Elpida Memory

Company history

Financial history 2002–2011 — revenue, cost structure, balance sheet, cash flow and key ratios, year by year →

Founded
1999
Head office
Yaesu, Chuo-ku, Tokyo
Listed
2004
Founders
NEC and Hitachi (joint venture)
Delisted
2012 (bankruptcy)
Revenue · FYE Mar 2011
$6.4B (¥514bn)
Net profit · FYE Mar 2011
$26.3M (¥2bn)
Elpida Memory: long-term performance & turning pointsSales (revenue) and profit-margin ratio
Sales (¥ bn)Net margin (%)

1999What was left after everyone else quit

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
FY2002 · consolidated
Revenue$625M
Net income-$212M
Net margin-34%
FY2002 · consolidated
Revenue$625M
Net income-$212M
Net margin-34%
  1. 1999NEC Hitachi Memory incorporated in Tokyo
  2. 2000Renamed Elpida Memory; DRAM development begins
  3. 2001Construction starts on the E300Fab 300mm plant, Hiroshima
  4. 2002Share down to ~4%; parents refuse further equity

DRAM is a capital-goods business with one iron rule: whoever stops paying for the next process node loses on cost. Inside a Japanese electronics conglomerate, a memory division had to win its capital budget against every other division each year — an argument it could not keep winning against Korean rivals who simply invested. That arithmetic is why NEC and Hitachi carved their DRAM operations out rather than fix them in place, incorporating NEC Hitachi Memory in December 1999 in Yaesu, Tokyo, and renaming it Elpida Memory in May 2000.

The carve-out inherited an industry in retreat. Japanese makers had held nearly 90% of the world DRAM market in the 1980s; by the late 1990s Samsung had taken it with concentrated investment, and in the years around Elpida’s founding Fujitsu and Toshiba both walked away from DRAM. But a 50-50 joint venture is a slow machine. The roughly 15% combined share the two parents brought in had fallen by more than half by early 2003, dropping Elpida to fifth in the world; consolidated revenue for the year to March 2002 was ¥78.3 billion against a net loss of ¥26.6 billion, with only 630 employees and no fabs of its own — production was contracted out to NEC’s Hiroshima plant and Hitachi’s Singapore plant.

In February 2001 Elpida began building its own 300mm wafer fab, E300Fab, at Hiroshima. Each process generation yields more chips per wafer, so whoever spends first takes the volume profit — but the plant needed roughly $1.3B (¥160bn) in equipment against ¥52 billion of paid-in capital, the rest borrowed. When the fab opened in January 2003 at only 3,000 wafers a month, it was plainly too small to survive on, and in February 2003 NEC and Hitachi told Elpida there would be no further equity from them: find the expansion money outside. What the parents supplied instead of capital was a new chief executive.

Read the full history in Japanese →


2003An outsider cuts the parent cords

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
FY2003 · consolidated
Revenue$545M
Net income-$225M
Net margin-41.3%
FY2007 · consolidated
Revenue$4.2B
Net income$449M
Net margin10.8%
  1. 2002Sakamoto Yukio becomes president (November)
  2. 2003Mitsubishi Electric’s DRAM business absorbed; E300 Area 1 in volume production
  3. 2004Listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, First Section
  4. 2005First profitable year; E300 Area 2 starts up
  5. 2007Rexchip JV agreed with Powerchip; record ¥52.9bn net profit

In November 2002 Sakamoto Yukio became president — an outsider courted for a year by NEC’s own president after he had turned around UMC Japan. He had joined Texas Instruments Japan out of university in 1970, run a 600-person manufacturing department at thirty-one, and reached the vice-presidency by 1993. His opening promises were specific and public: profitability within a year, a stock listing within two, a top-three world share within four. He transferred every seconded parent-company employee onto Elpida’s own payroll and abolished the practice of alternating senior posts between NEC and Hitachi appointees — the point being that a company owned half-and-half decides nothing quickly.

