Welcome to TSMC's first quarter 2013 earnings conference and conference call. This is Elizabeth Sun, TSMC's Director of Corporate Communications, and your host for today. The event is webcast live via tsmc.com. If you are joining us through the call, your dialing lines are in listen-only mode. As this conference is being viewed by investors around the world, we will conduct this event in English only. The format for today's event will be as follows. First, TSMC's SVP and CFO, Ms. Lora Ho, will summarize our operations in the first quarter, followed by our guidance for the current quarter. Afterwards, TSMC's Chairman and CEO, Dr. Morris Chang, will provide his general remarks and couple of key messages. We will open the floor to questions.
For those participants on the call, if you do not have a copy of the press release, you may download it from tsmc.com. Please also download the summary slides in relation to today's earnings conference presentation. Before we begin, I would like to remind everybody that today's discussions may contain forward-looking statements that are subject to significant risk and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statement. Please refer to the safe harbor notice that appears on our press release. Now I would like to turn the podium to TSMC CFO, Ms. Lora Ho.
Thank you, Elizabeth. Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for your participation. Today, my presentation will start with financial highlights for the first quarter 2013, followed by the guidance for the second quarter. Our first quarter revenue turned out better than guidance due to more favorable exchange rate and stronger mobile demand, and TSMC's strong position in 28 nm. Compared to the previous quarter, first quarter revenue increased 1% to TWD 133 billion. On the margin side, gross margin was 45.8%, down 1.4 percentage point from the fourth quarter last year. Higher capacity utilization and the TWD depreciation contributed to a favorable impact to our gross margin by 3 percentage point. However, the inventory valuation adjustment on a quarter-over-quarter basis has impact our gross margin by 4.4 percentage point. This is consistent with the accounting treatment under ROC GAAP number 10 as before.
First quarter operating margin was 33.5%, down 1.8 percentage point from the prior quarter due to higher opening expense for Fab 15 capacity expansion for 28 nm. Non-operating items was a gain of TWD 1.3 billion for this quarter, much better than the loss in the fourth quarter of 2012. The difference is mainly due to the lack of impairment charges of TWD 1.5 billion we took in the fourth quarter last year for certain invested companies. Also, in the first quarter, we disposed a portion of these SMIC shares at a profit of TWD 0.7 billion versus its value on our book. Overall, our EPS was TWD 1.53. ROE was 21.3%. As you may have noticed, we are preparing financial statements in accordance with Taiwan IFRS starting this year. To illustrate the difference, we prepared a comparison table under both ROC GAAP and the Taiwan IFRS using 2012 number as example.
I would like to highlight a few items here, and you can find a more detailed explanation on TSMC website. On the profit side, Taiwan IFRS require us to reclassify some items among operating and non-operating items. For example, technical service income were reclassified from non-operating item to revenue. Loss of impairment of idle assets will be reclassified from non-operating expenses to other operating expenses, et cetera. The overall impact on our net income is small increase of TWD 0.2 billion in profitability, which is less than 0.1% of our total net income. On balance sheet, the key changes for TSMC is the reclassification of sales return allowance from deduction in accounts receivable to other current liabilities. Therefore, the balance of both accounts receivable and other current liabilities increased. This leads to a four-day increase in accounts receivable turnover day in calculation.
Let's move back to revenue analysis for the first quarter of 2013. Overall, revenue from all applications showed better than seasonal quarter-over-quarter changes in the first quarter. As mobile product IC designers accelerated preparation for new product launches, demand for communication-related applications showed the strongest growth of 4%. Computer increased by 3%, consumer increased by 3%, and industrial revenue declined by 2% in the first quarter. If we look at the revenue by technology, demand for our 28 nm technology remained robust. 28 nm contribution to total wafer revenue further increased from 22% in the fourth quarter to 24% in the first quarter of 2013. With solid demand and a smooth ramp, we expect 28 nm revenue continue to grow each quarter, and we are confident that 28 nm wafer revenue for 2013 will triple that of 2012.
