|
Joseph Cross, President and CEO
- Welcome
to our first quarter 2001 conference call. We appreciate
your continuing interest and support. The Nanophase attendees
for this session are: Dan Bilicki, VP Sales and Marketing;
Dr. Don Freed, VP Business Development; Dr. Gina Kritchevsky,
VP Technology and Engineering; Jess Jankowski, CFO
and Corporate Controller; and Bob Haines, VP of Operations,
who joined the company during the quarter.
- To
review the quarter, Jess Jankowski will provide a financial
summary of results …Jess……….
Jess
Jankowski, CFO and Controller
- Good
morning and thank you for attending.
- Beginning
this quarter, in the interest of communicating better with
our shareholders, we are going to review the Company's results
and financial condition in more detail.
- For
the first quarter of 2001, our revenues were approximately
$1,072,000 versus approximately $619,000 for the same quarter
in year 2000. The majority of our revenues continue to come
from products. Please note that approximately $400,000 of
first quarter 2001 product revenue related to the catalyst
order that we discussed in our March 28th press release.
We had had positive negotiations with that customer for
some time prior to finalizing arrangements and were ready
to fill the order immediately upon coming to terms. The
timing of this revenue seems to have been a point of confusion
to some of our shareholders.
-
We had approximately $220,000 in gross margin for the first
quarter of this year. This was achieved through a combination
of favorable product mix and the fact that we are starting
to see many of our manufacturing cost-saving measures coming
through. We now feel that gross margins should remain positive
through the balance of the year. The extent to which we
remain positive, as a percentage of revenue, will be dependent
upon revenue mix, revenue volume, and our ability to continue
to cut costs. On the bottom line, we lost 8 cents per share
for the first quarter of this year versus 11 cents per share
for the first quarter of 2000.
- I
would now like to spend a little time walking you through
the major categories on the March 31, 2001 balance sheet:
-
All numbers are approximate….
-
At March 31st, we had $14.9million in cash and investments.
- Accounts
Receivable amounted to $1.3million. 96% of our receivables
were current. The reason that our receivables appear large
in relation to sales are several:
-
First, we have an accrued receivable relating to a
minimum royalty due us from a licensee, that amounts
to $300,000/year and is accrued at a rate of $75,000
per quarter. Most of these monies are not due until
the middle of this quarter. As the quarters go by,
this builds our A/R and may lead people unfamiliar
with this relationship to assume that we are not collecting
on a timely basis. This receivable makes up 28% of
our A/R balance.
- Another
reason is that receivables from BASF, currently our
largest customer, amounted to 37% of our accounts
receivable and have been historically shipped under
60-day terms. Through a series of negotiations, we
have been able to reduce these terms to 30-days, beginning
this month.
- Another
30% of our A/R relates to the catalyst order that
we filled at the end of the first quarter and discussed
earlier. At this time we are not able to discuss customer
specifics.
- What
we can discuss however, is that Nanophase is confident that
these customers, comprising approximately 95% of our receivables,
are financially sound and will be paying us within proscribed
terms.
- I'm
sure that you have noticed that inventory has gone up by
$500,000 between the end of 2000 and March 31st. This build-up
was anticipated and strictly controlled by management. As
a matter of fact, we originally planned to exit 2000 with
more inventory than we actually did but were stymied by
one of the nastiest winters in Chicago's history. On top
of the December holiday schedule, we lost at least five
shifts due to a combination of travel conditions and the
weather's impact on utilities. In January, as many of you
may be aware, BASF gave us an updated forecast that shifted
much of our anticipated shipping schedule out, putting more
weight on the 3rd and 4th quarters. In order to most efficiently
manage resources, we will continue to build inventory in
Q2 and through part of Q3 so as not to be placed in a "crunch"
situation in the latter half of this year. 65% of our total
inventory relates to this business. We continue to manage
this situation closely.
- Nanophase,
throughout our organization, remains focused on producing
as efficiently as possible. When the time comes, we'll increase
our capacity, via added manpower, to meet this customer's
requirements….but, until then, we'd rather keep our overhead
to a minimum. With the improvements made, our existing infrastructure
can support this customer's current 2002 forecast.
- Switching
gears to another key area of focus:
- Capital
expenditures amounted to $1million dollars in the first
quarter of this year. We anticipate spending an additional
$6million in the balance of the year, depending on scheduling.
These projects may take us into the first quarter of next
year.
- Most
of our spending is earmarked for three main categories:
-
The pilot manufacturing facility in Romeoville
- The
powder coating area in Romeoville (Includes upgrades
to existing building utilities, like electrical power
and related controls, and other things)
- Planned
capacity expansion to our Burr Ridge facility
- With
respect to the powder coating area, our cash outflows are
being offset by a $1.3million dollar loan from BASF upon
which we have received roughly 50% and expect to receive
the balance shortly.
-
Another thing I would like to address on the March 31st
balance sheet is the Company's roughly $1million dollars
in long and short-term debt. 65% of this, which is currently
classified as long-term, reflects funds received against
the previously discussed $1.3million loan. The balance reflects
insurance premiums that management elected to finance. Given
our current view, we plan to exit this year with between
$9 and $10million. That number is a little difficult to
determine at this point in our year. Keep in mind that we
are currently involved with several business development
opportunities whose ultimate magnitude and impact on cash
are difficult to gauge. We will update you from time to
time if there are significant changes.
-
Lastly, we have also had some increases in our accounts
payable. This is mainly a result of both our building inventory
and our capital-spending plan.
- Thanks
for your attention, now I'd like to turn things back over
to Joseph Cross, our President and CEO.