The money then came from outside rather than from above, which also diluted the parents and so sped up decisions further. Within a year of taking office Sakamoto raised ¥170 billion, and in March 2003 Elpida absorbed Mitsubishi Electric’s DRAM business, leaving Japan with exactly one DRAM company. In November 2004 it listed on the First Section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange, issuing 31.85 million shares. The year to March 2005 brought revenue of ¥207.0 billion, roughly 2.1 times the prior year, and the first profit in the company’s history — ¥8.2 billion. High-margin non-PC chips were made in Hiroshima; commodity PC parts were farmed out to foundries such as SMIC.

The high point came in the year to March 2007: revenue of ¥490.0 billion, operating profit of ¥68.4 billion and net profit of $449.2M (¥53bn) — the largest Elpida would ever earn — with the market capitalisation reaching ¥848.8 billion in December 2006. By then Hitachi held 11% and NEC a little over 8%. The same month Sakamoto agreed with Taiwan’s Powerchip to build Rexchip, a 50-50 fab in Taichung: ¥480 billion of combined investment, 240,000 wafers a month at full tilt, on land leased from the state at ¥900,000 per hectare per month where Hiroshima industrial land sold for some ¥200 million per hectare. He announced it without consulting his former parents. “Elpida and Powerchip used to be relatives,” he said in Taipei. “From now on we are family.”

Read the full history in Japanese →


2008The price collapse, and Japan’s first corporate bailout

Revenue (¥ bn, bars) · net margin (%, line)
Source: securities reports
FY2008 · consolidated
Revenue$3.9B
Net income-$227M
Net margin-5.8%
FY2011 · consolidated
Revenue$6.4B
Net income$26M
Net margin0.4%
  1. 2008DRAM falls from $6 to under 60 cents; Hiroshima subsidiary absorbed
  2. 2009First company certified under the revised Industrial Revitalisation Act; ¥30bn from DBJ
  3. 2010Two profitable years as prices recover
  4. 2011Record ¥514.3bn revenue, ¥2.1bn profit; prices break below $1

DRAM prices began falling in late 2007 and did not stop. A 1-gigabit chip that fetched $6 was under 60 cents by December 2008 — below cost even for Samsung — because makers starved of cash in the financial crisis dumped inventory at any price. Elpida lost ¥178.9 billion in the year to March 2009 on revenue of ¥331.0 billion; interest-bearing debt swelled to ¥495.0 billion and the equity ratio fell from 46.1% to 17.3%. The company had spent through the downturn regardless, absorbing its Hiroshima production subsidiary in April 2008 and consolidating Rexchip and Tera Probe in March 2009.

On 30 June 2009 Elpida became the first ordinary company certified under the revised Industrial Revitalisation Act: the Development Bank of Japan took $320.8M (¥30bn) of preferred shares and lent ¥10 billion, with the government guaranteeing up to 80% of the investment, alongside ¥100 billion of syndicated bank lending. Officials were explicit about the motive — one METI executive said Japan could not let Korea become the sole source of DRAM. Sakamoto was equally blunt about accepting state money: surviving and being able to invest again mattered more than pride. The catch was structural. ¥30 billion was enough to postpone a crisis and not enough to make any bank an owner of the problem, and the scheme’s assumed Taiwanese alliance never materialised.

That alliance had been Sakamoto’s real strategy. He believed only two DRAM camps would survive, and spent late 2008 flying to Taiwan fortnightly to fold its six small, patent-poor makers into Rexchip — six firms investing and pricing independently were why spot prices had fallen fifteen-fold in two and a half years. One chief executive refused to sign, and Taipei set up a state holding company instead; nothing came of it. Markets recovered enough for two profitable years, and the year to March 2011 produced Elpida’s highest-ever revenue of ¥514.3 billion — but only ¥2.1 billion of net profit, with ¥337.2 billion of debt still outstanding. From the summer of 2011 spot prices fell below $1 against a break-even nearer $1.50. “We use the most advanced technology in the world,” Sakamoto told analysts, “and it sells for the price of half a rice ball.”

