Source: http://quarterlyearnings.amd.com/node/25946/html
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 19:59:17+00:00

Document:
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” and "emerging growth company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Basis of Presentation. The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the Company or AMD) have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) for interim financial information and the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. The results of operations for the quarter and six months ended July 1, 2017 shown in this report are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for the full year ending December 30, 2017. In the opinion of the Company’s management, the information contained herein reflects all adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the Company’s results of operations, financial position and cash flows. All such adjustments are of a normal, recurring nature. The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.
The Company uses a 52 or 53 week fiscal year ending on the last Saturday in December. The quarters and six months ended July 1, 2017 and June 25, 2016 each consisted of 13 weeks and 26 weeks, respectively.
Principles of Consolidation. The condensed consolidated financial statements include the Company’s accounts and those of its wholly-owned subsidiaries. Upon consolidation, all significant inter-company accounts and transactions are eliminated.
Inventory. In July 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued ASU No. 2015-11, Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory (ASU 2015-11), which requires entities to measure inventory at the lower of cost or net realizable value. This ASU simplifies the subsequent measurement of inventory by replacing the lower of cost or market test with a lower of cost or net realizable value test. The Company adopted this guidance in the first quarter of 2017 and it did not have an impact on its consolidated financial statements.
Investments. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-07, Investments – Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323): Simplifying the Transition to the Equity Method of Accounting (ASU 2016-07), which requires the equity method investor to add the cost of acquiring the additional interest in the investee to the current basis of the investor’s previously held interest and adopt the equity method of accounting as of the date the investment qualifies for equity method accounting. The Company adopted this guidance in the first quarter of 2017 and it did not have an impact on its consolidated financial statements.
Stock Compensation. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718) Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting (ASU 2016-09), which is intended to simplify several aspects of the accounting for share-based payment award transactions. The Company adopted this guidance in the first quarter of 2017 and elected to continue to estimate forfeitures expected to occur to determine the amount of compensation cost to be recognized in each period. In the first quarter of 2017, the Company recorded a $96 million cumulative-effect adjustment in accumulated deficit and an offsetting increase in deferred tax assets for previously unrecognized excess tax benefits that existed as of December 31, 2016. Since substantially all of the Company’s U.S. and foreign deferred tax assets, net of deferred tax liabilities, are subject to a valuation allowance and the realization of these assets is not more likely than not to be achieved, the Company recorded a $96 million valuation allowance against these deferred tax assets with an offsetting adjustment in accumulated deficit. The Company elected to report cash flows related to excess tax benefits as an operating activity on a prospective basis. The presentation requirement for cash flows related to employee taxes paid for withheld shares did not impact the statements of cash flows because such cash flows have historically been presented as a financing activity.
Revenue Recognition. In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Topic 606 (ASU 2014-09), which creates a single source of revenue guidance under U.S. GAAP for all companies in all industries and replaces most existing revenue recognition guidance in U.S. GAAP. Under the new standard, revenue is recognized when a customer obtains control of promised goods or services and is recognized in an amount that reflects the consideration which the entity expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services. In addition, the new standard requires disclosure of the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. The FASB has issued several amendments to the new standard, including clarification on accounting for licenses of intellectual property and identifying performance obligations.
Company will not early adopt the new standard and therefore the new standard will be effective for the Company in the first quarter of its fiscal 2018.
The guidance permits two methods of adoption: retrospectively to each prior reporting period presented (full retrospective method), or prospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying the guidance recognized at the date of initial application and providing additional disclosures comparing results to the previous rules in the year of adoption of the new standard (the modified retrospective method or the cumulative catchup method). The Company currently anticipates adopting the standard using the full retrospective method to restate each prior reporting period presented. The Company’s ability to adopt utilizing the full retrospective method is dependent upon system readiness and the completion of its analysis of information necessary to restate prior period financial statements. In 2016, the Company established a cross-functional team consisting of representatives across both business segments. While the Company is continuing to assess all potential impacts of the standard, it currently believes the most significant impact relates to accelerated revenue recognition for sales to its distributors, whereby revenue is expected to be recognized upon the initial sale to the Company's distributors, instead of the current recognition upon resale by the distributors to the end customers. The Company currently expects other revenue streams to remain substantially unchanged.
As part of the Company’s assessment and implementation plan, the Company is evaluating and implementing changes to its policies, procedures and controls.
Financial Instruments. In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments - Overall: Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities (ASU 2016-01), which requires that most equity investments be measured at fair value, with subsequent changes in fair value recognized in net income. The ASU also impacts financial liabilities under the fair value option and the presentation and disclosure requirements for financial instruments. In addition, the FASB clarified guidance related to the valuation allowance assessment when recognizing deferred tax assets resulting from unrealized losses on available-for-sale debt securities. Entities will have to assess the realizability of such deferred tax assets in combination with the entities' other deferred tax assets. ASU 2016-01 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and for interim periods within that reporting period. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of its pending adoption of ASU 2016-01 on its consolidated financial statements.
Leases. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (ASU 2016-02), which increases transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements. ASU 2016-02 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years, with early adoption permitted. Upon adoption, lessees must apply a modified retrospective transition approach for leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of its pending adoption of ASU 2016-02 on its consolidated financial statements.
Financial Instruments. In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326), Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments (ASU 2016-13). The standard changes the methodology for measuring credit losses on financial instruments and the timing of when such losses are recorded. ASU 2016-13 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2018. The Company is currently evaluating the timing of adoption and impact of ASU 2016-13 on its consolidated financial statements.
Statement of Cash Flows. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments (ASU 2016-15), which is intended to reduce the existing diversity in practice in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are classified in the statement of cash flows. ASU 2016-15 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years with early adoption permitted, provided that all of the amendments are adopted in the same period. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of its pending adoption of ASU 2016-15 on its consolidated financial statements.
Income Taxes. In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-16, Income Taxes (Topic 740), Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory (ASU 2016-16), which requires entities to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset other than inventory when the transfer occurs. This amends current GAAP which prohibits recognition of current and deferred income taxes for all types of intra-entity asset transfers until the asset has been sold to an outside party. ASU 2016-16 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods therein with early adoption permitted. Upon adoption, the Company must apply a modified retrospective transition approach through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the period of adoption. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this new standard on its consolidated financial statements, as well as its planned adoption date.
Goodwill Impairment. In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other: Topic 350: Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment (ASU 2017-04), which eliminates step two from the goodwill impairment test. Under the amendments in ASU 2017-04, an entity should recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value; however, the loss recognized should not exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. ASU 2017-04 is effective for annual and any interim impairment tests performed for periods beginning after December 15, 2019 on a prospective basis, and earlier adoption is permitted for goodwill impairment tests performed on testing dates after January 1, 2017. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of its pending adoption of ASU 2017-04 on its consolidated financial statements.
1.The award’s fair value (or calculated value or intrinsic value, if those measurement methods are used).
3.The award’s classification as an equity or liability instrument.
ASU 2017-09 is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017 on a prospective basis, and early adoption is permitted. The Company has evaluated the impact of its pending adoption of ASU 2017-09 and does not expect that this guidance will have a significant impact on its financial statements.
Although there are several other new accounting pronouncements issued or proposed by the FASB, which the Company has adopted or will adopt, as applicable, the Company does not believe any of these accounting pronouncements has had or will have a material impact on its consolidated financial position or operating results.
Wafer Supply Agreement. The Wafer Supply Agreement (WSA) governs the terms by which the Company purchases products manufactured by GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GF).
Sixth Amendment to Wafer Supply Agreement. On August 30, 2016, the Company entered into a sixth amendment (the Sixth Amendment) to the WSA. The Sixth Amendment modified certain terms of the WSA applicable to wafers for the Company’s microprocessor, graphics processor and semi-custom products for a five-year period from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020. The Company and GF also agreed to establish a comprehensive framework for technology collaboration for the 7nm technology node.
The Sixth Amendment also provides the Company a limited waiver with rights to contract with another wafer foundry with respect to certain products in the 14nm and 7nm technology nodes and gives the Company greater flexibility in sourcing foundry services across its product portfolio. In consideration for these rights, the Company agreed to pay GF $100 million in installments starting in the fourth fiscal quarter of 2016 through the third fiscal quarter of 2017. During the second fiscal quarter of 2017, the Company paid GF $25 million and, as of July 1, 2017, the Company had paid GF $75 million in aggregate. Starting in 2017 and continuing through 2020, the Company also agreed to make quarterly payments to GF based on the volume of certain wafers purchased from another wafer foundry.
Further, for each calendar year during the term of the Sixth Amendment, the Company and GF agreed to annual wafer purchase targets that increase from 2016 through 2020. If the Company does not meet the annual wafer purchase target for any calendar year, the Company will be required to pay to GF a portion of the difference between the Company’s actual wafer purchases and the wafer purchase target for that year. The annual targets were established based on the Company’s business and market expectations and took into account the limited waiver it received for certain products. As of July 1, 2017, the Company expected to meet its 2017 wafer purchase target.
The Company and GF also agreed on fixed pricing for wafers purchased during 2016 and established a framework to agree on annual wafer pricing for the years 2017 to 2020. The Company and GF have agreed on pricing for wafer purchases for 2017.
payable to GF was $229 million and $255 million, respectively, included in Payables to related parties on the Company's condensed consolidated balance sheets.
Warrant Agreement. Also on August 30, 2016, in consideration for the limited waiver and rights under the Sixth Amendment, the Company entered into a warrant agreement (the Warrant Agreement) with West Coast Hitech L.P. (WCH), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mubadala Development Company PJSC (Mubadala). Under the Warrant Agreement, WCH and its permitted assigns are entitled to purchase 75 million shares of the Company’s common stock (the Warrant Shares) at a purchase price of $5.98 per share. The warrant is exercisable in whole or in part until February 29, 2020, provided that the maximum number of Warrant Shares that may be exercised prior to the one-year anniversary of the Warrant Agreement cannot exceed 50 million. The warrant will be fully exercisable as of August 30, 2017. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Warrant Agreement will only be exercisable to the extent that Mubadala does not beneficially own, either directly through any other entities directly and indirectly owned by Mubadala or its subsidiaries, an aggregate of more than 19.99% of the Company’s outstanding capital stock after any such exercise.
GF continues to be a related party of the Company because Mubadala and Mubadala Technology Investments LLC (Mubadala Tech, a party to the WSA) are affiliated with WCH, the Company’s largest stockholder. GF, WCH and Mubadala Tech are wholly-owned subsidiaries of Mubadala.
As of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, Accounts receivables, net included unbilled accounts receivables of $45 million and $37 million, respectively. Unbilled accounts receivable represent revenue recognized but not billed as payments are deferred by customers until certain contractual milestones are met. Substantially all unbilled accounts receivable are expected to be billed and collected within twelve months.
The Company incurs costs for the fabrication of masks used by its foundry partners to manufacture its products. Beginning the first fiscal quarter of 2017, the Company capitalizes mask costs that are expected to be utilized in production manufacturing as the Company’s product development process has become more predictable and thus supports capitalization of the mask. The capitalized mask costs begin depreciating to Cost of Sales once the products go into production, on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of two years. Previously mask sets were expensed to research and development.
On April 29, 2016, the Company and certain of its subsidiaries completed the sale of a majority of the equity interests in Suzhou TF-AMD Semiconductor Co., Ltd. (formerly, AMD Technologies (China) Co., Ltd.), and TF AMD Microelectronics (Penang) Sdn. Bhd. (formerly, Advanced Micro Devices Export Sdn. Bhd.), to affiliates of Tongfu Microelectronics Co., Ltd. (formerly, Nantong Fujitsu Microelectronics Co., Ltd.) (TFME), a Chinese joint stock company, to form two joint ventures (collectively, the ATMP JV). As a result of the sale, TFME’s affiliates own 85% of the equity interests in the ATMP JV while certain of the Company’s subsidiaries own the remaining 15%. The Company has no obligation to fund the ATMP JV.