Joseph
Cross, President and CEO
- Thank
you, Jess
- To
summarize first quarter 2001, the management team believes
that the quarter was quite successful and provides a sound
beginning to the new fiscal year. Despite the unexpected
delivery rescheduling for sunscreen materials that occurred
during the end of January, Nanophase was still able to achieve
a 73% increase in revenues and reduce its loss by approximately
30% compared to the same period last year. Perhaps more
significantly, the company was able to demonstrate a positive
gross margin on sales of 21%, representing a 50% increase
compared to the same period last fiscal year and an approximate
28% improvement to the previous quarter.
- Gross
margin growth is largely due to the company's rigorous efforts
over the last 15 months to reduce manufacturing cost through
engineering improvements to the process and implementing
world-class manufacturing techniques. We have now been able
to reduce cost on major products by approximately 50% and
increase output per reactor by 30-100% depending on the
product. As a secondary, but equally important contributor,
we have also been able to obtain higher margin business,
primarily in environmental catalysts, and believe that we
have additional opportunities to increase sales margins
on products in several of the potential business development
opportunities currently in process.
- Addressing
infrastructure, we made progress to our plans scaling-up
Burr Ridge to have capacity in place for current annual
supply agreements and customer forecasts during 2001, as
well as into early 2002 as far as we have visibility. The
Romeoville upfit remains on schedule as we completed two
additional labs and continued readying manufacturing capability
for our proprietary nanopowder coating area targeted for
June and the pilot area to supply large-scale dispersions
and formulations to customers, which should be ready during
July.
-
We also executed to our manufacturing plan of building inventory
to manage and perform to the projected increased revenue
and delivery schedule during the third and fourth quarters
of this year. Or goal here is to perform to the customers
needs without spending the capital to add peak capacity
capability or incurring unnecessary cost in overtime or
other variable manufacturing expenses.
- In
business development, we continue to demonstrate progress
with a new long-term supply agreement for abrasion-resistant
material for vinyl flooring and a new environmental catalyst
application. We made sound progress in application engineering
developing nanosolutions with lead customers in target markets
and toward readying Audrey for commercial production during
the third quarter.
-
To elaborate on this topic, I would like Dr. Don Freed,
VP Business Development, to provide an update on the company's
business development activity, Don.
Dr.
Don Freed - Vice President, Business Development
- Good
morning - and thanks for your interest. Despite the economic
slowdown, interest in the Company's capabilities to develop
unique nanoparticle solutions continues to be strong. During
the 1st quarter we initiated new programs in several market
areas including environmental catalysts - you've probably
read our recent news release on that, as well as transparent
functional coatings and electronics.
- Today,
I'd like to focus on our activities in developing transparent,
functional coatings, - we believe the programs that we are
initiating now will contribute significantly to our revenue
and profit targets for 2002 and 2003. But before I do this,
I'd like to briefly remind you of just how the Company's
business development activities are organized and how we
select opportunities.
- We
use two very important criteria to evaluate potential -
time-to-market and value - value both to the customer and
value to Nanophase. Our time-to-market criteria are 12 to
18 months from project inception to commercial production
- and, because our materials are not commodities, but higher
priced, uniquely engineered products, our value criteria
require that customers gain significant performance advantages
from using our nanomaterials.
- Now,
getting back to transparent coatings, let's translate the
value criteria to several programs. Nanophase has developed
the capability to incorporate nanocrystalline aluminum oxide
into a broad range of materials for application such as
wear-resistant coatings - we've now taken the technology
originally developed for wear-resistant flooring into several
new products - We're working with a large manufacturer of
specialty fabrics to increase the wear resistance of ballistic
nylon and polypropylene - and gained a threefold improvement
just by incorporating our nanoparticles into this particular
customer's fabric coatings - we haven't changed that material
substantially - in fact, because of the small size of our
particles, the coating is practically invisible, but products
made using this new material should have much better durability
and we expect to be selling into this application later
this year. We're also co-developing together, with one of
the world's largest household appliance manufacturers, transparent
wear-resistant protective coatings capable of withstanding
elevated temperatures and with more than half a dozen additional
companies in applications as diverse as scratchproof coil
coatings to wear resistant floor polishes and we expect
many of the above-identified opportunities to be realized
during the next eighteen months.
-
By focusing our know-how in a concentrated area, we're increasing
our chances of success - as we deliver more application
solutions to customers, we gain more in-house knowledge
(which we protect by filing for patents) and more experience
which allows us to tackle more complex problems and most
importantly, reduce our time-to-market. And, our available
market also grows - to many times that just for the initial
applications, which when we started we estimated at $25
- $30 million - we believe the current opportunity in wear-resistant
coatings to be more than double that and growing rapidly
- in fact, we believe that some day, nanoparticulate-based
wear-resistant coatings will form the basis for a separate
business unit within Nanophase.
- Bear
in mind that we're not ignoring our other potential and
on subsequent calls, we'll cover additional developing market
areas so that before very long you'll have the total picture.
- Now,
I'd like to turn it back to Joe Cross - Joe…
Joseph
Cross, President and CEO
- Thanks,
Don. Following
in line with business development initiatives, Dan Bilicki,
vice president of sales and marketing, will now summarize
the company's progress during the first quarter. Dan…
Dan
Bilicki, VP Sales & Marketing
- As
reported, revenue from Q1 was $1,072 million with $980K
or 91% being derived from sales of products. Compared to
Q1 of 2000 this is an increase of 73% in revenue and a 101%
increase in product sales.
- Nanophase
consistently generates a majority of product sales from
the 4 key market segments that include Personal Care, Transparent
Functional Coatings, Catalysts, and Ceramics including Thermal
Spray. For Q1 2001, of the $980K in product sales 96% were
generated from these 4 key market segments.
- I
would now like to provide an update on the progress of product
sales by market segment for Q1 and an outlook for Q2.