Read the full history in Japanese →


2012Bankruptcy, and the name that disappeared

  1. 2012Files for corporate reorganisation, 27 February, with ¥448bn of liabilities
  2. 2012Delisted from the Tokyo Stock Exchange (March)
  3. 2013Acquired by Micron Technology; the Elpida name is retired

Between January and April 2012 Elpida had to find over ¥120 billion for bond redemptions and loan repayments, and its Revitalisation Act certification expired that March. Having dealt with every bank at equal distance, it had no lead bank to organise a rescue — only the Development Bank of Japan, which in mid-December 2011 made refinancing conditional on finding a partner and adding ¥200 billion of capital. In January 2012 the METI official who had handled the earlier bailout was arrested for insider trading, which made further state help harder still.

A merger with Micron Technology had been negotiated since autumn 2011 and a scheme was agreed on 3 February 2012 — an eight-year courtship, since Micron’s chief executive Steve Appleton had been proposing it since 2004. Days later Appleton was killed in a light-aircraft crash and the deal died with him. The ¥200 billion condition remained. Sakamoto flew abroad weekly and could raise loans but not equity; on the morning of 27 February a company that had promised to buy half the Hiroshima plant did not call, and when he called at 10:30 the price did not work. That afternoon Elpida filed for corporate reorganisation at the Tokyo District Court with liabilities of $5.6B (¥448bn) — the largest manufacturing failure in Japanese history. The yen was under ¥80 to the dollar and 2-gigabit PC chips were selling below $1. The exchange delisted the shares in March.

Four bidders emerged — Micron, SK Hynix, Toshiba and China’s Hony Capital — and what they wanted was telling: Toshiba was interested in the Taiwanese Rexchip fab and, in one executive’s words, felt nothing at all for Hiroshima. Only Micron would add ¥80 billion of capital spending on top of the ¥200 billion, and in July 2013 Elpida became a Micron subsidiary. The brand vanished after fourteen years, though the contract protected the plants and no jobs were cut; Hiroshima ran flat out at 120,000 wafers a month on mobile DRAM. Sakamoto’s own verdict was that the fatal error had been the ¥30 billion of 2009: “the worst mistake was making the DBJ our lead bank for ¥30 billion — without it, some commercial bank would have stepped up.” His evidence was the quarter immediately after the sale, when the same business earned ¥39.0 billion on ¥130.0 billion of revenue. By March 2013 the yen had fallen to ¥97 and DRAM had recovered to $1.74.

Read the full history in Japanese →


Key decisions — the author’s view

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY2007

Rexchip: a 50-50 DRAM fab in Taiwan with Powerchip (2007)

What a site chosen on tax and land left behind

A lease at ¥900,000 per hectare a month, against land selling at ¥200 million a hectare. That gap is not the kind a manager’s resolve or an engineer’s skill can close. Judged against the conditions of the time, Sakamoto Yukio’s choice of Taichung was rational: alone, Elpida could not reach Samsung’s 200,000 wafers a month; with Powerchip it would reach 390,000. Building in Japan meant fewer wafers for the same money. In an industry decided by scale, location is not something a company chooses so much as something the conditions decide.

That this rationality did not mesh with the logic of public support surfaced from 2009 onward. The state’s reason for putting in ¥30 billion was to keep a DRAM industry in Japan, which does not square with having the most advanced volume production in Taichung. The clearest sign of the mismatch is that in the post-bankruptcy auction, the bidders put their money on the Taiwanese plant rather than on Hiroshima. In an age when companies choose countries, a country tried to choose its company again — and the gap between the two cast its shadow over the half-measure of the later bailout.

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY2009

Taking ¥30bn of state preferred shares under the Industrial Revitalisation Act (2009)

What the size of ¥30 billion decided

“The worst mistake was making the DBJ our lead bank for ¥30 billion. Without the DBJ, some commercial bank would have stepped up.” Eighteen months after the failure, Sakamoto Yukio named the scale of the rescue itself as the cause of it. His reading was that with borrowings on the ¥100 billion scale, as at Sharp or Renesas, the banks could not have let the company go. ¥30 billion was enough to defer the crisis and not enough to make a bank a party to it — and by taking public money, Elpida arguably closed off the space in which a private lead bank might have appeared.

