasing from the 20% it accounted for
during the first quarter of 2008.
Gross
profit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
$ |
(1,511 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,579 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,580 |
) |
|
|
4.3 |
% |
|
|
4.4 |
% |
Gross
profit
|
|
$ |
880 |
|
|
$ |
899 |
|
|
$ |
838 |
|
|
|
(2.1 |
)% |
|
|
5.0 |
% |
Gross
margin (as a percentage of net revenues)
|
|
|
36.8 |
% |
|
|
36.3 |
% |
|
|
34.7 |
% |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
On a
year-over-year basis, our gross profit increase was mainly driven by our higher
sales volume, our improved manufacturing efficiencies and our mix of products,
which exceeded the negative impact of the decline in selling prices and the
weakening U.S. dollar. As a result, our gross margin improved 210 basis points.
Excluding Flash our gross margin was 37.8% in the second quarter of
2007.
On a
sequential basis, our gross margin increased by 50 basis points, primarily
benefiting from our higher sales volume, the deconsolidation of the FMG business
and our improved product mix.
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
$ |
(281 |
) |
|
$ |
(304 |
) |
|
$ |
(270 |
) |
|
|
7.7 |
% |
|
|
(4.0 |
)% |
As
percentage of net revenue
|
|
|
(11.8 |
)% |
|
|
(12.3 |
)% |
|
|
(11.2 |
)% |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
The
amount of our selling, general and administrative (“SG&A”) expenses
increased on a year-over-year basis, mainly due to the negative impact of the
U.S. dollar rate and the integration of Genesis. Our share-based compensation
charges were $8 million, slightly lower than the $9 million booked in the second
quarter of 2007.
They were
also partially offset by the deconsolidation of our FMG segment. As a percentage
of revenues, SG&A expenses increased to 11.8%.
Sequentially,
our SG&A expenses decreased primarily due to lower charges related to
share-based compensation, which amounted to $16 million in the first quarter of
2008, and the deconsolidation of the FMG segment. As a percentage of revenues,
we registered an improvement from (12.3)% to (11.8)%.
Research
and development expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development expenses
|
|
$ |
(470 |
) |
|
$ |
(509 |
) |
|
$ |
(446 |
) |
|
|
7.6 |
% |
|
|
(5.5 |
)% |
As
percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
(19.6 |
)% |
|
|
(20.5 |
)% |
|
|
(18.4 |
)% |
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
On a
year-over-year basis, our research and development expenses increased in line
with the expansion of our activities, including the integration of the Genesis
accounts and the acquisition of a 3G design team. They also increased
due to the negative impact of the U.S. dollar exchange rate. The second quarter
of 2008 amount included $5 million of share-based compensation charges compared
to $3 million in the second quarter of 2007. The second quarter of 2008 also
benefited from $37 million recognized as research tax credits following the
amendment of a law in France. The research tax credits were also available in
previous periods, but under different terms and conditions. As such,
in the past they were not shown as a reduction in research and development
expenses but rather included in the calculation of the effective income tax rate
of the period.
On a
sequential basis, research and development expenses decreased compared to the
first quarter of 2008, during which we had a $21 million write-off of In-Process
R&D recognized in the Genesis acquisition and higher share-based
compensation charges in the amount of $10 million. As a percentage of revenues,
there was a significant sequential improvement in our research and development
expenses from (20.5)% to (19.6)%.
Other
income and expenses, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Research
and development funding
|
|
$ |
24 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
Start-up
costs
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Exchange
gain (loss) net
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Patent
litigation costs
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Patent
pre-litigation costs
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Gain
on sale of non-current assets
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Other,
net
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
10 |
|
Other
income and expenses, net
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
As a
percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
|
0.4 |
% |
|
|
0.5 |
% |
Other
income and expenses, net, mainly included, as income, items such as research and
development funding and exchange gain and, as expenses, start-up costs and
patent claim costs. Research and development funding income was associated with
our research and development projects, which qualifies upon project approval as
funding on the basis of contracts with local government agencies in locations
where we pursue our activities. The balance of these factors resulted in net
income of $30 million, originated by $24 million in research and development
funding, which experienced a strong year-over-year increase, and a decrease in
the amount of start-up expenses from the rationalized manufacturing
activities.
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs
|
|
$ |
(185 |
) |
|
$ |
(183 |
) |
|
$ |
(906 |
) |
As a
percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
(7.8 |
)% |
|
|
(7.4 |
)% |
|
|
(37.5 |
)% |
In the
second quarter of 2008, we recorded impairment, restructuring charges and other
related closure costs of $185 million related to:
|
·
|
The
decision to sell our fab in Phoenix, which gave rise to an
impairment loss of $114 million calculated on the assets to be sold and
classified as “Assets held for
sale”;
|
|
·
|
FMG
assets disposal which required the recognition of $25 million as an
additional loss and $10 million as restructuring and other related
disposal costs; this additional loss was the result of additional charges
for the contributed assets;
|
|
·
|
One-time
termination benefits to be paid at the closure of our Carrollton, Texas
and Phoenix, Arizona sites, as well as other charges, which were
approximately $27 million; and
|
|
·
|
Other
previously and newly committed restructuring plans, for which we incurred
$9 million restructuring and other related closure costs consisting
primarily of voluntary termination benefits and early retirement
arrangements in some of our European
locations.
|
In the
second quarter of 2007, we recorded $906 million in impairment, restructuring
charges and other related closure costs, of which $857 million were for
impairment losses related to the FMG sale, $40 million for our 2007
restructuring plan and $9 million for previously announced restructuring
plans.
In the
first quarter of 2008, we recorded $183 million in impairment, restructuring
charges and other related closure costs, mainly comprised of: a $164 million
additional loss related to the disposal of our FMG assets, which had primarily
resulted from revised terms of the transaction, an updated calculation of our
expected equity value at closing and $2 million of other related disposal costs;
$14 million related to our 2007 restructuring plan; and $3 million related to
previously announced restructuring plans.
See Note
7 to our Unaudited Interim Consolidated Financial Statements.
Operating
loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Operating
loss
|
|
$ |
(26 |
) |
|
$ |
(88 |
) |
|
$ |
(772 |
) |
In
percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
(1.1 |
)% |
|
|
(3.6 |
)% |
|
|
(31.9 |
)% |
Year-over-year
basis
Our
operating results improved from a loss of $772 million to a loss of $26 million
due primarily to lower impairment charges, particularly those incurred on the
FMG business disposal; excluding impairment and restructuring charges, our
operating income improved on a year-over-year basis, despite the significant
negative impact of the weakening U.S. dollar, which we have estimated to be
around $134 million, with about one half of the impact on manufacturing costs
and the other half on operating expenses.
With reference to our product group segments, both ASG and IMS
registered operating income. IMS improved its profitability thanks to higher
sales volume and an improved product mix, while ASG’s operating income
deteriorated
because of declining gross margin and higher manufacturing expenses, which were
largely impacted by the weakening U.S. dollar exchange rate.
Sequentially
On a
sequential basis, we registered a significant improvement in our operating
results when excluding the impairment and restructuring charges and the FMG
deconsolidation. This improvement was driven by our higher sales
volume.
The
operating income of both ASG and IMS increased sequentially as a result of
higher sales volume, despite the negative impact of the U.S. dollar exchange
rate.
Interest
income, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Interest
income, net
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
20 |
|
|
$ |
18 |
|
We
recorded net interest income of $19 million, which included $4 million received
as interest income on the subordinated notes from Numonyx.
Other-than-temporary
impairment charges on marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Other-than-temporary
impairment charges on marketable securities
|
|
$ |
(39 |
) |
|
$ |
(29 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
Beginning
in May 2006, we gave a specific mandate to Credit Suisse Securities LLC to
invest a portion of our cash in a U.S. federally-guaranteed student loan
program. In August 2007, we became aware Credit Suisse Securities LLC had
deviated from our instructions and that our account had been credited with
investments in unauthorized Auction Rate Securities. In the fourth quarter of
2007, we registered a $46 million charge due to a decline in the fair value of
these Auction Rate Securities and considered this decline as
“Other-than-temporary.” Recent credit concerns arising in the capital markets
have reduced the ability to liquidate Auction Rate Securities that we classify
as available for sale securities on our consolidated balance sheet. The entire
portfolio having experienced an estimated $115 million decline in fair-value as
at June 28, 2008, we recorded an additional other-than-temporary impairment
charge of $39 million in the second quarter of 2008. See more details in
paragraph “Liquidity and Capital resources.”
Earnings
(loss) on equity investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Earnings
(loss) on equity investments
|
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
Through
the first quarter of 2008, our income on equity investments included our
minority interest in the joint venture with Hynix Semiconductor in China, which
was transferred to Numonyx on March 30, 2008.
In the
second quarter of 2008 we recorded a $5 million loss on our Numonyx equity
investment, primarily resulting from a $4 million charge related to an interest
expense on the subordinated notes and corresponding to our equity interest in
the financial expense of Numonyx.
Equity
gain (loss) related to Numonyx earnings in the second quarter of 2008 will be
recognized next quarter due to an anticipated one quarter delay in
reporting.
Income
tax benefit (expense)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Income
tax benefit (expense)
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
(4 |
) |
During
the second quarter of 2008, we registered an income tax benefit of $5 million,
reflecting an effective tax rate of approximately 10% which includes the tax
benefit associated with the impairment of the Phoenix fab that we plan to sell
and the actual loss on assets contributed to Numonyx. Excluding the impact of
the impairment and restructuring charges, our estimated effective tax rate is
approximately 9%. In addition, following the amendment of a law in France,
research tax credits that were included in the calculation of the effective tax
rate in 2007 and prior years, were recognized as a reduction of research and
development expenses in the second quarter of 2008. During the second quarter of
2007, we had an income tax expense of $4 million. During the first quarter of
2008, we recorded an income tax benefit of $14 million.
Our tax
rate is variable and depends on changes in the level of operating income within
various local jurisdictions and on changes in the applicable taxation rates of
these jurisdictions, as well as changes in estimated tax provisions due to new
events. We currently enjoy certain tax benefits in some countries; as such
benefits may not be available in the future due to changes in the local
jurisdictions, our effective tax rate could be different in future quarters and
may increase in the coming years.
Net
loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Net
loss
|
|
$ |
(47 |
) |
|
$ |
(84 |
) |
|
$ |
(758 |
) |
As
percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
(2.0 |
)% |
|
|
(3.4 |
)% |
|
|
(31.4 |
)% |
We
reported a net loss mainly due to impairment and restructuring
charges.
For the
second quarter of 2008, we reported a loss of $47 million, compared to a net
loss of $758 million in the second quarter of 2007 and net loss of $84 million
in the first quarter of 2008. Our second quarter of 2008 was penalized primarily
by the impairment charge on the Phoenix fab, other than temporary impairment
charges, and the adverse impact of fluctuations in U.S. dollar exchange rate.
Basic and diluted loss per share for the second quarter of 2008 was $(0.05). The
impact of restructuring and impairment charges and other-than-temporary
impairment charges was estimated to be equivalent to approximately $(0.23) per
share. In the first quarter of 2008, loss per share was $(0.09) and $(0.84) in
the year-ago quarter.
First
Half of 2008 vs. First Half of 2007
Based on
most recently published estimates, semiconductor industry revenue increased by
approximately 5.4% for the TAM and by approximately 10.2% for the
SAM.
Net
Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
$ |
4,841 |
|
|
$ |
4,678 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
% |
Other
revenues
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net
revenues
|
|
$ |
4,869 |
|
|
$ |
4,693 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
% |
Net
revenues excluding FMG
|
|
$ |
4,570 |
|
|
$ |
4,039 |
|
|
|
13.2 |
% |
Our net
revenues decreased on a year-over-year basis due to the deconsolidation of the
FMG segment. Excluding the FMG segment, our first half of 2008 net revenues
increased by 13.2%. This result was due to both an increase in units sold and an
improved product mix. During the first half of 2008, the continuous pressure on
prices in the semiconductor industry resulted in an approximate 7% decline in
average selling prices.
With
respect to our product group segments, both registered a double digit increase
supported by higher sales volume. ASG increased by 15.1% and IMS by
10.0%.
By market
segment application, excluding FMG, Industrial & Others, Telecom and
Consumer were the main contributors to positive year-over-year variation with
growth of approximately 18%, 17% and 11%, respectively.
By
location of order shipment, excluding FMG, a double digit increase was
experienced in all regions, except for Europe which decreased by 1.1%. Main
contributors were Asia Pacific, Japan and Emerging markets which improved by
approximately 36%, 31% and 28%, respectively.
In the
first half of 2008, we had several large customers, with the largest one, the
Nokia Group of companies, accounting for approximately 19% of our net revenues
excluding FMG, slightly decreasing from the 20% it accounted for during the
first half of 2007.
Gross
profit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
$ |
(3,090 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,070 |
) |
|
|
(0.7 |
)% |
Gross
profit
|
|
$ |
1,779 |
|
|
$ |
1,623 |
|
|
|
9.6 |
% |
Gross
margin (as a percentage of net revenues)
|
|
|
36.5 |
% |
|
|
34.6 |
% |
|
|
- |
|
Our gross
profit increased 9.6% and our gross margin improved 190 basis points compared to
34.6% in the year-ago period, driven by improved manufacturing efficiencies
(including the suspended depreciation of FMG assets in the first quarter of 2008
and of the Phoenix fab in the second quarter of 2008) and higher sales volume,
which exceeded the negative impact of the decline in selling prices and the
weakening U.S. dollar.
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Selling,
general and administrative expenses
|
|
$ |
(585 |
) |
|
$ |
(531 |
) |
|
|
(10.2 |
)% |
As a
percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
(12.0 |
)% |
|
|
(11.3 |
)% |
|
|
- |
|
Our
selling, general and administrative expenses slightly increased by 10.2% due to
an unfavorable trend in the U.S. dollar exchange rate. Expenses in the first
half of 2008 included $24 million in charges related to share-based compensation
compared to $19 million in the first half of 2007.
Research
and development expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development expenses
|
|
$ |
(978 |
) |
|
$ |
(881 |
) |
|
|
(11.1 |
)% |
As a
percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
(20.1 |
)% |
|
|
(18.8 |
)% |
|
|
- |
|
Our
research and development expenses increased in line with the expansion of our
activities, including the integration of the Genesis accounts and the
acquisition of a 3G design team, and also due to the negative impact of the U.S.
dollar exchange rate. Furthermore, we immediately recognized as expenses $21
million of In-Process R&D write-off as a result of the purchase accounting
of Genesis. The amount for the first half of 2008 included $15 million of
share-based compensation charges compared to $8 million in the first half of
2007. Finally, the first half of 2008 benefited from $73 million recognized as
research tax credits following the amendment of a law in France. The research
tax credits were also available in previous periods, however under different
terms and conditions; as such, in the past they were not shown as a reduction in
research and development expenses but rather included in the calculation of the
effective income tax rate of the period.
Other
income and expenses, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Research
and development funding
|
|
$ |
44 |
|
|
$ |
26 |
|
Start-up
costs
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Exchange
gain (loss) net
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Patent
litigation costs
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
Patent
pre-litigation costs
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Gain
on sale of non-current assets
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other,
net
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Other
income and expenses, net
|
|
$ |
39 |
|
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
As a
percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
0.8 |
% |
|
|
(0.1 |
)% |
“Other
income and expenses, net” resulted in a net income of $39 million in the first
half of 2008, compared to a net expense of $3 million in the first half of 2007.
Research and development funding included the income of some of our research and
development projects, which qualify as funding on the basis of contracts with
local government agencies in locations where we pursue our activities. The
majority of our research and development funding was received in Italy and
France and compared to the first half of 2007, it has increased
significantly.
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Impairment,
restructuring charges
and
other related closure costs
|
|
$ |
(369 |
) |
|
$ |
(918 |
) |
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs decreased significantly
compared to the previous year. This first half expense was mainly composed
of:
· FMG
assets disposal which required the recognition of $189 million as an additional
loss and $12 million as restructuring and other related disposal costs; this
additional loss was the result of revised terms of the transaction
from those expected at December 31, 2007 and an updated market value of
comparable companies;
· The
decision to sell our fab in Phoenix, which gave rise to an impairment
loss of $114 million calculated on the assets to be sold and classified as
“Assets held for sale”;
· $41
million incurred as part of our 2007 restructuring initiatives which include our
fabs in Phoenix and Carrollton (USA) and of our back-end facilities in Ain Sebaa
(Morocco); and
· Other
previously and newly announced restructuring plans for $13 million, consisting
primarily of voluntary termination benefits and early retirement arrangements in
some of our European locations.
In the
first half of 2007, we incurred $918 million of impairment, restructuring
charges and other related closure costs, including $857 million booked upon
signing the agreement for the disposal of our FMG assets, $40 million related to
the severance costs booked in relation to the 2007 restructuring plan of our
manufacturing activities and $21 million relating to previously announced
programs.
See Note
7 to our Unaudited Interim Consolidated Financial Statements.
Operating
loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Operating
loss
|
|
$ |
(114 |
) |
|
$ |
(710 |
) |
As a
percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
(2.3 |
)% |
|
|
(15.1 |
)% |
Our
operating loss significantly improved from the $710 million recorded in the
first half of 2007 primarily due to lower impairment charges incurred,
especially on the FMG business deconsolidation. See “Business
Overview.”
We
registered operating income in all of our product groups. In the first quarter
of 2008, FMG had registered a significant benefit from the suspended
depreciation associated with assets held for sale. ASG registered operating
income of $42 million, compared to $52 million in the first half of 2007 despite
higher sales because of higher operating expenses and the significant impact of
the weakening U.S. dollar. IMS registered operating income of $222 million,
slightly increasing compared to the $210 million registered in the first half of
2007, thanks to higher sales.
Interest
income, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Interest
income, net
|
|
$ |
40 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
In the
first half of 2008, interest income, net contributed $40 million compared to
interest income, net of $36 million in the same period in 2007. Interest income
also included the interest received on the subordinated notes from
Numonyx.
Other-than-temporary
impairment charges on marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Other-than-temporary
impairment charges on marketable securities
|
|
$ |
(69 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Beginning
in May 2006, we gave a specific mandate to Credit Suisse Securities LLC to
invest a portion of our cash in a U.S. federally-guaranteed student loan
program. In August 2007, we became aware that Credit Suisse Securities LLC had
deviated from our instructions and that our account had been credited with
investments in unauthorized Auction Rate Securities. In the fourth quarter of
2007, we registered a $46 million charge due to a decline in the fair value of
these Auction Rate Securities and considered this decline as
“Other-than-temporary.” Recent credit concerns arising in the capital markets
have reduced the ability to liquidate Auction Rate Securities that we classify
as available for sale securities on our consolidated balance sheet. The entire
portfolio having experienced an estimated $115 million decline in fair-value as
at June 28, 2008, we recorded an additional other-than-temporary impairment
charge of $69 million in the first half of 2008. See more details in the
paragraph “Liquidity and Capital resources.”
Earnings
(loss) on equity investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Earnings
(loss) on equity investments
|
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
9 |
|
Through
the first quarter of 2008, our income on equity investments included our
minority interest in the joint venture with Hynix Semiconductor in China, which
was transferred to Numonyx on March 30, 2008.
In the
second quarter of 2008 we recorded a $5 million loss on our Numonyx equity
investment, primarily resulting from a $4 million charge related to an interest
expense on the subordinated notes and corresponding to our equity interest in
the financial expense of Numonyx.
Income tax benefit
(expense)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Income
tax benefit (expense)
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
(15 |
) |
During
the first half of 2008, we registered an income tax benefit of $19 million,
reflecting an estimated annual effective tax rate for recurring operations of
approximately 8% before one-time elements. After one-time elements, this annual
effective tax rate was estimated at approximately 13%. In the first half of
2007, we incurred a tax expense of $15 million.
Our tax
rate is variable and depends on changes in the level of operating income within
various local jurisdictions and on changes in the applicable taxation rates of
these jurisdictions, as well as changes in estimated tax provisions due to new
events. We currently enjoy certain tax benefits in some countries; as such
benefits may not be available in the future due to changes in the local
jurisdictions, our effective tax rate could be different in future quarters and
may increase in the coming years.
Net
income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(unaudited,
in millions)
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(131 |
) |
|
$ |
(684 |
) |
As a
percentage of net revenues
|
|
|
(2.7 |
)% |
|
|
(14.6 |
)% |
For the
first half of 2008, we reported a net loss of $131 million, compared to a net
loss of $684 million in the first half of 2007. The first half of 2008 was
negatively impacted by the impairment charge on the Phoenix fab that
we
plan to
sell, the additional loss recorded for the FMG deconsolidation and the adverse
impact of the U.S. dollar exchange rate fluctuation. The same period in 2007
included a significant amount of impairment on the FMG deconsolidation since
those assets were reclassified for sale, significant restructuring charges and
the effect of the weakening U.S. dollar exchange rate. Loss per share for the
first half of 2008 was $(0.15). Impairment charges, restructuring charges and
other specific items accounted for a $(0.45) loss per diluted share in the first
half of 2008, while they accounted for $(1.01) per diluted share in the same
period in the prior year.
Legal
Proceedings
We are
currently a party to legal proceedings with SanDisk Corporation.
On
October 15, 2004, SanDisk filed a complaint for patent infringement and a
declaratory judgment of non-infringement and patent invalidity against us with
the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The
complaint alleges that our products infringed a single SanDisk U.S. patent and
seeks a declaratory judgment that SanDisk did not infringe several of our U.S.
patents (Civil Case No. C 04-04379JF). By an order dated January 4, 2005, the
court stayed SanDisk’s patent infringement claim, pending final determination in
an action filed contemporaneously by SanDisk with the United States
International Trade Commission (“ITC”), which covers the same patent claim
asserted in Civil Case No. C 04-04379JF. The ITC action was subsequently
resolved in our favor. On August 2, 2007, SanDisk filed an amended complaint
adding allegations of infringement with respect to a second SanDisk U.S. patent
which had been the subject of a second ITC action and which was also resolved in
our favor. On September 6, 2007, we filed an answer and a counterclaim alleging
various federal and state antitrust and unfair competition claims. SanDisk filed
a motion to dismiss our antitrust counterclaim, which was denied on January 25,
2008. The Court converted SanDisk’s motion to dismiss our antitrust
counterclaims into a motion for summary judgment which is scheduled to be heard
in the third quarter of 2008. A decision regarding the trial
schedule will be delayed, pending the outcome of this
motion.