-
In the Personal Care market segment inventory adjustments
and rescheduling off take of ZnO to personal care applications
resulted in lower that expected sales volume for Q1. Sales
volume of ZnO into the personal care market is expected
to exceed last year by 37% resulting in strong demand in
Q3 & Q4.
- Good
progress has been made in on the installation of a material
handling and proprietary surface treatment system that will
allow Nanophase to end our dependence upon a third party
and surface treat the ZnO in house. Surface treated ZnO
from the Nanophase facility will be shipped to customers
for their approval in Q3.
- As
mentioned during last quarter conference call we have 2
other non-ZnO personal care initiatives underway. One of
the programs is in the trial stage and is expected to move
to the product sales stage in the fourth quarter of this
year. The other program proposal is currently under review
by senior management with approval expected in Q3.
- Nanophase
has made progress in taking ZnO to horizontal markets outside
of personal care; we expect to start selling ZnO into the
electronics market in Q3.
- Transparent
functional coating market segment has the highest level
of product testing activities of all 4-market segments.
As reported last quarter Nanophase has signed up 2 agreements
with separate customers for flooring applications. The larger
of these two customers has delayed their launch due to circumstances
beyond their control. A meeting is scheduled in May to discuss
rescheduling the new product launch. Sales revenue for this
application has not been included in our current forecast
for 2001.
- Sales
to Catalysts applications continue to grow as the company
has announced sales of $400,000 to a new environmental catalyst
application in Q1. The nano crystalline material provided
will be used for large-scale tests. Although this development
effort is still in the early stage we expect that significant
additional revenues will be generated in 2001 and beyond.
- In
ceramics, Nanophase is currently working with lead customers
and leading centers of thermal spray excellence to test
and provide comparative analysis of the performance of our
products in thermal spray applications. The development
of nano chrome oxide for thermal spray applications is proceeding
on schedule.
- In
Summary: Q1 product sales were significantly ahead of Q1
last year. An initial sale of product into a new environmental
catalyst application is a very encouraging development.
Product sales for Q2 are expected to exceed Q1 by 50% as
sales volume of ZnO into personal care applications returns
to forecasted levels.
- And
now back to Joe
Joseph
Cross, President and CEO
- Thanks,
Dan. Now, Dr.
Gina Kritchevsky, vice president of Technology and Advanced
Engineering, will summarize the company's quarterly technology
achievements, Gina.
Dr.
Gina Kritchevsky, VP of Technology and Engineering
- Good
morning.
- During
the first quarter of 2001 we have continued to focus much
of our advanced engineering efforts on Audrey. For any newcomers
to our conference call, Audrey is a new nanoparticle production
technology that we have been developing over the past nine
months. The goal is to enable us to broaden the range of
nanomaterials that we offer in the marketplace and to produce
these materials at significantly higher rates than PVS with
a wider range of feed materials. During the quarter we have
screened over a dozen candidate materials. We continue to
be extremely encouraged by both the results and the progress
to date. Depending upon the feedstock and the product, rates
have varied from two to 10 times the rates for the same
material produced by the PVS process. In many instances,
the cost of the raw feed material has also been substantially
less expensive than the wire and rod feed used in PVS. In
several cases, the feed materials have been half or less
than half the cost of the feed for PVS.
- The
experience gained in the course of the screening experiments
has provided additional insight into the Audrey process.
In the second quarter we will implement the equipment and
process design improvements derived from our experiences
during the initial trials, and will begin to commercialize
Audrey processes for several selected materials.
- Nanophase
currently relies on two major complementary core technologies.
The first is nanoparticle production and we constantly work
to broaden both the range of nanomaterials we produce and
the processes that we are able to use to manufacture these
particles. Our second core technology involves tailoring
the chemistry of the particle surface and the interfacial
region between the particles and the material that the particles
are imbedded into. This also includes controlling the interactions
between particles and the dispersion of the particles into
a formulation liquid.
- Several
breakthroughs in our Application Engineering labs during
the quarter will enable us to make better particle dispersions
and coatings in addition to providing some novel particle
chemistries. We expect these breakthroughs to develop into
new products during the year. We have also been active during
the first quarter in protecting the intellectual property
that we have developed in both these core technologies and
for applications of our products.
Joseph
Cross, President and CEO
- Thanks,
Gina. Now, I would like to introduce Bob Haines, our new
vice president of operations, who will give an update on
our manufacturing team and the achievements in the first
quarter.
Bob
Haines, VP of Operations
- Nanophase
is the industry leader in making industrial quantities of
nanomaterials, with current manufacturing capabilities of
producing at an annualized rate of over 400,000 kilograms.
At this level, we have certainly demonstrated that Nanophase
has robust manufacturing processes capable of delivering
high volumes of quality nano powders.
- Nanophase
had a very strong quarter in terms of our ability to manufacture
and deliver high volume, high quality nano powders. Using
a lean manufacturing approach focused on continuous improvement,
our manufacturing and process engineering team made significant
progress in terms of process optimization, reducing manufacturing
costs and a notable increase in the productivity of existing
manufacturing processes.
- During
the first quarter of this year, our customer service rate
was greater than 98.5%. This is a measurement of our actual
delivery performance versus commitment as viewed from the
customer's perspective. The overall variable manufacturing
cost per kilogram of high volume product was reduced by
21% as compared to the last quarter of 2000. In addition,
process output in terms of kilograms per hour produced was
improved by over 50% without adding additional reactors.
With these output improvements, we are able to ramp up zinc
oxide production to meet increased third and fourth quarter
customer requirements without significant additional capital.
- Early
in January, we introduced a Manufacturing Score Card that
focused our operations on real time management of five critical
manufacturing performance metrics,
-
Quality / Customer Satisfaction
- Safety
- Cost
- Capital
Utilization
- Productivity
-
We know every shift, every day where we are in terms of
these critical performance measurements and where we should
be focusing our attention and resources. Our objective is
to set the right aggressive goals, frequently measure and
communicate our performance against the goals, and continuously
improve our manufacturing operations in those areas that
actually create value as perceived by our customers.
