Source: European Parliament
Significant progress in bolstering EU defence has been made in recent years. However, the shift in United States (US) policy on Ukraine has prompted European leaders to convene several times, to coordinate their response. The European Parliament is due to discuss the future of European defence during the March plenary session.
Source: European Parliament
One of the first, and boldest, measures taken by Western countries as a response to Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 was the immobilisation of around €260 billion worth of Russian central bank assets held under their jurisdictions. In October 2024, the G7 reached an agreement on the use of the extraordinary revenues generated, to service and repay a US$50 billion loan to Ukraine from G7 countries, while the complex debate on the legality and related risks on the use of the principal capital continues. A debate on this issue, following statements by the Council and the Commission, is scheduled for the March plenary session.
Source: European Parliament
Russia’s war in Ukraine led the EU to take measures for its energy security. Three years later, the results are positive, but more can be done to further lower reliance on Russian fossil fuels and nuclear energy in the EU. The Commission is due to make a statement on the issue during the March plenary session.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra
Issues sometimes “come at you”, Anthony Albanese declared on Thursday at the end of a news conference, held at Canberra’s National Situation Room, about Cyclone Alfred.
The cyclone is a disaster for millions of people in its path. For the prime minister, it is a major political disruptor.
Albanese cancelled his visit to Western Australia: he’d wanted to be there when Labor has its anticipated certain win at Saturday’s election.
His own election planning – which seemed headed for an April 12 election called this weekend – has been thrown into some disarray (although this is contested by those involved).
Then there was the good news that was crowded out. Wednesday’s national accounts finally showed some of the much hoped-for positive trends, especially an end to the per capita recession, which had been running for seven consecutive quarters. But with the cyclone naturally dominating attention, who noticed?
Albanese’s response to the new circumstances was to place himself at the centre of the planning for the cyclone. He stood side by side with Queensland Premier David Crisafulli at his news conference on Wednesday and was early to the Situation Room on Thursday morning, promising to give regular updates.
To questions about whether he’d abandoned any thought of calling an election at the weekend, the PM insisted (unconvincingly) that politics was furthest from his mind. Though announcing an election would appear near impossible in the circumstances, and attention had already begun turning to a May date (and a budget beforehand), Albanese on Thursday wouldn’t be drawn. Basically, he was waiting to see what happened with the weather.
The cyclone will be a passing disruptor. The disruption from the Trump administration will be with Australia (and the world) for the foreseeable future.
Next week Australia will know whether its intense lobbying for an exemption from the US tariffs on aluminium and steel has been effective. Those around the government are not optimistic.
More concerning than the immediate impact on Australia if we fail to win the exemption is the effect of US protectionism more generally.
Reserve Bank deputy Governor Andrew Hauser confirmed this week that “from a macroeconomic perspective, Australia’s direct exposure to US tariffs levied on our exports is limited”.
“[But] Australia is heavily integrated into, and reliant on, the global economy more broadly – and particularly China. Hence the bigger macroeconomic risk for us would be if the imposition of US tariffs on third countries triggered a global trade war that impaired our trade and financial linkages more broadly.
“As Australia’s long history has shown, we thrive when trade, labour and assets flow freely in the global economy, but we suffer when countries turn inwards.”
How disruptive this new world will be to the Australian economy can’t be known but it could make things very difficult for a second term Albanese government or a first term Dutton one.
As Trump tries to force a settlement on Ukraine, there’s been increasing attention on the Europeans’ plans to boost their defence expenditure. This week, we started to feel the heat on Australia to do the same.
Trump’s nominee for Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Elbridge Colby told the US Senate Committee on Armed Services, in a written answer during his confirmation hearing, that “Australia is a core U.S. ally. […] The main concern the United States should press with Australia, consistent with the President’s approach, is higher defense spending. Australia is currently well below the 3% level advocated for by NATO Secretary General Rutte, and Canberra faces a far more powerful challenge in China.”
Presently Australia’s defence spending is about 2% of GDP, projected to increase to 2.4% by 2033–34.The Coalition has said it would spend more than Labor (but has not specified how much more).
Defence Minister Richard Marles said he could “obviously understand the US administration seeking for its friends and allies around the world to do more. That’s a conversation that we will continue to have with the US administration. […] But it’s really important to understand we are increasing that spending right now.”
It’s also important to understand that if Australia must ramp up defence further or faster than present plans, that will suck funds from other priorities, putting another squeeze on future governments.
Trump’s bullying of Ukraine and its leader Volodymyr Zelensky has not weakened the bipartisan support in Australia for Ukraine.
But a difference has emerged over whether Australia should (if asked) take part in any peacekeeping force. Peter Dutton said this role should be left to the Europeans. But Albanese flagged his government would consider it, pointing to the many other peacekeeping operations we have participated in.
Former prime minister Scott Morrison got on well with Trump during the president’s first term and has become even more signed up since. The Morrisons were at Mar-a-Lago for New Year’s eve.
Morrison was distinctly sympathetic to Trump’s approach when talking this week about Ukraine. He told an Australian Financial Review dinner, “Do we just keep fighting this war every day? The alternative is to find a peace that can be secured.
“There was no conversation, no real conversation, about peace in Ukraine up until now.” Zelensky had the “most to gain” from negotiating to end the war, he said.
Morrison is affiliated with lobbying firm American Global Strategies, which has links to the Trump administration. Colby is listed as a senior adviser. The chairman and founder of the group, Robert C. O’Brien, was formerly a national security adviser to Trump.
Morrison is one of a number of former senior Australian political figures who have a current professional or commercial lock-in to Washington politics.
Former Liberal treasurer Joe Hockey, who was close to the Trump White House when Hockey was ambassador in 2016-20, is founder and global president of Bondi Partners, a lobbying firm that operates between the US and Australia.
Another former Australian ambassador to Washington, Arthur Sinodinos, is based in Washington as a partner in the Asia Group, a strategic advisory firm.
Meanwhile former PM Kevin Rudd, as Australian ambassador in Washington, is trying to amplify Australia’s official voice with the administration.
Speculation continues about Rudd’s future if the government changed. Dutton says that would depend on how effective Rudd was, saying his present instinct would be leave him in the job.
Others are sceptical this would happen, and raise Morrison’s name as a possible replacement. Morrison has reportedly told people he would not want the post. But you couldn’t rule it out.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Grattan on Friday: Anthony Albanese beset by disruptors, from Cyclone Alfred to Donald Trump – https://theconversation.com/grattan-on-friday-anthony-albanese-beset-by-disruptors-from-cyclone-alfred-to-donald-trump-251258
Source: United Nations MIL OSI b
“Our world is going through a period of turbulence and unpredictability, reflected in growing conflict and divided societies,” Türk told the Human Rights Council.
“We cannot allow the fundamental global consensus around international norms and institutions, built painstakingly over decades, to crumble before our eyes.”
Presenting his global update covering more than 30 countries, the High Commissioner described as “outrageous” the fact that legal safeguards for non-combatants were being repeatedly ignored.
“Civilians are deliberately attacked. Sexual violence and famine are used as weapons of war,” Mr. Türk said. “Humanitarian access is denied, while weapons flow across borders and circumvent international sanctions. And humanitarian workers are targeted. In 2024, a record 356 humanitarian workers were killed while providing aid to people in some of the world’s most appalling crises.”
In Sudan, the High Commissioner once again condemned devastating bomb attacks launched in heavily built-up areas with total impunity, by the parties to the conflict.
All the while, the world’s worst humanitarian catastrophe deepens, threatening regional stability, he maintained: “Civilians are paying an unbearable price, in a naked struggle for power and resources. All countries must use their influence to apply pressure on the parties and their allies, to stop the war, embark on an inclusive dialogue, and transition to a civilian-led Government.”
Turning to Ukraine, whose future material support from the United States appeared unclear following televised disagreements between Presidents Trump and Zelensky at a White House meeting on Friday, Mr. Türk opposed any peace deal that excluded Ukraine.
“Three years since the full-scale Russian invasion, people continue to suffer appallingly…Any discussions about ending the war must include Ukrainians and fully respect their human rights. Sustainable peace must be based on the United Nations Charter and international law.”
Civilian casualties in Ukraine rose by 30 per cent between 2023 and 2024, the High Commissioner continued, as he accused Russia’s armed forces of systematically targeting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure with coordinated strikes, causing widespread disruptions to essential services.
“Relentless attacks with aerial glide bombs, long-range missiles and drones have placed civilians in a state of constant insecurity and fear,” Mr. Türk noted.
Ukrainian prisoners also continue to face summary executions and “widespread and systematic torture” by Russian forces, he continued.
In the Occupied Palestinian Territory, the UN rights chief insisted that the fragile ceasefire holds in Gaza “and becomes the basis for peace”.
He also insisted that aid deliveries into Gaza should resume immediately, just as Israel announced a halt to aid flowing into the shattered enclave, having proposed extending the first phase of the ceasefire which ended at the weekend and which would allow Israeli troops to stay in Gaza.
UN aid chief Tom Fletcher responded with alarm to the Israeli decision, insisting that the ceasefire “must hold”.
In an online appeal, he added: “International humanitarian law is clear: We must be allowed access to deliver vital lifesaving aid. We can’t roll back the progress of the past 42 days. We need to get aid in and the hostages out.”
Back in the Council, Mr. Türk explained that the Gaza had been “razed” by constant Israeli bombardment in response to the “horrific” Hamas-led attacks on Israel that sparked the war in October 2023. “Any solution to the cycles of violence must be rooted in human rights, including the right to self-determination, the rule of law and accountability. All hostages must be freed; all those detained arbitrarily must be released; and humanitarian aid into Gaza must resume immediately.”
Reflecting deep concerns by humanitarians and the human rights community about Israeli military raids on Palestinian settlements in the West Bank, the UN High Commissioner insisted that Israel’s “unilateral actions and threats of annexation in the West Bank, in violation of international law, must stop”.
Mr. Türk also condemned the use of “military weapons and tactics, including tanks and airstrikes, against Palestinians”. Equally worrying was “the destruction and emptying of refugee camps, the expansion of illegal settlements, the severe restrictions on movement and the displacement of tens of thousands of people”.
Turning to the conflict in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo, the High Commissioner underscored that entire communities in North and South Kivu had been devastated.
“In the past five weeks, thousands of people have reportedly been killed during attacks by the M23 armed group, backed by the Rwandan Armed Forces, in intense fighting against the Armed Forces of the DRC and their allies,” the UN rights chief said, pointing to reports of rape, sexual slavery and summary executions.
“More than half a million people have been forced to flee this year, adding to almost 7.8 million people already displaced in the country,” Mr. Türk said. “The violence must stop, violations by all parties must be investigated, and dialogue must resume.”
© WFP/Michael Castofas
More than half a million people have been forced to flee DR Congo this year.
Moving on to the ongoing escalation of violence in Myanmar sparked by the military coup on 1 February 2021, the UN rights chief noted that 2024 was the deadliest year for civilians since the junta takeover.
“The military ramped up brutal attacks on civilians as their grip on power eroded, with retaliatory airstrikes and artillery shelling of villages and urban areas…and the forcible conscription of thousands of young people,” he said, before calling for the supply of arms and finance to the country’s military’s to be “cut decisively”.
The UN rights chief also expressed deep concerns about chronic lawlessness and heavily armed clashes in Haiti involving gangs that humanitarians warned last week recruit children as young as eight. More than 5,600 people were killed last year and thousands more were injured or kidnapped, Mr. Türk told the Human Rights Council.
“Full implementation of the Security Council‘s arms embargo and support to the Multinational Security Support Mission are crucial to resolving this crisis,” he insisted.
On Yemen, the High Commissioner noted that amid ongoing hostilities, nearly 20 million Yemenis need humanitarian support. Mr. Türk also expressed his outrage at the death of a UN World Food Programme colleague in detention earlier this month. “All 23 UN staff – including eight colleagues from my own Office – who are arbitrarily detained by the Houthis must be released immediately.”
In a half-hour address to the Council that traditionally highlights the most worrying emergencies in the world and the need to tackle their root causes, the UN rights chief issued a call for greater global solidarity and accountability for crimes as a way to push back against those who would violate fundamental freedoms.
“We all have a responsibility to act – through our consumption habits, our social media use, and our political and social engagement,” he told the Council’s 47 Member States.
“We can trace a clear line between the lack of accountability for airstrikes on hospitals in Syria in the 2010s, attacks on healthcare facilities in Yemen, and the destruction of health systems in Gaza and Sudan,” he continued.
Equally alarming is the rise of unelected and unregulated “tech oligarchs” who reflect the new global power dynamic, Mr. Türk warned, before urging governments to fulfil their primary purpose of protecting their people from unchecked power.