On
October 14, 2005, we filed a complaint against SanDisk and its current CEO, Dr.
Eli Harari, before the Superior Court of California, County of Alameda. The
complaint seeks, among other relief, the assignment or co-ownership of certain
SanDisk patents that resulted from inventive activity on the part of Dr. Harari
that took place while he was an employee, officer and/or director of Waferscale
Integration, Inc. and actual, incidental, consequential, exemplary and punitive
damages in an amount to be proven at trial. We are the successor to Waferscale
Integration, Inc. by merger. SanDisk removed the matter to the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California which remanded the matter
to the Superior Court of California, County of Alameda in July 2006. SanDisk
moved to transfer the case to the Superior Court of California, County of Santa
Clara and to strike our claim for unfair competition, which were both denied by
the trial court. SanDisk appealed these rulings and also moved to stay the case
pending resolution of the appeal. On January 12, 2007, the California Court of
Appeals ordered that the case be transferred to the Superior Court of
California, County of Santa Clara. On August 7, 2007, the California Court of
Appeals affirmed the Superior Court’s decision denying SanDisk’s motion to
strike our claim for unfair competition. SanDisk appealed this ruling to the
California Supreme Court, which refused to hear it. SanDisk and Dr. Hariri had
previously filed a motion for summary judgment which was scheduled to be heard
in the third quarter of 2008. However, SanDisk has recently moved this case to
Federal Court for a second time. We have in turn filed a motion to remand the
case back to State Court. A decision on our motion is expected
shortly.
With
respect to the lawsuits with SanDisk as described above, and following two prior
decisions in our favor taken by the ITC, we have not identified any risk of
probable loss that is likely to arise out of the outstanding
proceedings.
We are
also a party to legal proceedings with Tessera, Inc.
On
January 31, 2006, Tessera added our Company as a co-defendant, along with
several other semiconductor and packaging companies, to a lawsuit filed by
Tessera on October 7, 2005 against Advanced Micro Devices Inc. and Spansion in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Tessera is claiming that certain of our small format BGA packages infringe
certain patents owned by Tessera, and that ST is liable for damages. Tessera is
also claiming that various ST entities breached a 1997 License Agreement and
that ST is liable for unpaid royalties as a result. In February and March 2007,
our co-defendants Siliconware Precision Industries Co., Ltd. and Siliconware
USA, Inc., filed reexamination requests with the U.S. Patent and Trademark
Office covering all of the
patents
and claims asserted by Tessera in the lawsuit. In April and May 2007, the United
States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) initiated reexaminations in response
to the reexamination requests. A final decision regarding the
reexamination requests is pending. On May 24, 2007, this action was stayed
pending the outcome of the ITC proceeding described below.
On April
17, 2007, Tessera filed a complaint against us, Spansion, ATI Technologies,
Inc., Qualcomm, Motorola and Freescale with the ITC with respect to certain
small format ball grid array packages and products containing the same, alleging
patent infringement claims of two of the Tessera patents previously asserted in
the District Court action described above and seeking an order excluding
importation of such products into the United States. On May 15, 2007, the ITC
instituted an investigation pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1337, entitled In the Matter
of Certain Semiconductor Chips with Minimized Chip Package Size and Products
Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-605. As discussed above, the patents at issue
are being reexamined by the PTO based on petitions filed by a third-party. The
PTO’s Central Reexamination Unit has issued office actions rejecting all of the
asserted patent claims on the grounds that they are invalid in view of certain
prior art. Tessera is contesting these rejections, and the PTO has not made a
final decision. On February 25, 2008, the administrative law judge issued an
initial determination staying the ITC proceeding pending completion of these
reexamination proceedings. On March 28, 2008, the ITC reversed the
administrative law judge and ordered him to reinstate the ITC proceeding. The
trial took place from July 14, 2008 to July 18, 2008. An initial determination
is due no later than October 20, 2008, and the target date for the completion of
the investigation is February 21, 2009.
Furthermore,
recently we have, along with several other companies such as Freescale, NXP
Semiconductor, Grace Semiconductor, National Semiconductor, Spansion and Elpida,
been sued by LSI Corp. before the International Trade Commission in Washington.
The lawsuit follows LSI Corp.’s purchase of Agere Systems Inc. and alleges
infringement of a single Agere US process patent (US 5,227,335). The
International Trade Commission initiated an investigation in May 2008 and has
set a March 2009 trial date.
Other
Litigation
In
September 2006, after our internal audit department uncovered fraudulent foreign
exchange transactions not known to us performed by our former Treasurer and
resulting in payments by a financial institution of over 28 million Swiss Francs
in commissions for the personal benefit of our former Treasurer, we filed a
criminal complaint before the Public Prosecutor in Lugano, Switzerland.
Following such complaint, our former Treasurer was arrested in November 2006 and
on February 12, 2008 sentenced to three and one-half years imprisonment.
Following the evidence uncovered during the trial which led to the decision of
February 12, 2008 which is currently under appeal on legal grounds, we have
declared ourselves a plaintiff in a new action launched in April 2008 by the
Public Prosecutor in Lugano, against directors of Credit Suisse for
falsification of documentation. This action could help us in recovering from
Credit Suisse amounts not refunded by our former Treasurer by further
highlighting responsibility of the bank in the fraud. To date, we have recovered
over half of the illegally paid commissions.
In
February 2008, following unauthorized purchases for our account of certain
Auction Rate Securities, we initiated arbitration proceedings against Credit
Suisse Securities LLC seeking to reverse the unauthorized purchases and recover
all losses in our account, including, but not limited to, the $115 million
impairment posted to date.
Related-Party
Transactions
One of
the members of our Supervisory Board is managing director of Areva SA, which is
a controlled subsidiary of Commissariat de l’Energie Atomique (“CEA”), one of
the members of our Supervisory Board is the Chairman and CEO of France Telecom,
one is a member of the Board of Directors of Thomson, another is the
non-executive Chairman of the Board of Directors of ARM Holdings PLC (“ARM”) and
a non-executive director of Soitec, one of the members of the Supervisory Board
is also a member of the supervisory board of BESI and one of the members of the
Supervisory Board is a director of Oracle Corporation (“Oracle”) and Flextronics
International. France Telecom and its subsidiaries as well as Oracle’s new
subsidiary PeopleSoft supply certain services to our Company. We have a
long-term joint research and development partnership agreement with Leti, a
wholly-owned subsidiary of CEA. We have certain licensing agreements with ARM,
and have conducted transactions with Soitec and BESI as well as with Thomson and
Flextronics. We believe that each of these arrangements and transactions are
made on an arms-length basis in line with market practices and
conditions.
Impact
of Changes in Exchange Rates
Our
results of operations and financial condition can be significantly affected by
material changes in exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and other currencies,
particularly the Euro.
As a
market rule, the reference currency for the semiconductor industry is the U.S.
dollar and product prices are mainly denominated in U.S. dollars. However,
revenues for certain of our products (primarily our dedicated products sold in
Europe and Japan) are quoted in currencies other than the U.S. dollar and as
such are directly affected by fluctuations in the value of the U.S. dollar. As a
result of currency variations, the appreciation of the Euro compared to the U.S.
dollar could increase, in the short term, our level of revenues when reported in
U.S. dollars; revenues for all other products, which are either quoted in U.S.
dollars and billed in U.S. dollars or in local currencies for payment, tend not
to be affected significantly by fluctuations in exchange rates, except to the
extent that there is a lag between changes in currency rates and adjustments in
the local currency equivalent price paid for such products. Furthermore, certain
significant costs incurred by us, such as manufacturing, labor costs and
depreciation charges, selling, general and administrative expenses, and research
and development expenses, are largely incurred in the currency of the
jurisdictions in which our operations are located. Given that most of our
operations are located in the Euro zone or other non-U.S. dollar currency areas,
our costs tend to increase when translated into U.S. dollars in case of dollar
weakening or to decrease when the U.S. dollar is strengthening.
In
summary, as our reporting currency is the U.S. dollar, currency exchange rate
fluctuations affect our results of operations: if the U.S. dollar weakens, we
receive a limited part of our revenues, and more importantly, we incur a
significant part of our costs, in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. As
described below, our effective average U.S. dollar exchange rate weakened during
the first half of 2008, particularly against the Euro, causing us to report
higher expenses and negatively impacting both our gross margin and operating
income. Our consolidated statements of income for the first half of 2008 include
income and expense items translated at the average U.S. dollar exchange rate for
the period.
Our
principal strategy to reduce the risks associated with exchange rate
fluctuations has been to balance as much as possible the proportion of sales to
our customers denominated in U.S. dollars with the amount of raw materials,
purchases and services from our suppliers denominated in U.S. dollars, thereby
reducing the potential exchange rate impact of certain variable costs relative
to revenues. Moreover, in order to further reduce the exposure to U.S. dollar
exchange fluctuations, we have hedged certain line items on our consolidated
statements of income, in particular with respect to a portion of the costs of
goods sold, most of the research and development expenses and certain selling
and general and administrative expenses, located in the Euro zone. Our effective
average exchange rate of the Euro to the U.S. dollar was $1.51 for €1.00 in the
first half of 2008 compared to $1.31 for €1.00 in the first half of 2007. Our
effective average rate of the Euro to the U.S. dollar was $1.55 for €1.00 for
the second quarter of 2008 and $1.47 for €1.00 in the first quarter of 2008
while it was $1.33 for €1.00 for the second quarter of 2007. These effective
exchange rates reflect the actual exchange rates combined with the impact of
hedging contracts matured in the period.
As of
June 28, 2008, the outstanding hedged amounts to cover manufacturing costs were
€165 million and to cover operating expenses were €220 million, at an average
rate for both of about $1.57 for €1.00, respectively (including the premium paid
to purchase foreign exchange options), maturing over the period from July 2,
2008 to November 12, 2008. As of June 28, 2008, these outstanding hedging
contracts and certain expired contracts covering manufacturing expenses
capitalized in inventory represented a deferred gain of approximately $3 million
after tax, recorded in “Other comprehensive income” in shareholders’ equity,
compared to a deferred gain of approximately $10 million after tax as of March
30, 2008 and to a deferred gain of approximately $8 million after tax as at
December 31, 2007.
Our
hedging policy is not intended to cover the full exposure. In addition, in order
to mitigate potential exchange rate risks on our commercial transactions, we
purchased and entered into forward foreign currency exchange contracts and
currency options to cover foreign currency exposure in payables or receivables
at our affiliates. We may in the future purchase or sell similar types of
instruments. See “Item 11, Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk,” in the Form 20-F as may be updated from time to time in our public
filings for full details of outstanding contracts and their fair values.
Furthermore, we may not predict in a timely fashion the
amount of
future transactions in the volatile industry environment. Consequently, our
results of operations have been and may continue to be impacted by fluctuations
in exchange rates.
Our
treasury strategies to reduce exchange rate risks are intended to mitigate the
impact of exchange rate fluctuations. No assurance may be given that our hedging
activities will sufficiently protect us against declines in the value of the
U.S. dollar. Furthermore, if the value of the U.S. dollar increases, we may
record losses in connection with the loss in value of the remaining hedging
instruments at the time. In the first half of 2008, as the result of cash flow
hedging, we recorded a net gain of $30 million, consisting of a gain of $11
million to research and development expenses, a gain of $16 million to costs of
goods sold and a gain of $3 million to selling, general and administrative
expenses, while in the first half of 2007, we recorded a net gain of $18
million. In the second quarter of 2008, we generated net gain of $18 million,
compared to a net gain of $9 million in the second quarter of 2007, and a gain
of $12 million in the first quarter of 2008.
The net
effect of the consolidated foreign exchange exposure resulted in a net gain of
$11 million in “Other income and expenses, net” in the first half of
2008.
Assets
and liabilities of subsidiaries are, for consolidation purposes, translated into
U.S. dollars at the period-end exchange rate. Income and expenses are translated
at the average exchange rate for the period. The balance sheet impact of such
translation adjustments has been, and may be expected to be, significant from
period to period since a large part of our assets and liabilities are accounted
for in Euros as their functional currency. Adjustments resulting from the
translation are recorded directly in shareholders’ equity, and are shown as
“Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)” in the consolidated statements
of changes in shareholders’ equity. At June 28, 2008, our outstanding
indebtedness was denominated mainly in U.S. dollars and in Euros.
For a
more detailed discussion, see “Item 3, Key Information — Risk Factors — Risks
Related to Our Operations” in the Form 20-F as may be updated from time to time
in our public filings.
Impact
of Changes in Interest Rates
Interest
rates may fluctuate upon changes in financial market conditions and material
changes can affect our results from operations and financial condition, since
these changes can impact the total interest income received on our cash and cash
equivalents and the total interest expense paid on our financial
debt.
Our
interest income, net, as reported on our consolidated statements of income, is
the balance between interest income received from our cash and cash equivalent
and marketable securities investments and interest expense paid on our long-term
debt. Our interest income is dependent on the fluctuations in the interest
rates, mainly in the U.S. dollar and the Euro, since we are investing on a
short-term basis; any increase or decrease in the short-term market interest
rates would mean an equivalent increase or decrease in our interest income. Our
interest expenses are associated with our long-term convertible bonds (with a
fixed rate) and Floating Rate senior bonds whose rate is fixed quarterly at
LIBOR + 40bps. To manage the interest rate mismatch, in the second quarter of
2006, we entered into cancelable swaps to hedge a portion of the fixed rate
obligations on our outstanding long-term debt with Floating Rate derivative
instruments. Of the $974 million in 2016 Convertible Bonds issued in the first
quarter of 2006, we entered into cancelable swaps for $200 million of the
principal amount of the bonds, swapping the 1.5% yield equivalent on the bonds
for 6 Month USD LIBOR minus 3.375%, partially offsetting the interest rate
mismatch of the 2016 Convertible Bond. We also have $250 million of restricted
cash at a fixed rate formally associated with the joint venture with Hynix
Semiconductor. Our hedging policy is not intended to cover the full exposure and
all risks associated with these instruments.
As of
June 28, 2008, our cash and cash equivalents generated an average interest
income rate of 3.1%; the 8-year U.S. swap interest rate was 4.8%. The fair value
of the swaps as of June 28, 2008 was positive for $12 million since they were
executed at higher than current market rates. In compliance with FAS 133
provisions on fair value hedges, the net impact of the hedging transaction on
our consolidated statements of income was a gain of $1 million in the first half
of 2008, which represents the ineffective part of the hedge. This amount was
recorded in “Other income and expenses, net.” These cancelable swaps were
designed and are expected to effectively replicate the bond’s behavior through a
wide range of changes in financial market conditions and decisions made by both
the holders of
the bonds
and us, thus being classified as highly effective hedges; however no assurance
can be given that our hedging activities will sufficiently protect us against
future significant movements in interest rates.
We may in
the future enter into further cancellable swap transactions related to the 2016
Convertible Bonds or other fixed rate instruments. For full details of
quantitative and qualitative information, see “Item 11, Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk” included in the Form 20-F, as may be
updated from time to time in our public filings.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Treasury
activities are regulated by our policies, which define procedures, objectives
and controls. The policies focus on the management of our financial risk in
terms of exposure to currency rates and interest rates. Most treasury activities
are centralized, with any local treasury activities subject to oversight from
our head treasury office. The majority of our cash and cash equivalents are held
in U.S. dollars and Euros and are placed with financial institutions rated “A”
or better. Part of our liquidity is also held in Euros to naturally hedge
intercompany payables in the same currency and is placed with financial
institutions rated at least single A long-term rating, meaning at least A3 from
Moody’s Investor Service and A- from Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Ratings.
Marginal amounts are held in other currencies. See “Item 11, Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” included in the Form 20-F, as may be
updated from time to time in our public filings.”
In the
third quarter of 2007, we determined that since unauthorized investments in
Auction Rate Securities other than U.S. federally-guaranteed student loan
program experienced auction failure since August such investments were to be
more properly classified on our consolidated balance sheet as “Marketable
securities” instead of “Cash and cash equivalents” as done in previous periods.
The revision of the June 30, 2007 consolidated balance sheet results in a
decrease of “Cash and cash equivalents” from $1,849 million to $1,374 million
with an offsetting increase to “Marketable securities” from $931 million to
$1,406 million. The revision of the consolidated statement of cash flows for the
six months ended June 30, 2007 affects “Net cash used in investing activities,”
which increased from $796 million to $967 million based on an increase from $511
million to $682 million in the investing activities line “Payment for purchase
of marketable securities.” The “Net cash decrease” caption was also changed from
a decrease of $114 million to a decrease of $285 million, and “Cash and cash
equivalents at the end of the period” changed to match the $1,374 million on the
revised consolidated balance sheet. “Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning
of the period” was also restated from $1,963 million to $1,659 million following
the restatement performed on the December 31, 2006 financial statements, as
described in the Form 20-F. The revision of consolidated statements of cash
flows for the three months ended June 30, 2007 affects “Net cash used in
investing activities,” which increased from $430 million to $436 million based
on the increase in the investing activities line “Payment for purchase of
marketable securities” from $231 million to $237 million. The “Net cash
decrease” caption was also changed from a decrease of $191 million to a decrease
of $197 million, and the “Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period”
changes to match the $1,374 million on the revised consolidated balance sheet.
The “Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period” was also restated
from $2,040 million to $1,571 million following the restatement performed on
March 30, 2007 financial statements. We believe that investments made for our
account in Auction Rate Securities other than U.S. federally-guaranteed student
loans have been made without our due authorization and in 2008 we instituted
proceedings against Credit Suisse Securities LLC with a view to (fully) recovery
of our losses. We intend to pursue our claim vigorously.
As of
June 28, 2008, we had $2,136 million in cash and cash equivalents, marketable
securities amounted to $898 million as current assets, composed of senior debt
Floating Rate Notes issued by primary financial institutions, $250 million as
restricted cash and $300 million as non-current assets invested in Auction Rate
Securities. At March 30, 2008, cash and cash equivalents were $2,060 million and
at December 31, 2007 they were $1,855 million.
As of
June 28, 2008, we had $898 million in marketable securities as current assets,
with primary financial institutions with a minimum rating of A1/A-. They are
reported at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized as a separate
component of “Accumulated other comprehensive income” in the consolidated
statement of changes in shareholders’ equity. The change in fair value of these
instruments amounted to approximately $6 million after tax as of June 28, 2008.
We sold $160 million of these instruments in the second quarter of 2008.
Marketable securities amounted to $1,060 million as of March 30, 2008, while we
had $1,014 as of December 31, 2007. Changes in the
instruments
adopted to invest our liquidity in future periods may occur and may
significantly affect our interest income (expense), net.
As of
June 28, 2008, we had Auction Rate Securities in an amount of $300 million with
a par value of $415 million. These securities represent interest in
collateralized obligations and other commercial obligations. In the fourth
quarter 2007, we registered a decline in fair value of these Auction Rate
Securities and considered this decline as “Other-than-temporary.” Recent credit
concerns arising in the capital markets have reduced the ability to liquidate
Auction Rate Securities that we classify as available for sale securities on our
consolidated balance sheet. The entire portfolio having experienced an estimated
$115 million decline in fair-value as at June 28, 2008, we recorded an
additional other-than-temporary impairment charge of $39 million in the second
quarter of 2008 on top of the charge registered in the first quarter of 2008.
The fair value measure of these securities was based on publicly available
indices of securities with the same rating and comparable/similar underlying
collaterals or industries exposure (such as ABX, ITraxx and IBoxx), which we
believe approximates the orderly exit value in the current market. Until
December 31, 2007, the fair value was measured (i) based on the weighted average
of available information in public indices as described above and (ii) using
‘mark to market’ bids and ‘mark to model’ valuations received from the
structuring financial institutions of the outstanding auction rate securities,
weighting the different valuations at 80% and 20%, respectively. In the second
quarter of 2008, no prices for these securities were available from the
financial institutions. The estimated value of these securities could further
decrease in the future as a result of credit market deterioration and/or other
downgrading. After the application of the $39 million impairment charge recorded
in quarter ended June 28, 2008, our Auction Rate Securities have, therefore, an
estimated fair value of approximately $300 million as of June 28,
2008.
Liquidity
We
maintain a significant cash position and a low debt to equity ratio, which
provide us with adequate financial flexibility. As in the past, our cash
management policy is to finance our investment needs with net cash generated
from operating activities.
During
the first half of 2008, the favorable evolution of our cash flow produced an
increase in our cash and cash equivalents of $281 million.
The
evolution of our cash flow for each of the respective periods is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions)
|
|
Net
cash from operating activities
|
|
$ |
918 |
|
|
$ |
940 |
|
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(581 |
) |
|
|
(967 |
) |
Net
cash used in financing activities
|
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
(262 |
) |
Effect
of change in exchange rates
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Net
cash increase (decrease)
|
|
$ |
281 |
|
|
$ |
(285 |
) |
Net cash from operating
activities. As in prior periods, the major source of liquidity during the
first half of 2008 was cash provided by operating activities. Our net cash from
operating activities totaled $918 million in the first half of 2008, decreasing
compared to $940 million in the first half of 2007 due to a lower level of
profitability from operations. Changes in our operating assets and liabilities
resulted in a use of cash in the amount of $47 million in the first half of
2008, compared to net cash used of $67 million used in the first half of
2007.
Net cash used in investing
activities. Net cash used in investing activities was $581 million in the
first half of 2008, compared to the $967 million used in the first half of 2007.
Payments for purchases of tangible assets were the main utilization of cash,
amounting to $530 million for the first half of 2008, an increase of over $507
million in the first half of 2007 primarily as a result of our repurchase of a
portion of the Crolles2 equipment. The first half of 2007 payments included a
$682 million purchase of marketable securities and were net of $250 million
proceeds from matured short-term deposits and $40 million proceeds from
marketable securities. We did not purchase any
marketable
securities in the first half of 2008, although we sold $160 million of Floating
Rate Notes. Furthermore, the first half of 2008 included the payment of $170
million for business acquisitions related to the Genesis deal.
Net cash used in
financing activities. Net cash used in financing activities was $79
million in the first half of 2008 compared to $262 million used in the first
half of 2007. The variance is primarily due to dividends paid to shareholders,
for which only one fourth of the total amount equivalent to $81 million was paid
as at June 28, 2008, while the total amount of the prior year’s dividend ($269
million) had already been paid as at June 30, 2007. During the second quarter of
2008, we also commenced our share repurchase program, spending an aggregate
amount of $83 million.