The Company accounts for its equity interests in the ATMP JV under the equity method of accounting due to its significant influence over the ATMP JV. As of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the carrying value of the Company's investment in the ATMP JV was approximately $58 million and $59 million, respectively. Following the deconsolidation, the ATMP JV is a related party of the Company. The ATMP JV provides assembly, test, mark and packaging (ATMP) services to the Company. The Company currently pays the ATMP JV for ATMP services on a cost-plus basis. The Company's total purchases from the ATMP JV during the three and six months ended July 1, 2017 amounted to approximately $105 million and $201 million, respectively. The Company's total purchases from the ATMP JV during the three and six months ended June 25, 2016 amounted to approximately $66 million. As of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the amount payable to the ATMP JV was $145 million and $128 million, respectively, included in Payables to related parties on its condensed consolidated balance sheets.
During the three and six months ended July 1, 2017, the Company recorded $3 million and $5 million, respectively, in Equity loss in investee on its condensed consolidated statements of operations, which included certain expenses incurred by the Company on behalf of the ATMP JV. During the three and six months ended June 25, 2016, the Company recorded a loss of $3 million, in Equity loss in investee on its condensed consolidated statements of operations, which included certain expenses incurred by the Company on behalf of the ATMP JV.
by the Company’s contribution of certain of its patents. The JV Partner is responsible for the initial and on-going financing of the THATIC JV’s operations. The Company has no obligations to fund the THATIC JV.
The Company concluded the China JV1 and China JV2 are not operating joint ventures and are variable interest entities due to their reliance on on-going financing by JV Partner. The Company determined that it is not the primary beneficiary of either China JV1 or China JV2, as the Company does not have unilateral power to direct selling and marketing, manufacturing and product development activities related to the THATIC JV’s products. Accordingly, the Company will not consolidate either of these entities and therefore accounts for its investments in the THATIC JV under the equity method of accounting. The THATIC JV is a related party of the Company.
In February 2016, the Company licensed certain of its intellectual property (Licensed IP) to the THATIC JV for a total of approximately $293 million in license fee payable over several years contingent upon achievement of certain milestones. The Company also expects to receive a royalty based on the sales of the THATIC JV’s products to be developed on the basis of such Licensed IP. The Company will also provide certain engineering and technical support to the THATIC JV in connection with the product development. In March 2017, the Company entered into a development and intellectual property agreement with THATIC JV, and also expects to receive a royalty based on the sales of the THATIC JV’s products to be developed on the basis of such agreement. The Company will also provide certain engineering and technical support to the THATIC JV in connection with the product development.
The Company recognizes income related to the Licensed IP over the period commencing upon delivery of the first Licensed IP milestone through the date of the milestone that requires the Company’s continuing involvement in the product development process. Royalty payments will be recognized in income once earned. The Company will classify Licensed IP income and royalty income as other operating income. During the three and six months ended July 1, 2017, the Company recognized $25 million and $52 million licensing gain associated with the Licensed IP, respectively, and development fees of $6 million and $10 million, respectively, as a credit to research and development expenses. During the three and six months ended June 25, 2016, the Company recognized $26 million and $33 million licensing gain, respectively. No development fee credit associated with these agreements was recognized by the Company during the three and six months ended June 25, 2016. No royalty income was recognized by the Company during the three and six months ended July 1, 2017 and June 25, 2016.
The Company’s total exposure to losses through its investment in the THATIC JV is limited to the Company’s investment in the THATIC JV, which was zero as of July 1, 2017. The Company’s share in the net losses of the THATIC JV for the three and six months ended July 1, 2017 and June 25, 2016 was not material and is not recorded in the Company’s condensed consolidated statement of operations since the Company is not obligated to fund the THATIC JV’s losses in excess of the Company’s investment in the THATIC JV. The Company’s receivable from THATIC JV was $2 million and zero as of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively, included in Prepayment and other receivables - related parties on its condensed consolidated balance sheets. As of July 1, 2017, the total assets and liabilities of the THATIC JV were not material.
On September 14, 2016, the Company issued $700 million in aggregate principal amount of 2.125% Convertible Senior Notes due 2026 (2.125% Notes). The Company also granted an option to the underwriters to purchase an additional $105 million aggregate principal amount of the 2.125% Notes. On September 28, 2016, this option was exercised in full and the Company issued an additional $105 million aggregate principal amount of the 2.125% Notes.
The 2.125% Notes are general unsecured senior obligations of the Company and will mature on September 1, 2026, unless earlier repurchased or converted. Interest is payable in arrears on March 1 and September 1 of each year beginning on March 1, 2017. The 2.125% Notes are governed by the terms of a base indenture and a supplemental indenture (together the 2.125% Indentures) dated September 14, 2016 between the Company and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee.
on each such trading day; or (3) upon the occurrence of specified corporate events. On or after June 1, 2026 until the close of business on the business day immediately preceding the maturity date, holders may convert their notes at any time, regardless of the foregoing circumstances. Upon conversion, the Company will pay or deliver, as the case may be, cash, shares of the Company's common stock or a combination of cash and shares of the Company's common stock, at the Company's election. The first event described in (1) above was met during the second quarter of 2017 and as a result, the 2.125% Notes are convertible at the option of the holder as of July 1, 2017 and remain convertible until September 30, 2017. The Company's current intent is to deliver shares of its common stock upon conversion of the 2.125% Notes. As such, the Company continued to classify the carrying value of the liability component of the 2.125% Notes as long-term debt and the equity component of the 2.125% Notes as permanent equity on its condensed consolidated balance sheet as of July 1, 2017.
The Company may not redeem the notes prior to the maturity date, and no sinking fund is provided for the 2.125% Notes.
The conversion rate is currently 125.0031 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of 2.125% Notes(equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $8.00 per share of common stock). The conversion rate is subject to adjustment in some events but will not be adjusted for any accrued and unpaid interest. In addition, following certain corporate events that occur prior to the maturity date, the Company will increase the conversion rate for a holder who elects to convert its notes in connection with such a corporate event in certain circumstances.
If the Company undergoes a fundamental change prior to the maturity date of the notes, holders may require the Company to repurchase for cash all or any portion of their 2.125% Notes at a fundamental change repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the 2.125% Notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the fundamental change repurchase date.
In accounting for the issuance of the 2.125% Notes, the Company separated the 2.125% Notes into liability and equity components. The carrying amounts of the liability component was calculated by measuring the fair value of a similar liability that does not have associated conversion features. The carrying amount of the equity component representing the conversion option was determined by deducting the fair value of the liability component from the par value of the 2.125% Notes as a whole. The excess of the principal amount of the liability component over its book value (debt discount) is accreted to interest expense over the term of the 2.125% Notes. The equity component is not remeasured as long as it continues to meet the conditions for equity classification.
In accounting for the issuance costs related to the 2.125% Notes, the Company allocated the total amount of issuance costs incurred to the liability and equity components based on their relative fair values. Issuance costs attributable to the liability component are being amortized to interest expense over the term of the 2.125% Notes, and the issuance costs attributable to the equity component were netted against the equity component in additional paid-in capital. During 2016, the Company recorded issuance costs of $15 million and $9 million, for the liability and equity portions, respectively.
The determination of whether or not the 2.125% Notes are convertible must continue to be performed on a calendar-quarter basis.
Included in the consolidated balance sheets within Long-term debt, net and amortized over the remaining life of the notes using the effective interest rate method.
Included in the consolidated balance sheets within additional paid-in capital, net of $9 million of equity issuance costs.
As of July 1, 2017, the remaining life of the 2.125% Notes was approximately 111 months.
Based on the closing price of the Company's common stock of $12.48 on June 30, 2017, the last business day of the second quarter of 2017, the if-converted value of the 2.125% Notes exceeded its principal amount by approximately $451 million.
On February 26, 2014, the Company issued $600 million of its 6.75% Senior Notes due 2019 (6.75% Notes). The 6.75% Notes are general unsecured senior obligations of the Company. Interest is payable on March 1 and September 1 of each year beginning September 1, 2014 until the maturity date of March 1, 2019. The 6.75% Notes are governed by the terms of an indenture (the 6.75% Indenture) dated February 26, 2014 between the Company and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee.
On February 10, 2017, the Company settled $5 million in aggregate principal amount of its 6.75% Notes with treasury stock. As of July 1, 2017, the outstanding aggregate principal amount of the 6.75% Notes was $191 million.
On August 15, 2012, the Company issued $500 million of its 7.50% Senior Notes due 2022 (7.50% Notes). The 7.50% Notes are general unsecured senior obligations of the Company. Interest is payable on February 15 and August 15 of each year beginning February 15, 2013 until the maturity date of August 15, 2022. The 7.50% Notes are governed by the terms of an indenture (the 7.50% Indenture) dated August 15, 2012 between the Company and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee.
On February 10, 2017, the Company settled $3 million in aggregate principal amount of its 7.50% Notes with treasury stock. As of July 1, 2017, the outstanding aggregate principal amount of the 7.50% Notes was $347 million.
On June 16, 2014, the Company issued $500 million of its 7.00% Senior Notes due 2024 (7.00% Notes). The 7.00% Notes are general unsecured senior obligations of the Company. Interest is payable on January 1 and July 1 of each year beginning January 1, 2015 until the maturity date of July 1, 2024. The 7.00% Notes are governed by the terms of an indenture (the 7.00% Indenture) dated June 16, 2014 between the Company and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee.
During the first quarter of 2017, the Company settled $26 million in aggregate principal amount of its 7.00% Notes with treasury stock.
During the second quarter of 2017, the Company repurchased $40 million in aggregate principal amount of its 7.00% Notes for $42 million.
As of July 1, 2017, the outstanding aggregate principal amount of the 7.00% Notes was $350 million.
The Company may elect to purchase or otherwise retire the 6.75% Notes, 7.50% Notes, 7.00% Notes and 2.125% Notes with cash, stock or other assets from time to time in open market or privately negotiated transactions, either directly or through intermediaries, or by tender offer when the Company believes the market conditions are favorable.
and Restated Loan Agreement) by and among the Loan Parties, the financial institutions party thereto from time to time as lenders (the Lenders) and Bank of America, N.A., acting as agent for the Lenders (the Agent).
On March 21, 2017, the Loan Parties entered into a fifth amendment to the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement (the Fifth Amendment) by and among the Loan Parties, the financial institutions party thereto from time to time as lenders and the Agent, which modifies the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement. The Fifth Amendment amends the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement by, among other things, extending the maturity date of the Secured Revolving Line of Credit from April 14, 2020 to March 21, 2022, reducing the Applicable Margin (as defined in the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement), reducing the commitment fee, lowering the minimum threshold of Availability (as defined in the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement) required to be maintained by the Company and AMDISS in order to avoid cash dominion, amending the borrowing base reporting requirement, amending maximum dollar limits related to supply chain finance arrangements, and reducing the amount of the Secured Revolving Line of Credit available for the issuance for letters of credit from $75 million to $45 million.
The Amended and Restated Loan Agreement provides for a Secured Revolving Line of Credit for a principal amount up to $500 million with up to $45 million available for issuance of letters of credit. Borrowings under the Secured Revolving Line of Credit are limited to up to 85% of eligible accounts receivable (90% for certain qualified eligible accounts receivable), minus specified reserves. The size of the commitments under the Secured Revolving Line of Credit may be increased by up to an aggregate amount of $200 million.