Today’s tech oligarchs “have our data: they know where we live, what we do, our genes and our health conditions, our thoughts, our habits, our desires and our fears…And they know how to manipulate us,” the High Commissioner insisted.
“I have followed recent election campaigns in Europe, North America and beyond with increasing trepidation. Single-issue soundbites devoid of substance oversimplify complex issues and are often based on scapegoating, disinformation, and dehumanization,” he continued.
“Dehumanization is a well-worn step towards treating an entire group as outsiders, unworthy of the basic rights we all enjoy. It is a dangerous precursor to hate and violence and must be called out whenever it occurs.”
UN Human Rights Council/Marie Bambi
Volker Türk, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, presents his latest report on the obligation to ensure accountability and justice in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.
The High Commissioner also voiced his concern about the resurgence of toxic ideas about masculinity and efforts to glorify gender stereotypes, especially among young men.
To blame for this are “misogynistic influencers” with millions of followers on social media who “are hailed as heroes”, Mr. Türk said.
Online and offline, their ideas push back against gender equality and result in “violence and hateful rhetoric against women, women’s rights defenders, and women politicians”, the High Commissioner continued.
In a message of solidarity with people who have been left “feeling alienated and abandoned” by such malign influences, Mr. Türk insisted that the United Nations was by their side. “Your concerns are our concerns, because they are about human rights: to education, to health, to housing, to free speech, and access to justice. Human rights are about people’s daily concerns for their families and their future. We must cherish the values of respect, unity and solidarity; and work together for a safer, more just, more sustainable world. We can and will persevere,” he concluded.
Source: European Commission (video statements)
EU leaders are meeting for a special summit to discuss continued support for Ukraine and European defence.
Press conference by António COSTA, President of the European Council and Ursula von der LEYEN, President of the European Commission
Follow us on:
-X: https://twitter.com/EU_Commission
-Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/europeancommission/
-Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/EuropeanCommission
-LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/european-commission/
-Medium: https://medium.com/@EuropeanCommission
Visit our website: http://ec.europa.eu
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
ING publishes 2024 Annual Report
ING today published its 2024 Annual Report, giving stakeholders an insight into our strategy, business activities and performance over the past year. Our activities are presented in the context of our strategic priorities: providing a superior customer experience and putting sustainability at the heart of what we do.
“We have had a solid year on all counts in 2024; we were able to deliver on our promises on the basis of a very strong financial performance. This would not have been possible without the dedication of our more than 60,000 colleagues in 36 countries serving our customers worldwide, and we thank them for their hard work and collaboration,” write chairman Karl Guha and CEO Steven van Rijswijk in their message to shareholders and stakeholders. “We believe that ING is well positioned, and we are confident in our ability to navigate through the existing and emerging challenges as we continue to deliver on our promises.”
This report features the report of the Executive Board, the consolidated and parent company financial statements and other information. The report of the Executive Board includes the sustainability statement which is prepared in accordance with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), as delegated by the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD).
The 2024 Annual Report is available to download on ing.com, along with the 2024 ING Bank Annual Report, Pillar III Report, and other relevant documents.
Note for editors
For more on ING, please visit www.ing.com. Frequent news updates can be found in the Newsroom. Photos of ING operations, buildings and its executives are available for download at Flickr.
ING PROFILE
ING is a global financial institution with a strong European base, offering banking services through its operating company ING Bank. The purpose of ING Bank is: empowering people to stay a step ahead in life and in business. ING Bank’s more than 60,000 employees offer retail and wholesale banking services to customers in over 100 countries.
ING Group shares are listed on the exchanges of Amsterdam (INGA NA, INGA.AS), Brussels and on the New York Stock Exchange (ADRs: ING US, ING.N).
ING aims to put sustainability at the heart of what we do. Our policies and actions are assessed by independent research and ratings providers, which give updates on them annually. ING’s ESG rating by MSCI was reconfirmed by MSCI as ‘AA’ in August 2024 for the fifth year. As of December 2023, in Sustainalytics’ view, ING’s management of ESG material risk is ‘Strong’. Our current ESG Risk Rating, is 17.2 (Low Risk). ING Group shares are also included in major sustainability and ESG index products of leading providers. Here are some examples: Euronext, STOXX, Morningstar and FTSE Russell. Society is transitioning to a low-carbon economy. So are our clients, and so is ING. We finance a lot of sustainable activities, but we still finance more that’s not. Follow our progress on ing.com/climate.
IMPORTANT LEGAL INFORMATION
Elements of this press release contain or may contain information about ING Groep N.V. and/ or ING Bank N.V. within the meaning of Article 7(1) to (4) of EU Regulation No 596/2014 (‘Market Abuse Regulation’).
ING Group’s annual accounts are prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards as adopted by the European Union (‘IFRS- EU’). In preparing the financial information in this document, except as described otherwise, the same accounting principles are applied as in the 2024 ING Group consolidated annual accounts. All figures in this document are unaudited. Small differences are possible in the tables due to rounding. Certain of the statements contained herein are not historical facts, including, without limitation, certain statements made of future expectations and other forward-looking statements that are based on management’s current views and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in such statements. Actual results, performance or events may differ materially from those in such statements due to a number of factors, including, without limitation: (1) changes in general economic conditions and customer behaviour, in particular economic conditions in ING’s core markets, including changes affecting currency exchange rates and the regional and global economic impact of the invasion of Russia into Ukraine and related international response measures (2) changes affecting interest rate levels (3) any default of a major market participant and related market disruption (4) changes in performance of financial markets, including in Europe and developing markets (5) fiscal uncertainty in Europe and the United States (6) discontinuation of or changes in ‘benchmark’ indices (7) inflation and deflation in our principal markets (8) changes in conditions in the credit and capital markets generally, including changes in borrower and counterparty creditworthiness (9) failures of banks falling under the scope of state compensation schemes (10) non- compliance with or changes in laws and regulations, including those concerning financial services, financial economic crimes and tax laws, and the interpretation and application thereof (11) geopolitical risks, political instabilities and policies and actions of governmental and regulatory authorities, including in connection with the invasion of Russia into Ukraine and the related international response measures (12) legal and regulatory risks in certain countries with less developed legal and regulatory frameworks (13) prudential supervision and regulations, including in relation to stress tests and regulatory restrictions on dividends and distributions (also among members of the group) (14) ING’s ability to meet minimum capital and other prudential regulatory requirements (15) changes in regulation of US commodities and derivatives businesses of ING and its customers (16) application of bank recovery and resolution regimes, including write down and conversion powers in relation to our securities (17) outcome of current and future litigation, enforcement proceedings, investigations or other regulatory actions, including claims by customers or stakeholders who feel misled or treated unfairly, and other conduct issues (18) changes in tax laws and regulations and risks of non-compliance or investigation in connection with tax laws, including FATCA (19) operational and IT risks, such as system disruptions or failures, breaches of security, cyber-attacks, human error, changes in operational practices or inadequate controls including in respect of third parties with which we do business and including any risks as a result of incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise flawed outputs from the algorithms and data sets utilized in artificial intelligence (20) risks and challenges related to cybercrime including the effects of cyberattacks and changes in legislation and regulation related to cybersecurity and data privacy, including such risks and challenges as a consequence of the use of emerging technologies, such as advanced forms of artificial intelligence and quantum computing (21) changes in general competitive factors, including ability to increase or maintain market share (22) inability to protect our intellectual property and infringement claims by third parties (23) inability of counterparties to meet financial obligations or ability to enforce rights against such counterparties (24) changes in credit ratings (25) business, operational, regulatory, reputation, transition and other risks and challenges in connection with climate change, diversity, equity and inclusion and other ESG-related matters, including data gathering and reporting and also including managing the conflicting laws and requirements of governments, regulators and authorities with respect to these topics (26) inability to attract and retain key personnel (27) future liabilities under defined benefit retirement plans (28) failure to manage business risks, including in connection with use of models, use of derivatives, or maintaining appropriate policies and guidelines (29) changes in capital and credit markets, including interbank funding, as well as customer deposits, which provide the liquidity and capital required to fund our operations, and (30) the other risks and uncertainties detailed in the most recent annual report of ING Groep N.V. (including the Risk Factors contained therein) and ING’s more recent disclosures, including press releases, which are available on www.ING.com.
This document may contain ESG-related material that has been prepared by ING on the basis of publicly available information, internally developed data and other third-party sources believed to be reliable. ING has not sought to independently verify information obtained from public and third-party sources and makes no representations or warranties as to accuracy, completeness, reasonableness or reliability of such information.
Materiality, as used in the context of ESG, is distinct from, and should not be confused with, such term as defined in the Market Abuse Regulation or as defined for Securities and Exchange Commission (‘SEC’) reporting purposes. Any issues identified as material for purposes of ESG in this document are therefore not necessarily material as defined in the Market Abuse Regulation or for SEC reporting purposes. In addition, there is currently no single, globally recognized set of accepted definitions in assessing whether activities are “green” or “sustainable.” Without limiting any of the statements contained herein, we make no representation or warranty as to whether any of our securities constitutes a green or sustainable security or conforms to present or future investor expectations or objectives for green or sustainable investing. For information on characteristics of a security, use of proceeds, a description of applicable project(s) and/or any other relevant information, please reference the offering documents for such security.
This document may contain inactive textual addresses to internet websites operated by us and third parties. Reference to such websites is made for information purposes only, and information found at such websites is not incorporated by reference into this document. ING does not make any representation or warranty with respect to the accuracy or completeness of, or take any responsibility for, any information found at any websites operated by third parties. ING specifically disclaims any liability with respect to any information found at websites operated by third parties. ING cannot guarantee that websites operated by third parties remain available following the publication of this document, or that any information found at such websites will not change following the filing of this document. Many of those factors are beyond ING’s control.
Any forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of ING speak only as of the date they are made, and ING assumes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information or for any other reason.
This document does not constitute an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to purchase, any securities in the United States or any other jurisdiction.
Attachment
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ben Wellings, Associate Professor in Politics and International Relations, Monash University
There’s been some “great television” this past week for those who like to watch the end of the West.
The US president and vice-president effectively sided with Russia in an attempt to bring the war in Ukraine to an end in a way that benefits a) the United States, b) the US president’s vanity, and c) Vladimir Putin.
But every crisis also provides an opportunity. The UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, grasped the chance to slough off his uninspiring domestic image as he sought to keep the US engaged in negotiations and preserve a semblance of Ukrainian sovereignty.
In truth, Starmer’s diplomacy continues the policy of the previous government, which made Ukraine the crucible for Britain’s post-Brexit reintegration into European diplomacy.
Since the Russian invasion of 2022, Britain distinguished itself as one of Ukraine’s most vociferous backers. It provided strident rhetorical support alongside around £13 billion in aid since the conflict began.
Like his predecessors, Starmer’s support for Ukraine has offered respite from domestic challenges. His recent advocacy has led to a three-month high in the polls, albeit with a still dismal net approval rating of -28.
But we shouldn’t be overly cynical. His government has provided us with a framework to understand its approach. According to the doctrine of Progressive Realism, the UK government’s foreign policy reflects a “tough-minded” assessment of Britain’s position within the balance of power as it pursues enlightened ends.
The initial fit is evident: throughout his advocacy, Starmer’s continued appeals for a US backstop indicate awareness of British limitations while championing Ukrainian self-determination.
However, increasing Britain’s military budget to counter Russia at the expense of the country’s overseas aid budget is hardly progressive, as both Starmer and UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy have previously noted. Most recently, in Lammy’s case, this concerned Trump’s cuts to USAID last month.
To his credit, Starmer has recognised that Britain cannot deter Russia alone, and is assembling a “coalition of the willing”. However, even with France and smaller players such as the Scandinavians, Canadians and Australians, this may well be insufficient. Hence the ongoing appeals to the US for security guarantees that it is clearly unwilling to provide.
If we accept Einstein’s famous definition of insanity as doing the same thing and expecting different results, how should we interpret Starmer’s plans?
Amid all the crisis diplomacy and commentary suggesting this might be the end of the trans-Atlantic alliance, continuity as well as change can be observed.
One of the most striking examples is the extent to which Starmer emphasises Britain’s longstanding self-perception as a “bridge” between the US and Europe. While recent turmoil has prompted Germany’s new Chancellor Friedrich Merz to declare the need for strategic independence from the US, Starmer continues to depict the US as the “indispensable” ally with whom Britain must strengthen ties.
Considered alongside Britain’s deep integration in the US’s defence and intelligence architecture, including through AUKUS – with which Trump seemed unfamiliar – it is unlikely Britain will break with America. In fact, it may even strengthen its relationship if Trump’s remarks about a UK-US trade agreement are to be believed.
For some, these structural explanations suffice when considering Britain’s commitment to the “special relationship” and its identity as the transatlantic bridge. However, psychological factors are also worth considering. Britain’s relationship with the US has been a crucial element of Britain’s pretensions to global leadership since the second world war.