Net operating cash flow. We
also present net operating cash flow defined as net cash from operating
activities minus net cash used in investing activities, excluding payment for
purchases of and proceeds from the sale of marketable securities (both current
and non-current), short-term deposits and restricted cash. We believe net
operating cash flow provides useful information for investors and management
because it measures our capacity to generate cash from our operating and
investing activities to sustain our operating activities. Net operating cash
flow is not a U.S. GAAP measure and does not represent total cash flow since it
does not include the cash flows generated by or used in financing activities. In
addition, our definition of net operating cash flow may differ from definitions
used by other companies. Net operating cash flow is determined as follows from
our Unaudited Interim Consolidated Statements of Cash Flow:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions)
|
|
Net
cash from operating activities
|
|
$ |
416 |
|
|
$ |
918 |
|
|
$ |
940 |
|
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(128 |
) |
|
|
(581 |
) |
|
|
(967 |
) |
Payment
for purchase and proceeds from sale of marketable securities (current and
non-current), short-term deposits and restricted cash, net
|
|
|
(160 |
) |
|
|
(160 |
) |
|
|
424 |
|
Net
operating cash flow
|
|
$ |
128 |
|
|
$ |
177 |
|
|
$ |
397 |
|
We
generated favorable net operating cash flow of $177 million in the first half of
2008, decreasing compared to net operating cash flow of $397 million in the
first half of 2007. This decrease is primarily due to the business acquisition
of Genesis in the first half of 2008 for which we paid $170 million – net of
available cash – in the first quarter of 2008.
Capital
Resources
Net
financial position
We define
our net financial position as the difference between our total cash position
(cash, cash equivalents, current and non-current marketable securities,
short-term deposits and restricted cash) net of total financial debt (bank
overdrafts, current portion of long-term debt and long-term debt). Net financial
position is not a U.S. GAAP measure. We believe our net financial position
provides useful information for investors because it gives evidence of our
global position either in terms of net indebtedness or net cash by measuring our
capital resources based on cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities and
the total level of our financial indebtedness. The net financial position is
determined as follows from our Unaudited Interim Consolidated Balance Sheets as
at June 28, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions)
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents, net of bank overdrafts
|
|
$ |
2,136 |
|
|
$ |
2,060 |
|
|
$ |
1,855 |
|
|
$ |
1,333 |
|
Marketable
securities, current
|
|
|
898 |
|
|
|
1,060 |
|
|
|
1,014 |
|
|
|
1,406 |
|
Restricted
cash
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
Marketable
securities, non-current
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Total
cash position
|
|
|
3,584 |
|
|
$ |
3,709 |
|
|
|
3,488 |
|
|
|
2,989 |
|
Current
portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
(153 |
) |
|
|
(300 |
) |
|
|
(103 |
) |
|
|
(127 |
) |
Long-term
debt
|
|
|
(2,313 |
) |
|
|
(2,324 |
) |
|
|
(2,117 |
) |
|
|
(1,992 |
) |
Total
financial debt
|
|
|
(2,466 |
) |
|
|
(2,624 |
) |
|
|
(2,220 |
) |
|
|
(2,119 |
) |
Net
financial position
|
|
$ |
1,118 |
|
|
$ |
1,085 |
|
|
$ |
1,268 |
|
|
$ |
870 |
|
The net
financial position as of June 28, 2008 resulted in a net cash position of $1,118
million, representing an improvement from $1,085 as of March 30, 2008 due to
quarterly positive net operating cash flow of $128 million. In the same period,
our total cash position decreased slightly to $3,584 million and total financial
debt decreased to $2,466 million.
On July
28, 2008 we closed our previously announced deal to create a joint venture
company with NXP from our wireless operations, which resulted in our providing a
cash payment of $1,550 million to NXP. In addition to that deal, we
expect substantial use of cash in the coming quarter due to our common share
repurchase program and our upcoming payment of the cash dividend.
At June
28, 2008, the aggregate amount of our long-term debt was $2,466 million,
including $2 million of our 2013 Convertible Bonds, $1,021 million of our 2016
Convertible Bonds and $787 million of our 2013 Senior Bonds (corresponding to
the €500 million at issuance). Our long-term debt included as at June 28, 2008
$90 million of capital leases related to the equipment used but not yet
purchased as part of the Crolles2 alliance termination. Additionally, the
aggregate amount of our total available short-term credit facilities, excluding
foreign exchange credit facilities, was approximately $856 million, which was
not used at June 28, 2008. We also had a €245 million credit facility with the
European Investment Bank as part of a funding program loan, which was fully
drawn in U.S. dollars for a total amount of $341 million as at June 28, 2008. A
new European Investment Bank loan was signed on July 21, 2008 for a total amount
of €250 million for R&D Italy, which has not yet been drawn. We also
maintain uncommitted foreign exchange facilities totaling $891 million at June
28, 2008. Our long-term capital market financing instruments contain standard
covenants, but do not impose minimum financial ratios or similar obligations on
us. Upon a change of control, the holders of our 2016 Convertible Bonds and 2013
Senior Bonds may require us to repurchase all or a portion of such holder’s
bonds. See Note 15 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
As of
June 28, 2008, debt payments due by period and based on the assumption that
convertible debt redemptions are at the holder’s first redemption option were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in
millions)
|
|
Long-term
debt (including current portion)
|
|
$ |
2,466 |
|
|
$ |
153 |
|
|
$ |
135 |
|
|
$ |
1,101 |
|
|
$ |
62 |
|
|
$ |
849 |
|
|
$ |
59 |
|
|
$ |
107 |
On August
7, 2006, as a result of almost all of the holders of our 2013 Convertible Bonds
exercising the August 4, 2006 put option, we repurchased $1,397 million
aggregate principal amount of the outstanding convertible bonds. The outstanding
2013 Convertible Bonds, corresponding to approximately $2 million and
approximately 2,505 bonds, may be redeemed, at the holder’s option, for cash on
August 5, 2008 at a conversion ratio of $975.28, or on August 5, 2010 at a
conversion ratio of $965.56, subject to adjustments in certain
circumstances.
As of
June 28, 2008, we have the following credit ratings on our 2013 and 2016
Bonds:
|
Moody’s
Investors Service
|
|
|
Zero
Coupon Senior Convertible Bonds due 2013
|
WR
(1)
|
|
A-
|
Zero
Coupon Senior Convertible Bonds due 2016
|
Baa1
|
|
A-
|
Floating
Rate Senior Bonds due 2013
|
Baa1
|
|
A-
|
(1) Rating
withdrawn since the redemption in August 2006 of $1.4 billion of our 2013
Convertible Bonds, which left only $2 million of our 2013 Convertible Bonds
outstanding.
On April
11, 2008, Moody’s Investors Service and Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services
put our ratings “on review for possible downgrade” and “on CreditWatch with
negative implications,” respectively. On June 24, 2008 Standard and Poor’s
Rating Services affirmed the “A-” rating. On June 25, 2008 Moody’s Investors
Service downgraded our senior debt rating from “A3” to “Baa1.”
In the
event of a downgrade of these ratings, we believe we would continue to have
access to sufficient capital resources.
Contractual
Obligations, Commercial Commitments and Contingencies
Our
contractual obligations, commercial commitments and contingencies as of June 28,
2008, and for each of the five years to come and thereafter, were as follows
(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
leases(2)
|
|
$ |
514 |
|
|
$ |
80 |
|
|
$ |
82 |
|
|
$ |
69 |
|
|
$ |
62 |
|
|
$ |
54 |
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
|
$ |
116 |
|
Purchase
obligations(2)
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
579 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
which:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equipment
and other asset purchase
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foundry
purchase
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Software,
technology licenses and design
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
obligations(2)
|
|
|
1,771 |
|
|
|
1,620 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Long-term
debt obligations (including current portion)(3)(4)(5)
|
|
|
2,466 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
1,101 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
849 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
of
which: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital leases(3)
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Pension
obligations(3)
|
|
|
304 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
Other
non-current liabilities(3)
|
|
|
311 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
6,007 |
|
|
$ |
2,460 |
|
|
$ |
395 |
|
|
$ |
1,282 |
|
|
$ |
180 |
|
|
$ |
1,019 |
|
|
$ |
145 |
|
|
$ |
526 |
|
(1) Contingent
liabilities which cannot be quantified are excluded from the table
above.
(2) Items
not reflected on the Unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheet at June 28,
2008.
(3) Items
reflected on the Unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheet at June 28,
2008.
(4) See
Note 15 to our Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements at June 28, 2008 for
additional information related to long-term debt and redeemable convertible
securities.
(5) Year
of payment is based on maturity before taking into account any potential
acceleration that could result from a triggering of the change of control
provisions of the 2016 Convertible Bonds and the 2013 Senior Bonds.
As a
consequence of our July 10, 2007 announcement concerning the planned closures of
certain of our manufacturing facilities, the future shutdown of our plants in
the United States will lead to negotiations with some of our suppliers. As no
final date has been set, none of the contracts as reported above have been
terminated nor do the reported amounts take into account any termination
fees.
Operating
leases are mainly related to building leases and to equipment leases as part of
the Crolles2 equipment repurchase as detailed below. The amount disclosed is
composed of minimum payments for future leases from 2008
to 2013
and thereafter. We lease land, buildings, plants and equipment under operating
leases that expire at various dates under non-cancelable lease
agreements.
Purchase
obligations are primarily comprised of purchase commitments for equipment, for
outsourced foundry wafers and for software licenses. Following the termination
of the Crolles2 alliance with our partners Freescale Semiconductor and NXP
Semiconductors, we signed an agreement with each of the two partners to commit
to purchasing 300-mm equipment during 2008. The timing of the purchase has been
agreed on the basis of our visibility of the loading for our Crolles2 wafer fab.
Out of the $404 million in assets remaining to be purchased in 2008, $125
million were repurchased in the first half of 2008, $150 million were assigned
to leasing companies which purchased these assets and we subsequently entered
into operating leases for this amount, $90 million of equipment used but not yet
purchased were accounted for as a capital lease, and $39 million that were not
used were reported as a purchase commitment in the above table.
Other
obligations primarily relate to firm contractual commitments with respect to a
cooperation agreements. On April 10, 2008, we announced our agreement with NXP
to combine our respective key wireless operations to form a joint venture
company. The transaction closed on July 28, 2008. At closing, we
received an 80% stake in the joint venture and paid $1,550 million to NXP,
including a control premium, that was funded from outstanding
cash. On January 17, 2008 we acquired effective control of Genesis.
There remains a commitment of $5 million related to a retention
program.
Long-term
debt obligations mainly consist of bank loans, convertible and non-convertible
debt issued by us that is totally or partially redeemable for cash at the option
of the holder. They include maximum future amounts that may be redeemable for
cash at the option of the holder, at fixed prices. On August 7, 2006, as a
result of almost all of the holders of our 2013 Convertible Bonds exercising the
August 4, 2006 put option, we repurchased $1,397 million aggregate principal
amount of the outstanding convertible bonds. The outstanding 2013 Convertible
Bonds, corresponding to approximately $2 million and approximately 2,505 bonds,
may be redeemed, at the holder’s option, for cash on August 5, 2008 at a
conversion ratio of $975.28, or on August 5, 2010 at a conversion ratio of
$965.56, subject to adjustments in certain circumstances.
In
February 2006, we issued $1,131 million principal amount at maturity of Zero
Coupon Senior Convertible Bonds due in February 2016. The bonds are convertible
by the holder at any time prior to maturity at a conversion rate of 43.118317
shares per one thousand dollars face value of the bonds corresponding to
41,997,240 equivalent shares. The holders can also redeem the convertible bonds
on February 23, 2011 at a price of $1,077.58, on February 23, 2012 at a price of
$1,093.81 and on February 24, 2014 at a price of $1,126.99 per one thousand
dollars face value of the bonds. We can call the bonds at any time after March
10, 2011 subject to our share price exceeding 130% of the accreted value divided
by the conversion rate for 20 out of 30 consecutive trading days.
At our
annual general meeting of shareholders held on April 26, 2007, our shareholders
approved a cash dividend distribution of $0.30 per share. Pursuant to the terms
of our 2016 Convertible Bonds, the payment of this dividend gave rise to a
slight change in the conversion rate thereof. The new conversion rate was
43.363087 corresponding to 42,235,646 equivalent shares. At our annual general
meeting of shareholders held on May 14, 2008, our shareholders approved a cash
dividend distribution of $0.36 per share. The payment of this dividend gave rise
to a change in the conversion rate thereof. The new conversion rate is
43.833898, corresponding to 42,694,216 equivalent shares.
In March
2006, STMicroelectronics Finance B.V. (“ST BV”), one of our wholly-owned
subsidiaries, issued Floating Rate Senior Bonds with a principal amount of €500
million at an issue price of 99.873%. The notes, which mature on March 17, 2013,
pay a coupon rate of the three-month Euribor plus 0.40% on the 17th of June,
September, December and March of each year through maturity. The notes have a
put for early repayment in case of a change of control.
Pension
obligations and termination indemnities amounting to $304 million consist of our
best estimates of the amounts projected to be payable by us for the retirement
plans based on the assumption that our employees will work for us until they
reach the age of retirement. The final actual amount to be paid and related
timings of such payments may vary significantly due to early retirements,
terminations and changes in assumptions rates. See Note 17 to our Consolidated
Financial Statements. In addition, following the FMG deconsolidation, we
contractually
agreed to
maintain in our books the existing defined benefit plan obligation of one of the
deconsolidated entities, which was classified as a non-current liability for $40
million (see below) as at June 28, 2008. The FMG deconsolidation did not trigger
any significant curtailment gain.
Other
non-current liabilities include, in addition to the above-mentioned pension
obligation, future obligations related to our restructuring plans and
miscellaneous contractual obligations. They also include, following the FMG
deconsolidation as at June 28, 2008, a long-term liability for capacity rights
amounting to $82 million and a $69 million guarantee liability based on the fair
value of the term loan over 4 years with effect of the savings provided by the
guarantee.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
At June
28, 2008, we had convertible debt instruments outstanding. Our convertible debt
instruments contain certain conversion and redemption options that are not
required to be accounted for separately in our financial statements. See Note 15
to our Unaudited Interim Consolidated Financial Statements for more information
about our convertible debt instruments and related conversion and redemption
options.
We have
no other material off-balance sheet arrangements at June 28, 2008.
Financial
Outlook
We are
reconfirming our target to have capital expenditures represent approximately 10%
of sales in 2008; we, therefore, currently expect that capital spending for 2008
will decrease compared to the $1.14 billion spent in 2007. The most significant
of our 2008 capital expenditure projects are expected to be: (a) for the
front-end facilities: (i) full ownership of existing capacity in our 300-mm fab
in Crolles, through the buy-back of the Alliance partners tools; (ii) a specific
program of capacity growth devoted to MEMS in Agrate (Italy) and mixed
technologies in Agrate and Catania (Italy) to support the significant growth
opportunity in these technologies; (iii) focused investment both in
manufacturing and R&D in France sites to secure and develop our system
oriented proprietary technologies portfolio (HCMOS derivatives and mixed signal)
required by our strategic customers; and (b) for the back-end facilities, the
capital expenditures will mainly be dedicated to increasing our assembly and
testing capacity, to the technology evolution to support the IC’s path to
package size reduction in Shenzhen (China) and Muar (Malaysia) and to preparing
the room for future years capacity growth by completing the new production area
in Muar and the new plant in Longgang (China).
The
Crolles2 alliance with NXP Semiconductors and Freescale expired on December 31,
2007. We agreed
to buy the remainder of their equipment, and a final payment of $129 million was
made on June 30, 2008 in connection therewith.
The
transaction resulting from the agreement with NXP to combine our respective key
wireless operations to form a joint venture company was closed on July 28, 2008
and the joint venture company, which is named ST-NXP Wireless, will start
operations on August 2, 2008. At closing, we received an 80% stake in the joint
venture and we paid NXP $1,550 million, including a control premium, which was
funded from outstanding cash.
We will
continue to monitor our level of capital spending by taking into consideration
factors such as trends in the semiconductor industry, capacity utilization and
announced additions. We expect to have significant capital requirements in the
coming years and in addition we intend to continue to devote a substantial
portion of our net revenues to research and development. We plan to fund our
capital requirements from cash provided by operating activities, available funds
and available support from third parties, and may have recourse to borrowings
under available credit lines and, to the extent necessary or attractive based on
market conditions prevailing at the time, the issuing of debt, convertible bonds
or additional equity securities. A substantial deterioration of our economic
results and consequently of our profitability could generate a deterioration of
the cash generated by our operating activities. Therefore, there can be no
assurance that, in future periods, we will generate the same level of cash as in
the previous years to fund our capital expenditures for expansion plans, our
working capital requirements, research and development and industrialization
costs.
Impact
of Recently Issued U.S. Accounting Standards
(a)
Accounting pronouncements effective in 2008
In
September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157, Fair Value Measurements (“FAS
157”). This statement defines fair value as “the price that would be received to
sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between
market participants at the measurement date.” In addition, the
statement defines a fair value hierarchy which should be used when determining
fair values, except as specifically excluded (i.e., stock awards, measurements
requiring vendor specific objective evidence, and inventory pricing). The
hierarchy places the greatest relevance on Level 1 inputs which include quoted
prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 2 inputs,
which are observable either directly or indirectly, include quoted prices for
similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices in non-active markets, and inputs
that could vary based on either the condition of the assets or liabilities or
volume sold. The lowest level of the hierarchy, Level 3, is unobservable inputs
and should only be used when observable inputs are not available. This would
include company level assumptions and should be based on the best available
information under the circumstances. FAS 157 is effective for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007. However, in February 2008, the Financial
Accounting Standards Board issued an FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) that partially
deferred the effective date of FAS 157 for one year for nonfinancial assets and
nonfinancial liabilities that are recognized at fair value in the financial
statements on a nonrecurring basis. However, the FSP did not defer recognition
and disclosure requirements for financial assets and financial liabilities or
for nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities that are measured at least
annually, which do not include goodwill. We adopted FAS 157 on January 1, 2008.
FAS 157 adoption is prospective, with no cumulative effect of the change in the
accounting guidance for fair value measurement to be recorded as an adjustment
to retained earnings, except for the following: valuation of financial
instruments previously measured with block premiums and discounts; valuation of
certain financial instruments and derivatives at fair value using the
transaction price; and valuation of a hybrid instrument previously measured at
fair value using the transaction price. We did not record, upon adoption, any
adjustment to retained earnings since it does not hold any of the three
categories of instruments described above. Consequently, consolidated financial
statements as of January 1, 2008 reflected fair value measures in compliance
with previous GAAP. In the first quarter of 2008, we reassessed fair value on
financial assets and liabilities in compliance with FAS 157. We identified the
valuation of available-for-sale securities for which no observable market price
is obtainable as an item for which detailed assessment on FAS 157 impact was
required. Management estimates that the fair value of these instruments when
measured in compliance with FAS 157 does not materially differ from the
estimates applied to GAAP in previous periods and that the fair value measure,
even if using certain entity-specific assumptions, is in line with an FAS 157
fair value hierarchy. We are also assessing the future impact of FAS 157 when
adopted for nonfinancial assets and liabilities that are recognized at fair
value in the financial statements on a nonrecurring basis, such as impaired
long-lived assets or goodwill. For goodwill impairment testing and the use of
fair value of tested reporting units, we are currently reviewing our goodwill
impairment model to measure fair value on marketable comparables, instead of
discounted cash flows generated by each reporting entity. Based on our
preliminary assessment, management estimates that FAS 157 adoption could have an
effect on certain future goodwill impairment tests, in the event our strategic
plan could necessitate changes in the product portfolios, upon the final date of
adoption of FAS 157.
In
February 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities- Including an amendment of FASB Statement No.
115 (“FAS 159”). This statement permits companies to choose to
measure eligible items at fair value at specified election dates and report
unrealized gains and losses in earnings at each subsequent reporting date on
items for which the fair value option has been elected. The objective of this
statement is to improve financial reporting by providing companies with the
opportunity to mitigate volatility in reported earnings caused by measuring
related assets and liabilities differently without having to apply complex hedge
accounting provisions. A company may decide whether to elect the fair value
option for each eligible item on its election date, subject to certain
requirements described in the statement. FAS 159 is effective for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007 with early adoption permitted for fiscal
year 2007 if first quarter statements have not been issued. We adopted FAS 159
on January 1, 2008 and have not elected to apply the fair value option on any of
our assets and liabilities as permitted by FAS 159.
In June
2007, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue No. 06-11,
Accounting for Income Tax
Benefits of Dividends on Share-Based Payment Awards (“EITF 06-11”). The
issue applies to equity-classified
nonvested
shares on which dividends are paid prior to vesting, equity-classified nonvested
share units on which dividends equivalents are paid, and equity-classified share
options on which payments equal to the dividends paid on the underlying shares
are made to the option-holder while the option is outstanding. The issue is
applicable to the dividends or dividend equivalents that are (1) charged to
retained earnings under the guidance in Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 123 (Revised 2004), Share-Based
Payment (“FAS 123R”) and (2) result in an income tax deduction
for the employer. EITF 06-11 states that a realized tax benefit from dividends
or dividend equivalents that are charged to retained earnings and paid to
employees for equity-classified nonvested shares, nonvested equity share units,
and outstanding share options should be recognized as an increase to additional
paid-in-capital. Those tax benefits are considered excess tax benefits
(“windfall”) under FAS 123R. EITF 06-11 must be applied prospectively to
dividends declared in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2007 and
interim periods within those fiscal years, with early adoption permitted for the
income tax benefits of dividends on equity-based awards that are declared in
periods for which financial statements have not yet been issued. We adopted EITF
06-11 in the first quarter of 2008 and EITF 06-11 did not have any impact on our
financial position and results of operations.
In June
2007, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue No. 07-3,
Accounting for Advance
Payments for Goods or Services to Be Used in Future Research and Development
Activities (“EITF 07-3”). The issue addresses whether non-refundable
advance payments for goods or services that will be used or rendered for
research and development activities should be expensed when the advance payments
are made or when the research and development activities have been performed.