- During
the first quarter, our Burr Ridge plant was recertified
as an ISO9001 manufacturing facility and maintained cGMP
status for Zinc Oxide products for the health care industry.
Going forward, we will obtain a similar status for the Romeoville
coating facility once it is commissioned and producing production
quantities of coated zinc oxide.
-
Over this year, we will be bringing on-line additional production
capacity for environmental catalysts and precursors for
abrasion resistant coatings. We will continue to develop
our lean manufacturing approach with a focus on agility
to meet our developing customer requirements; having the
right manufacturing capacity at the right time with unquestionable
quality.
- Going
forward, we will continue to reduce manufacturing costs,
improve process yields, and productivity and delight our
customers.
Joseph
Cross, President and CEO
- Thanks,
Bob.
- Looking
forward into the second quarter, we expect that revenue
will increase by at least 50% from first quarter 2001 while
variable manufacturing cost and variable expenses will continue
to decrease due to continuing aggressive management efforts
in those areas. We also expect to close some of our existing
business development opportunities during the second quarter,
which we believe will contribute to revenue in 2001 and
2002.
- For
this fiscal year, we remain comfortable with our current
revenue forecast of approximately $10 million, which would
be about 2.4 times 2000 revenue, or an increase of 140%.
- This
concludes our prepared comments. Let me remind you that
our comments will be available on our web site, www.nanophase.com,
on or about Friday, April 27. We are available for any questions
you may have.
FIRST
QUARTER CONFERENCE CALL 04-26-01 QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
| OPERATOR: |
Thank
you ladies and gentlemen. To ask a question, please
press the one key on your touch-tone telephone. If your
question has been answered, or you wish to remove yourself
from the queue, please press the pound key.
And, if you're using a speakerphone, please lift the
handset before you ask your question.
Our first question comes from Donald Hutchinson, of
Merrill Lynch, Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc.; Ticker: MER;
URL: http://www.ml.com/>. |
| DONALD
HUTCHINSON, MERRILL LYNCH: |
Good
morning, Joe. |
| CROSS: |
Good
morning. |
| HUTCHINSON: |
I
just have one quick question. Of the $10 million in
sales estimates for the year, is there any portion of
that that is due to unannounced new opportunities?
|
|
CROSS: |
Let
me answer that two ways. There is some of the forecast
that we can't discuss because of secrecy agreements
with customers. So, inasmuch as that provides unannounced
opportunities, that's true. The opportunities we currently
have in business development are not all factored in
our current forecast. There are several opportunities
that we haven't been able to quantify adequately, at
this time and we haven't included in our sales forecast.
|
| HUTCHINSON: |
So,
these - that number then is on folks that we already
know that have been announced, in one way or the other
- is that right?
|
| CROSS: |
I
would say that is true to a certain extent, but we have
factored in closing some business development activities
that are very close to the end of the cycle. Those that
are close - those that we've got to a point that we
think the customer can make an adequate forecast to
us, or that we can forecast closely - we've included
in the $10 million number. Outside of that, there are
several additional opportunities that are not in that
$10 million number. But, again, at this time, we haven't
been able to adequately quantify those to even consider
in a forecast. We would expect, as the year unfolds,
that we would continue to fine-tune the $10 million
number. |
|
HUTCHINSON: |
OK.
Thank you. |
| OPERATOR: |
Our
next question comes for Lisa Nichols, of Robinson Humphries. |
| LISA
NICHOLS, ROBINSON HUMPHRIES: |
Hello.
I had a few questions and a follow-up on - first of
all, on the revenue projections. Can you give us a better
idea how they might play out for the year, as you get
to the 10 million by the end of the year? Like how much
will be in Q3, and Q4 and Q2? |
| CROSS: |
I'll
ask Dan to respond to that. |
| BILICKI: |
As
you heard from our initial discussions, we anticipate
50 percent increase in Q2, over Q1. And to go forward
from that, we obviously have to be looking for ranges
over two million plus in Q3, and over three million
in fourth, in order to achieve the target. |
| NICHOLS: |
OK.
All right. And, can you give a - well, let's see, I
guess I'll ask this one first. Given whatever anomalies
might play out, with regards to building inventories,
how likely are we to see cost reductions reflected in
the P&L?
|
| CROSS: |
Well,
I think you're already seeing cross-reductions reflected
in the P&L. Toward our goal of reducing manufacturing
costs 20 percent this entire year, we achieved 14 percent
of that 20 percent in the first quarter. We will still
achieve manufacturing cost reductions, throughout this
year. I think you will see improving financials on a
gross margin line that are due to improving manufacturing
costs.
In regard to building inventory, this is a very controlled
inventory build with constant contact to the customer
- we have a very good relationship there. We are building
inventory very prudently to their forecast and are in
almost weekly conversation on this topic. So, we're
not concerned at all at this time about the inventory
level, relative to what we perceive our customers will
take for the sunscreen market, at this time. |
| NICHOLS: |
OK.
So, as far as where it we'll be on the P&L, will primarily
see the improvement in the gross margin line?
|
| BILICKI: |
Yes. |
| NICHOLS: |
All
right. You talked a little bit about the environmental
- progress of the environmental catalysts, so I wondering
if you could provide any further color, as far as an
update on how satisfied customers are, or confident
you are in developing the business this year and next?
|
| CROSS: |
The
initial tests of this catalyst are quite encouraging.
As Dan Bilicki mentioned, going forward there'll be
some very large scale testing, but at this point in
time the customer and the people who ultimately use
this, are quite satisfied, as expected. |
| NICHOLS: |
OK.