The uncomfortable truth about bridges is that they get walked over, as was evident when Starmer was blindsided by the US decision to suspend military aid to Ukraine.
With regard to Europe, it is another case of “plus ça change”. As in 1945, Europe again finds itself caught in the middle between Russia and the US. Critics might say the Europeans should have seen this coming.
Following the 2022 invasion, Germany, Europe’s most significant economy, proclaimed the moment as one of Zeitenwende, or a “turning point”. However, it subsequently failed to fully substantiate the claim.
Recently, President of the European Commission and former German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen has proposed a “Rearm Europe Plan” that could see up to €800 billion (A$1.36 trillion) allocated to European defence. Whether this materialises remains to be seen.
France has sought to assume its traditional leading role in advocating for Europe’s strategic autonomy from the US. President Emmanuel Macron has been a prominent figure, but his plan for a partial one-month truce has garnered only lukewarm support.
However, Putin and Trump do have their admirers in Europe. What is perhaps surprising is that some of this has been too much even for the radical right to stomach – Nigel Farage, for example, leaped to Britain’s defence after Vance’s disparaging remarks. This only underscores the differences in attitudes towards Ukraine between MAGA Americans and Europeans.
Starmer has undoubtedly secured diplomatic plaudits. However, the structural forces at play suggest that his “coalition of the willing”, if it sticks to outdated ideas, will struggle to make liberal democracy great again, much as that is needed.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Can the UK prime minister make liberal democracies great again? – https://theconversation.com/can-the-uk-prime-minister-make-liberal-democracies-great-again-251360
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Harrington, Associate Professor, School of Communication, Queensland University of Technology
It’s hard to keep track of US President Donald Trump’s many notable acts since returning to the White House. His recent pro-Russia stance on the war in Ukraine has, rightly, received a lot of attention.
But for every big moment, there are others that fly under the radar. One such issue is the politicisation of the Department of Justice (DoJ).
Although there is longstanding precedent that the DoJ remains politically neutral in its operations, recent events have indicated a dramatic break from that tradition.
And, importantly, Trump has been laying the groundwork to justify this for nearly two years, using a propaganda tactic that’s been employed by authoritarian governments throughout history.
The current administration has attempted to fire or sideline anyone at the DoJ who was involved with prior investigations and prosecutions of the now-president.
This includes special counsel Jack Smith’s investigations into several aspects of Trump’s wrongdoing, which have since ended. Several lawyers have been fired, ostensibly because “the Acting Attorney-General does not trust these officials to assist in faithfully implementing the President’s agenda”.
This action is not only vindictive, but likely designed to intimidate would-be investigators and make them think twice before further examining any wrongdoing by Trump or his associates.
Equally noteworthy has been the department’s attempts to drop corruption charges against New York mayor Eric Adams.
The official reason is that pursuing the charges might “interfere” with Adams’ reelection campaign.
In reality, however, Adams has been accused of cutting a deal with the administration: he agrees to assist with Trump’s immigration crackdown in return for having the charges against him withdrawn (although not dropped entirely).
Adams denies the existence of a quid pro quo, but he did joke about it on national television with Tom Homan, Trump’s “Border Czar”.
So deeply problematic was all this that two US attorneys for the Southern District of New York opted to resign in protest, rather than be party to what they saw as a nakedly corrupt act.
The whole scenario is eerily reminiscent of 1973’s “Saturday Night Massacre”, when President Richard Nixon ordered his Attorney-General Elliot Richardson to fire the special prosecutor investigating the Watergate scandal.
Nixon eventually had his way, but not before refusals and resignations from both Richardson, and the Deputy Attorney-General William Ruckleshaus.
But, where Nixon’s move dramatically hastened his own downfall, Trump’s actions have barely raised an eyebrow. Why?
The answer lies in a propaganda technique known as “accusation in a mirror”, which entails accusing one’s opponents of the very wrongdoing one plans to commit.
As one legal scholar explains, it’s:
a rhetorical practice in which one falsely accuses one’s enemies of conducting, plotting, or desiring to commit precisely the same transgressions that one plans to commit against them.
Accusation in a mirror has been used in the past, including in the Rwandan genocide. There, trusted voices claimed the Tutsi wanted to “exterminate” the Hutu. Tragically, it helped bring about the exact opposite circumstance.
Similarly, in February 2022 Russian President Vladimir Putin accused the Ukrainian government of committing genocide against Russian-speaking populations in the Donbas region. This baseless accusation provided a justification for invading Ukraine, which mirrored Russia’s own indiscriminate shelling of Ukrainian civilians.
We suggest Trump has been using this technique since he was first criminally indicted, in early 2023, on 34 felony charges related to the falsification of business records. He and his supporters have insisted the department, under President Joe Biden, was “weaponised” against him.
Trump repeatedly claimed those charges – and subsequent indictments – were a politically motivated “witch hunt”. He reiterated these claims in his first speech to Congress.
Many elected Republicans have also supported and amplified that narrative.
These claims of victimhood have helped prime Trump’s base to appraise any subsequent legal scrutiny of him as purely partisan, and therefore invalid.
In reality, the facts were straightforward. Prosecutors were sure there was enough proof to proceed with the case, including evidence Trump illegally kept classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence, and obstructed attempts to retrieve them.
In a functioning legal system, nobody is “above the law”. This means even former presidents can be prosecuted if there’s enough evidence.
Yet Trump’s accusations of a partisan DoJ completely reframed legitimate investigations into alleged political vendettas. In doing so, it effectively justified his subsequent decisions.
The idea that “if they did it to me, I’m entitled to do it back” was made explicit by Trump in late 2023.
When asked if he would use the DoJ to go after his political rivals, Trump argued he would only be levelling the playing field, stating:
they’ve already done it, but if they want to follow through on this, yeah, it could certainly happen in reverse.
In short, Trump’s false claim of being victimised by a politicised DoJ served as moral cover for his own politicisation of it.
This is a textbook example of how accusation in a mirror can help manufacture the reality it pretends to condemn.
This tactic has long been a play by totalitarian and authoritarian leaders.
Foundational propaganda scholars such as Hannah Arendt and Jacques Ellul highlighted how authoritarian rulers often repeat falsehoods – flipping the aggressor and victim – until the masses become desensitised, alienated and confused.
Once enough people believe the system is already corrupt and untrustworthy, they are less likely to be shocked by an actual purge (such as firing DoJ officials).
The implications of such tactics extend internationally, not just to the US.
History cries out to us about the risks of this sort of public discourse. It erodes trust in institutions and liberal democratic processes, paving the road for leaders to undermine them further, corrupting the system in the name of rooting out corruption.
Ultimately, one of the best antidotes is awareness. By exposing these tactics, we can better safeguard against disinformation, protect the rule of law and hold leaders accountable.
Stephen Harrington receives funding from the Australian Research Council, for the Discovery Project ‘Understanding and Combatting “Dark Political Communication”‘.
Timothy Graham receives funding from the Australian Research Council (ARC) for his Discovery Early Career Researcher Award, ‘Combatting Coordinated Inauthentic Behaviour on Social Media’. He also receives ARC funding for the Discovery Project, ‘Understanding and Combatting “Dark Political Communication”‘.
– ref. How Trump is weaponising the Department of Justice, and the ‘dark’ tactic he’s using to get away with it – https://theconversation.com/how-trump-is-weaponising-the-department-of-justice-and-the-dark-tactic-hes-using-to-get-away-with-it-250760
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator Tommy Tuberville (Alabama)
WASHINGTON – Today,U.S. Senator Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) spoke with Dr. Jayanta Bhattacharya, President Trump’s nominee to lead the National Institutes of Health (NIH) during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee. During his remarks, Bhattacharya explained his plan to root out waste within the NIH and how he will earn back the trust of the American people by ensuring transparency.
Read Sen. Tuberville’s remarks below or on YouTube or Rumble.
TUBERVILLE: “Thank you doctor for being here. It’s always good to run into somebody that’s name’s harder to say than mine and mispronounced more.
You’ve got a hard job in front of you, but I share the ideas and desire that the President has to root out waste and the fraud that we have in this country. Because if we don’t, we’re not gonna have a country left. It’s gonna be gone. And he’s doing the right thing. You’re gonna have a tough job. You’re gonna have to put your team together and do the same thing. We have got to make sure we use American taxpayers’ money the right way.
So, kind of give me your plan of how you’re gonna do this—when you come into office and are confirmed how you’re gonna put your team together?”
BHATTACHARYA: “Thanks Senator, I should say this: I have a background as an economist as well as being a doctor. And to me, that background, what it leads me to do is understand that every dollar wasted on a frivolous study is a dollar not spent—every dollar wasted on administrative costs that are not needed—is a dollar not spent on research. The team I’m gonna put together is gonna be hyper-focused to make sure that the portfolio grants that the NIH funds is devoted to the chronic disease problems of this country. It’s gonna be devoted to making sure we have not just incremental progress, but research projects that have the capacity to make huge advances in treatment for cancer, for diabetes, for obesity. That’s how I’m going to decide what the team is.
And the NIH […], I’m blessed in some ways because it already has so many excellent scientists there to advise me on the on the areas I don’t know about. And I wanna tap [into] that resource. I wanna make sure I talk to every single person who who’s already a leader at the NIH to understand where those opportunities are.”
TUBERVILLE: “Yeah. Well, thank you.
You know, for the past four years, I’ve been on this Committee, and we’ve obviously gone through COVID [which was] devastating to not just our country, but the world.
Transparency and trust is gonna have to be earned again from a lot of people. Most people across this country don’t know what the hell NIH stands for. Okay? But now they do because of COVID. You said that science has to be reliable, exactly. But people also have to trust, you know, we’re finding out now we have biolabs in Ukraine—where a war is going on, and we’re funding them.
I mean, and so you’ve got to be on top of that, and the American people have to trust you that you will say, ‘Listen, we’re gonna keep an eye on, you know, the biolabs in North Carolina,’ or wherever we have them. Because it scares me to death of what’s going on.
What’s your plan there of getting trust back in this country?”
BHATTACHARYA: “Senator first of all […], I want to work with Congress to make sure that there’s appropriate regulation of any risky research. The NIH […] I don’t think should be doing any research that has the potential to cause a pandemic. And I want to work with Congress to make sure that happens.
As far as trust, I think the key thing is we have to be utterly open, if I’m confirmed, I’ll be at the head of an organization that’s a scientific organization. As a citizen, I would often look for FOIA responses from the NIH Freedom Information Act request, and they’d be fully redacted during the pandemic.
You can’t have trust unless you are transparent. And if I’m confirmed as an NIH Director, I fully commit to making sure that the American people can see all of the activities of the NIH openly, with limited sort of obfuscation. [The NIH has been characterized this way], I think unfortunately, [because of the] way that they’ve interacted with American people.”
TUBERVILLE: “And I think that starts with being very visual on television, telling people, you know, the truth. Don’t hide anything because we’ve been hiding things for years and that that doesn’t work. We found that out.
You know, Chairman Cassidy and I led a letter to the NIH under the last administration asking questions about a grant that the NIH funded focused on children transitioning genders. The study followed all these children—two of them committed suicide. Devastating.
So, how can we ensure the NIH doesn’t grant funds to things like this?”
BHATTACHARYA: “Well, first of all, I think it’s if you have a negative result and it’s politically inconvenient to you, usually, you have an obligation to scientists to report it. Right?
So, the NIH funds a study that shows that the gender transition doesn’t reduce suicide rate among, you know, adolescents. That researcher has an obligation to report it even though she may think it’s politically inconvenient. So, I wanna make sure that NIH research is required to report even negative results. And there’s ways to do that we can talk about.
But I think as far as, like, the prioritization of studies, as I was telling Senator Paul, I think we wanna make sure that the studies are focused on the diseases that really are hurting Americans—obesity—a lot of the research that, you know, it’s so easy to come up with, examples of this. One of a shrimp on a treadmill for instance, that was once funded. It’s not that I’m necessarily against research like that, but the American taxpayer should be focused on the needs of American taxpayers. And the research should be focused on those needs, the health needs of Americans. And I want to make sure that the NIH, if confirmed, focuses on exactly that.”
TUBERVILLE: “Thank you. Good luck.”
BHATTACHARYA: “Thank you so much.”
Senator Tommy Tuberville represents Alabama in the United States Senate and is a member of the Senate Armed Services, Agriculture, Veterans’ Affairs, HELP, and Aging Committees.
Source: China State Council Information Office
Flags of European Union (EU) and Ukraine are seen at the EU headquarters in Brussels, Belgium, Feb. 24, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]
French President Emmanuel Macron announced on Wednesday that he has decided to open strategic discussions with European allies on potential nuclear protection.