The Secured Revolving Line of Credit is secured by a first priority security interest in the Loan Parties’ accounts receivable, inventory, deposit accounts maintained with the Agent and other specified assets, including books and records.
As of July 1, 2017, the Secured Revolving Line of Credit had an outstanding loan balance of $42 million, at an interest rate of 4.75%. As of December 31, 2016, the Company did not have any borrowings outstanding under the Secured Revolving Line of Credit. As of July 1, 2017, the Company had $19 million letter of credit outstanding and up to $249 million available for future borrowings under the Secured Revolving Line of Credit. The Company reports its intra-period changes in its revolving credit balance on a net basis in its condensed consolidated statement of cash flows as the Company intends the period of the borrowings to be brief, repaying borrowed amounts within 90 days. As of July 1, 2017, the Company was in compliance with all required covenants in the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement.
Basic net income (loss) per share is computed based on the weighted average number of shares outstanding.
Diluted net income (loss) per share is computed based on the weighted average number of shares outstanding plus any potentially dilutive shares outstanding. Potentially dilutive shares include stock options, restricted stock units, shares issuable upon conversion of the 2.125% Notes and the exercise of the warrant under the Warrant Agreement.
Potential shares from stock options, restricted stock units, the 2.125% Notes and the warrants under the Warrant Agreement totaling 193 million for the second quarter of 2017 and potential shares from stock options and restricted stock units totaling 19 million for the second quarter of 2016 were not included in the net income (loss) per share calculations because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive.
Potential shares from stock options, restricted stock units, the 2.125% Notes and the warrants under the Warrant Agreement totaling 196 million for the six months ended July 1, 2017 and potential shares from stock options and restricted stock units totaling 41 million for the six months ended June 25, 2016 were not included in the net loss per share calculations because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive.
The Company did not have any transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy during the quarter and six months ended July 1, 2017 or the year ended December 31, 2016.
The Company's Level 1 assets are valued using quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets.
The Company’s Level 2 assets are valued using broker reports that utilize quoted market prices for identical or comparable instruments. Brokers gather observable inputs for all of the Company’s fixed income securities from a variety of industry data providers and other third-party sources.
Available-for-sale securities held by the Company as of July 1, 2017 consisted of commercial paper. The amortized cost of available-for-sale securities approximates the fair value for all periods presented.
In addition to those amounts presented above, as of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the Company had approximately $2 million of investments in government money market funds, used as collateral for letters of credit deposits, which were included in Other current assets on the Company’s condensed consolidated balance sheets. These government money market funds are classified within Level 1 because they are valued using quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets. Their amortized cost approximates the fair value for all periods presented. The Company is restricted from accessing these deposits.
As of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the Company also had approximately $16 million and $15 million, respectively, of investments in mutual funds held in a Rabbi trust established for the Company's deferred compensation plan, which were included in Other assets on the Company's condensed consolidated balance sheets. These mutual funds are classified within Level 1 because they are valued using quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets. Their amortized cost approximates the fair value for all periods presented. The Company is restricted from accessing these investments.
Carrying amounts of long-term debt are net of unamortized debt issuance costs of $22 million as of July 1, 2017 and $25 million as of December 31, 2016, based on the adoption of ASU 2015-03 and net of unamortized debt discount associated with the 2.125% Notes of $297 million as of July 1, 2017 and $308 million as of December 31, 2016.
The Company’s long-term debt is classified within Level 2. The fair value of the debt was estimated based on the quoted market prices for the same or similar issues or on the current rates offered to the Company for debt of the same remaining maturities. The fair value of the Company’s accounts receivable, accounts payable and other short-term obligations approximate their carrying value based on existing payment terms.
The Company’s foreign currency derivative contracts are classified within Level 2 because the valuation inputs are based on quoted prices and market observable data of similar instruments in active markets, such as currency spot and forward rates.
For the foreign currency contracts designated as cash flow hedges, the ineffective portions of the hedging relationship and the amounts excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness were immaterial.
As of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the notional values of the Company’s outstanding foreign currency forward contracts were $310 million and $138 million, respectively. All the contracts mature within 12 months, and, upon maturity, the amounts recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive gain (loss) are expected to be reclassified into earnings. The Company hedges its exposure to the variability in future cash flows for forecasted transactions over a maximum of 12 months.
In the second quarter of 2017, the Company recorded an income tax provision of $3 million, consisting of $1 million of foreign taxes in profitable locations and $3 million for withholding taxes applicable to license fee revenue from foreign locations, partially offset by $1 million of tax benefits comprising the tax effects of items credited directly to other comprehensive income, Canadian tax credits, and the monetization of certain U.S. tax credits.
For the six months ended July 1, 2017, the Company recorded an income tax provision of $8 million, consisting of $4 million of foreign taxes in profitable locations and $7 million for withholding taxes applicable to license fee revenue from foreign locations, partially offset by $3 million of tax benefits comprising the tax effects of items credited directly to other comprehensive income, Canadian tax credits, and the monetization of certain U.S. tax credits.
In the second quarter of 2016, the Company recorded an income tax provision of $29 million, consisting of $2 million of foreign taxes in profitable locations and $2 million for withholding taxes applicable to license fee revenue from foreign locations, partially offset by $2 million of tax benefits comprising the tax effects of items credited directly to other comprehensive income and Canadian tax credits. In addition, the Company recorded the tax effect of completion of the sale of a majority equity interest in two subsidiaries comprising $21 million of income tax expense in China and $6 million of withholding tax expense associated with a future repatriation of the gain generated in China by the Chinese portion of that transaction.
For the six months ended June 25, 2016, the Company recorded an income tax provision of $30 million due to foreign taxes in profitable locations and items identified above.
The Company has not recognized the tax benefit of future foreign tax credits associated with the withholding tax expense as the size and age profile of existing tax attributes does not allow us to satisfy the “more likely than not” criterion for the recognition of deferred tax assets.
As of July 1, 2017, substantially all of the Company’s U.S. and Canadian deferred tax assets, net of deferred tax liabilities, continue to be subject to a valuation allowance. The realization of these assets is dependent on substantial future taxable income which, as of July 1, 2017, in management’s estimate, is not more likely than not to be achieved.
The Company's total gross unrecognized tax benefits is increased from $42 million in prior quarter to $58 million as of July 1, 2017. This increase is due to additional R&D unrecognized tax benefits in foreign locations. The Company does not believe it is reasonably possible that unrecognized tax benefits will materially change in the next 12 months. However, the settlement, resolution or closure of tax audits are highly uncertain.
the Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom segment, which primarily includes server and embedded processors, semi-custom System-on-Chip (SoC) products, development services, technology for game consoles and licensing portions of its intellectual property portfolio.
In addition to these reportable segments, the Company has an All Other category, which is not a reportable segment. This category primarily includes certain expenses and credits that are not allocated to any of the reportable segments because management does not consider these expenses and credits in evaluating the performance of the reportable segments. This category also includes employee stock-based compensation expense and restructuring and other special charges, net.
In the second quarter of 2017 and 2016, the Company granted 1.5 million and 5.6 million shares of restricted stock units, respectively, with weighted average grant date fair values per share of $12.06 and $2.97, respectively. In the six months ended July 1, 2017 and June 25, 2016, the Company granted 2.1 million and 6.4 million shares of restricted stock units, respectively, with weighted average grant date fair values per share of $12.18 and $2.86, respectively.
The Company generally warrants that its products sold to its customers will conform to the Company’s approved specifications and be free from defects in material and workmanship under normal use and service for one year. Subject to certain exceptions, the Company also offers a three-year limited warranty to end users for only those central processing unit (CPU) and AMD accelerated processing unit (APU) products that are commonly referred to as “processors in a box” and for certain server CPU products. The Company also offers extended limited warranties to certain customers of “tray” microprocessor products and/or professional graphics products who have written agreements with the Company and target their computer systems at the commercial and/or embedded markets.
In addition to product warranties, the Company, from time to time in its normal course of business, indemnifies other parties, with whom it enters into contractual relationships, including customers, lessors and parties to other transactions with the Company, with respect to certain matters. In these limited matters, the Company has agreed to hold certain third parties harmless against specific types of claims or losses, such as those arising from a breach of representations or covenants, third-party claims that the Company’s products, when used for their intended purpose(s) and under specific conditions, infringe the intellectual property rights of a third party, or other specified claims made against the indemnified party. It is not possible to determine the maximum potential amount of liability under these indemnification obligations due to the unique facts and circumstances that are likely to be involved in each particular claim and indemnification provision. Historically, payments made by the Company under these obligations have not been material.
their motion for class certification, and on March 16, 2016, the Court granted plaintiffs' motion. A court-ordered mediation held in January 2016 did not result in a settlement of the lawsuit. The discovery process has concluded. Plaintiffs and defendants have filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and briefing on those motions was completed in July 2017.
Based upon information presently known to management, the Company believes that the potential liability, if any, will not have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, cash flows or results of operations.
On March 20, 2014, a purported shareholder derivative lawsuit captioned Wessels v. Read, et al., Case No. 1:14 cv-262486 (Wessels) was filed against the Company (as a nominal defendant only) and certain of its directors and officers in the Santa Clara County Superior Court of the State of California. The complaint purports to assert claims against the Company and certain individual directors and officers for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment. The complaint seeks damages allegedly caused by alleged materially misleading statements and/or material omissions by the Company and the individual directors and officers regarding its 32nm technology and “Llano” product, which statements and omissions, the plaintiffs claim, allegedly operated to artificially inflate the price paid for the Company's common stock during the period. On April 27, 2015, a similar purported shareholder derivative lawsuit captioned Christopher Hamilton and David Hamilton v. Barnes, et al., Case No. 5:15-cv-01890 (Hamilton) was filed against the Company (as a nominal defendant only) and certain of its directors and officers in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The case was transferred to the judge handling the Hatamian Lawsuit and is now Case No. 4:15-cv-01890.
On September 29, 2015, a similar purported shareholder derivative lawsuit captioned Jake Ha v Caldwell, et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-04485 (Ha) was filed against the Company (as a nominal defendant only) and certain of its directors and officers in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit also seeks a court order voiding the stockholder vote on the Company’s 2015 proxy. The case was transferred to the judge handling the Hatamian Lawsuit and is now Case No. 4:15-cv-04485. The Wessels, Hamilton and Ha shareholder derivative lawsuits are currently stayed.
On December 16, 2016, a patent lawsuit captioned ZiiLabs v. AMD, C.A. No. 2:16-cv-1418 in the United States District Court for Eastern District of Texas (the “ZiiLabs Lawsuit”) was filed against the Company in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The complaint alleges that the Company infringed four patents related generally to graphics processors and memory controllers. The complaint seeks damages, interest, and attorneys’ fees. ZiiLabs filed several similar lawsuits against other companies on the same day. On the same date, ZiiLabs also filed a complaint with the United States International Trade Commission (“USITC”) pursuant to Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 against the Company and several other companies asserting the same four patents (“USITC Proceeding”). The complaint seeks a limited exclusion order barring the importation of certain products that contain AMD memory controllers and graphics processors. Some of the Company’s customers are also named respondents. On January 18, 2017, the USITC announced that it would institute the investigation, entitled 337-TA-1037, In the Matter of Certain Graphics Processors, DDR Memory Controllers, and Products Containing the Same. Discovery is ongoing, and the target date for the USITC to issue a final determination is June 25, 2018. The ZiiLabs Lawsuit has been stayed pending completion of the USITC Proceeding. On July 7, 2017, ZiiLabs filed a motion to stay the USITC Proceeding pending finalization of a settlement reached in principle. The Administrative Law Judge granted ZiiLab's motion on July 10, 2017. On July 20, 2017, the Company obtained a license to patents-in-suit. Accordingly, the Company expects that the Company and ZiiLabs will, in the near future, ask the USITC and the Court to dismiss proceedings as to the Company. The resulting settlement obligation was not material. The applicable amount of the patent license will be capitalized on the Company's balance sheet in the third quarter of 2017 and amortized over its useful life.
filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. On June 14, 2017, the Court issued an order granting in part and denying in part the Company's motion to dismiss, and allowing the plaintiffs to move forward with a portion of their complaint. The putative class definition does not encompass the Company's Ryzen or EYPC processors.