EITF 07-3 applies only to non-refundable advance payments for goods and services
to be used and rendered in future research and development activities pursuant
to an executory contractual arrangement. EITF 07-3 states that non-refundable
advance payments for future research and development activities should be
capitalized until the goods have been delivered or the related services have
been performed. If an entity does not expect the goods to be delivered or
services to be rendered, the capitalized advance payment should be charged to
expense. EITF 07-3 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2007 and interim periods within those fiscal years. Earlier
application is not permitted and entities should recognize the effect of
applying the guidance in this Issue prospectively for new contracts entered into
after the EITF 07-3 effective date. We adopted EITF 07-3 in the first quarter of
2008 and EITF 07-3 did not have a material effect on our financial position and
results of operations.
In
November 2007, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue
No. 07-6, Accounting for the
Sale of Real Estate When the Agreement Includes a Buy-Sell Clause (“EITF
07-6”). The issue addresses whether the existence of a buy-sell arrangement
would preclude partial sales treatment when real estate is sold to a jointly
owned entity. The consensus provides that the existence of a buy-sell clause
does not necessarily preclude partial sale treatment under Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 66, Accounting for Sales of Real
Estate (“FAS 66”). EITF 07-6 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2007 and would be applied prospectively to transactions
entered into after the effective date. We adopted EITF 07-6 in the first quarter
of 2008 and EITF 07-6 did not have a material effect on our financial position
and results of operations.
In
November 2007, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 109, Written Loan Commitments Recorded at
Fair Value Through Earnings (“SAB 109”). SAB 109 provides the Staff’s
views regarding written loan commitments that are accounted for at fair value
through earnings under GAAP. SAB 109 revises and rescinds portions of Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 105, Application of Accounting Principles
to Loan Commitments (“SAB 105”). SAB 105 stated that in measuring the
fair value of a derivative loan commitment it would be inappropriate to
incorporate the expected net future cash flows related to the associated
servicing of the loan. Consistent with FAS 156 and FAS 159, SAB 109 states that
the expected net future cash flows related to the associated servicing of the
loan should be included in the measurement of all written loan commitments that
are accounted for at fair value through earnings. SAB 109 does, however, retain
the Staff’s views included in SAB 105 that no internally-developed intangible
assets should be included in the measurement of the estimated fair value of a
loan commitment derivative. SAB 109 is effective for all written loan
commitments recorded at fair value that are entered into, or substantially
modified, in fiscal quarters beginning after December 15, 2007. We adopted SAB
109 in the first quarter of 2008 and SAB 109 did not have a material effect on
our financial position and results of operations.
In
January 2008, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 110, Year-End Help for Expensing Employee
Stock Options (“SAB 110”). SAB 110 expresses the views of the
Staff
regarding
the use of a “simplified” method, in developing an estimate of expected term of
“plain vanilla” share options in accordance with FAS 123R and amended its
previous guidance under SAB 107 which prohibited entities from using the
simplified method for stock option grants after December 31, 2007. The Staff
amended its previous guidance because additional information about employee
exercise behavior has not become widely available. With SAB 110, the Staff
permits entities to use, under certain circumstances, the simplified method
beyond December 31, 2007 if they conclude that their data about employee
exercise behavior does not provide a reasonable basis for estimating the
expected-term assumption. SAB 110 is not relevant to our operations since we
redefined in 2005 our compensation policy by no longer granting stock options
but rather issuing nonvested shares.
(b)
Accounting pronouncements expected to impact our operations that are not yet
effective and have not been adopted early by us
In
December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 141 (Revised 2007), Business Combinations (“FAS
141R”) and No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements, an amendment of ARB No. 51 (“FAS
160”). These new standards will initiate substantive and pervasive changes that
will impact both the accounting for future acquisition deals and the measurement
and presentation of previous acquisitions in consolidated financial statements.
The standards continue the movement toward the greater use of fair values in
financial reporting. FAS 141R will significantly change how business
acquisitions are accounted for and will impact financial statements both on the
acquisition date and in subsequent periods. FAS 160 will change the accounting
and reporting for minority interests, which will be recharacterized as
noncontrolling interests and classified as a component of equity. The
significant changes from current practice resulting from FAS 141R are: the
definitions of a business and a business combination have been expanded,
resulting in an increased number of transactions or other events that will
qualify as business combinations; for all business combinations (whether
partial, full, or step acquisitions), the entity that acquires the business (the
“acquirer”) will record 100% of all assets and liabilities of the acquired
business, including goodwill, generally at their fair values; certain contingent
assets and liabilities acquired will be recognized at their fair values on the
acquisition date; contingent consideration will be recognized at its fair value
on the acquisition date and, for certain arrangements, changes in fair value
will be recognized in earnings until settled; acquisition-related transaction
and restructuring costs will be expensed rather than treated as part of the cost
of the acquisition and included in the amount recorded for assets acquired; in
the case of in step acquisitions, previous equity interests in an acquiree held
prior to obtaining control will be revalued and compared to their
acquisition-date fair values, with any gain or loss recognized in earnings; when
making adjustments to finalize initial accounting, companies will revise any
previously issued post-acquisition financial information in future financial
statements to reflect any adjustments as if they had been recorded on the
acquisition date; reversals of valuation allowances related to acquired deferred
tax assets and changes to acquired income tax uncertainties will be recognized
in earnings, except for qualified measurement period adjustments (the
measurement period is a period of up to one year during which the initial
amounts recognized for an acquisition can be adjusted; this treatment is similar
to how changes in other assets and liabilities in a business combination will be
treated, and different from current accounting under which such changes are
treated as an adjustment of the cost of the acquisition); and asset values will
no longer be reduced when acquisitions result in a “bargain purchase,” instead
the bargain purchase will result in the recognition of a gain in earnings. The
significant change from current practice resulting from FAS 160 is that since
the noncontrolling interests are now considered as equity, transactions between
the parent company and the noncontrolling interests will be treated as equity
transactions as far as these transactions do not create a change in control. FAS
141R and FAS 160 are effective for fiscal years beginning on or after
December 15, 2008. FAS 141R will be applied prospectively, with the
exception of accounting for changes in a valuation allowance for acquired
deferred tax assets and the resolution of uncertain tax positions accounted for
under FIN 48. FAS 160 requires retroactive adoption of the presentation and
disclosure requirements for existing minority interests. All other requirements
of FAS 160 shall be applied prospectively. Early adoption is prohibited for both
standards. We are currently evaluating the effect the adoption of these
statements will have on our financial position and results of
operations.
In March
2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities (“FAS 161”). The new standard is
intended to improve financial reporting about derivative instruments and hedging
activities and to enable investors to better understand how these instruments
and activities affect an entity’s financial position, financial performance and
cash flows through enhanced disclosure requirements. FAS 161 is effective for
financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after
November 15, 2008, with early application permitted. We will adopt FAS
161
when
effective and are currently reviewing the new disclosure requirements and their
impact on our financial statements.
In May
2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 162, The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (“FAS 162”). The new standard identifies the
sources of accounting principles and the framework for selecting the principles
used in the preparation of financial statements of nongovernmental entities that
are presented in conformity with US generally accounting principles (“GAAP”).
The GAAP hierarchy previously resided in the American Institute of Certified
Accountants’ (“AICPA”) statements on auditing standards, which are directed to
the auditor rather than the reporting entity. FAS 162 moves the GAAP hierarchy
to the accounting literature, thereby directing it to reporting entities since
it is the entity, not its auditor, that is responsible for selecting accounting
principles for financial statements that are presented in conformity with GAAP.
FAS 162 is effective 60 days following the SEC’s approval of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) amendments to AU Section 411, The Meaning of Present Fairly in
Conformity With Generally Accepted Accounting Principles for financial
statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November
15, 2008, with early application permitted. We will adopt FAS 162 when effective
and management does not expect that FAS 162 will have a material effect on our
financial position and results of operations.
(c)
Accounting pronouncements that are not yet effective and are not expected to
impact our operations
In
November 2007, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue
No. 07-1, Accounting for
Collaborative Arrangements (“EITF 07-1”). The consensus prohibits the
application of Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 18, The Equity Method of Accounting
for Investments in Common Stock (“APB 18”) and the equity method of
accounting for collaborative arrangements unless a legal entity exists. Payments
between the collaborative partners would be evaluated and reported in the
consolidated statements of income based on applicable GAAP. Absent specific
GAAP, the entities that participate in the arrangement would apply other
existing GAAP by analogy or apply a reasonable and rational accounting policy
consistently. EITF 07-1 is effective for periods that begin after
December 15, 2008 and would apply to arrangements in existence as of the
effective date. The effect of the new consensus will be accounted for as a
change in accounting principle through retrospective application. We will adopt
EITF 07-1 when effective and management does not expect that EITF 07-1 will have
a material effect on our financial position and results of
operations.
In March
2008, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue No. 07-4,
Application of the Two-Class
Method under FAS 128 to Master Limited Partnerships (“EITF 07-4”). The
issue addresses the application of the two-class method for master limited
partnerships (“MLP”) when incentive distribution rights (“IDRs”) are present and
entitle the IDR holder to a portion of the distributions. The final consensus
states that when earnings exceed distributions, the computation of earnings per
unit (“EPU”) should be based on the terms of the partnership agreement.
Accordingly, any contractual limitations on the distributions to IDR holders
would need to be determined for each reporting period. EITF 07-4 is effective
for periods that begin after December 15, 2008 and will be accounted for as
a change in accounting principle through retrospective application. Early
application is prohibited. We will adopt EITF 07-4 when effective and management
does not expect that EITF 07-4 will have a material effect on our financial
position and results of operations.
In May
2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 163, Accounting for Financial Guarantee
Insurance Contracts (“FAS 163”). The new standard clarifies how Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards No. 60, Accounting and Reporting by
Insurance Enterprises (“FAS 60”) applies to financial guarantee insurance
contracts as defined in the new standard. FAS 163 is effective for financial
statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008, and all
interim periods within those fiscal years. Except for certain disclosures,
earlier application is not permitted. FAS 163 is not relevant to our operations
and thus management does not expect that FAS 163 will have a material effect on
our financial position and results of operations.
In June
2008, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue No. 07-5,
Determining Whether an
Instrument (or an Embedded Feature) Is Indexed to an Entity’s Own Stock
(“EITF 07-5”). The issue deals with how an entity should determine if an
instrument (or an embedded feature) is indexed to its own stock. The guidance in
Issue 07-5 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008 and
would be accounted for as a change in
accounting
principle through prospective application. Early adoption is not permitted. EITF
07-5 is not relevant to our operations and thus management does not expect that
EITF 07-5 will have a material effect on our financial position and results of
operations.
In June
2008, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue No. 08-3,
Accounting by Lessees for
Maintenance Deposits under Lease Agreements (“EITF 08-3”). The issue
addresses advance nonrefundable deposits made by a lessee to a lessor that will
be reimbursed to the lessee upon completion of maintenance on a leased asset.
The Task Force reached a final consensus that the maintenance payment should be
treated as a deposit asset, with the cost of maintenance expensed or capitalized
when it is performed. If the lessee determines that an amount on deposit is less
than probable of being returned to fund future maintenance cost or activity, it
shall be recognized as additional expense at that time. The guidance in Issue
08-3 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008 and would
be accounted for as a change in accounting
principle through a cumulative effect adjustment in opening retained earnings in
the year of adoption. We will adopt EITF 08-3 when effective and management does
not expect that EITF 08-3 will have a material effect on our financial position
and results of operations.
Equity
investments
Numonyx
On March
30, 2008 we finalized our joint venture agreement with Intel and Francisco
Partners L.P. for the creation of Numonyx. At closing, we contributed our flash
memory assets and businesses for a 48.6% equity ownership stake in common stock
and $156 million in long-term subordinated notes, which are further described in
Note 14 to the financial statements. Intel contributed its NOR assets and
certain assets related to PCM resources, while Francisco Partners L.P. invested
$150 million in cash. Intel and Francisco Partners equity ownership interest in
Numonyx is 45.1% in common shares and 6.3% in convertible preferred stock,
respectively. The convertible preferred stock of Francisco Partners includes
preferential payout rights. Also at closing, we accounted for our share in
Numonyx under the equity method based on the actual results of the venture. As
at June 28, 2008 we reported a $5 million loss for our Numonyx equity investment
on the line “Earnings (loss) on equity investments”. In the valuation of the
Numonyx investment under the equity method, we apply one-quarter lag reporting.
Consequently, equity gain (loss) related to Numonyx earnings for the second
quarter of 2008 will be reported by us in the third quarter of 2008. Business
conditions remain difficult for the flash memory business, so the earnings for
Numonyx in the second quarter of 2008 that will be reported by us in the third
quarter may be a loss, particularly after giving effect to certain purchase
accounting entries by Numonyx. We have recorded in the second quarter of 2008 on
the line “Earnings (loss) on equity investment” a $4 million decrease
to Numonyx equity investment related to an interest expense on the subordinated
notes and corresponding to the our equity interest in the financial expense of
Numonyx, as described in Note 8 to the financial statements. We also
recognized on the line “Earnings (loss) on equity investments” $1 million in
stock-based compensation and related payroll taxes recorded on awards granted to
employees transferred to Numonyx.
Upon
creation, Numonyx entered into financing arrangements for a $450 million term
loan and a $100 million committed revolving credit facility from two primary
financial institutions. The loans have a four-year term. We and Intel have each
granted in favor of Numonyx a 50% debt guarantee, not joint and several. In the
event of default and failure to repay the loans from Numonyx, the banks will
exercise our rights, subordinated to the repayment to senior lenders, to recover
the amounts paid under the guarantee through the sale of the
assets. The debt guarantee was evaluated under FIN 45. It
resulted in the recognition of a $69 million liability, corresponding to the
fair value of the guarantee at inception of the transaction. The liability was
recorded against the value of the equity investment. The debt guarantee
obligation was reported on the line “Other non-current liabilities” in the
consolidated balance sheet as at June 28, 2008.
At June
28, 2008 our investment in Numonyx amounted to $1,032 million.
Our
current maximum exposure to loss as a result of our involvement with Numonyx is
limited to our equity investment, our investment in subordinated notes and our
debt guarantee obligation.
Hynix
ST Joint Venture
In 2004,
we signed a joint-venture agreement with Hynix Semiconductor Inc. to build a
front-end memory-manufacturing facility in Wuxi City, Jiangsu Province, China.
Under the agreement, Hynix Semiconductor Inc.
contributed
$500 million for a 67% equity interest and we contributed $250 million for a 33%
equity interest. In addition, we originally committed to grant $250 million in
long-term financing to the new joint venture guaranteed by the subordinated
collateral of the joint-venture’s assets. We made the total $250 million capital
contributions as previously planned in the joint venture agreement in 2006. We
accounted for our share in the Hynix ST joint venture under the equity method
based on the actual results of the joint venture through the first quarter of
2008.
In 2007,
Hynix Semiconductor Inc. invested an additional $750 million in additional
shares of the joint venture to fund a facility expansion. As a result of this
investment, our interest in the joint venture declined from approximately 33% to
17%. At December 31, 2007 the investment in the joint venture amounted to $276
million and was included in assets held for sale on the consolidated balance
sheet as it was to be transferred to Numonyx upon the formation of that
company.
Due to
regulatory and withholding tax issues, we could not directly provide the joint
venture with the $250 million long-term financing as originally planned. As a
result, in 2006 we entered into a ten-year term debt guarantee agreement with an
external financial institution through which we guaranteed the repayment of the
loan by the joint venture to the bank. The guarantee agreement requires us to
place up to $250 million in cash in a deposit account. The guarantee deposit
will be used by the bank in case the joint venture fails to repay, with $250
million as the maximum potential amount of future payments we, as the guarantor,
could be required to make. In the event of default and failure to repay the loan
from the joint venture, the bank will exercise our rights, subordinated to the
repayment of senior lenders, to recover the amounts paid under the guarantee
through the sale of the joint-venture’s assets. In 2006, we placed $218 million
of cash on the guarantee deposit account. In the first half of 2007, we placed
the remaining $32 million of cash, which totaled $250 million as at June 28,
2008 and was reported as “Restricted cash” on the consolidated balance
sheet.
The debt
guarantee was evaluated under FIN 45. It resulted in the recognition of a $17
million liability, corresponding to the fair value of the guarantee at the
beginning of the transaction. The liability was recorded against the value of
the equity investment. The debt guarantee obligation was reported on the line
“Other non-current liabilities” in the consolidated balance sheet as at June 28,
2008 and we reported the debt guarantee on the line “Other investments and other
non-current assets” since the terms of the FMG deconsolidation do not include
the transfer of the guarantee.
Our
current maximum exposure to loss as a result of our involvement with the joint
venture is limited to our indirect investment through Numonyx and the debt
guarantee commitments.
Backlog and
Customers
The level
of bookings (including frame orders) continued to register at a solid level in
the second quarter of 2008, despite the difficult macroeconomic environment;
however, we entered the third quarter of 2008 with a backlog (including frame
orders, but excluding FMG as that business was sold in the first quarter) that
was basically equivalent to what we had entering the second quarter of 2008.
Backlog (including frame orders) is subject to possible cancellation, push back,
lower than expected hit of frame orders, etc., and thus, is not necessarily
indicative of billing amount or growth for the year.
In the
second quarter of 2008, we had several large customers, with the Nokia Group of
companies being the largest and accounting for approximately 18% of our
revenues, compared to 20% in the second quarter of 2007. We have no assurance
that the Nokia Group of companies, or any other customer, will continue to
generate revenues for us at the same levels. If we were to lose one or more of
our key customers, or if they were to significantly reduce their bookings, not
to confirm planned delivery dates on frame orders in a significant manner or
fail to meet their payment obligations, our operating results and financial
condition could be adversely affected.
Changes
to Our Share Capital, Stock Option Grants and Other Matters
The
following table sets forth changes to our share capital as of June 28,
2008:
Year
|
Transaction
|
Number
of shares
|
|
Nominal
value (Euro)
|
|
Cumulative
amount of capital (Euro)
|
|
Cumulative
number of shares
|
|
Nominal
value of increase/ reduction in capital
(Euro)
|
|
Amount
of issue premium (Euro)
|
|
Cumulative—issue premium
(Euro)
|
|
|
December
31, 2007
|
Exercise
of options
|
135,487 |
|
1.04 |
|
946,705,157 |
|
910,293,420 |
|
140,907 |
|
1,722,328 |
|
1,756,254,982 |
June
28, 2008
|
Exercise
of options
|
13,885 |
|
1.04 |
|
946,719,597 |
|
910,307,305 |
|
14,440 |
|
0 |
|
1,756,254,982 |
As of
June 28, 2008, we had 910,307,305 shares outstanding, including 14,061,954
shares owned as treasury stock to be used in our share repurchase program, of
which 6,734,450 were acquired in the second quarter of 2008. We also had
outstanding stock options exercisable into the equivalent of 41,784,926 common
shares and 6,173,667 unvested stock awards to be vested on treasury stock. Upon
fulfillment of the respective predetermined criteria, the first tranche of stock
awards granted under our 2007 stock-based plan vested on April 26, 2008, and the
second tranche and the last tranche of stock awards granted under our 2006 and
2005 stock-based plans, respectively, vested on April 27, 2008. For full details
of quantitative and qualitative information, see “Item 6. Directors, Senior
Management and Employees” as set forth in the Form 20-F, as may be updated from
time to time in our public filings, and see Notes 16 and 19 to our Unaudited
Interim Consolidated Financial Statements.
Disclosure
Controls and Procedures
Our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have evaluated the effectiveness
of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) of the
Exchange Act) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that
evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have
concluded that, as of the evaluation date, our disclosure controls and
procedures were effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by
us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded,
processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the
Commission’s rules and forms and is accumulated and communicated to our
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer as
appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure.
As part
of their evaluations, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
rely on the report and certification of our Chief Compliance Officer to whom the
internal audit and compliance activities have directly reported since December
2007. Apart from the above, there were no changes in our internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this report that
have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our
internal control over financial reporting.
Other
Reviews
We have
sent this report to our Audit Committee, which had an opportunity to raise
questions with our management and independent auditors before we submitted it to
the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Cautionary
Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
Some of
the statements contained in “Overview–Business Outlook” and in “Liquidity and
Capital Resources–Financial Outlook” and elsewhere in this Form 6-K that are not
historical facts are statements of future expectations and other forward-looking
statements (within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 or
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, each as amended) based on
management’s current views and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks
and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to
differ materially from those in such statements due to, among other
factors:
· our
ability to address changes in the exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and the
Euro, in particular with the furthering weakening of the U.S. dollar which
impacts our fixed costs incurred in Euros, when our selling prices are mainly in
U.S. dollars, our gross margins, as well as changes in the
exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and the currencies of the
other major countries in which we have our operating infrastructure;
· the
attainment of anticipated benefits of cooperative research and development
alliances and our ability to secure new process technologies in a timely and
cost effective manner so that the resultant products can be commercially viable
and acceptable in the marketplace;
· our
ability to sign and close an agreement for the sale of our manufacturing
facility in Phoenix, Arizona in accordance with the currently envisaged
terms;
· our
ability in an intensively competitive environment and cyclical industry to
design competitive products, to secure timely acceptance of our products by our
customers, to adequately operate our manufacturing facilities at sufficient
levels to cover fixed operating costs, and to achieve our pricing expectations
for high-volume supplies of new products in whose development we have been, or
are currently, investing;
· the
results of actions by our competitors, including new product offerings and our
ability to react thereto;
· pricing
pressures, losses or curtailments of purchases from key customers all of which
are highly variable and difficult to predict;
· the
ability of our suppliers to meet our demands for supplies and materials and to
offer competitive pricing;
· significant
differences in the gross margins we achieve compared to expectations, based on
changes in revenue levels, product mix and pricing, capacity utilization,
variations in inventory valuation, excess or obsolete inventory, manufacturing
yields, changes in unit costs, impairments of long-lived assets (including
manufacturing, assembly/test and intangible assets), and the timing and
execution of our manufacturing investment plans and associated costs, including
start-up costs;
· the
financial impact of obsolete or excess inventories if actual demand differs from
our manufacturing plans;
· future
developments of the world semiconductor market, in particular the future demand
for semiconductor products in the key application markets and from key customers
served by our products;
· changes
in our overall tax position as a result of changes in tax laws or pursuant to
tax audits, and our ability to accurately estimate tax credits, benefits,
deductions and provisions and to realize deferred tax assets;
· the
outcome of litigation;
· the
impact of intellectual property claims by our competitors or other third
parties, and our ability to obtain required licenses on reasonable terms and
conditions; and
· changes
in the economic, social or political environment, including military conflict
and/or terrorist activities, as well as natural events such as severe weather,
health risks, epidemics or earthquakes in the countries in which we, our key
customers and our suppliers, operate.