Overall, advanced technologies defined as 40 nm and below accounted for 47% of our total wafer revenue, up from 44% in the fourth quarter last year. Let me make a few comments on the balance sheet. Our cash and marketable securities increased TWD 38 billion to TWD 185 billion at the end of the first quarter, mainly due to proceeds from issuance of corporate bonds. By the same token, our long-term interest-bearing debt increased TWD 45 billion to TWD 127 billion. Looking at financial ratio, our accounts receivable turnover days remained flat at 43 days, and days of inventory increased by one day to 51 days. On the cash flow side, in the first quarter, we generated TWD 74 billion from operations, invested TWD 80 billion in capital expenditure, and raised TWD 45 billion through corporate bonds. In the US dollar term, our capital expenditure was $2.7 billion in the first quarter.
We expect the total CapEx to be front-end loaded for the whole year. Overall, our cash balance increased TWD 43 billion to TWD 186 billion. Free cash flow ended at TWD negative 7 billion, mainly due to higher capital expenditure in the first quarter. Lastly, let me make a few comments on our capacity plan. In the first quarter, due to fewer working days and a scheduled maintenance, our total capacity decreased 1% to around 3.9 million 8-inch equivalent wafers. While we continue to add 28 nm capacity, our second quarter capacity will pick up to a level close to 4 million wafers, up 3% from the first quarter. For the full year, our 12-inch capacity is expected to increase 17% in 2013, contributed by the ramp of Fab 15, and our total annual capacity will increase 11% year-over-year to reach around 16.5 million wafers. I have finished my financial report.
Let me provide you our second quarter guidance. Based on our current business expectation and a forecast exchange rate of 29.82, we expect our revenue to be between TWD 154 billion and TWD 156 billion, representing about 17% quarter-over-quarter growth. In terms of margins, we expect the second quarter growth margin to be between 47.5%-49.5%, and operating margin to be between 35%-37%. This concludes my remarks. Let me turn the podium to our Chairman and CEO, Dr. Morris Chang, for his remark.
I would like to make some comments on industry outlook, on 1Q and 2Q, then on our technology involvement, 28, 20, and 16, as well as our specialty technologies. Finally, I will talk about this year's CapEx. For the industry outlook, for the full year 2013, our estimate of global GDP remains unchanged at about 2.6% growth. Semiconductor market, we now estimate to be about 4% growth. That is up from the 3% earlier estimate, due mainly to memory price recovery. Fabless industry, our estimate of fabless industry growth remains unchanged at 9%. Foundry industry, we now estimate to grow at 10%. That is up from 7%, mainly due to the rise of our own estimate of our growth. TSMC growth will be much higher than the foundry industry growth of 10% that I mentioned earlier.
On inventory, supply chain inventory at the end of 4Q was close to seasonal, was reasonably balanced, close to the seasonal norm. We expect it to remain slightly above seasonal in all four quarters this year. Basically, we feel that it will be reasonably balanced every quarter this year. On 1Q and 2Q of 2013, we are pleased with our first quarter performance, and we are encouraged by the business prospects of the second quarter, as Lora has already guided. Both quarters are stronger than seasonal. We attribute our strength to, first, mobile-related applications whose demand remains strong. TSMC's strong position in 28 nm technology, which has become widely adopted by many mobile-related applications. A few comments on 28 nm. I said before, and I say again, our capacity and output continue to ramp up aggressively.
Both our production and our revenue of 28 nm wafers in 2013 will triple the production and revenue of 2012. This year, our volume and our revenue will triple that of 2012. Our High-k Metal Gate version will overtake the oxynitride version in third quarter of this year. Market share this year is expected to remain very high, due to, first, we have better yields on 28 LP, which is the oxynitride version. We have better yields on the oxynitride version than competition. Second, our differentiated offering in High-k Metal Gate, namely, we have gate-last versus competition's gate-first, offers better performance for our customers' products. Two reasons why our market share will remain very high. First, the 28 LP, the oxynitride version, has better yields than competition.
Second, our High-k Metal Gate version is different from what the competitors may offer because we're gate-last and theirs is gate-first. Our gate-last version is better performance for our customers' products. Lastly, I have been asked a couple times how our gross margin is doing on the 28 nm. I'm happy to report that the gross margin of 28 nm will be slightly higher than corporate average this year, the whole year, every quarter. A few comments on 20 nm and the 16 nm FinFET. On 20 nm, risk production has started in the first quarter, that is last quarter. Engagements with customers are on schedule, have scheduled 20 product tape-outs for this year from multiple customers. Many of these tape-outs will drive high production volume. Yield progress on 20 nm is on track.
