KLIC
#Yes, no problem.
Yes, I think based on what the, at least the various publication what we are seeing, it seems like there is definitely a lot of interest and some traction that is taking place within ---+ certainly within the memory players.
We certainly are very interested to gain further traction with our memory customers that's coming from either the OSATs and IDMs.
Both of those, and hopefully to get into more of the volume-type of repeat purchase order for our multiple sets of machines, purchase orders.
And that's something that we are continuing to work with.
There's a lot of different end applications that our customers are currently looking at, and once our machine to go through a qualification process for different type of memory type of, including the high-bandwidth memories or game console memory chips.
Well, I would say that it's a balanced view because, as you can see in the past, historically, we are able to manage our costs pretty effective if we need to.
Our aim here is not to really provide some kind of a guidance on our breakeven level, but I prefer not to go through some extreme cost-containment measures, but allow our team to basically to really leverage off the budget they have to pursue business opportunities.
So there are ways to tighten our belt if we need to and we certainly have done so in the past.
But I think the $115 million to $120 million in terms of how we actually guide the cost structure ---+ it is a balanced approach.
Just one second.
Cash generated is about $6 million for the last quarter.
Well, I think we believe this market is ---+ depending on the solutions that we're pursuing for each of the flavors that we are actually pursuing.
It's about probably $120 million or so or higher in each of the solutions.
But we think there is ---+ it is now just trying to taking traction.
And the size of the market ---+ it really depends on the adoption rate from our customers.
For this particular year, since it is just starting out, I would say from our perspective, we set our budget fairly conservatively from what we want to achieve.
So I don't ---+ just to answer your first question, it will have large tracking revenue but it's not going to be a significant level of revenue compared to the rest of the Company.
But the key is actually we need to be well-positioned if the track ---+ if basically adoption takes place, and then it's really the 2017 year that we need to be prepared for.
Yes.
That's the Wire Bonding business is really what we refer to as our core business; so, yes, the pickup in terms of volume and the revenue guidance is mainly from that business.
Well, I think there is going to be a small portion of it, but especially, the fact that the machines that we will be, in terms of we are able to recognize revenue on these machines, the fall-through is quite good because the fact that we have expensed these machines already.
So the fall-through on the net income is going to be quite high.
But the top line revenue is also still a majority coming from Ball Bonding, and to a smaller extent, the Wedge Bonding business.
Let me just add a little bit to that.
For APMR, we are still going to integration process and we set a reasonable budget for them for this year.
We are expecting more growth that comes from the subsequent year from this year.
But I can say that there are actually a lot of interest in terms of their solutions on the Mass Reflow side.
So the nice challenge is the fact that we need to ramp and be more scalable, while addressing the fact that they mainly sell in different currencies and where the KNS side do sell in US dollars and source in US dollars.
So there's some integration-related activities that we need to finish for the rest of the year.
But the team is working well together with us in terms of the integration process and we expect great things from that acquisition.
You are welcome.
Well, I would say if you look at the trends and we are seeing some steady pick-up in terms of demand coming from <UNK>na.
And late in the quarter, we are seeing basically from Taiwan as well.
So <UNK>na, as you look at ---+ I look at our top 10 list, basically our ---+ we sell through a distributor in <UNK>na, but (inaudible) most of the top OSATs in <UNK>na and they are steadily investing.
We're also seeing some steady investments coming from second-tier OSATs as well in <UNK>na.
So the fact that <UNK>na wants to be a leader in 10 years' time, I would say there's exceptionally, definitely increased investments in diverse ---+ a lot of different players on demand.
Sure, sure.
Our normal seasonality, as you know, December quarter is typically the lowest quarter.
But we have seen the past five years sometimes the second quarter would be lower.
And the fact that people don't like decisions until after <UNK>nese New Year.
But this year, we are seeing priorities.
We have seen basically ---+ base POs from our customers earlier on.
So that's why we were able to actually guide a little higher.
So it's a little different than previous years for that culture.
Well, we are seeing some inquiries and we are expecting some of the LED players to further invest in this area so it seems like it's an up trend.
The question then is, it's all about pricing and how do we actually maintain our market share space.
As mentioned in the past, LED is generally about 5% or less.
But we are selective in terms of the customers we serve and we are seeing some bigger players inquiring that they're building the new plants and capacity and we will selectively participate in this.
So we're ---+ in terms of outlook, I think ---+ this current quarter could be higher than 5%.
No problem, Steve.
Well, <UNK>, we don't guide past the current quarter.
But we have provided roughly what the size of that market was, which Joe just mentioned.
And the Advanced Packaging size is probably $250 million and it could grow at a fairly high CAGR ---+ the chart on that could grow as much as 40% CAGR over the next several years.
The question is really the adoption of ---+ by our customers, and I did mention in terms of this current year, we are actually just trying to at least get a position in there so that in the long term, we could be at least a 30% player in the market that we are serving.
We are talking about Advanced Packaging.
And the Thermo-Compression ---+ when I mentioned the four flavors, it's really ---+ there are two flavors are the Thermo-Compression Bonders, <UNK>p-to-Substrates, <UNK>p-to-Wafer; and then there are two other flavors, which is Fan-Out Wafer-Level Packaging and that doesn't use Thermo-Compression Bonder, and High Accuracy Flip chip, which also does not use TCB.
I think it is a good question.
We have different models that we run on our corporate ---+ we run a five-year corporate model, and there is actually scenario where it could actually be ---+ it could grow to a reasonable size.
So really again, it really depends on our customers basically adoption of this.
But one thing for sure, in our opinion, is that the traditional of the core business, while it is mature, it is not going away anytime soon.
The question is really Advanced Packaging could be a meaningful contributor in terms of revenue as well as bottom line to our business.
This is where we're cautiously optimistic.
We are obviously, after this current quarter, we hope there will be a ramp in terms of the Q3 and Q4.
But that's something that we have to look at one quarter at a time.
But we are always ready.
We are pretty flexible, as you know, with flexible manufacturing.
So we're ready.
If the demand is there, we will definitely try to capture as much as we can.
CapEx is actually generally ---+ we're low ---+
Sure.
Let me address that.
The topic of capital allocation is regularly discussed at the management level as well as the Board level and this is something that we review almost on a quarterly basis.
So while we actually are open to continuing with the share repurchase program, the question, then, is really to address the cyclicality of the business, in terms of broadening the business revenue streams that we believe is actually a higher priority at this point in time.
But I think, even if we want to actually increase the size of the program, just keep in mind, if we are actually borrow a ---+ basically a number of onshore in the US, we have to pay that back at some point.
So we still need US dollars to eventually service that debt.
So we are very cognizant just to ensure that our cash, then, onshore in the US, will need some cash flow sources to meet that.
So that's something that we are continuing to analyze and also update on a quarterly basis, basically.