Even so, one cannot say a larger cheque would have saved it. By 2009 DRAM had become an industry in which everyone except Samsung survived on their government’s or their banks’ support. Thicken the aid and you simply stay longer in that war of attrition. In fact the Taiwanese alliance written into the certification never happened, so the premise of the support collapsed in its first year. Once the state decided to keep DRAM in Japan, it had not decided how to keep it — and that is where the limit of this decision lies.

Revenue (¥ bn) · net margin % · around FY2012

Filing for corporate reorganisation and the sale to Micron Technology (2012)

Who was supposed to provide the extra year

“People say we were made to fail, but if the banks had waited one more year this would have been a hugely profitable company. It is a question of whether the banks could wait or not.” That was Sakamoto Yukio’s summing-up, and on the numbers alone he has a case. In the April–June quarter of 2013, immediately after passing to Micron, the standalone business posted ¥130.0 billion of revenue and ¥39.0 billion of net profit. The mobile-phone market it had bet on simply arrived a year late; the business itself was not dead.

But providing that year was management’s job as much as the banks’. In the year to March 2011 Elpida recorded its highest-ever revenue of ¥514.3 billion and kept ¥2.1 billion of net profit, leaving ¥337.2 billion of debt outstanding. What it failed to accumulate in the two good years determined how long it could wait in the bad one. Add that the Micron merger it had refused for eight years finally came together at the worst possible moment, only to be undone by the chance death of a chief executive, and this decision was taken within a very narrow band of available choices.

Each heading links to the full Japanese analysis — background, decision and outcome, with sources.


References & sources

This is a condensed English edition. The full, source-by-source history — with the detailed narrative, financial tables, shareholders and executives — is maintained in Japanese: 日本語版(詳細)— Elpida Memory full history in Japanese →

  1. Elpida Memory, Inc. — 有価証券報告書 (annual securities reports), years ended March 2005 through March 2011: history, selected financial data, employees and directors.
  2. Weekly Toyo Keizai — 週刊東洋経済 (Toyo Keizai Inc.): 12 Oct 2002 and 21 Dec 2002 (Intel’s stake and the state of Japanese DRAM); 22 Feb 2003 (“A turnaround man’s survival strategy”); 29 Nov 2003 (profile of Sakamoto Yukio).
  3. Weekly Toyo Keizai — 週刊東洋経済: 7/14 Aug 2004 (the listing and the Hiroshima expansion); 13 Jan 2007 (the Taiwan plant in full); 31 Jan 2009 (the semiconductor slump and industry realignment).
  4. Weekly Toyo Keizai — 週刊東洋経済: 11 Jul 2009 (“The first company bailed out with public funds”); 16 Jan 2010 (“Only two DRAM makers will survive”); 12 Nov 2011 (losses and looming repayments).
  5. Weekly Toyo Keizai — 週刊東洋経済: 10 Mar 2012 (the bankruptcy); 21 Apr 2012 (the fight over Hiroshima); 27 Apr / 4 May 2013 (“Did Japanese electronics really lose?”); 19 Oct 2013 (“The whole story of Elpida’s collapse”).
  6. Kabupro — 株主プロ, index of Elpida Memory (6665) securities reports. kabupro.jp.

Yen amounts are converted at the average rate of each figure’s own year — not today’s rate; revenue charts are shown in yen. Exchange rates & sources — the full ¥/US$ table →


Disclaimer


Data API

Elpida Memory’s history, financials, executives and shareholders are published as static JSON — no key, plain GET.

Method Endpoint Returns
GET /api/companies.json All companies
GET /api/6665/manifest.json Resource index
GET /api/6665/history.json History overview
GET /api/6665/timeline.json Chronology
GET /api/decisions.json All management decisions (index)
GET /api/6665/decisions.json Management decisions (index)
GET /api/6665/decisions/{slug}.json One decision (full dossier)
GET /api/6665/executives.json Executives
GET /api/6665/shareholders.json Major shareholders
GET /api/6665/financials.json Financial statements
GET /api/6665/financials-longterm.json Long-term results
GET /api/6665/segments.json Business segments
GET /api/6665/regions.json Sales by region
GET /api/6665/workforce.json Workforce