On 16 nm FinFET, we have said several times that this is a change in cadence in our new technology introduction. It used to be two years per node. In the case of 16 nm FinFET, it follows just by one year the 20SoC. It is a quickening of our cadence, and that is because of market requests, market requirements, customers' requests. Compared with the 20 nm, the 16 FinFET has same metal pitch, but tighter front-end FinFET design rules. The reason we can introduce it so quickly after the 20 is because the 16 FinFET can leverage the learning from 20 nm in interconnect and in double patterning. The yield improvement of the 16 FinFET is ahead of schedule. It is on track to begin volume production within one year from 20 nm.
For 20 nm and 16 nm as a whole, I expect that they will be, in combination, a bigger node than the 28 nm. A few words on the competitiveness of our 20 nm and our 16 nm. I have three points to make. First, TSMC technology is based on an open environment, the Open Innovation Platform, OIP. That open platform facilitates and invites innovations from all participants in the OIP. The participants include, of course, most importantly, our customers. They also include the design ecosystem partners. Of course, TSMC itself is a very important part of this open platform. The second point I want to make is that we have been collaborating with our customers and ecosystem partners for more than 15 years. Through the ecosystem OIP, TSMC's technology has been collaboratively optimized for SoC development.
With our customers, we have been optimizing our technology for SoC development. Together with our customers, established power-efficient, ARM-based architecture, and comprehensive mobile IPs with our ecosystem partners. We are confident that our customer products with TSMC's 20 and 16 nm technologies are very, very competitive. I think that is already proven by our customers' enthusiasm of our technologies, 20 and 16. A few words on specialty technologies. We don't want to neglect them at all. We talk about advanced technologies most of the time, but especially technologies are growing even faster. They already account for a very significant volume in our revenue. I'm talking about fingerprint technologies, motion sensors technologies and products, Near-Field Communication products, audio codec, power management, touch sensors, and an old friend, but still a very exciting technology, that is CIS. The imaging products, cameras.
These enhanced requirements for human-machine interfaces will fuel the growth of TSMC specialty technology businesses in mixed-signal, MEMS, embedded flash, and high voltage. Most of those technologies are now embedded in our less than leading-edge technologies, 40 nm, 65 nanometer, 90 nanometer, 0.18-micron, 0.15-micron, et cetera. Finally, CapEx, capital expenditures. CapEx will be between TWD 9.5 billion and TWD 10 billion this year. This is an increase from the last guidance we gave, which was about TWD 9 billion. Basically, we have stepped up the preparation for the ramp-up of 20 nanometer and 16 nanometer. We have pulled some of the capital in because we want to have as high yields as possible when we do start volume ramp-up. Of course, we are continuing to build up 28 nanometer capacity.
Therefore, approximately 90% of the capital expenditures are for 28 nanometer, 20 nanometer, 16 nanometer, both for building facility and equipment. Another 5% is for R&D, and that is mainly for 10 nanometer, 7 nanometer, et cetera. 2% for specialty equipment, and that is on the specialty technologies that I just mentioned. 1% for the land in Zhunan, which we announced a few months ago. Basically, I feel that the company is entering or has already entered a new growth period. We started to invest in this growth period even at the depth of the recession in early 2009. We have been investing in increased R&D, in increased capital for several years now. We have begun to see the benefits. We have been scaling new highs in revenue for four consecutive years, including this year.
We have scaled new highs in net income for three of the last four consecutive years. The best part is that the best is yet to come. Thank you.
This concludes our prepared statements. Before we begin the Q&A session, I would like to remind everybody to limit your questions to two at a time to allow all participants an opportunity to ask questions. Questions will be taken both from the floor and from the call. Should you wish to raise your question in Chinese, I will translate it to English before our CEO or CFO answers your questions. For those of you on the call, if you would like to ask a question, please press the star and the one on your telephone keypad now. Questions will be taken in the order in which they were received. If at any time you would like to remove yourself from the questioning queue, please press the pound or the hash key. Now, let us begin the Q&A session.
Our first question comes from the floor. It would be from Goldman Sachs, Donald Lu.
Chairman Lora and Elizabeth, or maybe I should use English here. Congratulations on the very good second quarter guidance.
Go forward.
Right. First question is on the 20 nm. Some investors, and also your customers, have been talking about the cost per transistor might start to go up after double patterning, et cetera. What's your view on this impact to the supply chain, your profitability, and your customers' profitability and the adoption of technology, et cetera? My second question is, just want to hear from you again the return and the profitability for future nodes, 20 nm and 16 nanometer. Thank you.