You've talked a lot about what kind of projects you're
working on. Can you identify, maybe, the real key projects
that you think are going to be generating the greatest
results over the next year? |
| FREED: |
This
is Don Freed. As we mentioned, outside of the healthcare
market, which continues to generate substantial revenue
for the Company, we believe that the transparent functional
coating market - and not just abrasion resistant coatings
- but in general, is very promising for Nanophase and
will be a significant contributor to our growth. Because
of the characteristics of the materials we make, and
their small size, and our capabilities of being able
to disperse them in a broad variety of matrices and
media. There are a very substantial number of applications.
And as I said, we ultimately believe that this would
be the basis for a separate standalone business, within
Nanophase, just relating to transparent functional coating. |
| CROSS: |
This
is Joe Cross. Let me follow-up on that, just a little
bit. As we announced in a previous press release, we
have extended our relationship with our largest customers
to include the personal care market. We have not yet
begun to see, really, the volume that we might expect
from penetration of that market by our customer on a
global basis. So, we expect growth in that throughout
this year and into 2002. But, that's still an early
initiative for that customer and we haven't been able
to quantify what that means yet. |
| NICHOLS: |
OK. |
| CROSS: |
The
second area I would not want to denigrate is the environmental
catalyst area. The opportunity that Don mentioned, that
we really can't discuss much about, is a very large
opportunity for this Company. The other opportunity
the Company's had for sometime, which has to do with
environmental catalysts for automotive usage, has a
rather serious development program underway with a major
player in that market. And we expect to have some success
on new materials in the marketplace. We will not know
the outcome of those tests until June. So, we have at
least four very significant markets, with very strong
initiatives, that could seriously add to this Company's
revenues, this year and next. |
| NICHOLS: |
All
right. Thank you very much. |
| OPERATOR: |
Again,
ladies and gentlemen, to ask a question, press one on
your touch-tone telephone. Our next question comes from
Loren Ben, of CIBC World Markets. |
| LOREN
BEN, CIBC WORLD MARKETS: |
Good
morning.
|
BEN:
|
Joe,
do you have an idea - and I know this is a difficult
question, because you're working with so many different
materials and so many different applications. What type
of gross margins do you hope to eventually end up with? |
| CROSS: |
That's
a good question, because actually the management team
spends a lot of time working on this. We expect, over
time, that our gross margin should climb to a 60 to
70 percent range. To do that, obviously we would have
to have higher margin on sales on our products and we
have to continue to decrease our manufacturing costs.
We believe that our leadership position in Nanomaterials
is not just the fact that we can make Nanomaterials
and encapsulate Nanomaterials with the DPE process,
we think that the fact that we are considerably up the
learning curve on the manufacturing side puts us ahead
of most of our current competitors. That, we believe,
is demonstrated by the company shipping over 200 metric
tons in 2000 and our success decreasing our costs by
50 percent over the last 15-months.
So, to your question, we think a variable margin of
about 70 percent is a number that we can achieve. |
| BEN: |
OK
- and a follow-up question, if I may. You have significant
test quantities in this first quarter. I don't know
what percentage they were of the overall. Going forward,
do you know how much in your plan is for test quantities,
and how much is for actual quantities that are going
to be used by the ultimate manufacturer in their products
and in their assembly lines, if you will? |
| BILICKI: |
Loren,
this is Dan Bilicki. As you're aware, and Don mentioned
in his presentation, that we're looking at 12 to 18-month
time-to- market. And, obviously, there are various stages
that you go through, including the value, and the concept
and trial stage. Where we are right now is, we've cleared
all those hurdles and we're in large trial stage in
the environmental catalyst area.
Obviously, at this juncture, until we clear this hurdle
- until everyone is comfortable that the product works
as expected - we really can't make any comments, on
the total market size. However, I must say, that if
it is successful the potential is significant, and we're
excited about it. |
| BEN: |
Well,
I guess, I'm not looking to find out what the total
market size is in any one contract, or any one application.
I think you've probably delineated in your presentations,
in the past, what you feel the market size is in certain
areas. What I'm trying to figure out is - next quarter
you go - you're looking to about a million six. And
then you said over two, and then over three. Of the
million six - then the two million - three million -
going forward. I guess I'm trying to get a feeling as
to how much of it is going to be ongoing quantities,
as opposed to test quantities. |
| BILICKI: |
I
understand the question. What we call research materials,
which are small amounts of material we sell to customers,
primarily in the very early stages of the discussion,
and we think that amounts to $35 - $40, 000 per quarter.
The other revenue that we're talking about, especially
in a production mode, this is well beyond research quantities.
These are in product rollouts and product introductions.
Probably the earliest would be large-scale pilot testing.
|
| BEN: |
Right. |
| BILICKI: |
So,
we don't perceive that anything we're calling production
revenue is a research quantity material at all. These
are things that are well down the path. |
| BEN: |
Stuff
that's in pilot manufacturing, though, is not - I mean,
they haven't assigned you a part number yet, have they?
|
|
DAN BILICKI: |
That
isn't true at all. What it really means is that the
customer is ramping up their product production, so
the quantities increase over time. |
| BEN: |
OK.
So then it has been accepted, and they are going to
go forward? |
| BILICKI: |
Yes,
it's just that they're launching maybe their testing
in a geographical area, or maybe they're only marketing
in, you know, three out of fifty states, or wherever.
|
| BEN: |
OK. |
| BILICKI: |
It's
that kind of rollout. |
|
JOE CROSS: |
But
essentially, as we stated for the catalyst order we
received, we also have deliveries scheduled for the
second quarter in that same product line. So, this is
ongoing production. What our customer really doesn't
know yet, on an annual basis, is the growth curve and
what is the quantity of material requirement yet. |
| BEN: |
OK. |
|
OPERATOR: |
Our
next question comes from Steve Springer, of Target Capital
Management. |
|
STEVE SPRINGER, TARGET CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: |
Good
morning. Congratulations on an excellent quarter. |
| JOE
CROSS: |
Thank
you, Steve. |
| SPRINGER: |
I
have three questions. The first is, you have outlined,
on a number of occasions, the criteria that Nanophase
uses in seeking to establish customer relationships.
