關(guān)鍵字:英飛凌 奇夢(mèng)達 內存
奇夢(mèng)達公司的破產(chǎn)管理人一開(kāi)始要求英飛凌支付的費用是17.1億歐元。但英飛凌并未說(shuō)明為什么至今這筆費用幾乎已增加了近一倍之多。
英飛凌正設法提升公司的整體營(yíng)收成長(cháng)。根據業(yè)界媒體報導,本月初,該公司CEO Peter Bauer對于2012年前景發(fā)表審慎持平的看法,他表示由于歐洲南部的需求疲軟扺銷(xiāo)了在亞洲穩定成長(cháng)的業(yè)績(jì),使得整體訂單量已略微下降。
在此銷(xiāo)售疲軟的背景下,英飛凌科技堅定地回絕了奇夢(mèng)達所提出的要求,該公司并不認同破產(chǎn)管理員所要求的金額及其提出這一要求的依據。
在響應這項要求的聲明中,英飛凌表示,管理人員聲稱(chēng)“2006年春天,有關(guān)兩項非現金投資的內存業(yè)務(wù)對奇夢(mèng)達所貢獻的產(chǎn)值,不但遠不及約值六億美元的新股價(jià)值,它事實(shí)上還是負的。”該公司并且已經(jīng)“仔細地檢視此一非現金投入的價(jià)值,將全力反擊奇夢(mèng)達的索賠要求,并對此次訴訟結果深具信心”
當英飛凌決定分割其內存業(yè)務(wù)另成立奇夢(mèng)達公司時(shí),DRAM市場(chǎng)的價(jià)格已經(jīng)開(kāi)始下跌了,只有少數幾家廠(chǎng)商還能獲利。為了持續在該領(lǐng)域具有競爭力所需付出的龐大資本開(kāi)支拖累了英飛凌其它更有利潤的業(yè)務(wù)部門(mén)。在當時(shí)的情況下,分割出內存業(yè)務(wù)似乎是一個(gè)不錯的主意,有助于該公司資產(chǎn)及其它資源集中,并脫離內存業(yè)務(wù)領(lǐng)域。
在當時(shí),奇夢(mèng)達可說(shuō)是市場(chǎng)上的第二大內存制造商,但后來(lái)卻無(wú)法維持這一地位,甚至慢慢地邁向破產(chǎn)與停業(yè)清盤(pán)。目前不利于英飛凌的法院裁決就是在“資產(chǎn)減損責任”方面。據報導,該公司在今年第一季末約有現金與短期投資共22億歐元,即使手上只有2.05億歐元的長(cháng)期債務(wù),該公司也必須大量借貸才可能負擔得起如此龐大的費用。
Will Infineon Be Forced to Pay Qimonda $4.2B?
Bolaji Ojo
The 2006 spinoff of Qimonda AG was meant to improve profitability and lessen capital expenditure requirements for Infineon Technologies AG (NYSE/Frankfurt: IFX) but is turning into a nightmare for the German company. In a press release today, Infineon said Qimonda's insolvency administrator wants it to pay ?.35 billion ($4.2 billion) plus interest to settle outstanding litigation resulting from its alleged failure to capitalize the former business unit properly.
The administrator initially asked Infineon to pay ?.71 billion. Infineon did not say why the amount has been nearly doubled.
Infineon is trying to boost revenue growth. Bloomberg reported this month that Peter Bauer, the newly appointed CEO, had given a cautious outlook for 2012 and said orders had fallen slightly, due to weak demand in southern Europe that countered modest improvement in Asia.
Against this backdrop of weakening sales, the Qimonda request is getting a spirited response from Infineon, which said it disagrees with the bankruptcy administrator both on the amount requested and the basis for the request.
In a response to the initial request, Infineon said the administrator had claimed that "the value of the memory business contributed to Qimonda AG as a non-cash contribution in connection with two capital increases in the spring of 2006 was not only not equivalent to the price of the new shares issued in return, namely Euro 600 million in total, but was actually negative." The company said it had "made a detailed examination of the value of the non-cash contribution, will continue to vigorously defend itself against the claims, and remains confident about the outcome of this lawsuit."
When Infineon decided to spin off its memory operation as Qimonda, pricing in the DRAM market was sinking, and few participants were turning a profit. The huge capital expenditure required to remain competitive in the sector was dragging down Infineon's more profitable business units. It seemed like a good idea at the time to spin off the operation, contribute assets and other resources, and get out of the memory business.
Qimonda was the second-largest memory maker in the market at the time of the spinoff, but it couldn't hold that position, and it slowly slid into liquidation. A court ruling against Infineon would be financially devastating for the company. It reported ?.2 billion in cash and short-term investments at the end of the first quarter, and even though it had only ?05 million of long-term debt (for a net cash position of approximately ? billion), it would still have to borrow heavily to foot a bill that large.