“Responding to the historic call of the future German chancellor, I have decided to open a strategic debate on the protection of our allies in Europe through our (nuclear) deterrent,” Macron said in a televised address.
Speaking on Europe’s defense and Ukraine, he emphasized that France’s nuclear deterrent has played a role in maintaining peace and security in Europe.
On Ukraine, Macron asserted that the country has “the right to peace and security for itself, and it is in the interest of the European continent’s security.” He stressed the need to ensure that any future peace, once achieved, is sustainable.
“This will certainly require long-term support for the Ukrainian army and could potentially involve deploying European forces,” he said.
However, Macron clarified that such European forces would not engage in frontline combat but would instead help ensure that peace is upheld once secured.
He also announced that France would host a meeting next week with countries willing to contribute to future European forces to be deployed in Ukraine.
Source: China State Council Information Office
U.S. President Donald Trump (2nd L) welcomes Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (2nd R) at the White House in Washington, D.C., the United States, on Feb. 28, 2025. [Photo/Xinhua]
The director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency said Wednesday that the United States has paused intelligence support to Ukraine, on top of halting weapons shipments to the country that’s still at war with Russia.
John Ratcliffe, the CIA chief, said in an interview with Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo that “(U.S. President) Trump had a real question about whether President Zelensky was committed to the peace process, and he said let’s pause.”
The decision came after a clash between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House on Friday, where Trump demanded gratitude from Zelensky for the aid Washington provided to Kiev. The Ukrainian leader was asked to leave the White House without signing a minerals deal with Trump as originally planned.
Zelensky has since been trying to mend the relationship with the U.S. administration by efforts including sending a letter to Trump expressing his willingness “to come to the negotiating table as soon as possible to bring lasting peace closer,” Trump said in his address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night.
“I want to give a chance to think about that and you saw the response that President Zelensky put out,” Ratcliffe told Bartiromo on Wednesday. “So I think on the military front and the intelligence front, the pause that allowed that to happen, I think will go away.”
“And I think we’ll work shoulder to shoulder with Ukraine,” Ratcliffe said in an expression of optimism, adding that Washington and Kiev would work together to “put the world in a better place for these peace negotiations to move forward.”
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore)
March 05, 2025
Washington D.C.—U.S. Senators Ron Wyden and Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., today led Senate colleagues, including Senator Jeff Merkley, in a letter to Donald Trump reaffirming Congress’ authority to maintain trade restrictions on the Russian Federation while it continues its war of aggression against Ukraine.
“Vladimir Putin is a ruthless dictator who has led the Russian Federation into a war of aggression against Ukraine with the explicit goal of denying Ukraine and its people their collective rights to independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity,” wrote the senators after Trump sandbagged talks between the United States and Ukraine last Friday and claimed Ukraine “should have never started [the war].”“Our country, in coordination with our allies and partners and with bipartisan support has imposed sweeping financial sanctions, stringent export controls, and aggressive trade restrictions on the Russian Federation.”
In 2022, Congress passed the Suspending Normal Trade Relations with Russia and Belarus Act which revoked Russia’s permanent normal trade relations status to ensure Russian goods and services do not enjoy privileged, “most-favored nation” access to the U.S. market. Congress also passed the Ending Importation of Russian Oil Act which banned the importation of all energy products from the Russian Federation.
According to these laws, the Russian Federation must reach an agreement relating to the withdrawal of its forces and cessation of military hostilities that is accepted by the free and independent government of Ukraine, recognize the right of the people of Ukraine to independently and freely choose their own government, and pose no immediate military threat of aggression to any NATO member before the president can restore normal trade relations.
“In light of your worrisome statements, we wish to remind you that you must not—and cannot, under statute—attempt to restore normal trade relations or lift the import ban on Russian energy products unless and until Ukraine’s peace demands are met and their free and independent government has accepted a peace agreement,” continued the senators. “Ukraine must be at the table to determine its future, and conditions for peace cannot be imposed on Ukraine.”
The letter was led by Wyden and Cortez Masto. In addition to Wyden, Cortez Masto and Merkley the letter was signed by Senators Michael Bennet, D-Colo., Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., Gary Peters, D-Mich., Jacky Rosen, D-Nev., Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., Raphael Warnock, D-Ga., and Peter Welch, D-Vt.
The full text of the letter is here.
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Alaska Dan Sullivan
03.05.25
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) today celebrated President Donald Trump’s endorsement of the Alaska Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Project as a top priority of his new administration in the President’s joint address to Congress last night.
Sen. Sullivan has been a relentless advocate for the Alaska LNG Project as an opportunity to provide abundant, clean-burning, low-cost energy to Alaskans, promote American energy security, and deepen America’s alliances with its Indo-Pacific partners, particularly Japan and South Korea. Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Sen. Sullivan has taken four trips to Japan and South Korea to promote the project, talking to numerous potential investors and the senior-most government and private sector officials in each country. More recently, he has spoken directly with President Trump on several occasions about the project and gave him the comprehensive document called, “America’s Gasline.” The senator has also had extensive conversations with nearly all of President Trump’s cabinet officials about the Alaska LNG Project, garnering their support.
“My administration is also working on a gigantic natural gas pipeline in Alaska, among the largest in the world, where Japan, South Korea and other nations want to be our partner with investments of trillions of dollars each,” President Trump said. “There’s never been anything like that one. It will be truly spectacular. It’s all set to go. The permitting is gotten.”
[embedded content]
“The fact that the President of the United States was highlighting the Alaska LNG Project as one of the biggest things he wants to get done for America was huge for our state and huge for our country,” Sullivan said in an interview following the address. “It’s not going to happen overnight, but the fact that we have the President and his entire cabinet fully putting their shoulder into this was quite remarkable…Governor Dunleavy and I pitched the Trump administration on having the President mention this in his State of the Union…I hope a lot of Alaskans saw that we have been working this really hard, because we have a great opportunity—the private sector elements of this are coming together, the foreign government elements of this giant project are coming together. But when you get the President and his entire cabinet saying, we’re going to get this done, and he tells the American people that, I don’t think that’s ever happened before for Alaska…It was a big night for us, and I’m really excited.”
The Alaska LNG Project will be capable of providing more than three billion cubic feet of low-cost, low-emission natural gas to Alaskans, Americans, and to allied nations around the world each day. It is also projected to create up to 10,000 construction and 1,000 operations jobs.
Below is a timeline of Sen. Sullivan’s recent work on advancing the Alaska LNG Project and deepening the energy security ties between the U.S. and America’s Japanese and Korean allies.
On February 24, 2025, Sen. Sullivan had an Alaska LNG focused meeting with Interior Secretary Doug Burgum at the Department of the Interior.
On February 7, 2025, President Trump announced a “joint venture” on Alaska oil and gas between the United States and Japan.
On January 8, 2025, Sen. Sullivan personally pitched President Trump on the Alaska LNG Project.
On December 17, 2024, Sen. Sullivan focused on the Alaska LNG Project in his meeting with now-Secretary of Energy Chris Wright.
In August of 2024, Sen. Sullivan participated in a bipartisan Senate delegation visit to Japan and South Korea, and discussed the Alaska LNG Project with numerous senior government and business leaders in both countries.
In February 2024, Sen. Sullivan and seven of his Senate colleagues introduced a Senate resolution recognizing the importance of trilateral cooperation among the United States, Japan, and South Korea.
On October 8, 2023, Sen. Sullivan penned an op-ed in the Anchorage Daily News urging Alaskans to unite in advancing the Alaska LNG Project as a critical solution to Alaska’s energy needs.
In June 2023, Sen. Sullivan visited South Korea and Japan, where he met with senior government and private sector officials about the Alaska LNG Project. Similar to his October 2022 visit to Tokyo, Sen. Sullivan convened an Alaska LNG Summit of U.S. and Korean energy and policy leaders with the U.S. Embassy in Seoul. Following the visit, the U.S. Embassy in Seoul established an Alaska LNG Task Force.
On May 18, 2023, Sen. Sullivan introduced the Indo-Pacific Strategic Energy Initiative Act, legislation to promote the financing and development of new energy infrastructure projects in the Indo-Pacific region—with a focus on natural gas—in order to end U.S. allies’ dependance on Russian natural gas in the wake of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
In May 2023, Sen. Sullivan spoke at the Alaska Sustainable Energy Conference about the Alaska LNG Project and opportunities to deliver clean-burning, low-cost gas to Alaskans and to America’s Indo-Pacific allies.
In May 2023, Sen. Sullivan, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), and Rep. Mary Peltola (D-Alaska) welcomed a ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit upholding the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) approval of the Alaska LNG Project.
On March 6, 2023, Sen. Sullivan led a letter with his Senate colleagues to U.S. Ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel urging the Biden administration to publicly support the export of abundant U.S. natural gas to America’s allies in Europe and Asia, particularly Japan, which has prioritized energy security in its term leading the G7.
On December 16, 2022, Sen. Sullivan welcomed a new national security strategy and related documents released by Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida that focuses on deepening Japan and the U.S.’s national security cooperation.
In October 2022, Sen. Sullivan visited Japan and South Korea to advocate for the Alaska LNG Project. In Tokyo, Sen. Sullivan and Ambassador Emanuel convened an Alaska LNG Summit of U.S. and Japanese energy and policy leaders. Prior to the summit, the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo established an Alaska LNG Task Force.
In June 2022, Sen. Sullivan and Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R-Alaska) visited Japan to meet with Japanese companies, utilities, and government ministries about the Alaska LNG Project.
In August 2021, Sens. Murkowski and Sullivan secured a provision in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act making the Alaska LNG Project eligible for a federal loan guarantee of roughly $30 billion that is indexed to inflation.
In August 2020, the Department of Energy (DOE) issued a final, unconditional order authorizing the Alaska LNG Project to export LNG.
In May 2020, FERC granted the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) authorization to construct and operate the Alaska LNG Project.
Between 2014 and 2022, the Alaska LNG Project secured all of its necessary federal permits and authorizations.
Source: China State Council Information Office
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Wednesday that his country plans to take the first steps towards peace in the near future.
“The first steps on the path to a just and lasting peace are incredibly important. We want to move forward speedily, in cooperation with the United States and all of Europe,” Zelensky said on social media platform X.
Meanwhile, Andriy Yermak, head of the President’s Office, announced that he had discussed steps towards peace in a phone conversation with U.S. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz.
“We exchanged views on security issues and the coordination of positions within the framework of bilateral relations between Ukraine and the U.S.,” Yermak said on Telegram.
He added that Ukrainian and U.S. teams are set to meet soon to “continue this important work.”
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra
The Trump presidency is turning much of the world order on its head. Tne United States president is arm-twisting Ukraine, playing nice with Russia, and using protection as an economic and political weapon.
The Australian government is pessimistic about escaping American tariffs on aluminium and steel when a decision is announced next week. Meanwhile, the message from the US is clear: we need to boost defence spending.
To discuss Trump Mark 2 on the world stage and what that means for Australia, we’re joined by James Curran, professor of modern history at the University of Sydney.
Curran says,
One gets the sense that we are looking at the kind of tectonic plates of world politics shifting before our very eyes.
Trump is about might is right. He does have an expansionary view of American power in the western hemisphere if we are to judge him by his statements on the Panama Canal and Greenland. But I think more broadly, his interpretation of American power is to simply “get out of America’s way”.
In terms of economic implications, [it’s] a confirmation that we are looking at the permanence of protectionism in the United States. This administration, along with the Biden administration and the first Trump administration, have been putting a wrecking ball through the multilateral trading system and the WTO. And that is certainly a not a good thing for free trade and for countries like Australia.
Curran explains what America’s expectation that countries need to spend more on defence would mean for Australia,
This has been the great concern, if you like, over a number of years – that Australia has got defence on the cheap, that it’s put so much of its national wealth into the middle class and welfare and infrastructure and developing the nation that it’s been able to rely on the American blanket of protection while it pursues its prosperity.
So if [defence spending] is to rise to 3% [of GDP], then that’s going to mean, firstly, a concentration on what are the lower cost alternatives to defend this continent? And secondly, where will the trade offs come? What will be sacrificed from the national budget? And what political leader in this country will front the Australian people and squarely and honestly and earnestly have a conversation about these dramatic strategic circumstances and why greater sacrifice is required from Australians to enable a higher defence expenditure.
Is the Trump world the new normal, or will this be over when Trump eventually leaves the White House?
I’m a little bit sceptical about this idea that we grit our teeth and close our eyes and hope that the nightmare is over in four years time. There is a really big question mark over how America can snap back in terms of its institutional robustness. The pressure that the courts, the media and the Congress are under. Does this all just snap back in four years time? Do we really think that either a Republican or a Democrat successor to Trump will ride into Washington, down Pennsylvania Avenue in a glittering chariot of liberal internationalism? To say everyone shouldn’t worry because the liberal international order is back and it’s gleaming and it’s working.