The first question.
Transistor cost.
Transistor cost. The second question is?
Is return profitability of
All right. Second question, return profitability. Transistor cost. I'm sorry. Okay. Thank you. Transistor cost, 20 nm transistor cost. Yes, the slope of decrease of transistor cost has been less between 28 and 20. The decrease in transistor cost is less than the decrease in transistor cost between 40 and 28. Now, the important point is that the value we offer in any new node is, I think, gradually shifting or has already gradually shifted from just pure lower transistor cost to the performance aspects, performance speed, and power. Of course, in addition to speed and power, we also offer value in quick access to market and services and those things. I think that there are opportunities for regaining the slope, the decrease of transistor cost. There are opportunities for regaining it.
For instance, I think that the recent developments in EUV, I think are encouraging. They will have an important role to play, if those developments continue to progress. On the other hand, the value that the new node offers in performance and power is exactly what our customers are looking for. I think that, yes, the transistor cost reduction has not been so great, but I think the acceptance of the 20 nm SoC will prove, and I'm certain of the acceptance. I think the acceptance will prove that the customers are still getting value. As to the return profitability of 20 and 16, well, I'm not prepared to offer you a quantitative measure of the return profitability. I will repeat our goals in this five-year period, I think starting 2012 to 2017, I guess.
That is 10% per year compounded annual growth in profit before tax, and return on equity of 20% or higher. Those targets I announced two years ago, I believe, and we remain fully committed to those.
Next question also comes from the floor from Deutsche Bank's Michael Zhou.
Chairman. Q1 and Q2 sales momentum is stronger than seasonal. Do you think the inventory risk will be rising by the end of Q2, or you think the demand can digest most of the output?
Inventory, whether or not inventory risk is going up, whether the supply chain can digest inventory this year.
Our inventory estimate is that it will only be slightly above seasonal in the next few quarters. Is that the question? Yeah, mm-hmm.
Can you give some color for Q2 outlook by segments?
Pardon me?
Q2 outlook by segments.
The outlook of different applications in Q2, segment by segment.
Yes.
Lora.
Maybe I can comment.
Yeah.
Okay. I just announced the guidance that we will grow 17%. For us, every segment will grow across the board. With the communication will grow the most, mainly because the mobile devices.
Okay. The second question is Oh, I'm sorry.
This is your third, so we have to go to another one. Okay. Next question also come from the floor, and that will be from Citibank, Roland Shu.
Hi, Chairman. First question is, the ARM-based application processor has been widely adopted on the mobile applications. Can we get your view about how do you think about the ARM-based application processors on PC, notebook, or even server? Do you think that will be happen very soon, or that will maybe take longer than expected time? Thank you.
Whether or not ARM-based processor can enter into the PC space. That's your question.
I think it's a possibility. I think, in fact Well, it's a possibility, that's not the first thing that comes to mind. I think the first thing that comes to mind is server stuff. I think some of our customers are already targeting that. Some of our customers are already targeting that.
Before this adoption be ramped up, what kind of the barrier or what kind of bottleneck or technology need to be resolved, and how TSMC can help to boost this kind of conversion going forward?
The what?
Your question is what kind of bottleneck that exists from our current customers offering.
Yeah.
if they want to go to PC, right? What TSMC can do to help them debottleneck.
I don't think I can answer that question very well. I think that it's something that I can't answer that question very well at this point.
You have a follow-up?
Yeah. I think follow-up is, I think for recently, TSMC just have a news release talking about tape-out with ARM, Cortex-A57 for 64-bit application processor. This is going to tape out on TSMC's 16-nanometer FinFET technology. My question is, except for this Cortex-A57, 16-nanometer FinFET, do you have any 64-bit ARM application processor on 20 nm or 28 nm technology? Thank you.
Well, just as I said, I think some of our customers are targeting the server segment. That's for the ARM architecture. Yeah.
Okay, I think we should go to the call for the next question. Operator, could you proceed to the first caller on the line?
Daniel Heyler from Bank of America Merrill Lynch, please ask your question.
Well, thank you very much, Elizabeth. Congratulations, Chairman, for your highly successful growth strategy and execution on your technology. I had two quick questions. First, Dr. Chang, in terms of the cadence where you've noted a pickup, especially on 16 nanometer, and your very strong growth in mobile processing and SoCs, what does this mean for the N minus one fabs? You're noting significant growth in your specialty processes. Are we seeing a cadence pickup in the mid-tier technologies such that you'll be able to keep the N minus one fabs relatively full going forward?