And so, presumably, before you actually get into the
negotiation process, you look at their agenda and your
agenda, and if there is compatibility there then you
can move forward.
In that context, I'd like to ask you, how many business
opportunities are you currently negotiating that have
passed that metric? |
| FREED: |
Steve,
this is Don Freed. There's a broad spectrum of opportunities.
Let me just preface it with this - no opportunity that
we consider for this Company, will not have passed that.
In other words, whatever we work on has to pass our
value criteria, and our time-to-market criteria. Otherwise,
we just don't do it.
So, the point is, once they pass that, there are probably
a dozen or more, in addition to ones that we've already
mentioned, that are in various stages, ranging from
proof of the feasibility - does it work - can we make
the product - can the customer use it - all the way
through to a pilot scale production, whatever you call
it.
But, I just want to make sure that everyone understands
that we will not work on something that doesn't meet
our criteria. |
|
SPRINGER: |
So
a dozen or more, of what you might call later stage
developments. And how many relationships do you have
now - how many existing relationships do you have? That
is to say, production relationships.
|
| FREED: |
Production
relationships - like customers to whom we regularly
ship products? |
| SPRINGER: |
Right. |
| FREED: |
I
would say, that numbers probably between six and eight.
|
| SPRINGER: |
OK. |
|
FREED: |
On
an adequate scale to be discussible. |
| SPRINGER: |
OK.
|
| FREED: |
The
other thing, Steve, on top of that, we receive 30 to
50 orders for what we call experimental research, in
small quantities, on a monthly basis. And that whole
list of customer is mined. We look at that very carefully
to find out what those people are doing, and do they
need to have any help in scaling-up and using more material.
|
| SPRINGER: |
OK.
Next, I'd like to reference the article that appeared
in the "Chicago Tribune," on the 23rd of April. And
in that article it mentioned - of course, referred to
the $5 million annual federal budget for Nanotechnology
research, and specifically referenced an initiative
on the part of the State of Illinois, to establish a
center with funding with as much $150 million - I think
it was at Argonne National Labs.
It also talked about Northwestern University's interest
in starting up their own research efforts. And it talked
about Chicago being possibly a major center for Nanotechnology
research. Could you talk a little about how you would
benefit from this initiative - from this funding, and
what your relationships are with these entities? |
| FREED: |
Steve,
this is Don Freed again. Long before that press release,
and the government's announcement, we had relationships,
both with Argonne and with Northwestern. |
| SPRINGER: |
Right. |
| FREED:
|
And
they've been centers for Nanotechnology research since
the mid 80's. In fact, we have exclusively licensed
to Argonne patents, which really belong to Nanophase
now. And it was from our Argonne that Dr. Dick Siegel,
who is on our Board of Directors, actually founded Nanophase.
So, we go back a long way.
As far as the President's budget, that money is really
earmarked for federally sponsored research and development
by universities - secondary and education - even primary
education. The benefit to Nanophase is (A) a greater
awareness, not only in the academic community, but also
in the research community and in general, of the benefits
of Nanotechnology. What that means to us, ultimately,
is more customers, more opportunities, and more people
who are aware.
In fact, in Germany you can read about Nanotechnology
on the back of Kellogg cereal boxes. So, the point is
that it raises the level of awareness. It's a long-term
benefit - that money is federal grant money. Nanophase
won't see that money directly; we'll see it indirectly
in increased uses in the Nanomaterials.
But, we're very keenly aware of what goes on, not only
in the two places that we mentioned - Argonne and Northwestern
- but also in many other places. And it's not only in
the State of Illinois, but the State of New York and
other states have already started major centers in Nanotechnologies.
So you can see that this is really a technology that
is key and here to stay. |
| SPRINGER: |
Yes,
I was aware of the relationship with Argonne. But, what
I was really pointing to is the extent to which there
maybe an opportunity to license, or acquire, or participate
in, new technologies, specially production technologies.
You've
talked in the past about looking at other companies,
looking at other technologies, and so I'd like to -
the third part of my question was, are there any other
technology developments, in terms of capabilities, that
you would like to acquire, or that you find interesting,
at this point? |
| CROSS: |
Steve,
it's Joe again. There are several technologies that
we review frequently. One of the reasons we go to the
Nanoparticle conferences is, frankly, just to investigate,
and watch papers and see if there's anything interesting.
At the last such conference, there was approximately
three we found interesting - two we weeded out quickly
- the third we're still in discussions with the inventors
- that happens to be a European technology.
We haven't seen much technology come in out of the States.
And in our perception - and frankly we're presented
with most of those technologies, most do not appear
to be scalable. There has been a lot of novelty-kind
of technologies that we've seen coming from universities
and other places that clearly are not scalable, and
are clearly non-economical.
But, we remain, we think, fairly well on top of it,
not just due to our own efforts, but also by staying
in contact with universities. For instance, several
of our Board Members are highly involved with Northwestern,
so we're pretty much on top of Northwestern and Argonne.
We also have relationships with the university in New
York that just started a major Nanoinitiative, part
of which is funded by IBM. Also, Dr. Dick Siegel, who
is in the Material Department at RPI, stays on top of
developments on a global basis and keeps us informed.