The Company is a defendant or plaintiff in various actions that arose in the normal course of business. With respect to these matters, based on the management’s current knowledge, the Company believes that the amount or range of reasonably possible loss, if any, will not, either individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In the third quarter of 2015, the Company implemented a restructuring plan (the 2015 Restructuring Plan) focused on its ongoing efforts to simplify its business and better align resources around its priorities and business outlook. The 2015 Restructuring Plan largely involved a reduction of global headcount by approximately 5% and included organizational actions such as outsourcing certain IT services and application development. The actions associated with the 2015 Restructuring Plan were completed during the first quarter of 2017. The liabilities related to the 2015 Restructuring Plan recorded in Other current liabilities on the Company's condensed consolidated balance sheets as of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016 were zero and $3 million, respectively.
In the fourth quarter of 2014, the Company implemented a restructuring plan (the 2014 Restructuring Plan) designed to improve operating efficiencies. The 2014 Restructuring Plan involved a reduction of global headcount by approximately 6% and an alignment of its real estate footprint with its reduced headcount. The 2014 Restructuring Plan was completed during the third quarter of 2015. The liabilities related to the 2014 Restructuring Plan recorded in Other current liabilities on the Company's condensed consolidated balance sheets as of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016 were $1 million and $4 million, respectively.
acquisitions, divestitures and/or joint ventures could disrupt its business, harm its financial condition and operating results or dilute, or adversely affect the price of, its common stock; AMD’s business is dependent upon the proper functioning of its internal business processes and information systems and modification or interruption of such systems may disrupt its business, processes and internal controls; data breaches and cyber-attacks could compromise AMD’s intellectual property or other sensitive information, be costly to remediate and cause significant damage to its business and reputation; AMD’s operating results are subject to quarterly and seasonal sales patterns; if essential equipment, materials or manufacturing processes are not available to manufacture its products, AMD could be materially adversely affected; if AMD’s products are not compatible with some or all industry-standard software and hardware, it could be materially adversely affected; costs related to defective products could have a material adverse effect on AMD; if AMD fails to maintain the efficiency of its supply chain as it responds to changes in customer demand for its products, its business could be materially adversely affected; AMD outsources to third parties certain supply-chain logistics functions, including portions of its product distribution, transportation management and information technology support services; AMD may incur future impairments of goodwill; AMD's stock price is subject to volatility; AMD’s worldwide operations are subject to political, legal and economic risks and natural disasters, which could have a material adverse effect on it; worldwide political conditions may adversely affect demand for AMD’s products; unfavorable currency exchange rate fluctuations could adversely affect AMD; AMD’s inability to effectively control the sales of its products on the gray market could have a material adverse effect on it; if AMD cannot adequately protect its technology or other intellectual property in the United States and abroad, through patents, copyrights, trade secrets, trademarks and other measures, it may lose a competitive advantage and incur significant expenses; AMD is a party to litigation and may become a party to other claims or litigation that could cause it to incur substantial costs or pay substantial damages or prohibit it from selling its products; AMD’s business is subject to potential tax liabilities; and AMD is subject to environmental laws, conflict minerals-related provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act as well as a variety of other laws or regulations that could result in additional costs and liabilities.
For a discussion of factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements, see “Part II, Item 1A—Risk Factors” beginning on page 41 and “Financial Condition” beginning on page 33 and other risks and uncertainties set forth below in this report or detailed in our other Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reports and filings. We assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements.
AMD, the AMD Arrow logo, ATI, and the ATI logo and combinations thereof, are trademarks of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Microsoft is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and other jurisdictions. Sony is a trademark of Sony Corporation. Other names are for informational purposes only and are used to identify companies and products and may be trademarks of their respective owners.
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and related notes included in this report and our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes as of December 31, 2016 and December 26, 2015, and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016 as filed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.
server and embedded processors, semi-custom System-on-Chip (SoC) products and technology for game consoles. We also license portions of our intellectual property portfolio.
In this section, we will describe the general financial condition and the results of operations of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, “us,” “our” or “AMD”), including a discussion of our results of operations for the quarter and six months ended July 1, 2017 compared to the quarter and six months ended June 25, 2016, an analysis of changes in our financial condition and a discussion of our contractual obligations.
We believe our financial results for the second quarter of 2017 reflect our continued financial growth and focus on executing our engineering milestones. Net revenue in the second quarter of 2017 was $1.22 billion, a 19% increase compared to the second quarter of 2016. The year-over-year increase was primarily due to a 51% increase in Computing and Graphics net revenue, partially offset by a 5% decrease in Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom net revenue. The increase in Computing and Graphics segment net revenue was primarily due to higher sales from our graphics processors and our AMD Ryzen™ desktop processors. The decrease in Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom segment net revenue was primarily driven by lower sales of our semi-custom SoCs. Our operating income for the second quarter of 2017 was $25 million compared to operating loss of $8 million in the second quarter of 2016. Gross margin, as a percentage of net revenue, for the second quarter of 2017 was 33% compared to 31% in the second quarter of 2016 due to a higher proportion of revenue from the Computing and Graphics segment as well as a richer product mix within the Computing and Graphics segment.
During the second quarter of 2017, we delivered a number of new products. We launched our AMD Ryzen™ 5 desktop processors targeting the mainstream desktop market and our AMD Ryzen PRO desktop processors for the commercial desktop market. We launched the Radeon™ 500 series graphics cards based on our 2nd generation "Polaris" architecture. Apple introduced their newest iMac, featuring our Radeon Pro 500 Series graphics processors that enables ultra-smooth gaming, fluid content creation, and support for GPU acceleration across a broad range of applications. We also announced the world's first professional dual-GPU card, the Radeon Pro Duo, and our first graphics card based on the next-generation "Vega" architecture for machine learning development and advanced visualization, the Radeon Vega Frontier Edition. We launched our AMD EPYC™ 7000 series high-performance datacenter processors, previously codenamed "Naples”, with ecosystem support from leading server members like Hewlett Packard Enterprise and Dell. This full family of high-performance processors for cloud-based and traditional enterprise servers is based on our "Zen" x86 processor core and offers a combination of processor core count, memory footprint, and I/O bandwidth.
With respect to our balance sheet, cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities as of the end of the second quarter of 2017 were $844 million, compared to $1.26 billion at end of 2016, primarily due to changes in working capital, largely driven by wafer purchases in support of anticipated sales in the third quarter of 2017.
We intend the discussion of our financial condition and results of operations that follows to provide information that will assist you in understanding our financial statements, the changes in certain key items in those financial statements from year to year and quarter to quarter, the primary factors that resulted in those changes, and how certain accounting principles, policies and estimates affect our financial statements.
the Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom segment, which primarily includes server and embedded processors, semi-custom SoC products, development services, technology for game consoles and licensing portions of our intellectual property portfolio.
In addition to these reportable segments, we have an All Other category, which is not a reportable segment. This category primarily includes certain expenses and credits that are not allocated to any of the reportable segments because management does not consider these expenses and credits in evaluating the performance of the reportable segments. This category also includes employee stock-based compensation expense and restructuring and other special charges, net.
We use a 52 or 53 week fiscal year ending on the last Saturday in December. The quarters ended July 1, 2017 and June 25, 2016 each consisted of 13 weeks. The six months ended July 1, 2017 and June 25, 2016 each consisted of 26 weeks.
Our operating results tend to vary seasonally with the markets in which our products are sold. For example, historically, first quarter PC product sales are generally lower than fourth quarter sales. In addition, with respect to our semi-custom SoC products for game consoles, we expect sales patterns to follow the seasonal trends of a consumer business with sales in the first half of the year being lower than sales in the second half of the year.
Computing and Graphics net revenue of $659 million in the second quarter of 2017 increased by 51%, compared to net revenue of $435 million in the second quarter of 2016, primarily as a result of a 31% increase in average selling price and a 12% increase in unit shipments. The increase in average selling price was primarily attributable to an increase in average selling price of our graphics processor products and our desktop processor products. The increase in average selling price was primarily due to a shift in product mix of our graphics processors and a greater mix of sales of our Ryzen desktop processors. The increase in unit shipments was primarily attributable to strong demand for our graphics processors and Ryzen desktop processors.
Computing and Graphics net revenue of $1,252 million in the first six months of 2017 increased by 40%, compared to net revenue of $895 million in the first six months of 2016, primarily as a result of a 30% increase in average selling price and a 6% increase in unit shipments. The increase in average selling price was primarily attributable to an increase in average selling price of our graphics and desktop processor products. The increase in average selling price was due to a shift in product mix of our graphics processors and a greater mix of sales of our Ryzen desktop processors. The increase in unit shipments was primarily attributable to strong demand for our graphics processors and Ryzen desktop processors.
partially offset by the related increase in cost of sales and $19 million increase in operating expenses. Operating expenses increased for the reasons set forth under “Expenses” below.
Computing and Graphics operating loss was $8 million in the first six months of 2017 compared to an operating loss of $151 million in the first six months of 2016. The improvement in operating results was primarily due to the increase in net revenue, partially offset by the related increase in cost of sales and $27 million increase in operating expenses. Operating expenses increased for the reasons set forth under “Expenses” below.
Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom net revenue of $563 million in the second quarter of 2017 decreased by 5% compared to net revenue of $592 million in the second quarter of 2016. The decrease in net revenue was primarily due to lower sales of our semi-custom SoC products and a decrease in non-recurring engineering (NRE) revenue.
Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom net revenue of $954 million in the first six months of 2017 decreased by 1% compared to net revenue of $964 million in the first six months of 2016. The decrease in net revenue was primarily due to a decrease in non-recurring engineering (NRE) revenue, partially offset by higher sales of our semi-custom SoC products.
Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom operating income was $42 million in the second quarter of 2017 compared to operating income of $84 million in the second quarter of 2016. The decline in operating results was primarily due to a $21 million increase in operating expenses and the decrease in net revenue referenced above. Operating expenses increased for the reasons set forth under “Expenses” below.
Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom operating income was $51 million in the first six months of 2017 compared to operating income of $100 million in the first six months of 2016. The decline in operating results was primarily due to a $46 million increase in primarily datacenter-related operating expenses and the decrease in net revenue referenced above, partially offset by a $19 million increase in IP licensing gain related to the THATIC JV. The IP licensing gain was recognized for the entire first six months of 2017 compared to the first six months of 2016. We started to recognize the IP licensing gain at the end of the first quarter of 2016. Operating expenses increased for the reasons set forth under “Expenses” below.
All Other operating loss of $24 million in the second quarter of 2017 was related to stock-based compensation expense. All Other operating loss of $11 million in the second quarter of 2016 included stock-based compensation expense of $18 million, partially offset by restructuring reversals of $7 million.
All Other operating loss of $47 million in the first six months of 2017 was related to stock-based compensation expense. All Other operating loss of $25 million in the first six months of 2016 included stock-based compensation expense of $34 million, partially offset by restructuring reversals of $10 million.
International sales as a percentage of net revenue were 77% in the second quarter of 2017 and the second quarter of 2016.