Your question is, in our leading-edge technology, the cadence has become faster, and therefore your question is whether or not the same cadence become faster for the N minus one technologies.
For the N minus one?
Correct. N minus one. One or two generations bigger.
Huh?
The bigger nodes. 20 nm and then 28 is N minus one. 40 is N minus two.
Cadence, in the past it was two years. That's history already. How does that become faster? I don't understand.
All right.
That's exactly my question. I'm wondering if there will be excess capacity in the middle end of your technologies, with the leading edge picking up and the mainstream technology remaining at two cadences.
Oh, the specialty technologies, will they migrate faster than they used to?
How do you-
Right now it looks like some of the specialty technologies are skipping nodes. They're migrating from 0.18-micron to 90 perhaps, rather than to 0.13-micron first and then 90. They're going from 0.18-micron to 90 directly, and they are going from 0.13-micron to 65 directly, skipping a node. That's happening. I don't know whether that's what you're asking or not. Is it?
Well, the crux of the question is how do you keep your mainstream fabs full? When everything is moving at the same pace, you can keep your mainstream fabs full. Will there be a challenge to keeping your middle-end technology fabs full? How do you address that?
I think you have come very close to the heart of my management problem, all right? Keeping the mainstream fabs full is almost as important as advancing the leading edge. Well, I understand your question, if I tell you the answers, I will be telling these to my competitors also, I'm not going to do that. Yeah.
We don't want you to do that either.
Basically, you can already guess. Why do I talk about these specialty technologies? The specialty technologies will keep the mainstream fabs full. Hopefully.
Okay. Thank you for that.
Yeah.
Great.
You don't have the second question, right?
Okay.
All right, we come back to the floor. The next question comes from the floor of Barclays, Andrew Lu.
Dr. Morris Chang and Lora.
Andrew.
I have 2 questions. Last time you mentioned 20 nm in next year, revenue will be larger than 28 nm, last year. How about the % in each quarter, which means the total % revenue will be higher compared to 2012? For example, last year, first quarter percentage 28 nm is about 5%, but 22% by Q4.
I'm not going to go into those details, but I repeat, I reiterate, I stand by what I said last time. That is that the production volume output of 20 nanometers next year will be greater than 28 in 2012. That I stand by. As to this percentage and so on
Thank you.
Yeah. Okay.
My second question, earlier you also mentioned migrate to 16-nanometer FinFET will be faster than the normal upgrade cycle, about two years, from 20 to 16. How about from 16 to 10?
No. It's going to be the same old slow cadence. Two years.
Back to two years. Won't be longer. Thank you.
Back to two years. Yes.
Okay. Next question comes from the floor of Credit Suisse, Randy Abrams.
Thank you. I wanted to go back to the second quarter guidance. It is well above most of the industry. Last quarter, I think you suggested first quarter was stronger, so it set up a higher base. Maybe what is driving the increased optimism, whether it is market-
Pleasantly, I found myself to be mistaken. Yes. Three months ago, I thought the higher base. In fact, it was even six months ago. Six months ago, I thought the higher base of the first quarter would make a significant growth in the second quarter very difficult. Pleasantly, I found myself to be too pessimistic.
Maybe just to follow on that, what drove that change where now you think you are mistaken from your prior view? Was it market share gains, or you saw incremental market momentum? Do you think sustainability into second half, where the last couple of years we saw a bit of dip after a strong first half?
Well, it is basically mobile products and market share gain. The mobile products, actually, there is one piece that I must mention, which we did not foresee very clearly six months ago. That is the China piece. The China piece is playing a pretty important factor in my present surprise.
Yes.
Okay. The second question on 450 millimeter. It is pretty far out, but we are seeing Intel already spend about TWD 2 billion-TWD 3 billion on a 450 millimeter shell. When do you expect-
On what?
18 inch.
Oh, 450 millimeter. Yeah.
Yeah. When is your expectation you'll have to start spending CapEx? Do you have any view on fab location at this stage?
Have we started to spend CapEx yet?
No.
Not yet. We have started to spend R&D. We have a small team working on 450, but not ready to start on the meaningful way in CapEx yet.