Such
forward-looking statements are subject to various risks and uncertainties, which
may cause actual results and performance of our business to differ materially
and adversely from the forward-looking statements. Certain forward-looking
statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology, such as
“believes,”
“expects,”
“may,” “are expected to,” “will,” “will continue,” “should,” “would be,” “seeks”
or “anticipates” or similar expressions or the negative thereof or other
variations thereof or comparable terminology, or by discussions of strategy,
plans or intentions. Some of these risk factors are set forth and are discussed
in more detail in “Item 3. Key Information—Risk Factors” in the Form 20-F.
Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should
underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from
those described in this Form 6-K as anticipated, believed or expected. We do not
intend, and do not assume any obligation, to update any industry information or
forward-looking statements set forth in this Form 6-K to reflect subsequent
events or circumstances.
Unfavorable
changes in the above or other factors listed under “Risk Factors” from time to
time in our SEC filings, could have a material adverse effect on our business
and/or financial condition.
|
|
UNAUDITED
INTERIM CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
Pages
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Income for the Three Months and Six Months Ended June 28,
2008 and June 30, 2007 (unaudited)
|
|
F-1
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of June 28, 2008 (unaudited) and December 31, 2007
(audited)
|
|
F-3
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the Three Months and Six Months Ended June
28, 2008 and June 30, 2007 (unaudited)
|
|
F-4
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity (unaudited)
|
|
F-5
|
|
Notes
to Interim Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited)
|
|
F-6
|
|
|
|
|
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, STMicroelectronics
N.V. has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date:
August
4, 2008
|
By:
|
/s/
Carlo Bozotti
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
Carlo
Bozotti
|
|
|
|
Title:
|
President
and Chief Executive Officer and Sole Member of our Managing
Board
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enclosure:
STMicroelectronics N.V.’s Second Quarter and First Half 2008:
|
●
|
Operating
and Financial Review and Prospects;
|
|
●
|
Unaudited
Interim Consolidated Statements of Income, Balance Sheets, Statements of
Cash Flow and Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity and related
Notes; and
|
|
●
|
Certifications
pursuant to Sections 302 and 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
submitted to the Commission on a voluntary
basis.
|
STMicroelectronics
N.V.
|
|
|
|
|
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
Three
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
June
28,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars except per share amounts
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
|
2,379 |
|
|
|
2,409 |
|
Other
revenues
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Net
revenues
|
|
|
2,391 |
|
|
|
2,418 |
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
(1,511 |
) |
|
|
(1,580 |
) |
Gross
profit
|
|
|
880 |
|
|
|
838 |
|
Selling,
general and administrative
|
|
|
(281 |
) |
|
|
(270 |
) |
Research
and development
|
|
|
(470 |
) |
|
|
(446 |
) |
Other
income and expenses, net
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
(185 |
) |
|
|
(906 |
) |
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(772 |
) |
Other-than-temporary
impairment charge on financial assets
|
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Interest
income, net
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Earnings
(loss) on equity investments
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
Loss
before income taxes and minority interests
|
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
(751 |
) |
Income
tax benefit (expense)
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
Loss
before minority interests
|
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(755 |
) |
Minority
interests
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Net
loss
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
(758 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per share (Basic)
|
|
|
(0.05 |
) |
|
|
(0.84 |
) |
Loss
per share (Diluted)
|
|
|
(0.05 |
) |
|
|
(0.84 |
) |
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited interim
consolidated financial statements
|
STMicroelectronics
N.V.
|
|
|
|
|
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
June
28,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars except per share amounts
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
|
4,841 |
|
|
|
4,678 |
|
Other
revenues
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Net
revenues
|
|
|
4,869 |
|
|
|
4,693 |
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
(3,090 |
) |
|
|
(3,070 |
) |
Gross
profit
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
1,623 |
|
Selling,
general and administrative
|
|
|
(585 |
) |
|
|
(531 |
) |
Research
and development
|
|
|
(978 |
) |
|
|
(881 |
) |
Other
income and expenses, net
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
(369 |
) |
|
|
(918 |
) |
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(114 |
) |
|
|
(710 |
) |
Other-than-temporary
impairment charge on financial assets
|
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Interest
income, net
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
Earnings
(loss) on equity investments
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
Loss
before income taxes and minority interests
|
|
|
(148 |
) |
|
|
(665 |
) |
Income
tax benefit (expense)
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
Loss
before minority interests
|
|
|
(129 |
) |
|
|
(680 |
) |
Minority
interests
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
Net
loss
|
|
|
(131 |
) |
|
|
(684 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per share (Basic)
|
|
|
(0.15 |
) |
|
|
(0.76 |
) |
Loss
per share (Diluted)
|
|
|
(0.15 |
) |
|
|
(0.76 |
) |
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited interim
consolidated financial statements
|
STMicroelectronics
N.V.
|
|
|
|
|
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
June
28,
|
December
31,
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
2008
|
2007
|
|
(unaudited)
|
(audited)
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
|
2,136 |
|
|
|
1,855 |
|
Marketable
securities
|
|
|
898 |
|
|
|
1,014 |
|
Trade
accounts receivable, net
|
|
|
1,473 |
|
|
|
1,605 |
|
Inventories,
net
|
|
|
1,580 |
|
|
|
1,354 |
|
Deferred
tax assets
|
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
Assets
held for sale
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
1,017 |
|
Other
receivables and assets
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
612 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
7,128 |
|
|
|
7,662 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
315 |
|
|
|
290 |
|
Other
intangible assets, net
|
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
5,059 |
|
|
|
5,044 |
|
Long-term
deferred tax assets
|
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
237 |
|
Equity
investments
|
|
|
1,032 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Restricted
cash
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
Non-current
marketable securities
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
Other
investments and other non-current assets
|
|
|
377 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
|
7,925 |
|
|
|
6,610 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
15,053 |
|
|
|
14,272 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
and shareholders' equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
Trade
accounts payable
|
|
|
1,161 |
|
|
|
1,065 |
|
Other
payables and accrued liabilities
|
|
|
981 |
|
|
|
744 |
|
Dividends
payable to shareholders
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Deferred
tax liabilities
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Accrued
income tax
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
2,679 |
|
|
|
2,077 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
debt
|
|
|
2,313 |
|
|
|
2,117 |
|
Reserve
for pension and termination indemnities
|
|
|
304 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
Long-term
deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Other
non-current liabilities
|
|
|
311 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
|
2,961 |
|
|
|
2,569 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
|
5,640 |
|
|
|
4,646 |
|
Commitment
and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority
interests
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock (preferred stock: 540,000,000 shares authorized, not issued; common
stock: Euro 1.04 nominal value, 1,200,000,000 shares authorized,
910,307,305 shares issued, 896,245,351 shares outstanding)
|
|
|
1,156 |
|
|
|
1,156 |
|
Capital
surplus
|
|
|
2,145 |
|
|
|
2,097 |
|
Accumulated
result
|
|
|
4,736 |
|
|
|
5,274 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
|
|
1,593 |
|
|
|
1,320 |
|
Treasury
stock
|
|
|
(273 |
) |
|
|
(274 |
) |
Shareholders'
equity
|
|
|
9,357 |
|
|
|
9,573 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders' equity
|
|
|
15,053 |
|
|
|
14,272 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited interim
consolidated financial statements
|
STMicroelectronics
N.V.
|
|
|
|
|
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
June
28,
|
|
|
June
30,
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
|
|
(131 |
) |
|
|
(684 |
) |
Items
to reconcile net loss and cash flows from operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
666 |
|
|
|
770 |
|
Amortization
of discount on convertible debt
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Other-than-temporary
impairment charge on financial assets
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other
non-cash items
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Minority
interests
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Deferred
income tax
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
(Earnings)
loss on equity investments
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs, net of cash
payments
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
885 |
|
Changes
in assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade
receivables, net
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Inventories,
net
|
|
|
(179 |
) |
|
|
(53 |
) |
Trade
payables
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Other
assets and liabilities, net
|
|
|
(176 |
) |
|
|
(58 |
) |
Net
cash from operating activities
|
|
|
918 |
|
|
|
940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment
for purchases of tangible assets
|
|
|
(530 |
) |
|
|
(507 |
) |
Payment
for purchase of marketable securities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(682 |
) |
Proceeds
from sale of marketable securities
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
Proceeds
from matured short-term deposits
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
250 |
|
Restricted
cash
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
Investment
in intangible and financial assets
|
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
Payment
for business acquisitions, net of cash and cash equivalents
acquired
|
|
|
(170 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(581 |
) |
|
|
(967 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds
from long-term debt
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Repayment
of long-term debt
|
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
(52 |
) |
Increase
in short-term facilities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
40 |
|
Capital
increase
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Repurchase
of common stock
|
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Dividends
paid
|
|
|
(81 |
) |
|
|
(269 |
) |
Net
cash used in financing activities
|
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
(262 |
) |
Effect
of changes in exchange rates
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Net
cash increase (decrease)
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
(285 |
) |
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of the period
|
|
|
1,855 |
|
|
|
1,659 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of the period
|
|
|
2,136 |
|
|
|
1,374 |
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited interim
consolidated financial statements
|
|
STMicroelectronics
N.V.
|
|
|
|
|
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDER’S
EQUITY
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars, except per share amounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
Capital
|
|
Treasury
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
Shareholders'
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Surplus
|
|
Stock
|
|
Result
|
|
income
|
|
Equity
|
|
Balance
as of December 31, 2006 (audited)
|
|
1,156 |
|
2,021 |
|
(332 |
) |
6,086 |
|
816 |
|
9,747 |
|
Cumulative
effect of FIN 48 adoption
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Capital
increase
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
|
74 |
|
58 |
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
74 |
|
Comprehensive
income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(477 |
) |
|
|
(477 |
) |
Other
comprehensive income, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
504 |
|
504 |
|
Comprehensive
income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
|
Dividends,
$0.30 per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(269 |
) |
|
|
(269 |
) |
Balance
as of December 31, 2007 (audited)
|
|
1,156 |
|
2,097 |
|
(274 |
) |
5,274 |
|
1,320 |
|
9,573 |
|
Capital
increase
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
Repurchase
of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
(83 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(83 |
) |
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
84 |
|
(84 |
) |
|
|
48 |
|
Comprehensive
income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(131 |
) |
|
|
(131 |
) |
Other
comprehensive income, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
273 |
|
273 |
|
Comprehensive
income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
142 |
|
Dividends,
$0.36 per share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(323 |
) |
|
|
(323 |
) |
Balance
as of June 28, 2008 (unaudited)
|
|
1,156 |
|
2,145 |
|
(273 |
) |
4,736 |
|
1,593 |
|
9,357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited interim
consolidated financial statements
|
STMicroelectronics
N.V.
Notes to Interim Consolidated Financial
Statements (Unaudited)
STMicroelectronics
N.V. (the “Company”) is registered in the Netherlands with its statutory
domicile in Amsterdam and its corporate headquarters located in Geneva,
Switzerland.
The
Company is a global independent semiconductor company that designs, develops,
manufactures and markets a broad range of semiconductor integrated circuits
(“ICs”) and discrete devices. The Company offers a diversified product portfolio
and develops products for a wide range of market applications, including
automotive products, computer peripherals, telecommunications systems, consumer
products, industrial automation and control systems. Within its diversified
portfolio, the Company has focused on developing products that leverage its
technological strengths in creating customized, system-level solutions with
high-growth digital and mixed-signal content.
The
Company’s fiscal year ends on December 31. Interim periods are established for
accounting purposes on a thirteen-week basis. In the first quarter of 2008, as a
direct result of closing a significant business disposal transaction on March
30, 2008, the Company decided to extend its first quarter reporting date by one
day to March 30. This change had no material impact on the first quarter 2008
statement of income. The Company’s second quarter ended on June 28 and its third
and fourth quarter will end on September 27 and on December 31,
respectively.
The
accompanying Unaudited Interim Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company
have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”), consistent in all material
respects with those applied for the year ended December 31, 2007. The interim
financial information is unaudited but reflects all normal adjustments which
are, in the opinion of management, necessary to provide a fair statement of
results for the periods presented. The results of operations for the interim
period are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the
entire year.
All
balances and values in the current and prior periods are in millions of U.S.
dollars, except shares and per-share amounts.
The
accompanying Unaudited Interim Consolidated Financial Statements do not include
certain footnotes and financial presentation normally required on an annual
basis under U.S. GAAP. Therefore, these interim financial statements should be
read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements in the Company’s
Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended
December
31, 2007, as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”)
on March 3, 2008.
The
preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported
amounts of net revenue and expenses during the reporting period. The primary
areas that require significant estimates and judgments by management include,
but are not limited to, sales returns and allowances, allowances for doubtful
accounts, inventory reserves and normal manufacturing capacity thresholds to
determine costs capitalized in inventory, accruals for warranty costs,
litigation and claims, assumptions used to discount monetary assets expected to
be recovered beyond one year, valuation of acquired intangibles, goodwill,
investments and tangible assets as well as the impairment of their related
carrying values, estimated value of the consideration to be received and used as
fair value for the asset group classified as assets to be held for sale,
measurement of the fair value of marketable securities classified as
available-for-sale for which no observable market price is obtainable,
restructuring charges, assumptions used in calculating pension obligations and
share-based compensation including assessment of the number of awards expected
to vest upon the satisfaction of certain conditions of future performance,
assumptions used to measure and recognize a liability for the fair value of the
obligation the Company assumes at the inception of a guarantee, measurement of
the hedge effectiveness of derivative instruments, deferred income tax assets
including required valuation allowances and liabilities as well
as provisions for specifically identified income tax exposures and
income tax uncertainties. The Company bases the estimates and assumptions on
historical experience and on various other factors such as market trends and
business plans that it believes to be reasonable under the circumstances, the
results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values
of assets and liabilities. While the Company regularly evaluates its estimates
and assumptions, the actual results experienced by the Company could differ
materially and adversely from management’s estimates. To the extent there are
material differences between the estimates and the actual results, future
results of operations, cash flows and financial position could be significantly
affected. In the first quarter of 2008, the Company launched its first 300-mm
production facility. Consequently, the Company assessed the useful life of its
300-mm manufacturing equipment, based on relevant economic and technical
factors. The conclusion was that the appropriate depreciation period for such
300-mm equipment was 10 years. This policy was applied starting January 1,
2008.
|
5.
|
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
|
In
September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157, Fair Value Measurements (“FAS
157”). This statement defines fair value as “the price that would be received to
sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between
market participants at the measurement date.” In addition, the
statement defines a fair value hierarchy which should be used when determining
fair values, except as specifically excluded (i.e., stock awards, measurements
requiring vendor specific
objective
evidence, and inventory pricing). The hierarchy places the greatest relevance on
Level 1 inputs which include quoted prices in active markets for identical
assets or liabilities. Level 2 inputs, which are observable either directly or
indirectly, include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted
prices in non-active markets, and inputs that could vary based on either the
condition of the assets or liabilities or volume sold. The lowest level of the
hierarchy, Level 3, is unobservable inputs and should only be used when
observable inputs are not available. This would include company level
assumptions and should be based on the best available information under the
circumstances. FAS 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007. However, in February 2008, the Financial Accounting
Standards Board issued an FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) that partially deferred
the effective date of FAS 157 for one year for nonfinancial assets and
nonfinancial liabilities that are recognized at fair value in the financial
statements on a nonrecurring basis. However, the FSP did not defer recognition
and disclosure requirements for financial assets and financial liabilities or
for nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities that are measured at least
annually, which do not include goodwill. The Company adopted FAS 157 on January
1, 2008. FAS 157 adoption is prospective, with no cumulative effect of the
change in the accounting guidance for fair value measurement to be recorded as
an adjustment to retained earnings, except for the following: valuation of
financial instruments previously measured with block premiums and discounts;
valuation of certain financial instruments and derivatives at fair value using
the transaction price; and valuation of a hybrid instrument previously measured
at fair value using the transaction price. The Company did not record, upon
adoption, any adjustment to retained earnings since it does not hold any of the
three categories of instruments described above. Consequently, consolidated
financial statements as of January 1, 2008 reflected fair value measures in
compliance with previous GAAP. In the first quarter of 2008, the Company
reassessed fair value on financial assets and liabilities in compliance with FAS
157. The Company identified the valuation of available-for-sale securities for
which no observable market price is obtainable as an item for which detailed
assessment on FAS 157 impact was required. Management estimates that the fair
value of these instruments when measured in compliance with FAS 157 does not
materially differ from the estimates applied to U.S. GAAP in previous periods
and that the fair value measure, even if using certain entity-specific
assumptions, is in line with an FAS 157 fair value hierarchy. The Company is
also assessing the future impact of FAS 157 when adopted for nonfinancial assets
and liabilities that are recognized at fair value in the financial statements on
a nonrecurring basis, such as impaired long-lived assets or goodwill. For
goodwill impairment testing and the use of fair value of tested reporting units,
the Company is currently reviewing its goodwill impairment model to measure fair
value on marketable comparables, instead of discounted cash flows generated by
each reporting entity. Based on the Company’s preliminary assessment, management
estimates that FAS 157 adoption could have an effect on certain future goodwill
impairment tests, in the event the Company’s strategic plan could necessitate
changes in the product portfolios, upon the final date of adoption of FAS
157.
In
February 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities- Including an amendment of FASB Statement No.
115 (“FAS 159”). This statement permits companies to choose to
measure eligible items at fair value at specified election dates and report
unrealized gains and losses in earnings at each subsequent reporting date on
items for which the fair value option has been elected. The objective of this
statement is to improve financial reporting by providing companies with the
opportunity to mitigate volatility in reported
earnings
caused by measuring related assets and liabilities differently without having to
apply complex hedge accounting provisions. A company may decide whether to elect
the fair value option for each eligible item on its election date, subject to
certain requirements described in the statement. FAS 159 is effective for fiscal
years beginning after November 15, 2007 with early adoption permitted for
fiscal year 2007 if first quarter statements have not been issued. The Company
adopted FAS 159 on January 1, 2008 and has not elected to apply the fair value
option on any of its assets and liabilities as permitted by FAS
159.
In June
2007, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue No. 06-11,
Accounting for Income Tax
Benefits of Dividends on Share-Based Payment Awards (“EITF 06-11”). The
issue applies to equity-classified nonvested shares on which dividends are paid
prior to vesting, equity-classified nonvested share units on which dividends
equivalents are paid, and equity-classified share options on which payments
equal to the dividends paid on the underlying shares are made to the
option-holder while the option is outstanding. The issue is applicable to the
dividends or dividend equivalents that are (1) charged to retained earnings
under the guidance in Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123
(Revised 2004), Share-Based
Payment (“FAS 123R”) and (2) result in an income tax deduction
for the employer. EITF 06-11 states that a realized tax benefit from dividends
or dividend equivalents that are charged to retained earnings and paid to
employees for equity-classified nonvested shares, nonvested equity share units,
and outstanding share options should be recognized as an increase to additional
paid-in-capital. Those tax benefits are considered excess tax benefits
(“windfall”) under FAS 123R. EITF 06-11 must be applied prospectively to
dividends declared in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2007 and
interim periods within those fiscal years, with early adoption permitted for the
income tax benefits of dividends on equity-based awards that are declared in
periods for which financial statements have not yet been issued. The Company
adopted EITF 06-11 in the first quarter of 2008 and EITF 06-11 did not have any
impact on its financial position and results of operations.
In June
2007, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue No. 07-3,
Accounting for Advance
Payments for Goods or Services to Be Used in Future Research and Development
Activities (“EITF 07-3”). The issue addresses whether non-refundable
advance payments for goods or services that will be used or rendered for
research and development activities should be expensed when the advance payments
are made or when the research and development activities have been performed.
EITF 07-3 applies only to non-refundable advance payments for goods and services
to be used and rendered in future research and development activities pursuant
to an executory contractual arrangement. EITF 07-3 states that non-refundable
advance payments for future research and development activities should be
capitalized until the goods have been delivered or the related services have
been performed. If an entity does not expect the goods to be delivered or
services to be rendered, the capitalized advance payment should be charged to
expense. EITF 07-3 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2007 and interim periods within those fiscal years. Earlier
application is not permitted and entities should recognize the effect of
applying the guidance in this Issue prospectively for new contracts entered into
after the EITF 07-3 effective date. The Company adopted EITF 07-3 in the first
quarter of 2008 and EITF 07-3 did not have a material effect on its financial
position and results of operations.
In
November 2007, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue
No. 07-6, Accounting for the
Sale of Real Estate When the Agreement Includes a Buy-Sell Clause
(“EITF
07-6”).
The issue addresses whether the existence of a buy-sell arrangement would
preclude partial sales treatment when real estate is sold to a jointly owned
entity. The consensus provides that the existence of a buy-sell clause does not
necessarily preclude partial sale treatment under Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 66, Accounting for Sales of Real
Estate (“FAS 66”). EITF 07-6 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2007 and would be applied prospectively to transactions
entered into after the effective date. The Company adopted EITF 07-6 in the
first quarter of 2008 and EITF 07-6 did not have a material effect on its
financial position and results of operations.
In
November 2007, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 109, Written Loan Commitments Recorded at
Fair Value Through Earnings (“SAB 109”). SAB 109 provides the Staff’s
views regarding written loan commitments that are accounted for at fair value
through earnings under GAAP. SAB 109 revises and rescinds portions of Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 105, Application of Accounting Principles
to Loan Commitments (“SAB 105”). SAB 105 stated that in measuring the
fair value of a derivative loan commitment it would be inappropriate to
incorporate the expected net future cash flows related to the associated
servicing of the loan. Consistent with FAS 156 and FAS 159, SAB 109 states that
the expected net future cash flows related to the associated servicing of the
loan should be included in the measurement of all written loan commitments that
are accounted for at fair value through earnings. SAB 109 does, however, retain
the Staff’s views included in SAB 105 that no internally-developed intangible
assets should be included in the measurement of the estimated fair value of a
loan commitment derivative. SAB 109 is effective for all written loan
commitments recorded at fair value that are entered into, or substantially
modified, in fiscal quarters beginning after December 15, 2007. The Company
adopted SAB 109 in the first quarter of 2008 and SAB 109 did not have a material
effect on its financial position and results of operations.