International sales as a percentage of net revenue were 77% in the first six months of 2017 and 80% in the first six months of 2016. The decrease in international sales as a percentage of net revenue in the first six months of 2017 compared to the first six months of 2016 was primarily driven by a higher proportion of revenue from domestic sales of our desktop processors, graphic processors and semi-custom SoC products.
We expect that international sales will continue to be a significant portion of total sales in the foreseeable future. Substantially all of our sales transactions were denominated in U.S. dollars.
Gross margin as a percentage of net revenue was 33% in the second quarter of 2017 compared to 31% in the second quarter of 2016 and 33% in the first six months of 2017 compared to 32% in the first six months of 2016. The improvement in gross margin was primarily driven by a richer product mix within the Computing and Graphics segment, primarily due to sales of our Ryzen desktop processors and a higher percentage of revenue from the Computing and Graphics segment.
Research and development expenses of $279 million in the second quarter of 2017 increased by $36 million, or 15%, compared to $243 million in the second quarter of 2016. The increase was primarily due to an $18 million increase in research and development expenses attributable to our Computing and Graphics segment mainly due to product engineering and design costs, a $15 million increase in research and development expenses attributable to our Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom segment due to higher datacenter related investments and a $3 million increase attributable to our All Other category as a result of stock-based compensation expense.
Research and development expenses of $545 million in the first six months of 2017 increased by $60 million, or 12%, compared to $485 million in the first six months of 2016. The increase was primarily due to a $35 million increase in research and development expenses attributable to our Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom segment due to higher datacenter related investments, a $17 million increase in research and development expenses attributable to our Computing and Graphics segment mainly due to product engineering and design costs and an $8 million increase attributable to our All Other category as a result of stock-based compensation expense.
Marketing, general and administrative expenses of $125 million in the second quarter of 2017 increased by $8 million, or 7%, compared to $117 million in the second quarter of 2016. The increase was primarily due to a $5 million increase attributable to our Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom segment, due to increases in sales and marketing activities, and a $2 million increase attributable to our All Other category as a result of stock-based compensation expense.
Marketing, general and administrative expenses of $246 million in the first six months of 2017 increased by $24 million, or 11%, compared to $222 million in the first six months of 2016. The increase was primarily due to a $10 million increase in marketing, general and administrative expenses attributable to our Computing and Graphics segment and, a $10 million increase attributable to our Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom segment, both primarily due to increases in sales and marketing activities, and a $5 million increase attributable to our All Other category as a result of stock-based compensation expense.
In the third quarter of 2015, we implemented a restructuring plan (the 2015 Restructuring Plan) focused on our ongoing efforts to simplify our business and better align resources around our priorities and business outlook. The 2015 Restructuring Plan largely involved a reduction of global headcount by approximately 5% and included organizational actions such as outsourcing certain IT services and application development. The actions associated with the 2015 Restructuring Plan were completed during the first quarter of 2017. The liabilities related to the 2015 Restructuring Plan recorded in Other current liabilities on our condensed consolidated balance sheets as of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016 were zero and $3 million, respectively.
In the fourth quarter of 2014, we implemented a restructuring plan (the 2014 Restructuring Plan) designed to improve operating efficiencies. The 2014 Restructuring Plan involved a reduction of global headcount by approximately 6% and an alignment of our real estate footprint with our reduced headcount. The 2014 Restructuring Plan was completed during the third quarter of 2015. The liabilities related to the 2014 Restructuring Plan recorded in Other current liabilities on our condensed consolidated balance sheets as of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016 were $1 million and $4 million, respectively.
Interest expense of $32 million in the second quarter of 2017 decreased by $9 million compared to $41 million in the second quarter of 2016 primarily due to a lower overall interest rate and lower debt balance.
Interest expense of $64 million in the first six months of 2017 decreased by $17 million compared to $81 million in the first six months of 2016 primarily due to a lower overall interest rate and lower debt balance.
Other expense, net of $3 million in the second quarter of 2017, changed by $153 million compared to $150 million Other income, net in the second quarter of 2016 primarily due to the gain on sale of equity interests in ATMP JV of $150 million in the second quarter of 2016.
Other expense, net of $8 million in the first six months of 2017, changed by $158 million compared to $150 million Other income, net in the first six months of 2016 primarily due to the gain on sale of equity interests in ATMP JV of $150 million in the first six months of 2016 and $7 million total loss on debt redemption in the first six months of 2017.
In the second quarter of 2017, we recorded an income tax provision of $3 million, consisting of $1 million of foreign taxes in profitable locations and $3 million for withholding taxes applicable to license fee revenue from foreign locations, partially offset by $1 million of tax benefits comprising the tax effects of items credited directly to other comprehensive income, Canadian tax credits, and the monetization of certain U.S. tax credits.
For the six months ended July 1, 2017, we recorded an income tax provision of $8 million, consisting of $4 million of foreign taxes in profitable locations and $7 million for withholding taxes applicable to license fee revenue from foreign locations, partially offset by $3 million of tax benefits comprising the tax effects of items credited directly to other comprehensive income, Canadian tax credits, and the monetization of certain U.S. tax credits.
In the second quarter of 2016, we recorded an income tax provision of $29 million, consisting of $2 million of foreign taxes in profitable locations and $2 million for withholding taxes applicable to license fee revenue from foreign locations partially offset by $2 million of tax benefits comprising the tax effects of items credited to other comprehensive income and Canadian tax credits. In addition, we recorded the tax effect of completion of the sale of a majority equity interest in two subsidiaries comprising $21 million of income tax expense in China and $6 million of withholding tax expense associated with a future repatriation of the gain generated in China by the Chinese portion of that transaction.
For the six months ended June 25, 2016, we recorded an income tax provision of $30 million due to foreign taxes in profitable locations and items identified above.
We have not recognized the tax benefit of future foreign tax credits associated with the withholding tax expense as the size and age profile of existing tax attributes does not allow us to satisfy the “more likely than not” criterion for the recognition of deferred tax assets.
As of July 1, 2017, substantially all of our U.S. and Canadian deferred tax assets, net of deferred tax liabilities, continue to be subject to a valuation allowance. The realization of these assets is dependent on substantial future taxable income, which as of July 1, 2017, in our estimate, is not more likely than not to be achieved.
Our total gross unrecognized tax benefits is increased from $42 million in prior quarter to $58 million as of July 1, 2017. This increase is due to additional R&D unrecognized tax benefits in foreign locations. We do not believe it is reasonably possible that unrecognized tax benefits will materially change in the next 12 months. However, the settlement, resolution or closure of our tax audits are highly uncertain.
For all periods presented, we did not realize any excess tax benefit related to stock-based compensation and therefore did not record any related operating cash flows.
Stock-based compensation expense of $24 million in the second quarter of 2017 increased by $6 million compared to $18 million in the second quarter of 2016. Stock-based compensation expense of $47 million in the first six months of 2017 increased by $13 million compared to $34 million in the first six months of 2016. The increase was primarily due to a higher weighted average grant date fair value of unvested restricted stock units in the three and six months ended July 1, 2017, compared to the three and six months ended June 25, 2016. The increase was also driven by the absence of the stock-based compensation expense related to performance-based restricted stock units with market condition in the first six months of 2016, as these awards were granted in the second half of 2016.
Wafer Supply Agreement. The Wafer Supply Agreement (WSA) governs the terms by which we purchase products manufactured by GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. (GF).
Sixth Amendment to Wafer Supply Agreement. On August 30, 2016, we entered into a sixth amendment (the Sixth Amendment) to the WSA. The Sixth Amendment modified certain terms of the WSA applicable to wafers for our microprocessor, graphics processor and semi-custom products for a five-year period from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020. AMD and GF also agreed to establish a comprehensive framework for technology collaboration for the 7nm technology node.
The Sixth Amendment also provides us a limited waiver with rights to contract with another wafer foundry with respect to certain products in the 14nm and 7nm technology nodes and gives us greater flexibility in sourcing foundry services across our product portfolio. In consideration for these rights, we agreed to pay GF $100 million in installments starting in the fourth fiscal quarter of 2016 through the third fiscal quarter of 2017. During the second fiscal quarter of 2017, we paid GF $25 million and, as of July 1, 2017, we had paid GF $75 million in aggregate. Starting in 2017 and continuing through 2020, we also agreed to make quarterly payments to GF based on the volume of certain wafers purchased from another wafer foundry.
Further, for each calendar year during the term of the Sixth Amendment, AMD and GF agreed to annual wafer purchase targets that increase from 2016 through 2020. If we do not meet the annual wafer purchase target for any calendar year, we will be required to pay to GF a portion of the difference between the our actual wafer purchases and the wafer purchase target for that year. The annual targets were established based on our business and market expectations and took into account the limited waiver we received for certain products. As of July 1, 2017, we expected to meet our 2017 wafer purchase target.
AMD and GF also agreed on fixed pricing for wafers purchased during 2016 and established a framework to agree on annual wafer pricing for the years 2017 to 2020. AMD and GF have agreed on pricing for wafer purchases for 2017.
Our total purchases from GF related to wafer manufacturing, research and development activities and other for the quarters ended July 1, 2017 and June 25, 2016 were $266 million and $85 million, respectively. Our total purchases from GF related to wafer manufacturing, research and development activities and other for the six months ended July 1, 2017 and June 25, 2016 were $442 million and $293 million, respectively. As of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the amount of prepayment and other receivables related to GF was $7 million and $32 million, respectively, included in Prepayment and other receivables - related parties on our condensed consolidated balance sheets. As of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the amount payable to GF was $229 million and $255 million, respectively, included in Payable to related parties on our condensed consolidated balance sheets.
Warrant Agreement. Also on August 30, 2016, in consideration for the limited waiver and rights under the Sixth Amendment, we entered into a warrant agreement (the Warrant Agreement) with West Coast Hitech L.P. (WCH), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mubadala Development Company PJSC (Mubadala). Under the Warrant Agreement, WCH and its permitted assigns are entitled to purchase 75 million shares of our common stock (the Warrant Shares) at a purchase price of $5.98 per share. The warrant is exercisable in whole or in part until February 29, 2020, provided that the maximum number of Warrant Shares that may be exercised prior to the one-year anniversary of the Warrant Agreement cannot exceed 50 million. The warrant will be fully exercisable as of August 30, 2017. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Warrant Agreement will only be exercisable to the extent that Mubadala does not beneficially own, either directly through any other entities directly and indirectly owned by Mubadala or its subsidiaries, an aggregate of more than 19.99% of our outstanding capital stock after any such exercise.
GF continues to be a related party of AMD because Mubadala and Mubadala Technology Investments LLC (Mubadala Tech, a party to the WSA) are affiliated with WCH, our largest stockholder. GF, WCH and Mubadala Tech are wholly-owned subsidiaries of Mubadala.
On April 29, 2016, we and certain of our subsidiaries completed the sale of a majority of the equity interests in Suzhou TF-AMD Semiconductor Co., Ltd. (formerly, AMD Technologies (China) Co., Ltd.), and TF AMD Microelectronics (Penang) Sdn. Bhd. (formerly, Advanced Micro Devices Export Sdn. Bhd.), to affiliates of Tongfu Microelectronics Co., Ltd. (formerly, Nantong Fujitsu Microelectronics Co., Ltd.) (TFME), a Chinese joint stock company, to form two joint ventures (collectively, the ATMP JV). As a result of the sale, TFME’s affiliates own 85% of the equity interests in the ATMP JV while certain of our subsidiaries own the remaining 15%. We have no obligation to fund the ATMP JV.