I really think this is up to America’s allies, both in Europe and in East Asia, to continue to protect as many of those rules and those institutions that have worked so well for so many of us, as much as they possibly can.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
– ref. Politics with Michelle Grattan: James Curran on Trump, Ukraine, shifting tectonic plates, and a bigger Australian defence bill – https://theconversation.com/politics-with-michelle-grattan-james-curran-on-trump-ukraine-shifting-tectonic-plates-and-a-bigger-australian-defence-bill-251486
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Vermont – Bernie Sanders
WASHINGTON, March 5 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), alongside Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), today asked for unanimous consent on the Senate floor to pass a series of straightforward resolutions condemning Russia’s illegal, unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. The senators offered six resolutions clarifying that the United States stands with the people of Ukraine in defense of their democracy and condemns the dictator Vladimir Putin’s crimes against humanity. Republicans rose in opposition to every one.
The senators’ resolutions are statements of fact and principle, backed by evidence and long-standing American foreign policy, including:
Sanders’ remarks on the Senate floor were livestreamed here and are available below.
I am here tonight with colleagues who have worked extremely hard to protect the sovereignty of Ukraine and to defend democracy in that country and, in fact, throughout the world.
And I thank my colleagues for getting on the floor this evening and for the resolutions that they will be bringing forth.
M. President, I am not a historian. But I do know that for the last 250 years, since the inception of our great country, despite our imperfections, the United States has stood in the world as a symbol of democracy. And all over the world people have looked to our country as an example of freedom and self-governance to which the rest of the world could aspire. People have long looked to our Declaration of Independence and Constitution as blueprints for how to establish governments of the people, by the people and for the people.
M. President, tragically, all of that is now changing. As President Trump moves this country towards authoritarianism, he is aligning himself with dictators and despots who share his disdain for democracy and the rule of law.
Just last week, in a radical departure from long-standing U.S. policy, the Trump administration voted against a United Nations resolution which clearly stated that Russia began the horrific war in Ukraine.
That U.N. resolution also called on Russia to withdraw its forces from occupied Ukraine, in line with international law. The resolution was brought forward by our closest allies, including the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Japan and dozens of other democratic nations. Ninety-three countries at the U.N. voted YES on that resolution.
Rather than side with our long-standing allies to preserve democracy and uphold international law, President Trump voted with authoritarian nations like Russia, North Korea, Iran and Belarus to oppose the resolution. Many of the other opponents of that resolution are undemocratic nations propped up by Russian military aid.
But it wasn’t just the U.N. vote. Pathetically, President Trump also told an outrageous lie, claiming that it was Ukraine that started the war, not Russia. He also called President Zelensky a dictator, rather than the leader of a democratic nation, as he is.
M. President, as we discuss Ukraine tonight, it is terribly important that we not forget who Vladimir Putin is and why he is no friend of the United States, and why we should not be in an alliance with him against Ukraine.
Putin is the man who crushed Russia’s movement towards democracy after the end of the Cold War. Putin is a man who steals elections, murders political dissidents and crushes freedom of the press. He has maintained control in Russia by offering the oligarchs there a simple deal: If they grant him absolute power and share the spoils, he would let them steal as much as they wanted from the Russian people. The result: while the vast majority of the Russian population struggles economically, Putin and his fellow oligarchs stash trillions of dollars in offshore tax havens.
And so today, 26 years after he took power, Putin is the absolute ruler of Russia. And I think as everyone knows, Russia’s elections are blatantly fraudulent. A sham.
And Putin is the man who sparked the bloodiest war in Europe since World War II.
More than three years ago, on February 24, 2022, Putin ordered a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, in clear violation of the Charter of the United Nations and international law. Russian land, air and naval forces have attacked and occupied territory across Ukraine.
Since that terrible day, more than a million people have been killed or injured because of Putin’s war. Putin’s forces have massacred civilians and kidnapped thousands of Ukrainian children, bringing them back to Russian “re-education” camps. These atrocities led the International Criminal Court to issue an arrest warrant for Putin in 2023 as a war criminal. That’s who we are allying ourselves with.
And still, today, Russia continues its attacks, raining down hundreds of missiles and drones on Ukrainian cities. Russian forces illegally occupy about 20 percent of Ukraine’s sovereign territory.
M. President, this war could end today if Putin gave up his outrageous effort to conquer a neighboring country. The war could end today. The killing could stop right now, if Putin gave that order.
And that, simply, M. President, is what my resolution says to Vladimir Putin: Stop the killing. Obey international law. Withdraw your forces and cease your attacks on Ukraine. And I, honestly, don’t understand how anyone in the United States Senate could object to that simple demand.
M. President, now, more than at any time in recent history, it is imperative that the Senate come together in a bipartisan manner to make it clear that we stand for democracy, not authoritarianism; that we stand for international law, not conquest by force; and that we stand with Ukraine and fellow democracies throughout the world, and not with the murderous dictator of Russia.
Source: US House Committee on Foreign Affairs
Media Contact 202-226-8467
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Europe Chairman Keith Self delivered opening remarks at subcommittee hearing titled, “Bridging the Gap: Turkey Between East and West.”
WATCH HERE
-Remarks-
I welcome everyone to the first Europe subcommittee hearing. It is an honor to chair this subcommittee that deals with a dynamic and potentially dangerous environment in a crucial region for U.S. national interests. I look forward to our work as a subcommittee.
Today, our objective is to examine Turkey’s roles in NATO and necessarily the Middle East, even though this is the Europe Subcommittee. It will be necessary to look at Turkey’s track record in NATO and the Middle East, in order to gain perspective on their role going forward in both regions. As a NATO member, historically Turkey has operated as a member of the NATO alliance, often aligning their foreign policy interests with the goals of NATO, but in the last decade there have been some actions that don’t line up with the NATO goals.
Take for example the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the barbaric October 7th attacks on Israel in 2023. While Turkey supports most of the agenda within the NATO alliance, it did operate as NATO’s lone member refusing to condemn the actions of nefarious players in the Middle East. The world is changing quickly and Turkey’s geographic location places it at the epicenter of the most tumultuous regions as conflicts rage in Europe and the Middle East. Turkey has also assumed the position of power broker in the vacuum created by Syria’s regime change but is vexed by their unresolved issues with the Kurds going forward. The world, particularly the United States, is watching closely as Turkey decides rather or not to ease tensions with the Kurds. America has relied on the Kurds partnership in the region and opposition to their success will be a major sticking point in Turkey’s relationship with the United States.
Turkey is also unique in that geographically it straddles both Europe and Asia. It is a prominent member of the Minerals Security Partnership and could be a strategic partner for the West by operating as an alternative to Beijing. Recently, Turkey laid claim to one of the largest rare-earth element reserves in the world with a rare earth 694-million ton deposit.
Historically, Turkey was the anchor for NATO’s Southeast corner against the old Soviet Union, but over the past decade Turkey’s commitment to anchoring that region has begun to crack. They have the second largest military in NATO – only behind the United States – which makes Turkey a key asset to the alliance, but their geographic location also makes them vulnerable to bad actors in the region.
I look forward to hearing testimony from our three experts today as they share their views on Turkey’s role in both Europe and the Middle East.
###
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
National security, growth and energy security will be top of the agenda at the first annual UK-Ireland Summit tomorrow as the Prime Minister underscores the importance of delivering for the people of the UK.
National security, growth and energy security will be top of the agenda at the first annual UK-Ireland Summit tomorrow as the Prime Minister underscores the importance of delivering for the people of the UK.
The meeting comes after the Prime Minister hosted 18 leaders in London on Sunday where he reiterated the UK’s unwavering support for Ukraine and European security. As part of that commitment, tomorrow the two leaders will announce closer collaboration on energy security to harness the full potential of the Irish and Celtic seas.
Through a new data sharing arrangement, the UK and Irish governments will lay the groundwork for commercial developers to increase offshore energy by cutting red tape and minimising the burden of maritime and environmental consent processes for developers.
This will speed up developments and mobilise investments in offshore energy infrastructure.
This new collaboration will increase renewable energy production and enhance the UK’s energy security, delivering on this Government’s Plan for Change.
Energy security and national security are two sides of the same coin, that is why we must work with our allies and partners across the world to protect the hardworking British people from external factors driving up household bills.
As our closest neighbour our partnership with Ireland is testament to the importance of working with international partners to deliver for people at home.
Now more than ever we must work with likeminded partners in the pursuit of global peace, prosperity and security.
Tomorrow, the Prime Minister and Taoiseach will host a joint business roundtable with industry leaders and businesses across tech, finance, clean energy, manufacturing and construction from the UK and Ireland. The discussion will focus on potential opportunities for growth and investment, and how the UK and Ireland can work together to build an even more resilient and successful trading relationship. They will also discuss how both countries can work closer together on renewable energy, tech, AI and security.
As part of tomorrow’s summit, the UK has welcomed new Irish investments worth £185.5 million creating 2,540 jobs across the country from Version 1, Applegreen, Omniplex, Galvia, Buymedia, Uniquely, Walsh Mushrooms and PM Group. From Evesham to Edinburgh, new investments show confidence in the UK as an attractive place to invest and delivers on the government’s Plan for Change to kickstart economic growth.
The UK will also announce that W.H. Davis, part of Buckland Group, has won a £100 million contract with Irish Rail supporting their investment in railway infrastructure in Ireland.
Ireland is the UK’s 6th largest trading partner with the trading relationship worth nearly £80 billion last year across sectors including renewable energy, life sciences, creative industries and tech.
Tomorrow’s events follow a cultural reception hosted by the Prime Minister and Taoiseach this evening, with representatives from both the UK and Ireland showcasing the world-class talent on both sides of the Irish sea.
After the summit, the Prime Minister will travel to a defence company to meet employees and apprentices working in the national security sector.
Visit comes after the Prime Minister’s landmark announcement made last week on increasing defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by April 2027.
In 2023-24, defence spending supported over 430,000 jobs across the UK, the equivalent to one in every 60, with 16,900 in the North West.
Published 5 March 2025
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Ogden, Associate Professor in Global Studies, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau
When Donald Trump’s benefactor and cost-cutter-in-chief Elon Musk recently supported a call for the United States to quit NATO and the United Nations, it should perhaps have been more surprising.
But the first months of the second Trump presidency have already seen key parts of the current international order undermined. Musk’s position fits a general pattern.
Aside from the tilt towards a multipolar world order, the US now refuses to recognise the International Criminal Court, has slashed its foreign aid contributions, and has withdrawn from the World Health Organization, the UN Human Rights Council and the Palestinian relief agency UNRWA.
With Trump’s domestic politics displaying a clear autocratic edge, the rejection of the founding principles and ideals of the UN comes into sharper relief. The intolerant and impatient negotiating approach he displayed with Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky also belies a disregard for cooperative and consensus-based diplomacy.
The drive to slash the federal deficit dovetails with this general abandonment of expensive international commitments. If the Trump regime follows through on its apparent strategy of manufacturing crises to advance its agenda, then leaving the UN entirely is a logical next step.
This is all in stark contrast to the central role the UN has traditionally played within the US-led international order since 1945.
Along with other institutions, the UN allowed the US to shape the international system in its own image and spread its domestic values and interests across the world. Along with NATO, the UN was designed as a global security institution to produce global stability.
In theory at least, the political and economic values of the US and other democracies enabled the construction of the postwar order. According to political scientist John Ikenberry, this was based on “multilateralism, alliance partnerships, strategic restraint, cooperative security, and institutional and rule-based relationships”.
But by the 21st century, US actions had undermined many of these principles. The US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 bypassed the authority of the UN, causing then secretary-general Kofi Annan to declare that “from the charter point of view [the invasion] was illegal”.
This undermined the legitimacy of the UN and America’s place within it. But it also diminished the organisation as a force for maintaining international security and national sovereignty in global affairs.
The subsequent human rights violations by the US through its use of rendition, torture and detention at facilities such as Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib further weakened the UN’s credibility as a protector of liberal international values.
The US has also been a regular non-payer of UN fees, owing US$2.8 billion in early 2025. And it is one of the lowest contribtuors of military and police personnel to UN peacekeeping operations, despite paying nearly 27% of the overall budget.
Since the 1990s, several Republican politicians have argued for the US to withdraw entirely from the UN. In 1997, senator Ron Paul introduced the American Sovereignty Restoration Act, aimed at ending UN membership, expelling the UN headquarters from New York and ending US funding.
Although it received minimal support and never reached committee hearings, Paul reintroduced the act in every congressional session until his 2011 retirement. It was then taken up by other Republicans, including Paul Broun and Mike Rogers.