In
January 2008, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued Staff
Accounting Bulletin No. 110, Year-End Help for Expensing Employee
Stock Options (“SAB 110”). SAB 110 expresses the views of the Staff
regarding the use of a "simplified" method, in developing an estimate of
expected term of "plain vanilla" share options in accordance with FAS 123R and
amended its previous guidance under SAB 107 which prohibited entities from using
the simplified method for stock option grants after December 31, 2007. The Staff
amended its previous guidance because additional information about employee
exercise behavior has not become widely available. With SAB 110, the Staff
permits entities to use, under certain circumstances, the simplified method
beyond December 31, 2007 if they conclude that their data about employee
exercise behavior does not provide a reasonable basis for estimating the
expected-term assumption. SAB 110 is not relevant to the Company’s operations
since the Company redefined in 2005 its compensation policy by no longer
granting stock options but rather issuing nonvested shares.
(b)
Accounting pronouncements expected to impact the Company’s operations that are
not yet effective and have not been adopted early by the Company
In
December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 141 (Revised 2007), Business Combinations (“FAS
141R”) and No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements, an amendment of ARB
No.
51 (“FAS 160”). These new
standards will initiate substantive and pervasive changes that will impact both
the accounting for future acquisition deals and the measurement and presentation
of previous acquisitions in consolidated financial statements. The standards
continue the movement toward the greater use of fair values in financial
reporting. FAS 141R will significantly change how business acquisitions are
accounted for and will impact financial statements both on the acquisition date
and in subsequent periods. FAS 160 will change the accounting and reporting for
minority interests, which will be recharacterized as noncontrolling interests
and classified as a component of equity. The significant changes from current
practice resulting from FAS 141R are: the definitions of a business and a
business combination have been expanded, resulting in an increased number of
transactions or other events that will qualify as business combinations; for all
business combinations (whether partial, full, or step acquisitions), the entity
that acquires the business (the "acquirer") will record 100% of all assets and
liabilities of the acquired business, including goodwill, generally at their
fair values; certain contingent assets and liabilities acquired will be
recognized at their fair values on the acquisition date; contingent
consideration will be recognized at its fair value on the acquisition date and,
for certain arrangements, changes in fair value will be recognized in earnings
until settled; acquisition-related transaction and restructuring costs will be
expensed rather than treated as part of the cost of the acquisition and included
in the amount recorded for assets acquired; in step acquisitions, previous
equity interests in an acquiree held prior to obtaining control will be
remeasured to their acquisition-date fair values, with any gain or loss
recognized in earnings; when making adjustments to finalize initial accounting,
companies will revise any previously issued post-acquisition financial
information in future financial statements to reflect any adjustments as if they
had been recorded on the acquisition date; reversals of valuation allowances
related to acquired deferred tax assets and changes to acquired income tax
uncertainties will be recognized in earnings, except for qualified measurement
period adjustments (the measurement period is a period of up to one year during
which the initial amounts recognized for an acquisition can be adjusted; this
treatment is similar to how changes in other assets and liabilities in a
business combination will be treated, and different from current accounting
under which such changes are treated as an adjustment of the cost of the
acquisition); and asset values will no longer be reduced when acquisitions
result in a "bargain purchase,” instead the bargain purchase will result in the
recognition of a gain in earnings. The significant change from current practice
resulting from FAS 160 is that since the noncontrolling interests are now
considered as equity, transactions between the parent company and the
noncontrolling interests will be treated as equity transactions as far as these
transactions do not create a change in control. FAS 141R and FAS 160 are
effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2008. FAS
141R will be applied prospectively, with the exception of accounting for changes
in a valuation allowance for acquired deferred tax assets and the resolution of
uncertain tax positions accounted for under FIN 48. FAS 160 requires retroactive
adoption of the presentation and disclosure requirements for existing minority
interests. All other requirements of FAS 160 shall be applied prospectively.
Early adoption is prohibited for both standards. The Company is currently
evaluating the effect the adoption of these statements will have on its
financial position and results of operations.
In March
2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities (“FAS 161”). The new standard is
intended to improve financial reporting about derivative instruments and hedging
activities and to enable investors to better understand how these instruments
and activities affect an entity’s financial position, financial performance and
cash
flows
through enhanced disclosure requirements. FAS 161 is effective for financial
statements issued for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November
15, 2008, with early application permitted. The Company will adopt FAS 161 when
effective and is currently reviewing the new disclosure requirements and their
impact on its financial statements.
In May
2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 162, The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (“FAS 162”). The new standard identifies the
sources of accounting principles and the framework for selecting the principles
used in the preparation of financial statements of nongovernmental entities that
are presented in conformity with US generally accounting principles (“GAAP”).
The U.S. GAAP hierarchy previously resided in the American Institute of
Certified Accountants’ (“AICPA”) statements on auditing standards, which are
directed to the auditor rather than the reporting entity. FAS 162 moves the U.S.
GAAP hierarchy to the accounting literature, thereby directing it to reporting
entities since it is the entity, not its auditor, that is responsible for
selecting accounting principles for financial statements that are presented in
conformity with GAAP. FAS 162 is effective 60 days following the SEC’s approval
of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) amendments to AU
Section 411, The Meaning of
Present Fairly in Conformity With Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles for financial statements issued for fiscal years and interim
periods beginning after November 15, 2008, with early application permitted. The
Company will adopt FAS 162 when effective and management does not expect that
FAS 162 will have a material effect on its financial position and results of
operations.
(c)
Accounting pronouncements that are not yet effective and are not expected to
impact the Company’s operations
In
November 2007, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue
No. 07-1, Accounting for
Collaborative Arrangements (“EITF 07-1”). The consensus prohibits the
application of Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 18, The Equity Method of Accounting
for Investments in Common Stock (“APB 18”) and the equity method of
accounting for collaborative arrangements unless a legal entity exists. Payments
between the collaborative partners would be evaluated and reported in the
consolidated statements of income based on applicable GAAP. Absent specific
GAAP, the entities that participate in the arrangement would apply other
existing U.S. GAAP by analogy or apply a reasonable and rational accounting
policy consistently. EITF 07-1 is effective for periods that begin after
December 15, 2008 and would apply to arrangements in existence as of the
effective date. The effect of the new consensus will be accounted for as a
change in accounting principle through retrospective application. The Company
will adopt EITF 07-1 when effective and management does not expect that EITF
07-1 will have a material effect on the Company’s financial position and results
of operations.
In March
2008, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue No. 07-4,
Application of the Two-Class
Method under FAS 128 to Master Limited Partnerships (“EITF 07-4”). The
issue addresses the application of the two-class method for master limited
partnerships (“MLP”) when incentive distribution rights (“IDRs”) are present and
entitle the IDR holder to a portion of the distributions. The final consensus
states that when earnings exceed distributions, the computation of earnings per
unit (“EPU”) should be based on the terms of the partnership agreement.
Accordingly, any contractual limitations on the distributions to IDR holders
would
need to
be determined for each reporting period. EITF 07-4 is effective for periods that
begin after December 15, 2008 and will be accounted for as a change in
accounting principle through retrospective application. Early application is
prohibited. The Company will adopt EITF 07-4 when effective and management does
not expect that EITF 07-4 will have a material effect on the Company’s financial
position and results of operations.
In May
2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 163, Accounting for Financial Guarantee
Insurance Contracts (“FAS 163”). The new standard clarifies how Statement
of Financial Accounting Standards No. 60, Accounting and Reporting by
Insurance Enterprises (“FAS 60”) applies to financial guarantee insurance
contracts as defined in the new standard. FAS 163 is effective for financial
statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008, and all
interim periods within those fiscal years. Except for certain disclosures,
earlier application is not permitted. FAS 163 is not relevant to the Company’s
operations and thus management does not expect that FAS 163 will have a material
effect on the Company’s financial position and results of
operations.
In June
2008, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue No. 07-5,
Determining Whether an
Instrument (or an Embedded Feature) Is Indexed to an Entity’s Own Stock
(“EITF 07-5”). The issue deals with how an entity should determine if an
instrument (or an embedded feature) is indexed to its own stock. The guidance in
Issue 07-5 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008 and
would be accounted for as a change in accounting principle through prospective
application. Early adoption is not permitted. EITF 07-5 is not relevant to the
Company’s operations and thus management does not expect that EITF 07-5 will
have a material effect on the Company’s financial position and results of
operations.
In June
2008, the Emerging Issues Task Force reached final consensus on Issue No. 08-3,
Accounting by Lessees for
Maintenance Deposits under Lease Agreements (“EITF 08-3”). The issue
addresses advance nonrefundable deposits made by a lessee to a lessor that will
be reimbursed to the lessee upon completion of maintenance on a leased asset.
The Task Force reached a final consensus that the maintenance payment should be
treated as a deposit asset, with the cost of maintenance expensed or capitalized
when it is performed. If the lessee determines that an amount on deposit is less
than probable of being returned to fund future maintenance cost or activity, it
shall be recognized as additional expense at that time. The guidance in Issue
08-3 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008 and would
be accounted for as a change in accounting principle through a cumulative effect
adjustment in opening retained earnings in the year of adoption. The Company
will adopt EITF 08-3 when effective and management does not expect that EITF
08-3 will have a material effect on the Company’s financial position and results
of operations.
|
6.
|
Other
Income and Expenses, Net
|
Other
income and expenses, net consisted of the following:
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
Three
months ended
|
|
|
Six
months ended
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
|
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
|
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development funding
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Start-up
costs
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Exchange
gain (loss), net
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Patent
litigation costs
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
Patent
pre-litigation costs
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Gain
on sale of non-current assets, net
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other,
net
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Other income and expenses, net
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Patent
litigation costs include legal and attorney fees and payment of claims, and
patent pre-litigation costs are composed of consultancy fees and legal fees.
Patent litigation costs are costs incurred in respect of pending litigation.
Patent pre-litigation costs are costs incurred to prepare for licensing
discussions with third parties with a view to concluding an
agreement.
Following
the passage of the French Finance Act for 2008, which included several changes
to the research tax credit regime, beginning on January 1, 2008, French research
tax credits that in prior years were accounted for as a reduction in income tax
expense were deemed to be grants in substance. However, unlike other research
and development funding, the amounts are determinable in advance and accruable
as research expenditures are made. Therefore, these credits, which amounted to
$37 million for the second quarter of 2008 and $73 million for the first half of
2008, were accounted for as a reduction of research and development
expenses.
For the
six months ended June 28, 2008 “Other, net” included a $2 million income net of
attorney and consultancy fees that the Company received in its ongoing pursuit
to recover damages related to the case with its former Treasurer as previously
disclosed.
|
7.
|
Impairment,
Restructuring Charges and Other Related Closure
Costs
|
In the
second quarter of 2008, the Company incurred impairment and restructuring
charges related principally to the Flash memory asset disposal (“FMG
deconsolidation”) and the manufacturing plan committed to by the Company in the
second quarter of 2007 (the “2007 restructuring plan”).
In the
second quarter of 2007, the Company announced it had entered into a definitive
agreement with Intel to create a new independent semiconductor company, Numonyx,
from the key assets of the Company’s and Intel’s Flash memory business, as
described in Note 12. In 2007, upon meeting FAS 144 criteria for assets held for
sale, the Company reclassified the to-be-contributed assets as current assets
and started to incur impairment and restructuring charges related to the
disposal of the memory business. On March 30, 2008 the Company closed the deal
to create the Numonyx venture and to deconsolidate the FMG contributed assets
accordingly.
The
Company announced in the third quarter of 2007 that management had committed to
a new restructuring plan. This plan is aimed at redefining the Company’s
manufacturing strategy in order to be more competitive in the semiconductor
market. In addition to the prior restructuring measures undertaken in past
years, which include the 150-mm restructuring plan and the headcount
reduction plan, this new manufacturing plan will pursue, among other
initiatives: the transfer of 150-mm production from Carrollton, Texas
to Asia, the transfer of 200-mm
production
from Phoenix, Arizona, to Europe and Asia and the restructuring of the
manufacturing operations in Morocco with a progressive phase out of the
activities in Ain Sebaa site synchronized with a significant growth in the
Company’s Bouskoura site. In the first half of 2008, upon receipt of certain
offers by third parties, the Company is planning to sell its Phoenix facilities.
Upon meeting FAS 144 criteria for assets held for sale in the second quarter of
2008, the Company reclassified the assets to be sold as current assets and
incurred impairment charges related to their disposal.
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs incurred in the second
quarter of 2008 are summarized as follows:
(Unaudited)
|
Three
months ended on June 28, 2008
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
Impairment
and additional disposal loss
|
Restructuring
charges
|
Other
related closure costs
|
Total impairment, restructuring
charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
restructuring plan
|
114
|
25
|
2
|
141
|
FMG
deconsolidation
|
25
|
1
|
9
|
35
|
Other
|
-
|
9
|
-
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
impairment, restructuring charges and other related closure
costs
|
139
|
35
|
11
|
185
|
(Unaudited)
|
Six
months ended on June 28, 2008
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
Impairment
and additional disposal loss
|
Restructuring
charges
|
Other
related closure costs
|
Total impairment, restructuring
charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
restructuring plan
|
114
|
38
|
3
|
155
|
FMG
deconsolidation
|
189
|
2
|
10
|
201
|
Other
|
-
|
11
|
2
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
impairment, restructuring charges and other related closure
costs
|
303
|
51
|
15
|
369
|
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs incurred in the second
quarter of 2007 are summarized as follows:
(Unaudited)
|
Three
months ended on June 30, 2007
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
Impairment
and additional disposal loss
|
Restructuring
charges
|
Other
related closure costs
|
Total impairment, restructuring
charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
restructuring plan
|
-
|
40
|
-
|
40
|
FMG
deconsolidation
|
857
|
-
|
-
|
857
|
Other
|
-
|
-
|
9
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
impairment, restructuring charges and other related closure
costs
|
857
|
40
|
9
|
906
|
(Unaudited)
|
Six
months ended on June 30, 2007
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
Impairment
and additional disposal loss
|
Restructuring
charges
|
Other
related closure costs
|
Total impairment, restructuring
charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
restructuring plan
|
-
|
40
|
-
|
40
|
FMG
deconsolidation
|
857
|
-
|
-
|
857
|
Other
|
-
|
2
|
19
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
impairment, restructuring charges and other related closure
costs
|
857
|
42
|
19
|
918
|
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs incurred in the second
quarter of 2007 were $906 million, of which $857 million were for the impairment
loss on FMG assets to be sold, $40 million for the 2007 restructuring plan
relating to the Company’s fabs in Phoenix and Carrollton (USA) as well as
back-end facilities in Ain-Sebaa (Morocco) and $9 million for past
initiatives.
Impairment
charges and additional disposal loss
On March
30, 2008 upon the closing of the previously announced the deal to create
Numonyx, the Company contributed its Flash memory business to the newly existing
entity. The Company incurred in the first half of 2008 a loss of $189 million,
consisting of a $164 million impairment charge recorded in the first quarter of
2008 and an additional loss of $25 million, which was recorded in the second
quarter of 2008 as a consequence of additional charges borne by the Company in
relation to the contributed assets. The total loss of the FMG deconsolidation
amounted to $1,295 million, of which $1,106 million was recorded in the year
ended December 31, 2007.
In the
second quarter of 2008, the Company reclassified, as current assets on the line “Assets
held for sale” on the consolidated balance sheet, the long-lived assets
of its manufacturing site in Phoenix, Arizona (that had previously been
designated for closure as part of the 2007 restructuring plan), pursuant to its
decision during the quarter to sell the facility as a going concern. The
reclassified assets are primarily property and other long-lived assets that
satisfied, as at June 28, 2008, all of the criteria required for “held-for-sale”
status as set forth in Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 144,
Accounting for the Impairment
or Disposal of Long-Term Assets (“FAS 144”). The carrying value of the
assets to be sold totaled $175 million at the date of the reclassification,
while fair value less costs to sell amounted to approximately $61 million, which
generated an impairment charge of $114 million recorded in the second quarter
of
2008.
Fair value less costs to sell was based on the consideration to be received upon
the sale, which is expected to occur within one year.
Restructuring
charges and other related closure costs
Provisions
for restructuring charges and other related closure costs as at June 28, 2008
are summarized as follows in millions of U.S. dollars:
|
2007
Restructuring Plan
|
FMG
Disposal
|
Other
Restructuring Initiatives
|
Total
Restructuring & Other Related Closure Costs
|
Provision
as at December 31, 2007
|
60
|
2
|
20
|
82
|
Changes
incurred in H 1 2008
|
41
|
37
|
13
|
91
|
Provision
on business combination
|
-
|
-
|
2
|
2
|
Amounts
paid
|
(12)
|
(5)
|
(15)
|
(32)
|
Currency
Translation Effect
|
-
|
-
|
2
|
2
|
Provision
as at June 28, 2008
|
89
|
34
|
22
|
145
|
2007
restructuring plan:
Pursuant
to its commitment to a restructuring plan aimed at improving its
competitiveness, the Company recorded in the first half of 2008 a total
restructuring charge amounting to $41 million, primarily related to one-time
termination benefits related to the Carrollton, Texas and Phoenix, Arizona
fabs.
FMG
disposal:
In the
first half of 2008, the Company recorded $37 million restructuring charges
related to FMG deconsolidation, of which $25 million were an additional loss on
the disposal recorded in the second quarter of 2008 and $12 million were other
related deconsolidation costs consisting of phase-out costs and severance
payments.
Other
restructuring initiatives:
In the
first half of 2008, the Company recorded $13 million restructuring charges
related to former and newly committed restructuring initiatives, consisting
primarily of termination benefits and early retirement arrangements in certain
European locations. Additionally, upon the acquisition of Genesis, the Company
committed to a restructuring plan aimed at rationalizing its
operations
in the region for which a provision for involuntary termination benefits
amounting to $2 million was recorded.
Total impairment, restructuring charges
and other related closure costs
The 2007
restructuring plan, which is still expected to result in pre-tax charges in the
range of $270 million to $300 million, registered a total charge of $228 million
as of June 28, 2008 (of which $155 million occurred in 2008 and $73 million
occurred in 2007). This plan is expected to be completed in mid
2009.
The total
actual costs that the Company will incur may differ from these estimates based
on the timing required to fully complete the restructuring plans, the number of
people involved, the final agreed termination benefits and the costs associated
with the transfer of equipment, product and processes.
Interest
income, net consisted of the following:
|
(Unaudited)
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three
months ended
|
Six
months ended
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
June
28, 2008
|
June
30, 2007
|
June
28, 2008
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
|
38
|
36
|
77
|
71
|
Expense
|
(19)
|
(18)
|
(37)
|
(35)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
interest income, net
|
19
|
18
|
40
|
36
|
Interest
expense also included charges related to the amortization of issuance costs
incurred by the Company for the outstanding bonds. In the second quarter of
2008, interest income included $4 million recognized on the subordinated notes
that the Company holds from its equity investment Numonyx, as described in Note
13.
On
January 17, 2008, the Company acquired effective control of Genesis Microchip
Inc. (“Genesis Microchip”) under the terms of a tender offer announced on
December 11, 2007. On January 25, 2008, the Company acquired the remaining
common shares of Genesis Microchip that had not been acquired through the
original tender by offering the right to receive the same $8.65 per share price
paid in the original tender offer. Payment of approximately $340 million for the
acquired shares was made through a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company that
was merged with and into Genesis Microchip promptly thereafter. Additional
direct costs associated with the acquisition are estimated to be approximately
$8 million and were accrued as at March 30, 2008. On closing, Genesis Microchip
became part of the Company’s Home Entertainment & Displays business activity
which is part of the Application Specific Product Group segment. The acquisition
of Genesis Microchip was performed to expand the Company’s leadership in the
digital TV market. Genesis Microchip will enhance the Company’s technological
capabilities for the transition to fully digital solutions in the segment and
strengthen its product intellectual property portfolio.
Purchase
price allocation resulted in the recognition of $11 million in marketable
securities, $14 million in property, plant and equipment, $44 million of
deferred tax assets while intangible assets included $44 million of core
technologies, $27 million related to customer relationships, $2 million of
trademarks, $17 million of goodwill and $2 million of liabilities net of other
current assets. The Company also recorded in the first quarter of 2008 $21
million of acquired research and development assets that the Company immediately
wrote-off. Such in-process research and development charge was recorded on the
line “research and development expenses” in the consolidated statement of income
in the first quarter of 2008. The core technologies have an average useful life
of approximately four years, the customers’ relationship of seven years
and
the
trademarks of approximately two years. The purchase price allocation is based on
a third party independent appraisal.
The
unaudited proforma information below assumes that Genesis Microchip was acquired
on January 1, 2008 and incorporates the results of Genesis Microchip beginning
on that date. The unaudited three months and six months ended June 30, 2007
information has been adjusted to incorporate the results of Genesis Microchip on
January 1, 2007. Such results are presented for information purposes only and
are not indicative of the results of operations that would have been achieved
had the acquisition taken place as of January 1, 2008.
Pro
forma Statements of Income (unaudited)
|
Three
months ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
June
28, 2008
|
June
30, 2007
|
June
28, 2008
|
June
30, 2007
|
Net
revenues
|
2,391
|
2,462
|
4,862
|
4,776
|
Gross
profit
|
880
|
855
|
1,777
|
1,654
|
Operating
expenses
|
(906)
|
(1,643)
|
(1,922)
|
(2,423)
|
Operating
loss
|
(26)
|
(788)
|
(145)
|
(769)
|
Net
loss
|
(47)
|
(773)
|
(162)
|
(739)
|
Loss
per share (basic)
|
(0.05)
|
(0.86)
|
(0.18)
|
(0.82)
|
Loss
per share (diluted)
|
(0.05)
|
(0.86)
|
(0.18)
|
(0.82)
|
|
|
|
|
Statements
of Income, as reported
|
Three
months ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
June
28, 2008
|
June
30, 2007
|
June
28, 2008
|
June
30, 2007
|
Net
revenues
|
2,391
|
2,418
|
4,869
|
4,693
|
Gross
profit
|
880
|
838
|
1,779
|
1,623
|
Operating
expenses
|
(906)
|
(1,610)
|
(1,893)
|
(2,333)
|
Operating
loss
|
(26)
|
(772)
|
(114)
|
(710)
|
Net
loss
|
(47)
|
(758)
|
(131)
|
(684)
|
Loss
per share (basic)
|
(0.05)
|
(0.84)
|
(0.15)
|
(0.76)
|
Loss
per share (diluted)
|
(0.05)
|
(0.84)
|
(0.15)
|
(0.76)
|
|
10.
|
Available-for-sale
Financial Assets
|
As at
June 28, 2008, the Company had financial assets classified as available-for-sale
corresponding to equity and debt securities.