We account for our equity interests in the ATMP JV under the equity method of accounting due to our significant influence over the ATMP JV. As of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the carrying value of our investment in the ATMP JV was approximately $58 million and $59 million, respectively. Following the deconsolidation, the ATMP JV is our related party. The ATMP JV provides assembly, test, mark and packaging (ATMP) services to us. We currently pay the ATMP JV for ATMP services on a cost-plus basis. Our total purchases from the ATMP JV during the three and six months ended July 1, 2017 amounted to approximately $105 million and $201 million, respectively. Our total purchases from the ATMP JV during the three and six months ended June 25, 2016 amounted to approximately $66 million. As of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the amount payable to the ATMP JV was $145 million and $128 million, respectively, included in Payables to related parties on our condensed consolidated balance sheets.
During the three and six months ended July 1, 2017, we recorded $3 million and $5 million, respectively, in Equity loss in investee on our condensed consolidated statements of operations, which included certain expenses incurred by us on behalf of the ATMP JV. During the three and six months ended June 25, 2016, we recorded a loss of $3 million, in Equity loss in investee on our condensed consolidated statements of operations, which included certain expenses incurred by us on behalf of the ATMP JV.
In February 2016, we and Tianjin Haiguang Advanced Technology Investment Co., Ltd. (THATIC), a third-party Chinese entity (JV Partner), formed a joint venture comprised of two separate legal entities, China JV1 and China JV2 (collectively, the THATIC JV). Our equity share in China JV1 and China JV2 is a majority and minority interest, respectively, funded by our contribution of certain of our patents. The JV Partner is responsible for the initial and on-going financing of the THATIC JV’s operations. We have no obligations to fund the THATIC JV.
We concluded the China JV1 and China JV2 are not operating joint ventures and are variable interest entities due to their reliance on on-going financing by the JV Partner. We determined that we are not the primary beneficiary of either China JV1 or China JV2, as we do not have unilateral power to direct selling and marketing, manufacturing and product development activities related to the THATIC JV’s products. Accordingly, we will not consolidate either of these entities and therefore account for our investments in the THATIC JV under the equity method of accounting. The THATIC JV is a related party of ours.
In February 2016, we licensed certain of our intellectual property (Licensed IP) to the THATIC JV for a total of approximately $293 million in license fee payable over several years contingent upon achievement of certain milestones. We also expect to receive a royalty based on the sales of the THATIC JV’s products to be developed on the basis of such Licensed IP. We will also provide certain engineering and technical support to the THATIC JV in connection with the product development. In March 2017, we entered into a development and intellectual property agreement with THATIC JV, and also expect to receive a royalty based on the sales of the THATIC JV’s products to be developed on the basis of such agreement. We will also provide certain engineering and technical support to the THATIC JV in connection with the product development.
We recognize income related to the Licensed IP over the period commencing upon delivery of the first Licensed IP milestone through the date of the milestone that requires our continuing involvement in the product development process. Royalty payments will be recognized in income once earned. We will classify Licensed IP income and royalty income as other operating income. During the three and six months ended July 1, 2017, we recognized $25 million and $52 million licensing gain associated with the Licensed IP, respectively, and development fees of $6 million and $10 million, respectively, as a credit to research and development expenses. During the three and six months ended June 25, 2016, we recognized $26 million and $33 million licensing gain, respectively. No development fee credit associated with these agreements was recognized during the three and six months ended June 25, 2016. No royalty income was recognized during the three and six months ended July 1, 2017 and June 25, 2016.
Our total exposure to losses through our investment in the THATIC JV is limited to our investment in the THATIC JV, which was zero as of July 1, 2017. Our share in the net losses of the THATIC JV for the three and six months ended July 1, 2017 and June 25, 2016 was not material and is not recorded in our condensed consolidated statement of operations since we are not obligated to fund the THATIC JV’s losses in excess of our investment in the THATIC JV. Our receivable from THATIC JV was $2 million and zero as of July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively, included in Prepayment and other receivables - related parties on our condensed consolidated balance sheets. As of July 1, 2017, the total assets and liabilities of the THATIC JV were not material.
As of July 1, 2017, our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities were $844 million compared to $1.26 billion as of December 31, 2016. The decrease in the six months of 2017 was due to net cash used in our operating and investing activities as described below. The percentage of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities held domestically was 93% as of July 1, 2017, compared to 98% at December 31, 2016.
Our aggregate debt obligations of $1.42 billion, net of unamortized debt issuance costs and unamortized debt discount associated with the 2.125% Convertible Senior Notes Due 2026 (2.125% Notes) as of July 1, 2017, decreased from $1.44 billion at December 31, 2016.
We believe our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities balance along with our Secured Revolving Line of Credit will be sufficient to fund operations, including capital expenditures, over the next 12 months. We believe that in the event we decide to obtain external funding, we may be able to access the capital markets on terms and in amounts adequate to meet our objectives.
limited in our ability to access the capital markets to meet liquidity needs on favorable terms or at all, which could adversely affect our liquidity and financial condition, including our ability to refinance maturing liabilities.
Net cash used in operating activities was $381 million in the first six months ended July 1, 2017 compared to $127 million in the first six months ended June 25, 2016. The increase in cash used in operating activities was primarily due to changes in working capital, largely driven by wafer purchases in support of anticipated sales in the third quarter of 2017, partially offset by higher cash collection primarily due to higher revenue in the first six months ended July 1, 2017 compared to the first six months ended June 25, 2016.
Net cash used in investing activities was $122 million in the first six months ended July 1, 2017, which consisted of net cash outflows of $84 million from purchases and maturities of available-for-sale securities and $35 million for purchases of property, plant and equipment.
Net cash provided by investing activities was $303 million in the first six months ended June 25, 2016, which consisted of net cash inflow of $351 million from sale of equity interests in the ATMP JV, partially offset by a cash outflow of $47 million for purchases of property, plant and equipment.
Net cash used in financing activities was $1 million in the first six months ended July 1, 2017, which consisted of a cash outflow of $42 million to repurchase a portion of our 7% Notes and $11 million for tax withholding on the vesting of restricted stock, partially offset by a cash inflow of net proceeds from borrowings pursuant to our Secured Revolving Line of Credit of $42 million and $10 million for proceeds from issuance of common stock from the exercise of employee stock options.
Net cash used in financing activities was $4 million in the first six months ended June 25, 2016 primarily due to $4 million net repayments of Secured Revolving Line of Credit borrowings.
Amounts largely represent future fixed and non-cancelable cash payments associated with software technology and licenses and IP licenses, including the payments due within the next 12 months.
Represents estimated aggregate interest obligations for our outstanding debt obligations that are payable in cash, excluding non-cash amortization of debt issuance costs.
We have purchase obligations for goods and services where payments are based, in part, on the volume or type of services we acquire. In those cases, we only included the minimum volume of purchase obligations in the table above. Purchase orders for goods and services that are cancelable upon notice and without significant penalties are not included in the amounts above.
Includes our currently expected purchases from GF for the remainder of 2017 for wafer manufacturing and research and development activities and minimum purchase obligations for wafer purchases for years 2018 through 2020. We cannot meaningfully quantify or estimate our future purchase obligations to GF beyond 2020 but expect that our future purchases from GF will continue to be material.
Total amount excludes contractual obligations already recorded on our condensed consolidated balance sheets except for debt obligations and other liabilities related to software and technology licenses and IP licenses.
On February 26, 2014, we issued $600 million of our 6.75% Senior Notes Due 2019 (6.75% Notes). Our 6.75% Notes are our general unsecured senior obligations. Interest is payable on March 1 and September 1 of each year beginning September 1, 2014 until the maturity date of March 1, 2019. Our 6.75% Notes are governed by the terms of an indenture (the 6.75% Indenture) dated February 26, 2014 between us and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee.
At any time before March 1, 2019, we may redeem some or all of our 6.75% Notes at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest and a “make whole” premium (as set forth in the 6.75% Indenture).
On February 10, 2017, we settled $5 million in aggregate principal amount of our 6.75% Notes with treasury stock. As of July 1, 2017, the outstanding aggregate principal amount of our 6.75% Notes was $191 million.
On August 15, 2012, we issued $500 million of our 7.50% Senior Notes Due 2022 (7.50% Notes). Our 7.50% Notes are our general unsecured senior obligations. Interest is payable on February 15 and August 15 of each year beginning February 15, 2013 until the maturity date of August 15, 2022. Our 7.50% Notes are governed by the terms of an indenture (the 7.50% Indenture) dated August 15, 2012 between us and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee.
Prior to August 15, 2022, we may redeem some or all of our 7.50% Notes at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest and a “make whole” premium (as set forth in the 7.50% Indenture).
On February 10, 2017, we settled $3 million in aggregate principal amount of our 7.50% Notes with treasury stock. As of July 1, 2017, the outstanding aggregate principal amount of our 7.50% Notes was $347 million.
On June 16, 2014, we issued $500 million of our 7.00% Senior Notes Due 2024 (7.00% Notes). The 7.00% Notes are our general unsecured senior obligations. Interest is payable on January 1 and July 1 of each year beginning January 1, 2015 until the maturity date of July 1, 2024. The 7.00% Notes are governed by the terms of an indenture (the 7.00% Indenture) dated June 16, 2014 between us and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee.
At any time before July 1, 2017, we may redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal amount of the 7.00% Notes within 90 days of the closing of an equity offering with the net proceeds thereof at a redemption price equal to 107.000% of the principal amount thereof, together with accrued and unpaid interest to but excluding the date of redemption. Prior to July 1, 2019, we may redeem some or all of the 7.00% Notes at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest and a “make whole” premium (as set forth in the 7.00% Indenture).
During the first quarter of 2017, we settled $26 million in aggregate principal amount of our 7.00% Notes with treasury stock.
During the second quarter of 2017, we repurchased $40 million in aggregate principal amount of our 7.00% Notes for $42 million.
As of July 1, 2017, the outstanding aggregate principal amount of our 7.00% Notes was $350 million.
On September 14, 2016, we issued $700 million in aggregate principal amount of our 2.125% Notes. We also granted an option to the underwriters to purchase up to an additional $105 million aggregate principal amount of our 2.125% Notes. On September 28, 2016, this option was exercised in full and we issued an additional $105 million aggregate principal amount of our 2.125% Notes.
Our 2.125% Notes are our general unsecured senior obligations and will mature on September 1, 2026, unless earlier repurchased or converted. Interest is payable in arrears on March 1 and September 1 of each year beginning on March 1, 2017. Our 2.125% Notes are governed by the terms of a base indenture and a supplemental indenture (together the 2.125% Indentures) dated September 14, 2016 between us and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee.
we continued to classify the carrying value of the liability component of the 2.125% Notes as long-term debt and the equity component of the 2.125% Notes as permanent equity on our condensed consolidated balance sheet as of July 1, 2017.
We may not redeem the notes prior to the maturity date, and no sinking fund is provided for the 2.125% Notes.
The conversion rate is currently 125.0031 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of 2.125% Notes (equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $8.00 per share of common stock). The conversion rate is subject to adjustment in some events but will not be adjusted for any accrued and unpaid interest. In addition, following certain corporate events that occur prior to the maturity date, we will increase the conversion rate for a holder who elects to convert its notes in connection with such a corporate event in certain circumstances.
If we undergo a fundamental change prior to the maturity date of the notes, holders may require us to repurchase for cash all or any portion of their 2.125% Notes at a fundamental change repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the 2.125% Notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but excluding, the fundamental change repurchase date.
As of July 1, 2017, the outstanding aggregate principal amount of our 2.125% Notes was $805 million.