So, we think we have pretty good tentacles out for a
small company. And, yes, we continue to look at technology,
and we continue to remain interested and we have no
problem at all considering a technology that's invented
somewhere that's good for us. We have no problem with
licensing or acquiring a company, as long as it's a
good business discussion. |
| SPRINGER: |
Which
is the university in New York that is active is Nanotechnology
development? |
| DON
FREED: |
There's
actually two - there's the University of Albany and
there's Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. |
| SPRINGER: |
OK.
Thank you. |
| OPERATOR: |
Our
next question comes from Todd Laird of NWQ Investment
Management. |
| TOM
LAIRD, NWQ INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT: |
I
guess in a general sense I'm just following-up on the
initiatives. I'm wondering in, you know, new business
initiatives and exploration of new developments, do
you see much competition, or are these usually joint
efforts, with existing research internally, with some
of these companies? Or, could you just give a little
color on that - sort of the competitive landscape? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
I
don't think I would call most of our business development
activities really research; I think I would classify
them as development, generally with a lead customer.
We do have some research projects with lead customers.
I would say that most of the projects we work on with
customers are co-development between us and the customer,
where we typically retain the intellectual property.
Relative to competition, our competition is in two piles.
The first is standard materials that are obviously priced
much less for a given application. So, we have to show
significant value in an application to warrant the price
to the customer. For instance, in a wear resistant coating,
nanomaterials increase the wear resistance three or
four times over normal materials. That's an incredible
value, as perceived by our customer.
Relative to other Nanotechnology companies, except in
very isolated situations, we do not see competition.
|
| LAIRD: |
Thank
you. |
| OPERATOR: |
Our
next question comes from Alan Yakuboff of Morgan Stanley.
|
| YAKUBOFF: |
Just
a clarification on the revenue side. You're looking
at about a million this quarter - 50 percent up. Next
quarter is about two-and-a-half million, or so. So,
you're looking at about seven-and-a-half million for
the second half of the year. That's almost about three-and-three-quarter
million dollars for the next two quarters, on average.
You were talking two to three million. Could you just
explain that a little further? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
Well,
we think that next quarter ought to be up about 50 percent.
We'd expect third quarter to more than double from that
and we think the fourth quarter run rate will probably
be over four million - if we achieve the 10 to 10-and-a-half
million goal, which the Company currently has. |
| YAKUBOFF: |
Oh,
so you're looking for about three million in the third
quarter? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
Yes,
at this point in time. |
| YAKUBOFF: |
And
somewhere about the four million range then. |
|
JOE CROSS: |
But,
don't forget as you consider this, that we're building
inventory right now, especially in sun screen materials,
to deliver in the third and fourth quarter. Because
the delivery requirements in that market are actually
three times - over three times larger than they are
in the first quarter of this year. So, it's quite a
bulge. |
| YAKUBOFF: |
Is
that the announcement about pushing it out until the
second half of the year made earlier, I think sometime
in January? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
Yes.
|
| YAKUBOFF: |
Now,
that wasn't pushed out to the second half that would
have been, more or less, the expectation to be delivered
in the second quarter? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
No.
Let me tell the story, as boring as it might be. The
customer actually modifies the forecast periodically.
The forecast from December 2000, on which we based our
initial estimates of revenue and loading for 2001, was
relatively level loaded. And that's exactly how we planned
our capacity, our manpower, and how we've set our financial
budgets.
We were not made aware of the change in the schedule
until the end of January, which is when we put the announcement
out. And essentially what that did was take material
delivery quantity out of the first quarter by almost
50 percent, on the second quarter by about 30 percent,
and load all that into the third and fourth quarter.
This is due primarily to products being rolled out,
in the personal care and sunscreen marketplace, by our
customer's schedule.
It's not a slippage in the marketplace, or a reduction
in volume; it's simply a change of schedules of rollouts,
actually from several different companies.
|
| YAKUBOFF: |
So
you consider those orders to be firm ... |
| JOE
CROSS: |
Yes,
at this point in time. |
| YAKUBOFF: |
...
in the second half of the year? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
We
have an annual purchase order from our largest customer
in the sunscreen market. And frankly, with life in a
manufacturing company, it gets about as firm as you
can get. |
| YAKUBOFF: |
Thank
you. |
| OPERATOR: |
Our
next question comes from Donald Hutchinson, of Merrill
Lynch. |
| HUTCHINSON: |
Hi.
Some of the comments have prompted some further investigation,
I think. I'm curious about the automobile catalyst.
I'm aware of the oxide for the cold start burn of those
things. Is this the same function, or material, that
is being tested through June, or whatever, or is there
something in addition to that? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
No,
actually we are working with a major manufacturer in
that arena testing various mixed metal oxides for that
application. Some of that is propriety technology to
this Company - some of it's done in collaboration with
this particular company. And the only reason we mention
that, frankly, was to show there's a continuing development
in technology effort in that particular marketplace.
Relative to the other environmental catalyst initiative
that we have going, we're frankly just not able to add
any color to that topic at all. |
| HUTCHINSON: |
OK.
The automobile business, though, is basically we're
still in the cold start section of the can there? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
I
can't really discuss that, without violating the secrecy
agreement with my customer. |
| HUTCHINSON: |
Well,
are we still working on the same thing that they were
working on from day one on that? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
We're
still in the same general area. We've evolved to broaden
that initiative in that area, but we're still in the
same general area. |
| HUTCHINSON: |
I
see. So this is just a refinement of the original objective,
it's not something entirely new? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
No.
Don, I think we've got a bit of confusion here. Let
me try to clarify it, if I can. The people we are working
with for catalytic converters, we're still working with,
and we've extended the development effort. The other
thing we've announced is not in that area, and we can't
say any more about it.
|
| HUTCHINSON: |
OK.