I think his question is, when do we plan to start CapEx? Well, I think our schedule is 2016.
In the 2016 time frame.
Yeah.
That will be the time we start to spend CapEx.
It's too early yet.
Great. Thank you.
Randy has a part that you also asked for the location, right?
Yeah. If you could suggest what you're thinking about for fab location.
Well, actually, didn't we mention when we acquired the Zhunan land? Yeah.
Yeah, the land we acquired in Zhunan is the R&D site for the 450, but not the production site.
Not the production. Yeah.
Okay.
It's going to take some time. Things take a little longer now than they used to. Yeah. Each advanced node of technology and the increase in the wafer diameter, you understand that I think that only three companies can afford to follow it through now. Maybe three, certainly including us. Because these things take more time and require more resources, both money and people, talents. The 450 certainly is going to take longer, the transition from 300 to 450 is certainly going to take longer than the transition from 200 to 300.
Okay. I think we should take our next question from the call. Operator, please proceed with the first caller on the line.
Eddie Hafni from SIP. Please ask your question.
Yes, thanks for taking my question. Dr. Chang, thanks for providing some color on the number of tape outs for 20 nanometer. Could you elaborate on the types of customers, or the number of customers, or any color that you could provide on the 20 tape outs that you have so far for 20 nanometer? I have a follow-up.
Some color on the customers for 20 nm?
Tape outs.
They are
The types of customers that add up to 20 tape outs for 20 nm.
The type of customer. Yeah. I was going to give you those. We have our traditional leading-edge users, the graphics.
FPGA
FPGA customers. Recently we have added another class of customers, that's smartphones and tablets, the mobile product users. Those are the main classes of customers that will provide the 20 tape outs for our 20SoC.
Thank you. The follow-up I have is actually on 20 nm. Can you help me understand how important is interposer to the economics that 20 nm would provide, cost versus economics? Does interposer really make a big difference to what your customers could get out of 20 nm?
That would be related to our CoWoS, right? The silicon interposer.
Yes.
Okay.
What was the question anyway?
What kind of benefit or importance that the interposer, the CoWoS, is to our customers at 20 nm compared to their cost?
It's basically just denser. It's an integration. It's kind of Moore's law on the circuit board. Denser packaging.
interposer is not ready. Is that going to make a big difference to your customer as they evaluate cost and benefit?
Is that going to be an important element when our customer evaluates the 20 nm?
I think so, yes. We already have customers using it, yes.
I believe they evaluate them that way, yeah.
Okay. Thank you.
All right. Now we can come back to our floor. The next question comes from HSBC, Steven Pelayo.
Great. Thank you. The foundry industry is roughly thought to be about TWD 40 billion, TWD 50 billion. If it grows about 10% this year, that's equal to about what you're going to grow. What does this mean for the rest of the industry? Are we seeing the competition even get to become a second source opportunity at 28 nm this year-
Well, Steve-
Is there nothing left over for them?
I have enough on my plate myself to worry about other foundries.
Well, maybe I should ask it this way.
Uh-
Are second sources starting to become viable enough that maybe they could cause some pricing pressures at some point at 28 nm this year?
Well, yeah. There are second sources on 28 nanometers. Second sourcing is not as simple in the foundry business. The customer has to work with the foundry for quite a long time before he can use the foundry. This is not a commodity business. A commodity business, you can set up second sources very quickly. This business, you can't. Still, having said all that, yeah, there will be second sources. If you look at 28, and I know that the analyst reports, the press have been talking about second sources and competition for TSMC in the 28 node. The fact of the matter is that this year, which is the second full year of production and ramp-up for us, even this year, we see relatively little competition, and we will still have a very high market share of 28.
Mm-hmm.
Just as a quick follow-up question. You talked about 28 nm growing each quarter. You talked about it tripling year-on-year. You give capacity numbers for 300 millimeter and 200 millimeter. I'm curious, what is your 28 nm capacity today, and what do you think it'll be at the end of the year? I don't know, on a monthly wafer starts per month, something like that.
Do we review that, Lora?
We do not review that.
All right, if you could just remind me, when is 20 nm revenues going to start being 1% or 2% or 3% of revenues? I forgot if you guys had talked about that.
20 nanometers?
Yes.
20 has not started.
When does it start? I know. When do you expect?
To when? First half next year. You're asking about 20?
Well, she answered already. She said first half of next year.