In December 2023, senator Mike Lee and representative Chip Roy led the introduction of the “Disengaging Entirely from the United Nations Debacle (DEFUND) Act”.
Roy referenced the perceived negative treatment of Israel, the promotion of China, “the propagation of climate hysteria” and the US$12.5 billion in annual payments. Lee added:
Americans’ hard-earned dollars have been funnelled into initiatives that fly in the face of our values – enabling tyrants, betraying allies, and spreading bigotry.
Public polling in 2024 also showed only 52% of Americans had a favourable view of the UN. This opposition has deeper historical roots, too.
In 1920, US isolationists blocked the ratification of the Treaty of Versailles, and with it US participation in the League of Nations (the predecessor to the United Nations). Although the US would interact with the League of Nations until the UN’s formation in 1945, it never became an official member.
Criticism of the UN also has a bipartisan angle, with the US withdrawing funding of UNRWA in 2024 during Joe Biden’s presidency after Israel accused the agency of links to Hamas.
If Trump harnesses these historical and modern forces to pull the US out of the UN, it would fundamentally – and likely irrevocably – undermine what has been a central pillar of the current international order.
It would also increase US isolationism, reduce Western influence, and legitimise alternative security bodies. These include the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, which the US could potentially join, especially given Russia and India are both members.
More broadly, the reduced influence of the UN will endanger general peace and security in the international sphere, and the wider protection and promotion of human rights.
There would be greater unpredictability in global affairs, and the world would be a more dangerous place. For countries big and small, a UN without the US will force new strategic calculations and create new alliances and blocs, as the world leaps into the unknown.
Chris Ogden is a Senior Research Fellow with The Foreign Policy Centre, London.
– ref. Elon Musk thinks the US should leave the UN – what if Trump does it? – https://theconversation.com/elon-musk-thinks-the-us-should-leave-the-un-what-if-trump-does-it-251483
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
Record Income from Operations
WATERLOO, Ontario and ATLANTA, March 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Descartes Systems Group Inc. (TSX:DSG) (Nasdaq:DSGX) announced its financial results for its fiscal 2025 fourth quarter (Q4FY25) and year (FY25) ended January 31, 2025. All financial results referenced are in United States (US) currency and, unless otherwise indicated, are determined in accordance with US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).
“Fiscal 2025 was another year of growth for Descartes, highlighted by the addition of numerous complementary services to the Global Logistics Network,” said Edward J. Ryan, Descartes’ CEO. “We believe these investments can help shippers, carriers, and logistics services providers manage the increased uncertainty and complexity that’s recently been introduced to the global trade environment. Our customers benefit from our diversity in international and domestic supply chains, our expertise with tariffs, sanctions and other global trade issues, and our expansive roster of connected trading partners as they navigate a quickly evolving trade landscape.”
FY25 Financial Results
As described in more detail below, key financial highlights for Descartes’ FY25 included:
Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues are non-GAAP financial measures provided as a complement to financial results presented in accordance with GAAP. We define Adjusted EBITDA as earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization, stock-based compensation (for which we include related fees and taxes) and other charges (for which we include restructuring charges, acquisition-related expenses, and contingent consideration incurred due to better-than-expected performance from acquisitions). These items are considered by management to be outside Descartes’ ongoing operational results. We define Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues as the quotient, expressed as a percentage, from dividing Adjusted EBITDA for a period by revenues for the corresponding period. A reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues to net income determined in accordance with GAAP is provided later in this release.
The following table summarizes Descartes’ results in the categories specified below over FY25 and FY24 (dollar amounts in millions):
| FY25 |
FY24 | |||
| Revenues | 651.0 | 572.9 | ||
| Services revenues | 590.2 | 520.9 | ||
| Gross margin | 76 | % | 76 | % |
| Cash provided by operating activities* | 219.3 | 207.7 | ||
| Income from operations | 181.1 | 142.8 | ||
| Net income | 143.3 | 115.9 | ||
| Net income as a % of revenues | 22 | % | 20 | % |
| Earnings per diluted share | 1.64 | 1.34 | ||
| Adjusted EBITDA | 284.7 | 247.5 | ||
| Adjusted EBITDA as a % of revenues | 44 | % | 43 | % |
(*) FY25 cash provided by operating activities was negatively impacted by the payment of $25.0 million in contingent acquisition consideration for previously completed deals, which was not accrued for at the time of acquisition but was paid due to post-acquisition performance exceeding expectations at the time of acquisition
Q4FY25 Financial Results
As described in more detail below, key financial highlights for Q4FY25 included:
The following table summarizes Descartes’ results in the categories specified below over the past 5 fiscal quarters (unaudited; dollar amounts, other than per share amounts, in millions):
| Q4 FY25 |
Q3 FY25 |
Q2 FY25 |
Q1 FY25 |
Q4 FY24 |
||||||
| Revenues | 167.5 | 168.8 | 163.4 | 151.3 | 148.2 | |||||
| Services revenues | 156.5 | 149.7 | 146.2 | 137.8 | 135.7 | |||||
| Gross margin | 76 | % | 74 | % | 75 | % | 77 | % | 76 | % |
| Cash provided by operating activities* | 60.7 | 60.1 | 34.7 | 63.7 | 50.8 | |||||
| Income from operations | 47.1 | 45.8 | 45.9 | 42.4 | 37.0 | |||||
| Net income | 37.4 | 36.6 | 34.7 | 34.7 | 31.8 | |||||
| Net income as a % of revenues | 22 | % | 22 | % | 21 | % | 23 | % | 21 | % |
| Earnings per diluted share | 0.43 | 0.42 | 0.40 | 0.40 | 0.37 | |||||
| Adjusted EBITDA | 75.0 | 72.1 | 70.6 | 67.0 | 65.7 | |||||
| Adjusted EBITDA as a % of revenues | 45 | % | 43 | % | 43 | % | 44 | % | 44 | % |
(*) Q2FY25 cash provided by operating activities was negatively impacted by the payment of $25.0 million in contingent acquisition consideration for previously completed deals, which was not accrued for at the time of acquisition but was paid due to post-acquisition performance exceeding expectations at the time of acquisition
Cash Position
At January 31, 2025, Descartes had $236.1 million in cash. Cash increased by $54.8 million in Q4FY25 and decreased by $84.9 million in FY25. The table set forth below provides a summary of cash flows for Q4FY25 and FY25 in millions of dollars:
| Q4FY25 | FY25 | |||
| Cash provided by operating activities | 60.7 | 219.3 | ||
| Additions to property and equipment | (2.1 | ) | (6.8 | ) |
| Acquisitions of subsidiaries, net of cash acquired | (3.7 | ) | (290.2 | ) |
| Payment of debt issuance costs | (0.1 | ) | ||
| Issuances of common shares, net of issuance costs | 2.5 | 12.4 | ||
| Payment of withholding taxes on net share settlements | – | (6.7 | ) | |
| Payment of contingent consideration | – | (9.2 | ) | |
| Effect of foreign exchange rate on cash | (2.6 | ) | (3.6 | ) |
| Net change in cash | 54.8 | (84.9 | ) | |
| Cash, beginning of period | 181.3 | 321.0 | ||
| Cash, end of period | 236.1 | 236.1 | ||
Conference Call
Descartes’ executive management team will hold a conference call to discuss the company’s financial results at 5:30 PM ET on Wednesday, March 5. Designated numbers are +1 289 514 5100 or +1 800 717 1738 for North America Toll-Free, using Passcode 45440#.
The company will simultaneously conduct an audio webcast on the Descartes website at https://www.descartes.com/who-we-are/investor-relations/financial-information. Phone conference dial-in or webcast login is required approximately 10 minutes beforehand.
Replays of the conference call will be available until March 12, 2025, by dialing +1 289 819 1325 or Toll-Free for North America using +1 888 660 6264 with Playback Passcode: 45440#. An archived replay of the webcast will be available at https://www.descartes.com/who-we-are/investor-relations/financial-information.
About Descartes
Descartes (Nasdaq:DSGX) (TSX:DSG) is the global leader in providing on-demand, software-as-a-service solutions focused on improving the productivity, security and sustainability of logistics-intensive businesses. Customers use our modular, software-as-a-service solutions to route, track and help improve the safety, performance and compliance of delivery resources; plan, allocate and execute shipments; rate, audit and pay transportation invoices; access global trade data; file customs and security documents for imports and exports; and complete numerous other logistics processes by participating in the world’s largest, collaborative multimodal logistics community. Our headquarters are in Waterloo, Ontario, Canada and we have offices and partners around the world. Learn more at www.descartes.com, and connect with us on LinkedIn and X (Twitter).
Descartes Investor Contact
Laurie McCauley
(519) 746-2969
investor@descartes.com
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This release may contain forward-looking information within the meaning of applicable securities laws (“forward-looking statements”) that relates to Descartes’ expectations concerning future revenues and earnings, and our projections for any future reductions in expenses or growth in margins and generation of cash; our assessment of the potential impact of geopolitical events, such as the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine (the “Russia-Ukraine Conflict”), and between Israel and Hamas (“Israel-Hamas Conflict”), or other potentially catastrophic events, on our business, results of operations and financial condition; continued growth and acquisitions including our assessment of any increased opportunity for our products and services as a result of trends in the logistics and supply chain industries; rate of profitable growth and Adjusted EBITDA margin operating range; demand for Descartes’ solutions; growth of Descartes’ Global Logistics Network (“GLN”); customer buying patterns; customer expectations of Descartes; development of the GLN and the benefits thereof to customers; and other matters. These forward-looking statements are based on certain assumptions including the following: global shipment volumes continuing at levels generally consistent with those experienced historically; the Russia-Ukraine Conflict and Israel-Hamas Conflict not having a material negative impact on shipment volumes or on the demand for the products and services of Descartes by its customers and the ability of those customers to continue to pay for those products and services; countries continuing to implement and enforce existing and additional customs and security regulations relating to the provision of electronic information for imports and exports; countries continuing to implement and enforce existing and additional trade restrictions and sanctioned party lists with respect to doing business with certain countries, organizations, entities and individuals; Descartes’ continued operation of a secure and reliable business network; the stability of general economic and market conditions, currency exchange rates, and interest rates; equity and debt markets continuing to provide Descartes with access to capital; Descartes’ continued ability to identify and source attractive and executable business combination opportunities; Descartes’ ability to develop solutions that keep pace with the continuing changes in technology, and our continued compliance with third party intellectual property rights. These assumptions may prove to be inaccurate. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of Descartes, or developments in Descartes’ business or industry, to differ materially from the anticipated results, performance or achievements or developments expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such factors include, but are not limited to, Descartes’ ability to successfully identify and execute on acquisitions and to integrate acquired businesses and assets, and to predict expenses associated with and revenues from acquisitions; the impact of network failures, information security breaches or other cyber-security threats; disruptions in the movement of freight and a decline in shipment volumes including as a result of contagious illness outbreaks; a deterioration of general economic conditions or instability in the financial markets accompanied by a decrease in spending by our customers; the ability to attract and retain key personnel and the ability to manage the departure of key personnel and the transition of our executive management team; changes in trade or transportation regulations that currently require customers to use services such as those offered by Descartes; changes in customer behaviour and expectations; Descartes’ ability to successfully design and develop enhancements to our products and solutions; departures of key customers; the impact of foreign currency exchange rates; Descartes’ ability to retain or obtain sufficient capital in addition to its debt facility to execute on its business strategy, including its acquisition strategy; disruptions in the movement of freight; the potential for future goodwill or intangible asset impairment as a result of other-than-temporary decreases in Descartes’ market capitalization; and other factors and assumptions discussed in the section entitled, “Certain Factors That May Affect Future Results” in documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Ontario Securities Commission and other securities commissions across Canada, including Descartes’ most recently filed Management’s Discussion and Analysis. If any such risks actually occur, they could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations. In that case, the trading price of our common shares could decline, perhaps materially. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance upon any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. Forward-looking statements are provided for the purpose of providing information about management’s current expectations and plans relating to the future. Readers are cautioned that such information may not be appropriate for other purposes. We do not undertake or accept any obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statements to reflect any change in our expectations or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based, except as required by law.
Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures – Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues
We prepare and release quarterly unaudited and annual audited financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP. We also disclose and discuss certain non-GAAP financial information, used to evaluate our performance, in this and other earnings releases and investor conference calls as a complement to results provided in accordance with GAAP. We believe that current shareholders and potential investors in our company use non-GAAP financial measures, such as Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues, in making investment decisions about our company and measuring our operational results.
The term “Adjusted EBITDA” refers to a financial measure that we define as earnings before certain charges that management considers to be non-operating expenses and which consist of interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization, stock-based compensation (for which we include related fees and taxes) and other charges (for which we include restructuring charges, acquisition-related expenses, and contingent consideration incurred due to better-than-expected performance from acquisitions). Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues divides Adjusted EBITDA for a period by the revenues for the corresponding period and expresses the quotient as a percentage.