We may elect to purchase or otherwise retire all or a portion of our 6.75% Notes, 7.50% Notes, 7.00% Notes and 2.125% Notes with cash, stock or other assets from time to time in open market or privately negotiated transactions, either directly or through intermediaries, or by tender offer when we believe the market conditions are favorable.
On April 14, 2015, AMD and its subsidiaries, AMD International Sales & Service, Ltd. (AMDISS) and ATI Technologies ULC (collectively, the Loan Parties), entered into an amended and restated loan and security agreement (the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement) by and among the Loan Parties, the financial institutions party thereto from time to time as lenders (the Lenders) and Bank of America, N.A., acting as agent for the Lenders (the Agent).
On March 21, 2017, the Loan Parties entered into a fifth amendment to the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement (the Fifth Amendment) by and among the Loan Parties, the financial institutions party thereto from time to time as lenders and the Agent, which modifies the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement. The Fifth Amendment amends the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement by, among other things, extending the maturity date of the Secured Revolving Line of Credit from April 14, 2020 to March 21, 2022, reducing the Applicable Margin (as defined in the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement), reducing the commitment fee, lowering the minimum threshold of Availability (as defined in the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement) required to be maintained by AMD and AMDISS in order to avoid cash dominion, amending the borrowing base reporting requirement, amending maximum dollar limits related to supply chain finance arrangements, and reducing the amount of the Secured Revolving Line of Credit available for the issuance for letters of credit from $75 million to $45 million.
As of July 1, 2017, the Secured Revolving Line of Credit had an outstanding loan balance of $42 million, at an interest rate of 4.75%. As of December 31, 2016, we did not have any borrowings outstanding under the Secured Revolving Line of Credit. As of July 1, 2017, we had $19 million letters of credit outstanding and up to $249 million available for future borrowings under the Secured Revolving Line of Credit. We report our intra-period changes in our revolving credit balance on a net basis in our condensed consolidated statement of cash flows as we intend the period of the borrowings to be brief, repaying borrowed amounts within 90 days. As of July 1, 2017, we were in compliance with all required covenants in the Amended and Restated Loan Agreement.
The agreements governing our 6.75% Notes, 7.50% Notes, 7.00% Notes, 2.125% Notes and Secured Revolving Line of Credit contain cross-default provisions whereby a default under one agreement would likely result in cross defaults under agreements covering other borrowings. The occurrence of a default under any of these borrowing arrangements would permit the applicable note holders or the lenders under the Secured Revolving Line of Credit to declare all amounts outstanding under those borrowing arrangements to be immediately due and payable.
We lease certain of our facilities under non-cancelable lease agreements that expire at various dates through 2028. We lease certain office equipment for terms ranging from one to five years. Total future non-cancelable lease obligations as of July 1, 2017 were $271 million, including $226 million of future lease payments and estimated operating costs related to the real estate transactions that occurred in Austin, Texas; Sunnyvale and Santa Clara, California; Markham, Ontario, Canada; and Singapore. During the second quarter of 2016, we signed an amendment to the lease agreement associated with our headquarters in Sunnyvale, California so that the lease expires in December 2017. In connection with the amendment, the lease payments were reduced for 2017. During the third quarter of 2016, we entered into a 10 year operating lease to occupy 220,000 square feet of new office space in Santa Clara, California. Base rent payments commence in August 2017 and the total estimate base rent payments over the life of the lease are approximately $104 million. In addition to the base rent payments, we will be obligated to pay certain customary amounts for our share of operating expenses and tax obligations. We will also incur costs for capital projects on the new office space. We have the option to extend the term of the lease for two additional five-year periods.
Our purchase obligations primarily include our obligations to purchase wafers and substrates from third parties, excluding our wafer purchase commitments to GF under the WSA. As of July 1, 2017, total non-cancelable purchase obligations were $516 million.
Our currently expected purchases from GF for the remainder of 2017 for wafer and research and development activities, and minimum purchase obligations for wafer purchases for years 2018 through 2020 are approximately $3.2 billion. We are not able to meaningfully quantify or estimate our future purchase obligations to GF beyond this amount but expect that our future purchases from GF will continue to be material.
As of July 1, 2017, we had no off-balance sheet arrangements.
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our condensed consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP). The preparation of our financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts in our condensed consolidated financial statements. We evaluate our estimates on an on-going basis, including those related to our net revenue, inventories, asset impairments and income taxes. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of our assets and liabilities. Although actual results have historically been reasonably consistent with management’s expectations, the actual results may differ from these estimates or our estimates may be affected by different assumptions or conditions.
Management believes there have been no significant changes during the quarter and six months ended July 1, 2017 to the items that we disclosed as our critical accounting estimates in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.
We will perform an annual goodwill impairment analysis as of the first day of the fourth quarter of 2017 pursuant to our accounting policy. However, we will also test for goodwill impairment at any time during the year if there are indicators of impairment present. If there are declines in our market capitalization, business climate or operating results, we may incur impairment charges that could be material.
Reference is made to “Part II, Item 7A, Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk,” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.
There have not been any material changes in market risk since December 31, 2016.
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports made under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer as appropriate, to allow for timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating our disclosure controls and procedures, our management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and our management is required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.
As of July 1, 2017, the end of the period covered by this report, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures. Based on the foregoing, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance level.
There was no change in our internal controls over financial reporting during our second quarter of 2017 that materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.
On January 15, 2014, a class action lawsuit captioned Hatamian v. AMD, et al., C.A. No. 3:14-cv-00226 (the Hatamian Lawsuit) was filed against us in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The complaint purports to assert claims against us and certain individual officers for alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), and Rule 10b-5 of the Exchange Act. The plaintiffs seek to represent a proposed class of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired our common stock during the period April 4, 2011 through October 18, 2012. The complaint seeks damages allegedly caused by alleged materially misleading statements and/or material omissions by us and the individual officers regarding our 32nm technology and “Llano” product, which statements and omissions, the plaintiffs claim, allegedly operated to artificially inflate the price paid for our common stock during the period. The complaint seeks unspecified compensatory damages, attorneys’ fees and costs. On July 7, 2014, we filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims. On March 31, 2015, the Court denied the motion to dismiss. On May 14, 2015, we filed our answer to plaintiffs’ corrected amended complaint. On September 4, 2015, plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification, and on March 16, 2016, the Court granted plaintiffs’ motion. A court-ordered mediation held in January 2016 did not result in a settlement of the lawsuit. The discovery process has concluded. Plaintiffs and defendants have filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and briefing on those motions was completed in July 2017.
Based upon information presently known to management, we believe that the potential liability, if any, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, cash flows or results of operations.
On March 20, 2014, a purported shareholder derivative lawsuit captioned Wessels v. Read, et al., Case No. 1:14 cv-262486 (Wessels) was filed against us (as a nominal defendant only) and certain of our directors and officers in the Santa Clara County Superior Court of the State of California. The complaint purports to assert claims against us and certain individual directors and officers for breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment. The complaint seeks damages allegedly caused by alleged materially misleading statements and/or material omissions by us and the individual directors and officers regarding our 32nm technology and “Llano” product, which statements and omissions, the plaintiffs claim, allegedly operated to artificially inflate the price paid for our common stock during the period. On April 27, 2015, a similar purported shareholder derivative lawsuit captioned Christopher Hamilton and David Hamilton v. Barnes, et al., Case No. 5:15-cv-01890 (Hamilton) was filed against us (as a nominal defendant only) and certain of our directors and officers in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The case was transferred to the judge handling the Hatamian Lawsuit and is now Case No. 4:15-cv-01890.
On September 29, 2015, a similar purported shareholder derivative lawsuit captioned Jake Ha v Caldwell, et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-04485 (Ha) was filed against us (as a nominal defendant only) and certain of our directors and officers in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit also seeks a court order voiding the stockholder vote on our 2015 proxy. The case was transferred to the judge handling the Hatamian Lawsuit and is now Case No. 4:15-cv-04485. The Wessels, Hamilton and Ha shareholder derivative lawsuits are currently stayed.
suit. Accordingly, we expect that us and ZiiLabs will, in the near future, ask the USITC and the Court to dismiss the proceedings as to AMD. The resulting settlement obligation was not material.
On October 26, 2015, a putative class action complaint captioned Dickey et al. v. AMD, No. 15-cv-04922 was filed against us in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The plaintiffs allege that we misled consumers by using the term "eight cores" in connection with the marketing of certain AMD FX CPUs that are based on our “Bulldozer” core architecture. The plaintiffs allege these products cannot perform eight calculations simultaneously, without restriction. The plaintiffs seek to obtain damages under several causes of action for a nationwide class of consumers who allegedly were deceived into purchasing certain Bulldozer-based CPUs that were marketed as containing eight cores. The plaintiffs also seek attorneys' fees. On December 21, 2015, we filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, which was granted on April 7, 2016. The plaintiffs then filed an amended complaint with a narrowed putative class definition, which the Court dismissed upon our motion on October 31, 2016. The plaintiffs subsequently filed a second amended complaint, and we filed a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint. On June 14, 2017, the Court issued an order granting in part and denying in part our motion to dismiss, and allowing the plaintiffs to move forward with a portion of their complaint. The putative class definition does not encompass our Ryzen or EPYC processors.
The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected. In addition, you should consider the interrelationship and compounding effects of two or more risks occurring simultaneously.
Intel Corporation’s dominance of the microprocessor market and its aggressive business practices may limit our ability to compete effectively.
Intel Corporation has been the market share leader for microprocessors for many years. Intel’s market share, margins and significant financial resources enable it to market its products aggressively, to target our customers and our channel partners with special incentives and to influence customers who do business with us. These aggressive activities have in the past and are likely in the future to result in lower unit sales and a lower average selling price for many of our products and adversely affect our margins and profitability.
Intel exerts substantial influence over computer manufacturers and their channels of distribution through various brand and other marketing programs. As a result of Intel’s position in the microprocessor market, Intel has been able to control x86 microprocessor and computer system standards and benchmarks and to dictate the type of products the microprocessor market requires of us. Intel also dominates the computer system platform, which includes core logic chipsets, graphics chips, motherboards and other components necessary to assemble a computer system. Additionally, Intel is able to drive de facto standards and specifications for x86 microprocessors that could cause us and other companies to have delayed access to such standards.
marketing and advertising expenditures in support of positioning the Intel brand over the brand of its original equipment manufacturer OEM customers.
Intel could also take actions that place our discrete GPUs at a competitive disadvantage, including giving one or more of our competitors in the graphics market, such as Nvidia Corporation, preferential access to its proprietary graphics interface or other useful information. Intel’s position in the microprocessor market and integrated graphics chipset market, its introduction of competitive new products, its existing relationships with top-tier OEMs and its aggressive marketing and pricing strategies could result in lower unit sales and a lower average selling price for our products, which could have a material adverse effect on us.
The WSA governs the terms by which we purchase products manufactured by GF. The WSA is in place until 2024. Pursuant to the WSA, we are required to purchase all of our microprocessor and APU product requirements, and a portion of our GPU product requirements from GF with limited exceptions. If GF is unable to achieve anticipated manufacturing yields, remain competitive using or implementing advanced leading-edge process technologies needed to manufacture future generations of our products, manufacture our products on a timely basis at competitive prices or meet our capacity requirements, then we may experience delays in product launches, supply shortages for certain products or increased costs and our business could be materially adversely affected. Moreover, if GF is unable to satisfy our manufacturing requirements and we are unable to secure from GF additional exceptions allowing us to contract with another wafer foundry to satisfy those requirements, then our business could be materially adversely affected.