The
amount invested in equity securities was $5 million at June 28, 2008. These
investments correspond to financial assets held as part of a long-term incentive
plan in one of the Company’s subsidiaries. They are reported on the line “Other
investments and other non-current assets” on the consolidated balance sheet as
at June 28, 2008. The Company did not record any significant change in fair
value on these equity securities classified as available-for-sale in the second
quarter of 2008.
As at
June 28, 2008, the Company had investments in long-term subordinated notes
amounting to $145 million and bearing interest at market rates as a result of
the Numonyx transaction, as further detailed in Notes 12, 13 and 14. These notes
are recorded as long-term receivables on the line “Other investments and other
non-current assets” on the consolidated balance sheet as at June 28, 2008, are
classified as available-for-sale and recorded at fair value as of June 28, 2008,
with changes to fair value, when determined as temporary declines, recognized as
a separate component of “Accumulated other comprehensive income” in the
consolidated statement of changes in shareholders’ equity. As of June 28, 2008
the Company had reported an after-tax decline in fair value on the long-term
subordinated notes totaling $10 million since the notes were received at the
time of the Numonyx transaction. Future fair value measurements, which will
correspond to an FAS 157 level 3 fair value hierarchy, will be based on publicly
available swap rates for fixed income obligations with similar maturities. Fair
value measurement information is further detailed in Note 23.
As at
June 28, 2008, the Company had investments in debt securities amounting to
$1,198 million, composed of $898 million invested in senior debt floating rate
notes issued by primary financial institutions with an average rating of Aa3/A+
and $300 million invested in auction rate securities. The floating rate notes
are reported as current assets on the line “Marketable securities” on the
consolidated balance sheet as at June 28, 2008, since they represent investments
of funds available for current operations. The auction-rate securities, which
have a final maturity between 10 and 40 years, were purchased in the Company’s
account by Credit Suisse Securities LLC contrary to the Company’s instructions;
they are classified as non-current assets on the line “Non-current marketable
securities” on the consolidated balance sheet as at June 28, 2008 since the
Company intends to hold these investments beyond one year. The Company sold $160
million of floating rate notes during the second quarter of 2008, in order to
generate cash in view of the foreseen payment commitment related to the
acquisition from NXP to be closed in the third quarter of 2008.
All these
debt securities are classified as available-for-sale and recorded at fair value
as at June 28, 2008, with changes in fair value, when determined as temporary
declines, recognized as a separate component of “Accumulated other comprehensive
income” in the consolidated statement of changes in shareholders’ equity. As of
June 28, 2008, the Company reported an after-tax decline in fair value on the
floating rate notes totaling $6 million due to the widening of
credit
spreads.
Out of the 24 investment positions in floating-rate notes, 10 positions are in
an unrealized loss position. The Company estimated the fair value of these
financial assets based on public quoted market prices, which corresponds to an
FAS 157 level 1 fair value hierarchy. This change in fair value was recognized
as a separate component of “Accumulated other comprehensive income” in the
consolidated statement of changes in shareholders’ equity since the Company
assessed that this decline in fair value was temporary and that the Company was
in a position to recover the total carrying amount of these investments on
subsequent periods. Since the duration of the floating-rate note portfolio is
only 2.5 years on average and the securities have a minimum Moody’s rating of
“A1”, the Company expects the value of the securities to return to par as the
final maturity is approaching.
On the
auction-rate securities, the Company reported an other-than-temporary decline in
fair value amounting to $39 million in the second quarter of 2008, which was
immediately recorded in the consolidated statement of income on the line
“Other-than-temporary impairment charge on financial assets”. Starting in the
first quarter of 2008, the fair value measure of these securities, which
corresponds to an FAS 157 level 3 fair value hierarchy, was based on publicly
available indexes of securities with same rating and comparable/similar
underlying collaterals or industries exposure (such as ABX, ITraxx and IBoxx),
which the Company believes approximates the orderly exit value in the current
market. Until December 31, 2007, the fair value was measured (i) based on the
weighted average of available information public indexes as described above and
(ii) using ‘mark to market’ bids and ‘mark to model’ valuations received from
the structuring financial institutions of the outstanding auction rate
securities, weighting the different information at 80% and 20% respectively. In
the second quarter of 2008, as in the previous quarter, no prices from the
financial institutions were available. The estimated value of these securities
could further decrease in the future as a result of credit market deterioration
and/or other downgrading. Fair value measurement information is further detailed
in Note 23.
In the
first half of 2007, the Company invested $511 million in floating-rate notes and
$171 million in auction-rate securities.
Inventories
are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Cost is based on the
weighted average cost by adjusting standard cost to approximate actual
manufacturing costs on a quarterly basis; the cost is therefore dependent on the
Company’s manufacturing performance. In the case of underutilization of
manufacturing facilities, the costs associated with the excess capacity are not
included in the valuation of inventories but charged directly to cost of
sales.
Provisions
for obsolescence are estimated for excess uncommitted inventories based on the
previous quarter sales, orders’ backlog and production plans.
Inventories,
net of reserve consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
(Audited)
|
|
In
In millions of U.S. dollars
|
|
As
at June 28, 2008
|
|
|
As
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raw
materials
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
Work-in-process
|
|
|
951 |
|
|
|
808 |
|
Finished
products
|
|
|
552 |
|
|
|
474 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Inventories, net
|
|
|
1,580 |
|
|
|
1,354 |
|
As at
June 28, 2008, inventories amounting to $2 million were reported as a component
of the line “Assets held for sale” on the consolidated balance sheet following
the management’s decision to sell the Company’s fab in Phoenix.
As at
December 31, 2007, inventories amounting to $329 million were reported as a
component of the line “Assets held for sale” on the consolidated balance sheet
as part of the assets to be transferred to Numonyx, the newly created flash
memory company upon FMG deconsolidation.
On
May 22, 2007, the Company announced that it had entered into an agreement
with Intel Corporation and Francisco Partners L.P. to create a new independent
semiconductor company from the key assets of the Company’s Flash Memory Group
and Intel’s flash memory business (“FMG deconsolidation”). Under the terms of
the agreement, the Company will sell its flash memory assets, including its NAND
joint venture interest and other NOR resources, to the new company, which will
be called Numonyx Holdings B.V. (“Numonyx”), while Intel will sell its NOR
assets and resources. In exchange, the Company was expected to receive, at
closing, a combination of cash and a 48.6% equity ownership stake in the new
company; Intel was expected to receive cash and a 45.1% equity ownership stake;
and Francisco Partners L.P. was to invest $150 million in cash to purchase
participating convertible preferred stock with certain liquidation preferences
and convertible into a 6.3% ownership interest, subject to adjustments in
certain circumstances.
As a
result of the signing of the definitive agreement for the FMG deconsolidation
and upon meeting FAS 144 criteria for assets held for sale, the Company
reclassified in 2007 the assets to be transferred to Numonyx from their original
balance sheet classification to the line “Assets held for sale”. Coincident with
this classification, the Company recorded an impairment charge
of $857 million to adjust the value of these assets to fair
value less costs to sell at June 30, 2007, reporting the loss on the line
“Impairment, restructuring charges and other related closure costs” of the
consolidated statement of income for second quarter of 2007. Fair value less
costs to sell was based on the net consideration provided for in the agreement
and significant estimates.
Although
the transaction was originally expected to close in the second half of 2007, the
closing was delayed due to, among other things, the significant turmoil in the
debt capital markets which, in turn, resulted in certain revisions to the terms
of the transaction. Based on the revised structure, at closing, Numonyx had a
similar level of cash but a lower level of indebtedness compared to what had
originally been anticipated. Additionally, the Company and Intel both agreed to
accept a reduction in the non-equity portion of their consideration and rather
than cash, agreed to accept long-term, interest-bearing subordinated notes. As a
consequence of these changes to the terms of the transaction, in combination
with changes to the levels of assets used by the business and exchange rates, as
well as a general decline in market valuations for comparable companies during
the second half of 2007 that impacted the valuation of the equity stake to be
received, the
estimated
value of the total consideration to be received by the Company in the
transaction was reduced in the fourth quarter of 2007 resulting in an additional
impairment charge of $249 million during the period.
During
the first quarter of 2008, the terms of the transaction were further refined.
Among other things, the Company and Intel agreed to guarantee the term debt and
revolving credit agreement of Numonyx; the Company and Intel agreed to a
reduction in the amount of subordinated notes they would receive; and it was
agreed that Francisco Partners would receive 6.3% of the total subordinated
notes to be issued by Numonyx in addition to its convertible preferred stock in
exchange for its initial investment of $150 million. The Numonyx transaction
closed on March 30, 2008. At closing, through a series of steps, the Company
contributed its flash memory assets and businesses as previously announced, for
109,254,191 common shares of Numonyx, representing a 48.6% equity ownership
stake valued at $966 million, and $156 million in long-term subordinated notes,
as described in Note 14. As a consequence of the final terms and balance sheet
at the closing date and additional agreements on assets to be contributed,
coupled with changes in valuation for comparable Flash memory companies, the
Company incurred an additional pre-tax loss of $189 million for the year, with
$164 million in the first quarter of 2008 and $25 million in the second quarter
of 2008, which was reported on the line “Impairment, restructuring charges and
other related closure costs” of the consolidated statement of income. The total
loss calculation also included a provision of $139 million to reflect the value
of rights granted to Numonyx to use certain assets retained by the Company. No
remaining amounts related to the FMG deconsolidation was reported as current
assets on the line “Assets held for sale” of the consolidated balance sheet as
of June 28, 2008.
The
amounts reflected in “Assets held for sale” at June 28, 2008 are related to the
Phoenix manufacturing site, as described in Note 7.
Hynix
ST Joint Venture
In 2004,
the Company signed a joint venture agreement with Hynix Semiconductor Inc. to
build a front-end memory manufacturing facility in Wuxi City, Jiangsu Province,
China. Under the agreement, Hynix Semiconductor Inc. contributed $500 million
for a 67% equity interest and the Company contributed $250 million for a 33%
equity interest. Additionally, the Company originally committed to grant $250
million in long-term financing to the new joint venture guaranteed by the
subordinated collateral of the joint venture’s assets. The Company made the
total $250 million capital contribution as previously planned in the joint
venture agreement in 2006. The Company accounted for its share in the Hynix ST
joint venture under the equity method based on the actual results of the joint
venture through the first quarter of 2008.
In 2007,
Hynix Semiconductor Inc. invested an additional $750 million in additional
shares of the joint venture to fund a facility expansion. As a result of this
investment, the Company’s equity interest in the joint venture declined from
approximately 33% to 17%. At December 31, 2007 the investment in the joint
venture amounted to $276 million and was included in assets held for sale on the
consolidated balance sheet as it was to be transferred to Numonyx upon the
formation of that company, as described in Note 12.
Due to
regulatory and withholding tax issues the Company could not directly provide the
joint venture with the $250 million long-term financing as originally planned.
As a result, in 2006, the Company entered into a ten-year term debt guarantee
agreement with an external financial institution through which the Company
guaranteed the repayment of the loan by the joint venture to the bank. The
guarantee agreement includes the Company placing up to $250 million in cash on a
deposit account. The guarantee deposit will be used by the bank in case of
repayment failure from the joint venture, with $250 million as the maximum
potential amount of future payments the Company, as the guarantor, could be
required to make. In the event of default and failure to repay the loan from the
joint venture, the bank will exercise the Company’s rights, subordinated to the
repayment to senior lenders, to recover the amounts paid under the guarantee
through the sale of the joint venture’s assets. In 2006, the Company placed $218
million of cash on the guarantee deposit account. In the first half of 2007, the
Company placed the remaining $32 million of cash, which totaled $250 million as
at June 28, 2008 and was reported as “Restricted cash” on the consolidated
balance sheet.
The debt
guarantee was evaluated under FIN 45. It resulted in the recognition of a $17
million liability, corresponding to the fair value of the guarantee at inception
of the transaction. The liability was recorded against the value of the equity
investment. The debt guarantee obligation was reported on the line “Other
non-current liabilities” in the consolidated balance sheet as at June 28, 2008,
and the Company reported the debt guarantee on the line “Other investments and
other non-current assets” since the terms of the FMG deconsolidation do not
include the transfer of the guarantee.
The
Company’s current maximum exposure to loss as a result of its involvement with
the joint venture is limited to its indirect investment through Numonyx and the
debt guarantee commitments.
Numonyx
On March
30, 2008, the Company signed a venture agreement with Intel and Francisco
Partners L.P. for the creation of Numonyx. At closing, the Company contributed
its flash memory assets and businesses for a 48.6% equity ownership stake in
common stock and $156 million in long-term subordinated notes, which are further
described in Note 14. Intel contributed its NOR assets and certain assets
related to PCM resources, while Francisco Partners L.P. invested $150 million in
cash. Intel and Francisco Partners L.P.’s equity ownership interest in Numonyx
are 45.1% in common shares and 6.3% in convertible preferred stock,
respectively. The convertible preferred stock of Francisco Partners L.P.’s
includes preferential payout rights. Also at closing, the Company accounted for
its share in Numonyx under the equity method based on the actual results of the
venture. As at June 28, 2008 the Company reported $5 million loss for Numonyx
equity investment on the line “Earnings (loss) on equity investments” on the
Company’s consolidated income statement. In the valuation of Numonyx investment
under the equity method, the Company applies a one-quarter lag reporting.
Consequently, equity gain (loss) related to Numonyx earnings for the second
quarter of 2008 will be reported by the Company in the third quarter of 2008.
Nevertheless, the Company has recorded in the second quarter of 2008 on the
line “Earnings (loss) on equity investment” a $4 million decrease to
Numonyx equity investment related to interest expense on the Subordinated notes
and corresponding to the Company’s equity interest in the financial expense of
Numonyx, as described in Note 8. The Company also recognized on the line
“Earnings (loss) on equity investments” $1 million stock-based
compensation
and related payroll taxes recorded on awards granted to employees transferred to
Numonyx.
Upon
creation, Numonyx entered into financing arrangements for a $450 million term
loan and a $100 million committed revolving credit facility from two primary
financial institutions. The loans have a four-year term. Intel and the Company
have each granted in favor of Numonyx a 50% debt guarantee not joint and
several. In the event of default and failure to repay the loans from Numonyx,
the banks will exercise the Company’s rights, subordinated to the repayment to
senior lenders, to recover the amounts paid under the guarantee through the sale
of the assets. The debt guarantee was evaluated under FIN 45. It resulted in the
recognition of a $69 million liability, corresponding to the fair value of the
guarantee at inception of the transaction. The liability was recorded against
the value of the equity investment. The debt guarantee obligation was reported
on the line “Other non-current liabilities” in the consolidated balance sheet as
at June 28, 2008.
At June
28, 2008 the Company’s investment in Numonyx amounted to $1,032
million.
The
Company’s current maximum exposure to loss as a result of its involvement with
Numonyx is limited to its equity investment, its investment in subordinated
notes and its debt guarantee obligation.
|
14.
|
Other
Investments and Other Non-current
Assets
|
Investments
and other non-current assets consisted of the following:
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
(Audited)
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
|
As
at June 28, 2008
|
|
|
As
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments
carried at cost
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Available
for sale equity securities
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Long-term
receivables related to funding
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Long-term
receivables related to tax refund
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Debt
issuance costs, net
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Cancellable
swaps designated as fair value hedge
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Deposits
and other non-current assets
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
Long-term
notes from equity investment
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Other investments and other non-current assets
|
|
|
377 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
The
Company entered into a joint venture agreement in 2002 with Dai Nippon Printing
Co, Ltd for the development and production of Photomask in which the Company
holds a 19% equity interest. The joint venture, DNP Photomask Europe S.p.A, was
initially capitalized with the Company’s contribution of €2 million of cash. Dai
Nippon Printing Co, Ltd contributed €8 million of cash for an 81% equity
interest. In the event of the liquidation of the joint venture, the Company is
required to repurchase the land at cost, and the facility at 10% of its net book
value, if no suitable buyer is identified. No provision for this obligation has
been recorded to date. At June 28, 2008, the Company’s total contribution to the
joint venture was $10 million. The Company continues to maintain its 19%
ownership of the joint venture, and therefore continues to account for this
investment under the cost method. The Company has identified the joint venture
as a Variable Interest Entity (VIE), but has determined that it is not the
primary beneficiary of the VIE. The Company’s current maximum exposure to loss
as a result of its involvement with the joint venture is limited to its equity
investment.
Long-term
receivables related to funding are mainly public grants to be received from
governmental agencies in Italy and France as part of long-term research and
development, industrialization and capital investment projects.
Long-term
receivables related to tax refunds correspond to tax benefits claimed by the
Company in certain of its local tax jurisdictions, for which collection is
expected beyond one year.
In 2006,
the Company entered into cancellable swaps with a combined notional value of
$200 million to hedge the fair value of a portion of the convertible bonds due
in 2016 that carry a fixed interest rate. The cancellable swaps convert the
fixed rate interest expense recorded on the convertible bonds due 2016 to a
variable interest rate based upon adjusted LIBOR. The cancellable swaps meet the
criteria for designation as a fair value hedge, as further detailed in Note 22
and are reflected at their fair value in the consolidated balance sheet as at
June 28, 2008, which was positive for approximately $12 million.
As
described in Note 13, the Company and its partners completed on March 30, 2008
the creation of Numonyx. At closing, as part of the consideration for its
contribution, the Company received $156 million in long-term subordinated notes,
due in 2038. The investment, registered at fair value, amounted to $145 million
as at June 28, 2008, with a pre-tax decline in fair value totaling $11 million
recorded as a separate component of “Accumulated other comprehensive income” in
the consolidated statement of changes in shareholders’ equity. Fair value
measurement on Numonyx Subordinated notes is further described in Note 23. These
long-term notes yield 9.5% interest, generally payable in kind for seven years
and in cash thereafter. In liquidation events in which proceeds are insufficient
to pay off the term loan, revolving credit facilities and the Francisco
Partners’ preferential payout rights, the subordinated notes will be deemed to
have been retired.
Long term
debt consisted of the following:
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
(Audited)
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
|
|
December
31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank
loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.72%
due 2008, floating interest rate at Libor + 0.40%
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
43 |
|
3.08%
due 2009, floating interest rate at Libor + 0.40%
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Funding
program loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.44%
(weighted average), due 2009, fixed interest rate
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
0.89%
(weighted average), due 2010, fixed interest rate
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
2.77%
(weighted average), due 2012, fixed interest rate
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
0.49%
(weighted average), due 2014, fixed interest rate
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
3.33%
(weighted average), due 2017, fixed interest rate
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
2.89%
due 2014, floating interest rate at Libor + 0.017%
|
|
|
341 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
Capital
leases:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.92%
(weighted average), due 2011, fixed interest rate
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Senior
Bonds:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.36%,
due 2013, floating interest rate at Euribor + 0.40%
|
|
|
787 |
|
|
|
736 |
|
Convertible
debt:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-0.50%
convertible bonds due 2013
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
1.5%
convertible bonds due 2016
|
|
|
1,021 |
|
|
|
1,010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term
debt
|
|
|
2,466 |
|
|
|
2,220 |
|
Less
current portion
|
|
|
(153 |
) |
|
|
(103 |
) |
Total
long-term debt, less current portion
|
|
|
2,313 |
|
|
|
2,117 |
|
In August
2003, the Company issued $1,332 million principal amount at issuance of zero
coupon unsubordinated convertible bonds due 2013. The bonds were issued with a
negative yield of 0.5% that resulted in a higher principal amount at issuance of
$1,400 million and net proceeds of $1,386 million. The negative yield through
the first redemption right of the holder totals $21 million and was recorded in
capital surplus. The bonds are convertible at any time by the holders at the
rate of 29.9144 shares of the Company’s common stock for each one thousand
dollar face value of the bonds. The holders may redeem their convertible bonds
on August 5, 2006 at a price of $985.09, on August 5, 2008 at $975.28 and on
August 5, 2010 at $965.56 per $1000 dollar face value of the bonds. As a result
of this holder’s option, the redemption occurred in 2006. Pursuant to the terms
of the convertible bonds due 2013, the Company was required to purchase, at the
option of the holders, 1,397,493 convertible bonds, at a price of $985.09 each
between August 7 and August 9, 2006. This resulted in a cash payment of $1,377
million. The outstanding long-term debt corresponding to the 2013 convertible
debt amounted approximately to $2 million as at June 28 2008 corresponding to
the remaining 2,505 bonds valued at August 5, 2008 redemption price. At any time
from August 20, 2006 the Company may redeem for cash at their negative accreted
value all or a portion of the convertible bonds subject to the level of the
Company’s share price.
In
February 2006, the Company issued $1,131 million principal amount at maturity of
zero coupon senior convertible bonds due in February 2016. The bonds were issued
at 100% of principal with a yield to maturity of 1.5% and resulted in net
proceeds to the Company of $974 million less transaction fees. The bonds are
convertible by the holder at any time prior to maturity at a conversion rate of
43.833898 shares per one thousand dollar face value of the bonds corresponding
to 42,694,216 equivalent shares. This conversion rate has been adjusted from
43.363087 shares per one thousand dollar face value of the bonds as at May 21,
2007, as the result of the extraordinary cash dividend approved by the Annual
General Meeting of Shareholders held on May 14, 2008. This new conversion has
been effective since May 19, 2008. The holders can also redeem the convertible
bonds on February 23, 2011 at a price of $1,077.58, on February 23, 2012 at a
price of $1,093.81 and on February 24, 2014 at a price of $1,126.99 per one
thousand dollar face value of the bonds. The Company can call the bonds at any
time after March 10, 2011 subject to the Company’s share price exceeding 130% of
the accreted value divided by the conversion rate for 20 out of 30 consecutive
trading days. The Company may redeem for cash at the principal amount at
issuance plus accumulated gross yield all, but not a portion, of the convertible
bonds at any time if 10% or less of the aggregate principal amount at issuance
of the convertible bonds remain outstanding in certain circumstances or in the
event of changes to the tax laws of the Netherlands or any successor
jurisdiction. In the second quarter of 2006, the Company entered into
cancellable swaps with a combined notional value of $200 million to hedge the
fair value of a portion of these convertible bonds. As a result of these
cancellable swap hedging transactions, which are described further in Note 22,
the effective yield on the $200 million principal amount of the hedged
convertible bonds has changed from 1.50% to -0.30% as of June 28,
2008.