Management considers these non-operating expenses to be outside the scope of Descartes’ ongoing operations and the related expenses are not used by management to measure operations. Accordingly, these expenses are excluded from Adjusted EBITDA, which we reference to both measure our operations and as a basis of comparison of our operations from period-to-period. Management believes that investors and financial analysts measure our business on the same basis, and we are providing the Adjusted EBITDA financial metric to assist in this evaluation and to provide a higher level of transparency into how we measure our own business. However, Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues are non-GAAP financial measures and may not be comparable to similarly titled measures reported by other companies. Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues should not be construed as a substitute for net income determined in accordance with GAAP or other non-GAAP measures that may be used by other companies, such as EBITDA. The use of Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues does have limitations. In particular, we have completed seven acquisitions since the beginning of fiscal 2024 and may complete additional acquisitions in the future that will result in acquisition-related expenses and restructuring charges. As these acquisition-related expenses and restructuring charges may continue as we pursue our consolidation strategy, some investors may consider these charges and expenses as a recurring part of operations rather than expenses that are not part of operations.
The table below reconciles Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues to net income reported in our audited Consolidated Statements of Operations for FY25 and FY24, which we believe is the most directly comparable GAAP measure.
| (US dollars in millions) | FY25 | FY24 | ||
| Net income, as reported on Consolidated Statements of Operations | 143.3 | 115.9 | ||
| Adjustments to reconcile to Adjusted EBITDA: | ||||
| Interest expense | 1.0 | 1.4 | ||
| Investment income | (11.5 | ) | (9.7 | ) |
| Income tax expense | 48.3 | 35.2 | ||
| Depreciation expense | 5.6 | 5.5 | ||
| Amortization of intangible assets | 69.4 | 60.5 | ||
| Stock-based compensation and related taxes | 21.1 | 17.1 | ||
| Other charges | 7.5 | 21.6 | ||
| Adjusted EBITDA | 284.7 | 247.5 | ||
| Revenues | 651.0 | 572.9 | ||
| Net income as % of revenues | 22 | % | 20 | % |
| Adjusted EBITDA as % of revenues | 44 | % | 43 | % |
The table below reconciles Adjusted EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenues to net income reported in our unaudited Consolidated Statements of Operations for Q4FY25, Q3FY25, Q2FY25, Q1FY25, and Q4FY24, which we believe is the most directly comparable GAAP measure.
| (US dollars in millions) | Q4FY25 | Q3FY25 | Q2FY25 | Q1FY25 | Q4FY24 | |||||
| Net income, as reported on Consolidated Statements of Operations | 37.4 | 36.6 | 34.7 | 34.7 | 31.8 | |||||
| Adjustments to reconcile to Adjusted EBITDA: | ||||||||||
| Interest expense | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.3 | |||||
| Investment income | (1.9 | ) | (2.9 | ) | (2.7 | ) | (4.1 | ) | (3.4 | ) |
| Income tax expense | 11.4 | 11.9 | 13.6 | 11.5 | 8.3 | |||||
| Depreciation expense | 1.5 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.4 | |||||
| Amortization of intangible assets | 19.4 | 17.5 | 17.4 | 15.0 | 15.1 | |||||
| Stock-based compensation and related taxes | 5.4 | 5.6 | 5.8 | 4.3 | 4.7 | |||||
| Other charges | 1.6 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 3.9 | 7.5 | |||||
| Adjusted EBITDA | 75.0 | 72.1 | 70.6 | 67.0 | 65.7 | |||||
| Revenues | 167.5 | 168.8 | 163.4 | 151.3 | 148.2 | |||||
| Net income as % of revenues | 22 | % | 22 | % | 21 | % | 23 | % | 21 | % |
| Adjusted EBITDA as % of revenues | 45 | % | 43 | % | 43 | % | 44 | % | 44 | % |
The Descartes Systems Group Inc.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(US dollars in thousands; US GAAP)
| January 31, | January 31, | |||
| 2025 | 2024 | |||
| ASSETS | ||||
| CURRENT ASSETS | ||||
| Cash | 236,138 | 320,952 | ||
| Accounts receivable (net) | ||||
| Trade | 53,953 | 51,569 | ||
| Other | 16,931 | 12,193 | ||
| Prepaid expenses and other | 45,544 | 33,468 | ||
| 352,566 | 418,182 | |||
| OTHER LONG-TERM ASSETS | 24,887 | 24,737 | ||
| PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT, NET | 12,481 | 11,552 | ||
| RIGHT-OF-USE ASSETS | 7,623 | 6,257 | ||
| DEFERRED INCOME TAXES | 3,802 | 2,097 | ||
| INTANGIBLE ASSETS, NET | 321,270 | 251,047 | ||
| GOODWILL | 924,755 | 760,413 | ||
| 1,647,384 | 1,474,285 | |||
| LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY | ||||
| CURRENT LIABILITIES | ||||
| Accounts payable | 20,650 | 17,484 | ||
| Accrued liabilities | 79,656 | 91,824 | ||
| Lease obligations | 3,178 | 3,075 | ||
| Income taxes payable | 9,313 | 6,734 | ||
| Deferred revenue | 104,230 | 84,513 | ||
| 217,027 | 203,630 | |||
| LEASE OBLIGATIONS | 4,718 | 3,903 | ||
| DEFERRED REVENUE | 978 | 1,464 | ||
| INCOME TAXES PAYABLE | 5,531 | 6,153 | ||
| DEFERRED INCOME TAXES | 34,127 | 21,101 | ||
| 262,381 | 236,251 | |||
| SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY | ||||
| Common shares – unlimited shares authorized; Shares issued and outstanding totaled 85,605,969 at January 31, 2025 (January 31, 2024 – 85,183,455) | 568,339 | 551,164 | ||
| Additional paid-in capital | 503,133 | 494,701 | ||
| Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (50,497 | ) | (28,586 | ) |
| Retained earnings | 364,028 | 220,755 | ||
| 1,385,003 | 1,238,034 | |||
| 1,647,384 | 1,474,285 | |||
The Descartes Systems Group Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Operations
(US dollars in thousands, except per share and weighted average share amounts; US GAAP)
| January 31, | January 31, | January 31, | ||||
| Year Ended | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | |||
| REVENUES | 651,000 | 572,931 | 486,014 | |||
| COST OF REVENUES | 158,574 | 138,295 | 113,326 | |||
| GROSS MARGIN | 492,426 | 434,636 | 372,688 | |||
| EXPENSES | ||||||
| Sales and marketing | 73,692 | 68,161 | 56,573 | |||
| Research and development | 95,497 | 84,103 | 70,353 | |||
| General and administrative | 65,248 | 57,373 | 49,710 | |||
| Other charges | 7,466 | 21,649 | 5,441 | |||
| Amortization of intangible assets | 69,399 | 60,501 | 60,177 | |||
| 311,302 | 291,787 | 242,254 | ||||
| INCOME FROM OPERATIONS | 181,124 | 142,849 | 130,434 | |||
| INTEREST EXPENSE | (1,004 | ) | (1,363 | ) | (1,167 | ) |
| INVESTMENT INCOME | 11,513 | 9,666 | 4,461 | |||
| INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES | 191,633 | 151,152 | 133,728 | |||
| INCOME TAX EXPENSE (RECOVERY) | ||||||
| Current | 53,402 | 41,223 | 28,248 | |||
| Deferred | (5,042 | ) | (5,978 | ) | 3,244 | |
| 48,360 | 35,245 | 31,492 | ||||
| NET INCOME | 143,273 | 115,907 | 102,236 | |||
| EARNINGS PER SHARE | ||||||
| Basic | 1.68 | 1.36 | 1.21 | |||
| Diluted | 1.64 | 1.34 | 1.18 | |||
| WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING (thousands) | ||||||
| Basic | 85,443 | 85,068 | 84,791 | |||
| Diluted | 87,323 | 86,818 | 86,451 | |||
The Descartes Systems Group Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(US dollars in thousands; US GAAP)
| Year Ended | January 31, | January 31, | January 31, | |||
| 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | ||||
| OPERATING ACTIVITIES | ||||||
| Net income | 143,273 | 115,907 | 102,236 | |||
| Adjustments to reconcile net income to cash provided by operating activities: | ||||||
| Depreciation | 5,589 | 5,474 | 5,225 | |||
| Amortization of intangible assets | 69,399 | 60,501 | 60,177 | |||
| Stock-based compensation expense | 19,962 | 16,480 | 13,667 | |||
| Other non-cash operating activities | 23 | 114 | 53 | |||
| Deferred tax expense (recovery) | (5,042 | ) | (5,978 | ) | 3,244 | |
| Changes in operating assets and liabilities | (13,932 | ) | 15,182 | 7,793 | ||
| Cash provided by operating activities | 219,272 | 207,680 | 192,395 | |||
| INVESTING ACTIVITIES | ||||||
| Additions to property and equipment | (6,743 | ) | (5,563 | ) | (6,071 | ) |
| Acquisition of subsidiaries, net of cash acquired | (290,204 | ) | (142,700 | ) | (115,561 | ) |
| Cash used in investing activities | (296,947 | ) | (148,263 | ) | (121,632 | ) |
| FINANCING ACTIVITIES | ||||||
| Payment of debt issuance costs | (53 | ) | (43 | ) | (1,118 | ) |
| Issuance of common shares for cash, net of issuance costs | 12,391 | 9,272 | 1,730 | |||
| Payment of withholding taxes on net share settlements | (6,745 | ) | (4,886 | ) | – | |
| Payment of contingent consideration | (9,223 | ) | (19,084 | ) | (5,215 | ) |
| Cash used in financing activities | (3,630 | ) | (14,741 | ) | (4,603 | ) |
| Effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash | (3,509 | ) | (109 | ) | (3,212 | ) |
| Increase (decrease) in cash | (84,814 | ) | 44,567 | 62,948 | ||
| Cash, beginning of year | 320,952 | 276,385 | 213,437 | |||
| Cash, end of year | 236,138 | 320,952 | 276,385 | |||
Source: International Atomic Energy Agency – IAEA
The presence of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) at Ukraine’s nuclear power plants (NPPs) remains an “invaluable asset” for the international community and must be preserved, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi told Member States after the completion of a delayed team rotation at the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP).
“Difficult conditions have in the past month complicated and delayed the latest rotation of experts, which was safely completed in recent days,” Director General Grossi said in his written introductory statement to the IAEA Board of Governors, which is holding its regular March meeting this week.
In December, a drone attack severely damaged an official IAEA vehicle during a rotation, and in February intense military activity forced the cancellation of the most recent planned rotation, which was finally concluded earlier this month. The current team at the ZNPP is the 27th since Director General Grossi established a continued IAEA presence at the site, where nuclear safety and security remains precarious.
Director General Grossi emphasized that “all the IAEA’s activities in Ukraine are being conducted in line with relevant resolutions of the UN General Assembly and of the IAEA policy-making organs”.
At the ZNPP, the IAEA team has continued to hear explosions on most days over the past week, at varying distances.
The IAEA team at the ZNPP was informed that scheduled maintenance of part of the safety system of reactor unit 1 had been completed and returned to service. At the same time, maintenance began at another part of the same reactor’s safety system.
At the Chornobyl site, firefighters have made progress in extinguishing the fire on the roof of the New Safe Confinement (NSC) caused by a drone strike on 14 February. The IAEA team at the site was informed that no smouldering fires had been detected over the past two days. The site continues to use thermal imaging and surveillance drones to monitor the structure.
The Chornobyl site has continued to perform frequent radiation monitoring and report the results to the IAEA team. The IAEA team has also undertaken its own independent monitoring. To date, all monitoring results have shown that there has not been any increase in the normal range of radiation levels measured at the site nor any abnormal readings detected.
The IAEA team at the Chornobyl site also reported multiple air raid alarms during the past week. In addition, the IAEA was informed by the Ukrainian regulator that the site recorded drone flights in the area early on 1 March.
Last week, a team of IAEA experts conducted another round of visits to seven electrical substations identified as critical for nuclear safety and security in Ukraine.
As during the previous visits last year, the team observed the current status of the substations and collected relevant information to assess any potential impacts of attacks in recent months to the safe operation of Ukraine’s nuclear facilities and to identify any further technical assistance that could be provided by the IAEA.
The IAEA teams at Ukraine’s operating NPPs – Khmelnytskyy, Rivne and South Ukraine – have continued to monitor the nuclear safety and security situation at these sites. The teams report hearing air raid alarms on most days, with the team at the Khmelnytskyy NPP having to shelter at the site on Monday. One reactor unit at the same plant last weekend began a planned outage for refuelling and maintenance.