It was my first question. I'm not going to second guess.
You actually set a pretty low hurdle. You said two or three%, right?
What's the first few % of 20 nanometers?
Huh? Two.
What quarter will be the first few % of revenues will come from 20 nm for TSMC?
What quarter will be the first 2% quarter?
Based on current estimation, it will be roughly second quarter 2014.
2014. Okay. Thank you.
All right. Next question also comes from the floor. That will be from Morgan Stanley's Charlie Chan.
Thanks for taking our question. ASML yesterday commented that they are making good progress in the EUV throughput. We are wondering if TSMC is seeing the similar trend. Will TSMC change the timing of adopting the EUV technology? Lastly, can management give us a sense what is the cost comparison between EUV and the non-EUV, for example, at the 16 nanometer? Thanks.
Could you repeat that question?
Okay, you are asking us to update on the EUV progress, right? Then the second part is the cost of using EUV versus not using EUV at 10 nm, or?
Yeah. Maybe current nodes or the future nodes.
Current nodes, we don't use EUV. Future nodes, it depends on when EUV will be available. Your question is comparing the cost with or without EUV?
Yeah, whether you want to advance your EUV adoption timing, if you want to use it for 16 nanometer, the competitor then should be at 16 nanometer. Thank you.
Well, all right. I think I understand the gist of the question, let me try to answer it. Actually, that question is probably more appropriate at an ASML analyst call. Let me try to answer what I can anyway. EUV recently has had a breakthrough. The power source wattage has now gone up to 40 watts. That will allow a throughput of some 30-something wafers per hour, which is still far from enough. To make it economically desirable, we'll need over 100 wafers per hour throughput, and that will require a power source of more than 100 watts. There is still some distance to go, but ASML is optimistic. Certainly, we certainly cheer them on. We are a stakeholder of ASML in more than one way.
We are a financial investor, we are also going to be a significant user and hopefully significant beneficiary of the EUV. Now, when are we going to use it? I think if we are optimistic, I would say that we'll be using it at least partially in the 10-nanometer node. Anyway, I think I have given as much answer as I can. Yeah.
Okay. Next question will actually be coming from the line. Operator, could you please proceed to the next caller on the line?
Brett Simpson from Arete Research, please ask your question.
Thanks very much. For Dr. Chang, just wanted to ask on Intel. We saw this Altera deal, and there's rumor Cisco's going to follow. Intel on the call yesterday was talking about this foundry strategy where they're crawling today, but they want to walk and then run over the next couple of years. I'm just interested, how do you view Intel as a long-term competitor, and how do you see their efforts to open up their fabs to selective customers?
I didn't hear the entire question.
Your main question is how do we see Intel as a competitor?
I think he also asked about.
Right
Altera, didn't he?
Yes.
Yeah. Do you-
it's Altera, Intel-
Intel
your competitor, and?
No. The Altera going to Intel for 14 nanometer.
Yeah, yeah.
So-
Yeah
Intel also announced.
Yeah
The plan to come into foundry.
Okay.
how we see them-
Anyway
as a competitor.
Two parts of the question. One is Altera, the other is Intel, right?
Okay. Altera. I very much regret Altera's decision to work on the 14 nanometer with Intel, even though the financial impact is relatively small, and Altera remains a major and valued partner of TSMC's. We have gained many customers in the last few years. I really hate to lose even a part of an old one. We want them all, really. I regret it, and because of this, we have thoroughly critiqued ourselves. If there was a thing like a investigative commission on what happened, we had it.
There were in fact many reasons why it happened, we have taken them to heart. It's a lesson to us, I don't think that we will try our very best not to let similar kinds of things happen again. I just want to emphasize that Altera remains a major and valued partner of ours. I say this with Altera's concurrence. Intel as a competitor. I noted Intel's yesterday's analyst call, in which they said they have now gone from crawl to walk, we'll go on to run. That's all very beautiful metaphor. They also raised several conditions or several criteria, three criteria, there's really nothing new in those, they have said those before. I still view Intel as a selective picker among customers.
As a foundry competitor, they will pick their targets and so on. I don't view them as a general competitor because they have already said, through the three criteria that they used, they have already said themselves that they will not be a general all-front competitor. They are a very serious competitor to our customers. That really, I would say, applies even greater pressure on us than Intel as a direct foundry competitor. They are a very serious competitor to our customers. Our customers rely on us. That is very serious pressure, we respond to that pressure, of course. Yeah. We respond to that pressure.