In
March 2006, STMicroelectronics Finance B.V. (“ST BV”), a wholly owned subsidiary
of the Company, issued floating rate senior bonds with a principal amount of
€500 million at an issue price of 99.873%. The notes, which mature on March 17,
2013, pay a coupon rate of the three-month Euribor plus 0.40% on the 17th of June, September,
December and March of each year through maturity. In the event of changes to the
tax laws of the Netherlands or any successor jurisdiction, ST BV or the Company
may redeem the full amount of senior bonds for cash. In the event of certain
change in control triggering events, the holders can cause ST BV or the Company
to repurchase all or a portion of the bonds outstanding.
|
16.
|
Earnings
(Loss) per Share
|
Basic net
earnings (loss) per share is computed based on net income available to common
shareholders using the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding
during the reported period; the number of outstanding shares does not include
treasury shares. Diluted EPS is computed using the weighted-average number of
common shares and dilutive potential common shares outstanding during the
period, such as stock issuable pursuant to the exercise of stock options
outstanding, nonvested shares granted and the conversion of convertible
debt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three
months ended
|
Six
months ended
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars, except per share amounts
|
June
28, 2008
|
June
30, 2007
|
June
28, 2008
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
Loss per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
(47)
|
(758)
|
(131)
|
(684)
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding
|
900,492,587
|
898,762,654
|
900,129,990
|
898,086,120
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per Share (basic)
|
(0.05)
|
(0.84)
|
(0.15)
|
(0.76)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
Loss per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
(47)
|
(758)
|
(131)
|
(684)
|
Interest
expense on convertible debt,
net
of tax
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
Net
loss, adjusted
|
(47)
|
(758)
|
(131)
|
(684)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average shares outstanding
|
900,492,587
|
898,762,654
|
900,129,990
|
898,086,120
|
Dilutive
effect of stock options
|
-
|
-
|
|
-
|
Dilutive
effect of nonvested shares
|
-
|
-
|
|
-
|
Dilutive
effect of convertible debt
|
-
|
-
|
|
-
|
Number
of shares used in calculating Loss per Share
|
900,492,587
|
898,762,654
|
900,129,990
|
898,086,120
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per Share (diluted)
|
(0.05)
|
(0.84)
|
(0.15)
|
(0.76)
|
As of
June 28, 2008, common shares issued were 910,307,305 shares of which 14,061,954
shares were owned by the Company as treasury stock.
As of
June 28, 2008, there were outstanding stock options exercisable into the
equivalent of 41,784,926 common shares. There was also the equivalent of
42,769,152 common shares outstanding for convertible debt, out of which 74,936
for the 2013 bonds and 42,694,216 for the 2016 bonds. None of these bonds have
been converted to shares during the second quarter of 2008.
|
17.
|
Post
Retirement and Other Long-term Employee
Benefits
|
The
Company and its subsidiaries have a number of both funded and unfunded defined
benefit pension plans and other long-term employees’ benefits covering employees
in various countries. The defined benefits plans provide for pension benefits,
the amounts of which are calculated based on factors such as years of service
and employee compensation levels. The other long-term employees’ plans provide
for benefits due during the employees’ period of service after certain seniority
levels. Consequently, the Company reported for the second quarter of 2008 and
2007, respectively, those plans under a separate tabular presentation. The
Company uses a December 31 measurement date for the majority of its plans.
Eligibility is generally determined in accordance with local statutory
requirements.
For
Italian termination indemnity plan (“TFR”), the Company continues to measure the
vested benefits to which Italian employees are entitled as if they retired
immediately as of June 28, 2008, in compliance with the Emerging Issues Task
Force Issue No. 88-1, Determination of Vested Benefit
Obligation for a Defined Benefit Pension Plan (“EITF 88-1”). The TFR was
reported according to FAS 132(R), as any other defined benefit plan until the
new Italian regulation concerning employee retirement schemes enacted on July 1,
2007. Since that date, the future TFR has been accounted for as a defined
contribution plan, the accruals being maintained as a Defined Benefit plan in
the company books.
The
components of the net periodic benefit cost included the following:
|
Pension
Benefits
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three
months ended
|
Six
months ended
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
June
28, 2008,
|
June
30, 2007
|
June
28, 2008,
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service
cost
|
6
|
10
|
10
|
20
|
Interest
cost
|
7
|
7
|
15
|
14
|
Expected
return on plan assets
|
(5)
|
(3)
|
(9)
|
(7)
|
Amortization
of actuarial net loss (gain)
|
-
|
1
|
-
|
1
|
Amortization
of prior service cost
|
-
|
|
-
|
-
|
Net
periodic benefit cost
|
8
|
15
|
16
|
28
|
|
Other long-term
Benefits
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
Three
months ended
|
Six
months ended
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
June
28, 2008,
|
June
30, 2007
|
June
28, 2008,
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service
cost
|
1
|
-
|
2
|
-
|
Interest
cost
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Expected
return on plan assets
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Amortization
of actuarial net loss (gain)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Amortization
of prior service cost
|
-
|
-
|
1
|
-
|
Net
periodic benefit cost
|
1
|
0
|
3
|
-
|
Employer
contributions paid and expected to be paid in 2008 are consistent with the
amounts disclosed in the consolidated financial statements for the year ended
December 31, 2007.
At the
Annual General Meeting of Shareholders on May 14, 2008 shareholders approved the
distribution of $0.36 per share in cash dividends, payable in four equal
quarterly installments. A first payment was made in the second quarter of 2008
for approximately $81 million. The remaining $0.27 per share cash dividend, to
be paid in the third and fourth quarter of 2008 and in the first quarter of
2009, totaled $242 million and was reported as “dividends payable to
shareholders” on the consolidated balance sheet as at June 28,
2008.
At the
Annual General Meeting of Shareholders on April 26, 2007 shareholders approved
the distribution of $0.30 per share in cash dividends. A dividend amount of
approximately $269 million was paid in the second quarter of 2007.
In 2002
and 2001, the Company repurchased 13,400,000 of its own shares, for a total
amount of $348 million, which were reflected at cost as a reduction of the
shareholders’ equity. Following the authorization by the Supervisory Board,
announced on April 2, 2008, to repurchase up to 30 million shares of its common
stock, the Company acquired 6,734,450 shares in the second quarter of 2008, for
a total amount of approximately $83 million, also reflected at cost as a
reduction of the shareholders’ equity.
The
treasury shares have been designated for allocation under the Company’s
share-based remuneration programs on non-vested shares including such plans as
approved by the 2005, 2006 and 2007 Annual General Meeting of Shareholders. As
of June 28, 2008, 6,072,496 of these treasury shares were transferred to
employees under the Company’s share-based remuneration programs, following the
full vesting of the 2005 stock-award plan, the vesting of the second tranche of
the 2006 stock-award plan and of the first tranche of the 2007 stock-award plan
in the second quarter of 2008, together with the acceleration of the vesting of
a limited number of stock-awards.
As of
June 28, 2008, 14,061,954 treasury shares were outstanding.
As of
June 30, 2007, 1,782,236 of these treasury shares had been transferred to
employees under the Company’s share-based remuneration programs, following the
vesting as of April 27, 2007 of the first and second tranches of the stock-award
plans granted in 2006 and 2005 and the acceleration of the vesting of a limited
number of stock-awards.
|
20.
|
Contingencies
and Uncertainties in Income Tax
Positions
|
The
Company is subject to the possibility of loss contingencies arising in the
ordinary course of business. These include but are not limited to: warranty cost
on the products of the Company, breach of contract claims, claims for
unauthorized use of third-party intellectual property, tax claims beyond
assessed uncertain tax positions as well as claims for environmental damages. In
determining loss contingencies, the Company considers the likelihood of a loss
of an asset or the
incurrence
of a liability as well as the ability to reasonably estimate the amount of such
loss or liability. An estimated loss is recorded when it is probable that a
liability has been incurred and when the amount of the loss can be reasonably
estimated. The Company regularly reevaluates claims to determine whether
provisions need to be readjusted based on the most current information available
to the Company. Changes in these evaluations could result in an adverse material
impact on the Company’s results of operations, cash flows or its financial
position for the period in which they occur.
With the
adoption of FIN 48 in the first quarter of 2007, the Company applies a two-step
process for the evaluation of uncertain income tax positions based on a “more
likely than not” threshold to determine if a tax position will be sustained upon
examination by the taxing authorities, as described in details in Note 5. In the
second quarter of 2008 the Company identified new uncertain tax positions in one
of its European tax jurisdictions, for which tax benefits totaling $16 million
were not recognized as at June 28, 2008. Except for this 2008 event, the amount
of unrecognized tax benefits did not materially change during the second quarter
of 2008. Nevertheless, events may occur in the near future that would cause a
material change in the estimate of the unrecognized tax benefit. All
unrecognized tax benefits would affect the effective tax rate, if recognized.
Interest and penalties recognized in the consolidated balance sheets as at June
28, 2008 and December 31, 2007 and in the consolidated statement of income for
the second quarter of 2008 and 2007 are not material. The tax years that remain
open for review in the Company’s major tax jurisdictions are from 1996 to
2008.
|
21.
|
Claims
and Legal
Proceedings
|
The
Company has received and may in the future receive communications alleging
possible infringements, in particular in the case of patents and similar
intellectual property rights of others. Furthermore, the Company may become
involved in costly litigation brought against the Company regarding patents,
mask works, copy-rights, trade-marks or trade secrets. In the event that the
outcome of any litigation would be unfavorable to the Company, the Company may
be required to license the underlying intellectual property right at
economically unfavorable terms and conditions, and possibly pay damages for
prior use and/or face an injunction, all of which individually or in the
aggregate could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of
operations, cash flows or financial position and ability to
compete.
The
Company is involved in various lawsuits, claims, investigations and proceedings
incidental to the normal conduct of its operations, other than external patent
utilization. These matters mainly include the risks associated with claims from
customers or other parties. The Company has accrued for these loss contingencies
when the loss is probable and can be estimated. The Company regularly evaluates
claims and legal proceedings together with their related probable losses to
determine whether they need to be adjusted based on the current information
available to the Company. Legal costs associated with claims are expensed as
incurred. In the event of litigation which is adversely determined with respect
to the Company’s interests, or in the event the Company needs to change its
evaluation of a potential third-party claim, based on new evidence or
communications, a material adverse effect could impact its operations or
financial condition at the time it were to materialize.
The
Company is currently a party to legal proceedings with SanDisk Corporation
(“SanDisk”) and Tessera Technologies, Inc (“Tessera”). Based on management’s
current assumptions made with support of the Company’s outside attorneys, the
Company is not currently in a position to evaluate any probable loss, which may
arise out of such litigation.
Derivative
Instruments Not Designated as a Hedge
The
Company conducts its business on a global basis in various major international
currencies. As a result, the Company is exposed to adverse movements in foreign
currency exchange rates, primarily with respect to the Euro. The Company enters
into foreign currency forward contracts and currency options to reduce its
exposure to changes in exchange rates and the associated risk arising from the
denomination of certain assets and liabilities in foreign currencies at the
Company's subsidiaries. These instruments do not qualify as hedging instruments
under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133, Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities (“FAS 133”) and are marked-to-market
at each period-end with the associated changes in fair value recognized in
“Other income and expenses, net” in the consolidated statements of
income.
Cash
Flow Hedge
To
further reduce its exposure to U.S. dollar exchange rate fluctuations, the
Company also hedges certain Euro-denominated forecasted transactions that cover
at reporting date a large part of its research and development, selling, general
and administrative expenses as well as a portion of its front-end manufacturing
costs of semi-finished goods through the use of foreign currency forward
contracts and currency options.
The
derivative instruments used to hedge exposures are reflected at their fair value
in the consolidated balance sheets and meet the criteria for designation as cash
flow hedges. The criteria for designating a derivative as a hedge include the
instrument’s effectiveness in risk reduction and, in most cases, a one-to-one
matching of the derivative instrument to its underlying transaction. Foreign
currency forward contracts and currency options used as hedges are effective at
reducing the Euro/U.S. dollar currency fluctuation risk and are designated as a
hedge at the inception of the contract and on an on-going basis over the
duration of the hedge relationship. Effectiveness on transactions hedged through
purchased currency options is measured on the full fair value of the option,
including the time value of the option. For these derivatives, ineffectiveness
appears if the hedge relationship is not perfectly effective or if the
cumulative gain or loss on the derivative hedging instrument exceeds the
cumulative change on the expected cash flows on the hedged transactions. The
ineffective portion of the hedge is immediately reported in “Other income and
expenses, net” in the consolidated statements of income. The gain or loss from
the effective portion of the hedge is reported as a component of “Accumulated
other comprehensive income” in the consolidated statements of changes in
shareholders’ equity and is reclassified into earnings in the same period in
which the hedged transaction affects earnings, and within the same consolidated
statements of income line item as the impact of the hedged transaction. The gain
or loss is recognized immediately in “Other income and expenses, net” in the
consolidated statements of income when a designated hedging instrument is either
terminated early or an improbable or ineffective portion of the hedge is
identified.
Fair
Value Hedge
In the
second quarter of 2006, the Company entered into cancellable swaps with a
combined notional value of $200 million to hedge the fair value of a portion of
the convertible bonds due 2016 carrying a fixed interest rate. These financial
instruments correspond to interest rate swaps with a cancellation feature
depending on the Company’s convertible bonds convertibility. They convert the
fixed rate interest expense recorded on the convertible bond due 2016 to a
variable interest rate based upon adjusted LIBOR. The interest rate swaps meet
the criteria for designation as a fair value hedge and, as such, both the
interest rate swaps and the hedged portion of the bonds are reflected at the
fair values in the consolidated balance sheets. The criteria for designating a
derivative as a hedge include evaluating whether the instrument is highly
effective at offsetting changes in the fair value of the hedged item
attributable to the hedged risk. Hedged effectiveness is assessed on both a
prospective and retrospective basis at each reporting period. The interest rate
swaps are highly effective for hedging the change in fair value of the hedged
bonds attributable to changes in interest rates and were designated as a fair
value hedge at their inception. Any ineffectiveness of the hedge relationship is
recorded as a gain or loss on derivatives as a component of “Other income and
expenses, net”. If the hedge becomes no longer highly effective, the hedged
portion of the bonds will discontinue being marked to fair value while the
changes in the fair value of the interest rate swaps will continue to be
recorded in the consolidated statements of income.
The net
gain recognized in “Other income and expenses, net” for the six months ended
June 28, 2008 as a result of the ineffective portion of this fair value hedge
amounted to $1 million. The net gain recognized in “Other income and expenses,
net” for the six months ended June 30, 2007 as a result of the ineffective
portion of this fair value hedge was not material.
The table
below details assets (liabilities) measured at fair value on a recurring basis
as at June 28, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
Value Measurements using
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quoted
Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level
1)
|
|
|
Significant
Other Observable Inputs (Level
2)
|
|
|
Significant
Unobservable Inputs (Level
3)
|
|
Description
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale debt
securities
|
|
|
1,198 |
|
|
|
898 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
300 |
|
Available-for-sale equity
securities
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale
long term subordinated notes
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
145 |
|
Equity
securities held for trading
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
instruments designated as cash flow hedge
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
instruments designated as fair value hedge
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
instruments not designated as hedge
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1,379 |
|
|
|
922 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
445 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For
assets measured at fair value using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3),
the reconciliation between June 28, 2008 and December 31, 2007 is presented as
follows:
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
Fair
Value Measurements using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level
3)
|
December
31, 2007
|
369
|
|
Subordinated
notes received in Numonyx transaction
|
156
|
|
Other-than-temporary
impairment charge included in earnings
|
(69
|
) |
Temporary
decline in fair value on Numonyx subordinated notes
|
(11
|
) |
Settlements
and redemptions
|
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
445
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
of total losses for the period included in earnings attributable to assets
still held at the reporting date
|
(69
|
) |
The
Company operates in two business areas: Semiconductors and
Subsystems.
In the
Semiconductors business area, the Company designs, develops, manufactures and
markets a broad range of products, including discrete and standard commodity
components, application-specific integrated circuits (“ASICs”), full custom
devices and semi-custom devices and application-specific standard products
(“ASSPs”) for analog, digital, and mixed-signal applications. In addition,
the Company further participates in the manufacturing value chain of Smartcard
products through its Incard division, which includes the production and sale of
both silicon chips and Smartcards.
Effective
January 1, 2007, to meet the requirements of the market together with the
pursuit of strategic repositioning in Flash memory, the Company reorganized its
product segment groups into three segments:
|
·
|
Application
Specific Product Groups (“ASG”)
segment;
|
|
·
|
Industrial
and Multisegment Sector (“IMS”) segment;
and
|
|
·
|
Flash
Memory Group (“FMG”) segment (until March 30,
2008).
|
The ASG
segment includes the Automotive Products, Computer Peripherals, Mobile,
Multimedia and Communications Group and Home, Entertainment & Display Group.
The IMS segment contains the Microcontrollers, Memories and Smartcards Group and
the Analog, Power and MEMS Group. FMG segment incorporates all Flash Memory
operations, including research and development and product-related activities,
front- and back-end manufacturing, marketing and sales. Since March 31, 2008,
following the creation with Intel of Numonyx, a new independent semiconductor
company from the key assets of its and Intel’s Flash memory business (“FMG
deconsolidation”), the Company has ceased reporting under the FMG
segment.
The
Company’s principal investment and resource allocation decisions in the
Semiconductor business area are for expenditures on research and development and
capital investments in front-end and back-end manufacturing facilities. These
decisions are not made by product segments, but on the basis of the
Semiconductor Business area. All these product segments share common research
and development for process technology and manufacturing capacity for most of
their products.
In the
Subsystems business area, the Company designs, develops, manufactures and
markets subsystems and modules for the telecommunications, automotive and
industrial markets including mobile phone accessories, battery chargers, ISDN
power supplies and in-vehicle equipment for electronic toll payment. Based
on its immateriality to its business as a whole, the Subsystems segment does not
meet the requirements for a reportable segment as defined in Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 131, Disclosures about Segments of an
Enterprise and Related Information (“FAS 131”).
The
following tables present the Company’s consolidated net revenues and
consolidated operating income by semiconductor product segment. For the
computation of the Groups’ internal financial measurements, the Company uses
certain internal rules of allocation for the costs not directly chargeable to
the Groups, including cost of sales, selling, general and administrative
expenses and a significant part of research and development
expenses. Additionally, in compliance with the Company’s internal policies,
certain cost items are not charged to the Groups, including impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs, start-up costs of new
manufacturing facilities, some strategic and special research and development
programs or other corporate-sponsored initiatives, including certain
corporate-level operating expenses and certain other miscellaneous
charges.
Net
revenues by product segment
|
|
Unaudited
|
|
|
Unaudited
|
|
|
|
Three
months ended
|
|
|
Six
months ended
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
|
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
|
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
revenues by product segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Specific Product Groups segment
|
|
|
1,511 |
|
|
|
1,303 |
|
|
|
2,904 |
|
|
|
2,524 |
|
Industrial
and Multisegment Sector segment
|
|
|
865 |
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
1,637 |
|
|
|
1,488 |
|
Flash
Memory Group segment
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
654 |
|
Others(1)
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Consolidated net revenues
|
|
|
2,391 |
|
|
|
2,418 |
|
|
|
4,869 |
|
|
|
4,693 |
|
(1)
|
Includes
revenues from sales of subsystems and other products not allocated to
product segments.
|
Operating
income (loss) by product segment
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
Three
months ended
|
|
|
Six
months ended
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
|
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
|
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
income (loss) by product segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Specific Product Groups segment
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
Industrial
and Multisegment Sector segment
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
210 |
|
Flash
Memory Group segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
Total
operating income (loss) of product segments
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
Others(1)
|
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
|
(903 |
) |
|
|
(394 |
) |
|
|
(930 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Consolidated operating income (loss)
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(772 |
) |
|
|
(114 |
) |
|
|
(710 |
) |
(1)
Operating income (loss) of “Others” includes items such as impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs, start-up costs, and other
unallocated expenses, such as: strategic or special research and development
programs, acquired in-process R&D, certain corporate-level operating
expenses, certain patent claims and litigations, and other costs that are not
allocated to the product segments, as well as operating earnings or losses of
the Subsystems and Other Products Group.
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
Three
months ended
|
|
|
Six
months ended
|
|
In
millions of U.S. dollars
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
|
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
June
28, 2008
|
|
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation
to Consolidated operating income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
operating income of product segments
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
Strategic
and other research and development programs
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Acquired
in-process R&D
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Start
up costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs
|
|
|
(185 |
) |
|
|
(906 |
) |
|
|
(369 |
) |
|
|
(918 |
) |
Other
non-allocated provisions(1)
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Total
operating loss Others (2)
|
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
|
(903 |
) |
|
|
(394 |
) |
|
|
(930 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Consolidated operating income (loss)
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(772 |
) |
|
|
(114 |
) |
|
|
(710 |
) |
(1)
Includes unallocated income and expenses such as certain corporate-level
operating expenses and other costs.
(2)
Operating income (loss) of “Others” includes items such as impairment,
restructuring charges and other related closure costs, start-up costs, and other
unallocated expenses, such as: strategic or
special research and development programs, acquired in-process
R&D, certain corporate-level operating expenses, certain patent claims and
litigations, and other costs that are not allocated to the product segments, as
well as operating earnings or losses of the Subsystems and Other Products Group
including remaining FMG costs starting from the second quarter of 2008.
On April
10, 2008, the Company announced that it had reached an agreement with NXP, an
independent semiconductor company founded by Philips, to combine their
respective key wireless operations to form a joint venture company. The
transaction closed on July 28, 2008 and the joint venture company, which is
named ST-NXP Wireless, will start operations on August 2, 2008. At closing, the
Company received an 80% stake in the joint venture and paid NXP $1,550 million,
including a control premium that was funded from outstanding cash. NXP will
continue to own a 20% interest in the venture; however, the Company and NXP have
agreed on a future exit mechanism for NXP’s interest, which involves put and
call options based on the financial results of the business that are exercisable
starting three years from the formation of the joint venture, or earlier under
certain conditions. The Company will consolidate the joint venture; however, the
purchase price has not yet been allocated.