I'm aware of that. I didn't hear where you guys made
a guess for next year - would you like to make one?
|
| JOE
CROSS: |
Not
particularly. You know, this is kind of like a vineyard
- we're not going to crack that cork before its time. |
| HUTCHINSON:
|
OK.
Thank you. |
|
OPERATOR: |
Our
next question comes from Steve Springer, of Target Capital
Management. |
| SPRINGER: |
Yeah.
I'd just like to follow-up on one question, regarding
the sunscreens. There have been reports that the FDA
is looking into the effect of organic sunscreens on
people's skin, in that they were never originally intended
to be on the skin all day. And now the cosmetic manufacturers
are putting these products in the sunscreens and products
they use, from morning to night. And in the context,
can you tell me if you're aware of what's going on,
in terms of that investigation, and how that might impact
the use of inorganic materials, such as yours? |
|
GINA KRITCHEVSKY: |
Yes,
Steve. This is Gina. We are aware of those studies and
at this point it's really difficult to predict how it
might impact the use of inorganic - you can make a guess. |
| DON
FREED: |
No,
let me add a little bit to this. First of all, there
have been some studies that just came out recently from
Switzerland, and this has prompted some reaction in
Denmark, which indicated a potential ban on organics
in daily wear products. This, of course, is being reputed
by the sunscreen industry. So, what you can only say
about this is watch this space, because a lot will happen,
in terms of this situation.
Obviously, if there were some concern the industry would
move toward inorganics, which we are well placed to
take advantage of. But, at this early stage there is
no way we can make a prediction. |
| SPRINGER: |
How
large is the market for sunscreens, in general? |
|
BILICKI: |
This
is Dan, Steve. If you lumped all the organic and inorganic
together, it's close to $400 million. Obviously, the
preponderance of that is organic - they've been around
a long time. Our own estimate of the inorganic sunscreen
market is in the $45 to $50 million range. |
| SPRINGER: |
But,
the Nanoparticle segment of it is essentially your relationship
with BASF - is that correct? |
| BILICKI: |
No.
There are other inorganic sunscreens, made from titanium
dioxide, that are also on the market. There are a number
of suppliers of that material. No, it's not just zinc
oxide. |
| SPRINGER: |
So,
Gina, what would be your guess as to how this might
play out? |
| KRITCHEVSKY: |
I
think Dan answered that, Steve. If indeed organic sunscreens
are banned, or reduced, then one would suspect people
to move to inorganic. But it's really too early to predict
that. |
| CROSS: |
Steve,
this is Joe. This is a very political situation, both
in the States and Europe. The FDA's monograph in the
States was given a two - I think it was given a two
or three-year review period - I can't remember which.
And that monograph basically wants to put sunscreens
under FDA control, which it is not now. If that should
occur, there seems to be, or appears to be, clinical
evidence that would concern people about organic sunscreens.
But right now, on both continents, the best we can answer
to you in reality - this is a very politically high
stakes game, and we really hate to guess as to how this
might come out. |
| SPRINGER: |
OK.
I just have two other questions on the subject. First
of all, what are the allegations that you're aware of,
as far as what the impact of prolonged exposure to organics
is? I mean, it is a serious matter - is it a discoloration
of the skin - something more severe?
|
| CROSS: |
Steve,
I don't think we'd like to comment on that. There is
conflicting medical evidence, to be really honest with
you. None of us purport to be researchers in this field,
so I'd really rather not comment on that - that's not
our field of expertise, and really that's a serious
battle zone right this minute. |
| SPRINGER: |
OK.
Last question is - are there any inherent advantages
to Nanoparticles zinc oxide, as opposed to Nanoparticle
titanium dioxide? |
| GINA
KRITCHEVSKY: |
They
absorb - or I should say protect from different portions
of the solar spectrum. Yes, there are advantages, depending
on which portion of the spectrum that you're exposed
to. Zinc oxide is a broader protection than the titanium
dioxide.
|
| SPRINGER: |
OK.
Thank you. |
|
OPERATOR: |
Our
next question comes from Loren Ben, of CIBC World Markets. |
| BEN: |
Once
again, thanks for pulling out a good quarter. CROSS:
Thank you. |
| BEN: |
And
since we were talking about sunscreens, and you also
brought up the area of wear resistant specialty fabrics.
There's been a lot of conversation lately, regarding
the UV qualities of clothing and I was wondering whether
- while you were talking to fabric manufactures - if
there was anything going on regarding UV protection
at the same time? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
We
really can't say at this point. |
| BEN: |
OK.
Thank you. |
| OPERATOR: |
Our
next question comes from Todd Cobey, Cobey Jacobson.
|
| TODD
COBEY, COBEY JACOBSON: |
Give
us your projections for increased financing, particularly
as to the amount you might need and whether - and what
your chronological time table would be? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
Right
now, we haven't made any decision on that matter. It
is an active discussion inside this Company, as well
as on the Board. We have not reached a decision on additional
equity, relative to how much, or when. We expect to
leave this year with somewhere between $8 and $10 million
in cash.
Some of the opportunities that are facing us have different
economic impacts that we cannot quite quantify at this
point in time, relative to our cash, or relative to
contribution by the customer involved. So, I don't think
we're prepared to state how much we may need, or when
we might need it. I think it's premature at this stage. |
| COBEY: |
But,
your thoughts are toward equity, rather than short or
long-term debt? |
| JOE
CROSS: |
Our
thoughts would tend to run towards equity. |
| COBEY: |
Thank
you. |
| OPERATOR: |
At
this time, there appear to be no further questions.
Please continue with any closing comments. |
| CROSS: |
Ladies
and gentlemen, thanks for your attention today, and
we'll look forward to talking to you at the end of next
quarter. Thank you very much. |
| OPERATOR: |
Ladies
and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today's
conference. This does conclude the program. You may
now disconnect. Good day. |
|