In August 2016, we entered into the sixth amendment to the WSA (Sixth Amendment) pursuant to which we agreed to certain annual wafer purchase targets through 2020, and if we fail to meet the agreed wafer purchase target during a calendar year we will be required to pay to GF a portion of the difference between our actual wafer purchases and the applicable annual purchase target. If our actual wafer requirements are less than the number of wafers required to meet the applicable annual wafer purchase target, we could have excess inventory or higher inventory unit costs, both of which may adversely impact our gross margin and our results of operations.
In addition, GF has relied on Mubadala Technology Investments LLC (Mubadala Tech) for its funding needs. If Mubadala Tech fails to adequately fund GF on a timely basis, or at all, GF’s ability to manufacture products for us could be materially adversely affected.
We rely on third parties to manufacture our products, and if they are unable to do so on a timely basis in sufficient quantities and using competitive technologies, our business could be materially adversely affected.
We rely on third-party wafer foundries to fabricate the silicon wafers for all of our products. We also rely on third-party manufacturers to assemble, test, mark and pack (ATMP) our products. It is important to have reliable relationships with all of these third-party manufacturing suppliers to ensure adequate product supply to respond to customer demand.
We cannot guarantee that these manufacturers or our other third-party manufacturing suppliers will be able to meet our near-term or long-term manufacturing requirements. If we experience supply constraints from our third-party manufacturing suppliers, we may be required to allocate the affected products amongst our customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our relationships with these customers and on our financial condition. In addition, if we are unable to meet customer demand due to fluctuating or late supply from our manufacturing suppliers, it could result in lost sales and have a material adverse effect on our business.
We do not have long-term commitment contracts with some of our third-party manufacturing suppliers. We obtain some of these manufacturing services on a purchase order basis and these manufacturers are not required to provide us with any specified minimum quantity of product beyond the quantities in an existing purchase order. Accordingly, we depend on these suppliers to allocate to us a portion of their manufacturing capacity sufficient to meet our needs, to produce products of acceptable quality and at acceptable manufacturing yields and to deliver those products to us on a timely basis and at acceptable prices. The manufacturers we use also fabricate wafers and ATMP products for other companies, including certain of our competitors. They could choose to prioritize capacity for other customers, increase the prices that they charge us on short notice or reduce or eliminate deliveries to us, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Other risks associated with our dependence on third-party manufacturers include limited control over delivery schedules and quality assurance, lack of capacity in periods of excess demand, misappropriation of our intellectual property, dependence on several small undercapitalized subcontractors and limited ability to manage inventory and parts. Moreover, if any of our third-party manufacturers suffer any damage to facilities, lose benefits under material agreements, experience power outages, lack sufficient capacity to manufacture our products, encounter financial difficulties, are unable to secure necessary raw materials from their suppliers or suffer any other disruption or reduction in efficiency, we may encounter supply delays or disruptions. If we are unable to secure sufficient or reliable supplies of products, our ability to meet customer demand may be adversely affected and this could materially affect our business.
If we transition the production of some of our products to new manufacturers, we may experience delayed product introductions, lower yields or poorer performance of our products. If we experience problems with product quality or are unable to secure sufficient capacity from a particular third-party manufacturer, or if we for other reasons cease utilizing one of those suppliers, we may be unable to secure an alternative supply for any specific product in a short time frame. We could experience significant delays in the shipment of our products if we are required to find alternative third-party manufacturers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
In April 2016, we consummated a transaction with Tongfu Fujitsu Microelectronics Co., Ltd. (formerly, Nantong Fujitsu Microelectronics Co., Ltd.) (TFME), under which we sold to TFME 85% of the equity interests in our ATMP facilities consisting of Suzhou TF-AMD Semiconductor Co., Ltd. (formerly AMD Technologies (China) Co., Ltd.) and TF-AMD Microelectronics (Penang) Sdn. Bhd. (formerly Advanced Micro Devices Export Sdn. Bhd.) thereby forming two joint ventures (collectively, the JVs). The majority of our ATMP services will be provided by the JVs and there is no guarantee that the JVs will be able to fulfill our long-term ATMP requirements. If we are unable to meet customer demand due to fluctuating or late supply from the JVs, it could result in lost sales and have a material adverse effect on our business.
Failure to achieve expected manufacturing yields for our products could negatively impact our financial results.
Semiconductor manufacturing yields are a result of both product design and process technology, which is typically proprietary to the manufacturer, and low yields can result from design failures, process technology failures or a combination of both. Our third-party foundries, including GF, are responsible for the process technologies used to fabricate silicon wafers. If our third-party foundries experience manufacturing inefficiencies or encounter disruptions, errors or difficulties during production, we may fail to achieve acceptable yields or experience product delivery delays. We cannot be certain that our third-party foundries will be able to develop, obtain or successfully implement leading-edge process technologies needed to manufacture future generations of our products profitably or on a timely basis or that our competitors will not develop new technologies, products or processes earlier. Moreover, during periods when foundries are implementing new process technologies, their manufacturing facilities may not be fully productive. A substantial delay in the technology transitions to smaller process technologies could have a material adverse effect on us, particularly if our competitors transition to more cost effective technologies before us. Any decrease in manufacturing yields could result in an increase in per unit costs, which would adversely impact our gross margin and/or force us to allocate our reduced product supply amongst our customers, which could harm our relationships and reputation with our customers and materially adversely affect our business.
The success of our business is dependent upon our ability to introduce products on a timely basis with features and performance levels that provide value to our customers while supporting and coinciding with significant industry transitions.
basis or that they will be well-received by our customers. Moreover, our investments in new products and technologies involve certain risks and uncertainties and could disrupt our ongoing business. New investments may not generate sufficient revenue, may incur unanticipated liabilities and may divert our limited resources and distract management from our current operations. We cannot be certain that our ongoing investments in new products and technologies will be successful, will meet our expectations and will not adversely affect our reputation, financial condition and operating results.
Delays in developing, qualifying or shipping new products can also cause us to miss our customers’ product design windows or, in some cases, breach contractual obligations or cause us to pay penalties. If our customers do not include our products in the initial design of their computer systems or products, they will typically not use our products in their systems or products until at least the next design configuration. The process of being qualified for inclusion in a customer’s system or product can be lengthy and could cause us to further miss a cycle in the demand of end-users, which also could result in a loss of market share and harm our business. In addition, market demand requires that products incorporate new features and performance standards on an industry-wide basis. Over the life of a specific product, the sale price is typically reduced over time. The introduction of new products and enhancements to existing products is necessary to maintain the overall corporate average selling price. If we are unable to introduce new products with sufficiently high sale prices or to increase unit sales volumes capable of offsetting the reductions in the sale prices of existing products over time, our business could be materially adversely affected.
If we cannot generate sufficient revenue and operating cash flow or obtain external financing, we may face a cash shortfall and be unable to make all of our planned investments in research and development or other strategic investments.
Our ability to fund research and development expenditures depends on generating sufficient revenue and cash flow from operations and the availability of external financing, if necessary. Our research and development expenditures, together with ongoing operating expenses, will be a substantial drain on our cash flow and may decrease our cash balances. If new competitors, technological advances by existing competitors or other competitive factors require us to invest significantly greater resources than anticipated in our research and development efforts, our operating expenses would increase. If we are required to invest significantly greater resources than anticipated in research and development efforts without an increase in revenue, our operating results could decline.
We regularly assess markets for external financing opportunities, including debt and equity financing. Additional debt or equity financing may not be available when needed or, if available, may not be available on satisfactory terms. The health of the credit markets may adversely impact our ability to obtain financing when needed. Any downgrades from credit rating agencies such as Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s may adversely impact our ability to obtain external financing or the terms of such financing. Credit agency downgrades or concerns regarding our credit worthiness may impact relationships with our suppliers, who may limit our credit lines. Our inability to obtain needed financing or to generate sufficient cash from operations may require us to abandon projects or curtail planned investments in research and development or other strategic initiatives. If we curtail planned investments in research and development or abandon projects, our products may fail to remain competitive and our business would be materially adversely affected.
The loss of a significant customer may have a material adverse effect on us.
Collectively, Sony Corporation, Microsoft Corporation and HP Inc. accounted for approximately 49% of our consolidated net revenue for the quarter ended July 1, 2017. Sales to Sony and Microsoft consisted of products from our Enterprise, Embedded and Semi-Custom segment and sales to HP Inc. consisted primarily of products from our Computing and Graphics segment. We expect that a small number of customers will continue to account for a substantial part of revenue of our businesses in the future. If one of our key customers decides to stop buying our products, or if one of these customers materially reduces or reorganizes its operations or its demand for our products, our business would be materially adversely affected.
Our receipt of revenue from our semi-custom SoC products is dependent upon our technology being designed into third-party products and the success of those products.
The revenue that we receive from our semi-custom SoC products is in the form of non-recurring engineering fees charged to third parties for design and development services and revenue received in connection with sales of our semi-custom SoC products to these third parties. As a result, our ability to generate revenue from our semi-custom products depends on our ability to secure customers for our semi-custom design pipeline, our customers’ desire to pursue the project, and our semi-custom SoC products being incorporated into those customer’s products. Any revenue from sales of our semi-custom SoC products is directly related to sales of the third-party’s products and reflective of their success in the market. Moreover, we have no control over the marketing efforts of these third parties, and we cannot make any assurances that sales of their products will be successful in current or future years. Consequently, the semi-custom SoC product revenue expected by us may not be fully realized and our operating results may be adversely affected.
Global economic uncertainty may adversely impact our business and operating results.
Uncertain global economic conditions have in the past and may in the future adversely impact our business, including, without limitation, a slowdown in the Chinese economy, one of the largest global markets for desktop and notebook PCs. Uncertainty in the worldwide economic environment may negatively impact consumer confidence and spending causing our customers to postpone purchases. In addition, during challenging economic times, our current or potential future customers may experience cash flow problems and as a result may modify, delay or cancel plans to purchase our products. Additionally, if our customers are not successful in generating sufficient revenue or are unable to secure financing, they may not be able to pay, or may delay payment of, accounts receivable that they owe us. The risk related to our customers’ potentially defaulting on or delaying payments to us is increased because we expect that a small number of customers will continue to account for a substantial part of our revenue. Any inability of our current or potential future customers to pay us for our products may adversely affect our earnings and cash flow. Moreover, our key suppliers may reduce their output or become insolvent, thereby adversely impacting our ability to manufacture our products. In addition, uncertain economic conditions may make it more difficult for us to raise funds through borrowings or private or public sales of debt or equity securities.
The markets in which our products are sold are highly competitive.
The markets in which our products are sold are very competitive and delivering the latest and best products to market on a timely basis is critical to achieving revenue growth. We believe that the main factors that determine our product competitiveness are timely product introductions, product quality, product features and capabilities (including enabling state-of-the-art visual and virtual reality experience), energy efficiency (including power consumption and battery life), reliability, processor clock speed, performance, size (or form factor), selling price, cost, adherence to industry standards (and the creation of open industry standards), level of integration, software and hardware compatibility, security and stability, brand recognition and availability.
We expect that competition will continue to be intense due to rapid technological changes, frequent product introductions by our competitors or new competitors of products that may provide better performance/experience or may include additional features that render our products uncompetitive. We may also face aggressive pricing by competitors, especially during challenging economic times. Some competitors may have greater access or rights to complementary technologies, including interface, processor and memory technical information. For instance, with the introduction of our APU products and other competing solutions with integrated graphics, we believe that demand for additional discrete graphics chips and cards may decrease in the future due to improvements in the quality and performance of integrated graphics. In addition, our competitors have significant marketing and sales resources which could increase the competitive environment in such a declining market, leading to lower prices and margins. If competitors introduce competitive new products into the market before us, demand for our products could be adversely impacted and our business could be adversely affected.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.