Maybe just a follow-up question, Dr. Chang. On the mobile guidance you've given for second quarter, is this all being driven by existing customers? Are you seeing something new in your customer mix going forward?
Your question is whether or not the strength of our second quarter business comes from new customer or
In mobile, yeah.
In mobile.
No. Well, obviously, something comes from new customers every quarter, not big. We get new customers all the time. Big customers, no. Second quarter strength is not due to one or two big new customers, no.
That's very helpful. Thanks. Could I maybe just ask one final question for Lora on depreciation, just to get a sense for through the rest of this year, how might depreciation trend, because it was flat in the March quarter?
Okay. You're asking about the March quarter? In general speaking, with the CapEx guidance, Chairman was talking about TWD 9.5 billion-TWD 10 billion. We expect whole year depreciation will go up around 23% on year-over-year basis.
Okay, thanks.
Yeah.
Okay, now we are coming back to the floor. The next question comes from Daiwa's Eric Chen.
Hi, Dr. Morris Chang. I'm sorry. My first question regarding to the gross margin. I saw for 28 nm process, we took like the 4 to 6 quarter to have the higher than the average of the gross margin. For the 20 nm process, do we have any schedule or internal plan? Thank you.
Eric, your question is, how long will it take for TSMC 20 nm to reach corporate gross margin? How long will it take, right?
Yes.
Let's see. I think that we have kept some statistics on these sort of things. Very interesting. I think it took six quarters, 40 nm took six quarters. Eight quarters. Seven to eight quarters. Seven to eight quarters. 28 nm is taking about eight quarters. You ask, how long is 20 nm going to take? Well, I only have history to guide me. All right.
How you think?
Yeah.
Take a guess. How you think, how long that will take?
What?
From your under.
He wants you to take a guess. Well, I think history is my best guess.
That mean the seven to eight quarter.
Yeah.
Okay.
Yeah.
Thank you. My second question regarding to the CapEx. We see the CapEx pretty centralized. On the top three, the semiconductor maker. I will say that for this year, probably over 70%, even 75%, the CapEx among these three. How you think about this kind of CapEx, the centralization, and how the TSMC look at the other two competitor in term of the CapEx? The follow-on is regarding to the 28 nm process capacity. Lora, if you don't mind, could you give us idea in term of the Q1, Q2, and the whole year, 28 nm process, the capacity? Thank you.
Eric, you have a question here on CapEx. You said that you observe CapEx tend to be centralized on the top three players.
Top three what?
Players. The top three companies.
Intel, Samsung, and TSMC.
Intel, Samsung, and TSMC.
Oh, okay.
So-
Congratulations.
your question is whether or not this is what implication of this trend.
Yeah. I would like to know this kind of CapEx, the centralization, will accelerate or not, and how the TSMC and to be outstanding one going forward in among the three.
Well, it looks like that only three companies can afford to keep investing. That is what you are referring to, really.
Right. With the other two, any strategy? For the CapEx, we see.
You mean TSMC versus the other two?
Mm-hmm. In terms of the CapEx. The trend.
Whether our CapEx will react to the other two companies' CapEx.
Whether what?
Our CapEx will be responsive, responding to other CapEx.
No. No, our CapEx is only responsive to our own needs.
Okay. We are not going to see the CapEx overcompetition going forward.
CapEx war?
Overcompetition.
I never, never, in the last 20 years, engaged in any CapEx war with anybody.
Good. Good point.
In the last, ever since we started the company, our CapEx has always been responsive to just one thing. That is our own needs, okay? Never mind what the other company spend.
Thank you.
Yeah.
Lora, 28 nm.
You're asking the capacity for each quarter for 28?
Roughly idea, yes.
Yeah, I'm afraid I cannot tell you, but I can tell you is, we are growing our capacity each quarter for 28. In terms of overall CapEx spending, I think we're toward the end of spending by the end of this year for 28.
Okay. Very quick, the 28 nm process in second quarter, in term of a quarter-on-quarter capacity growth, how many % will it be roughly?
I think it'll be in line with our revenue growth. Okay?
Okay. 17-
Quarter-over-quarter.
Okay. Thank you.
All right. If there's no other questions, we will end our investors conference and conference call right now. Thank you very much for coming, and we'll see you next quarter.