Separately, the IAEA has continued with its comprehensive programme of nuclear safety and security assistance to Ukraine, with three new deliveries of equipment bringing the total number since the start of the armed conflict to 111.
The Hydrometeorological Centre and Hydrometeorological Organizations of the State Emergency Services of Ukraine received survey meters, the Centralised Spent Fuel Storage Facility of Energoatom received thermal imaging cameras and the medical unit of the Khmelnytskyy NPP received medical equipment and supplies. The deliveries were supported with funds provided by the European Union, Norway and the United States.
“We are grateful to all 30 donor states and the European Union for their extrabudgetary contributions, and I encourage those who can, to support the delivery of the comprehensive assistance programme, for which EUR 22 million are still necessary,” Director General Grossi told the Board.
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Virginia Tim Kaine
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Tim Kaine (D-VA) released the following statement after President Trump’s joint address to Congress:
“President Trump’s address showed that he and his Administration have no problem turning their backs on middle-class Americans. In his first few weeks in office, President Trump has imposed steep tariffs that will raise costs and hurt businesses, fired thousands of federal workers who provide critical services to millions of Americans, illegally stopped the flow of federal funds that support programs Americans rely on, and cozied up to dictators like Vladimir Putin while abandoning Ukraine and our democratic allies. If the President, his Administration, and Republicans in Congress continue to go down the current path they are on, they should expect that they will be met with fierce opposition as more and more Americans will feel the impacts of Trump’s terrible policies. I know many Virginians are worried about the state of our country, and they have my commitment that I’ll continue to stand up against any efforts that will harm Virginians, hurt our economy, or make Virginians less safe.”
Kaine brought Fairfax resident and veteran Jason King as his guest. Jason was fired from his position in the Federal Aviation Administration’s safety division as a result of the Trump Administration’s mass firing of federal employees.
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
HOUSTON, March 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Amplify Energy Corp. (NYSE: AMPY) (“Amplify,” the “Company,” “us,” or “our”) announced today its operating and financial results for the fourth quarter and full-year 2024, year-end 2024 proved reserves, Juniper Capital (“Juniper”) acquisition update and full-year 2025 standalone guidance for the Company.
Key Highlights
| (1) | Net debt as of December 31, 2024, consisting of $127 MM outstanding under its revolving credit facility with ~$0.0 MM of cash and cash equivalents, and LTM Adjusted EBITDA as of the fourth quarter of 2024. | |
Martyn Willsher, Amplify’s President and Chief Executive Officer, commented, “In early 2024, we told stakeholders that 2024 had the potential to be a transformative year for the Company, and we believe that we delivered on that expectation throughout the year. The recently announced transaction with Juniper Capital expands our operations into the DJ and Powder River Basins, increases our scale, operating efficiency and margins, improves our inventory of attractive drilling locations, and provides us with a new core area for potential M&A activity. The transaction also resulted in a new long-term partnership with Juniper Capital, who have a long history of delivering substantial value to shareholders. At Beta, we safely and successfully initiated a drilling program, which has increased our confidence regarding the future inventory of the field and has enabled us to expand our development plans for this prolific asset in 2025 and beyond.”
Mr. Willsher continued, “While we have focused our attention and resources on these two significant initiatives, our team has also delivered value to stockholders by pursuing opportunities to reduce operating expenses and maximize the value of our existing asset base. For example, Magnify Energy Services, our wholly owned subsidiary that provides oilfield services to Amplify-operated wells, expanded meaningfully in scope, realizing a significant increase in revenue and efficiency and reducing operating costs in East Texas and Oklahoma. We also renegotiated several existing contracts, like our iodine extraction contract, to receive improved economics. Although smaller in scope, these efforts have demonstrated management’s commitment to identifying areas to improve our operations and deliver value to stockholders. On the value maximizing front, we were able to monetize a portion of our acreage with Haynesville rights for several million dollars, while retaining an interest to realize upside value.”
Mr. Willsher concluded, “We believe that our strategic and operational accomplishments in 2024 set the foundation for Amplify’s future and that in 2025 we will begin to capitalize on the growth potential of this significantly enhanced asset base. By delivering on our 2025 strategic initiatives, we believe we can create immediate and long-term value for Amplify’s stockholders.”
Juniper Capital Rocky Mountain Assets Update
On January 15, 2025, Amplify announced that it has entered into a definitive merger agreement with privately held Juniper to combine with certain Juniper portfolio companies owning assets and leasehold interests in the DJ and Powder River Basins. Such portfolio companies are oil-weighted and include approximately 287,000 net acres. We expect to close the acquisition in the second quarter of 2025. Amplify has provided more information on the portfolio companies and their assets and the value potential of the Transaction in its latest investor presentation, available on its investor relations website.
On March 4, 2025, a definitive proxy statement was filed providing additional details on the Transaction. A special meeting of stockholders, to be held virtually, has been scheduled for April 14, 2025, at 9:00 am Central Time, where stockholders of record as of March 3, 2025 can vote to approve the issuance of common stock, par value $0.01 per share (the “Common Stock”) (as described in more detail in the definitive proxy statement) in connection with the Transaction. In order to virtually attend, stockholders must register in advance at www.cesonlineservices.com/ampysm_vm prior to April 13, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. Central Time. More information can be found in the definitive proxy statement on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov and the Company’s website, www.amplifyenergy.com, under the Investor Relations section. Upon approval from our stockholders of the issuance of Common Stock and the resulting closing of the Transaction, Amplify and Juniper are expected to own approximately 61% and 39%, respectively, of the combined company’s outstanding equity.
In anticipation of closing, Amplify is currently working with Juniper and its portfolio companies on integrating the Juniper assets into the Amplify organization. Furthermore, the Company expects to refinance a substantial portion of its outstanding debt and approximately $133 million in principal amount of the portfolio companies’ outstanding debt prior to closing the Transaction. Amplify intends to update the market with developments of the Transaction as they progress.
East Texas Haynesville Monetization Update
Starting in 2024, several operators expressed increased interest in buying or partnering with Amplify on our East Texas Haynesville interests. In December 2024, Amplify monetized ninety percent (90%) of its interests in certain units with Haynesville rights in Panola and Shelby Counties, while retaining a ten percent (10%) working interest and the ability to participate in any well drilled within the boundary of such units. Upon closing, such transaction generated approximately $1.4 million in proceeds.
In January 2025, Amplify completed a second transaction with a separate counterparty. Amplify sold ninety percent (90%) of its interest in certain units with Haynesville rights in Harrison County, Texas, in addition to 11 gross operated wells. This transaction also established an Area of Mutual Interest (“AMI”) with the counterparty covering 10,000 gross acres. Amplify retained a ten percent (10%) working interest in the units it divested and purchased a ten percent (10%) working interest in the counterparty’s acreage. Amplify generated net proceeds of $6.2 million from these transactions and estimates the AMI has more than 30 potential gross drilling locations.
2024 Year-End Proved Reserve Update
The Company’s estimated proved reserves at SEC pricing for year-end 2024 totaled 93.0 MMBoe, which consisted of 82.2 MMBoe of proved developed reserves and 10.8 MMBoe of proved undeveloped reserves. Proved developed reserves were lower year-over-year, primarily due to lower SEC pricing for oil and natural gas, which fell from $78.22 to $75.48 for oil and from $2.64 to $2.13 for natural gas, and the impact of 2024 production roll-off. Total proved reserves were comprised of 44% oil, 19% NGLs, and 37% natural gas.
At year-end 2024, Amplify’s total proved reserves and proved developed reserves had PV-10 values of approximately $736 million and $507 million, respectively, using SEC pricing. Proved developed reserve value at Bairoil was lower than 2023 due to a combination of SEC pricing, production performance and higher operating cost assumptions due to significant increases in regulated electricity rates. Proved undeveloped reserves have increased materially as a result of the successful 2024 Beta development program, with the Company adding 23 additional locations and approximately $200 million in PV-10 value. The initial production rates for the two Beta wells brought on-line in 2024 exceeded the type-curves included in our year-end reserve report, and Amplify will consider increasing the type curve assumptions for Beta development wells after evaluating results from the 2025 development program. Detail on the Company’s reserves by asset is provided in the table below. Additionally, Amplify has provided more information on its Beta development program and the substantial value potential of the field in its latest investor presentation, available on its investor relations website.
| Estimated Net Reserves1 | |||||
| Region | MMBoe | % Oil and NGL | Proved Developed PV-10 | Proved Undeveloped PV-10 | Total Proved PV-10 |
| (in millions) | |||||
| Beta | 19.1 | 100% | $144 | $214 | $358 |
| Oklahoma | 27.0 | 46% | 138 | – | 138 |
| Bairoil | 16.4 | 100% | 118 | – | 118 |
| East Texas/ North Louisiana | 28.0 | 30% | 75 | 4 | 79 |
| Eagle Ford (Non-op) | 2.5 | 90% | 32 | 11 | 43 |
| Total | 93.0 | 63% | $507 | $229 | $736 |
| (1) | Amplify’s year-end 2024 total proved reserves, utilizing SEC pricing of $75.48/Bbl for oil and NGLs and $2.13/MMBtu for natural gas. |
Amplify’s reserves estimates were prepared by its third-party independent reserve consultant, Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc.
Key Financial Results
During the fourth quarter of 2024, the Company reported a net loss of approximately $7.4 million. The net loss was primarily attributable to a non-cash unrealized loss on commodity derivatives during the period. Excluding the impact of the non-cash unrealized loss on commodity derivatives in addition to other one-time impacts, Amplify generated Adjusted Net Income of $5.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2024.
Fourth quarter Adjusted EBITDA was $21.8 million, a decrease of approximately $3.7 million from $25.5 million in the prior quarter. The decrease was primarily due to lower realized oil prices (net of hedges) in the fourth quarter compared to the prior quarter.
Free cash flow was $2.9 million for the fourth quarter, a decrease of $0.7 million compared to the prior quarter. Amplify has now generated positive free cash flow in 18 of the last 19 fiscal quarters.
| Fourth Quarter | Third Quarter | |||||
| $ in millions | 2024 | 2024 | ||||
| Net income (loss) | ($7.4 | ) | $22.7 | |||
| Net cash provided by operating activities | $12.5 | $15.7 | ||||
| Average daily production (MBoe/d) | 18.5 | 19.0 | ||||
| Total revenues excluding hedges | $69.0 | $69.9 | ||||
| Adjusted EBITDA (a non-GAAP financial measure) | $21.8 | $25.5 | ||||
| Adjusted net income (loss), (a non-GAAP financial measure) | $5.1 | $9.8 | ||||
| Total capital | $15.3 | $18.2 | ||||
| Free Cash Flow (a non-GAAP financial measure) | $2.9 | $3.6 | ||||
Revolving Credit Facility
As of December 31, 2024, Amplify had $127.0 million outstanding under its revolving credit facility, and net debt to LTM Adjusted EBITDA was 1.2x (net debt as of December 31, 2024 and 4Q24 LTM Adjusted EBITDA). Fourth quarter net debt increased from the prior quarter due to expected changes in working capital and increased development activity, primarily at Beta.
Corporate Production and Pricing
During the fourth quarter of 2024, average daily production was approximately 18.5 Mboepd, a decrease of 0.5 Mboepd from the prior quarter. The decrease in production was driven by gas volumes, which were impacted by gas plant realizations in East Texas. Our oil volumes, although slightly higher compared to the prior quarter, were impacted by platform shutdowns following the completion of the emission reduction and electrification facility projects and several unexpected well failures and subsequent interventions at Beta. With the successful completion of the electrification and emissions reduction project in the fourth quarter 2024 and the intervention projects completed by end of January 2025, we are projecting Beta production to be significantly higher than the fourth quarter, before the impact of the 2025 drilling program. As of March 2, 2025, current 7-day average production rates at Beta were 4,834 gross Bopd (3,635 net Bopd), representing an approximate 9% increase from fourth quarter 2024 volumes, with minimal contribution from the recently completed C48 well, which we continue to draw down since completing in mid-February.
The Company’s product mix for the quarter was 45% crude oil, 17% NGLs, and 38% natural gas.
| Three Months | Three Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| December 31, 2024 | September 30, 2024 | ||||||
| Production volumes – MBOE: | |||||||
| Bairoil | 293 | 294 | |||||
| Beta | 308 | 304 | |||||
| Oklahoma | 436 | 454 | |||||
| East Texas / North Louisiana | 609 | 638 | |||||
| Eagle Ford (Non-op) | 60 | 62 | |||||
| Total – MBoe | 1,706 | 1,752 | |||||
| Total – MBoe/d | 18.5 | 19.0 | |||||
| % – Liquids | 62 | % | 60 | % | |||
Total oil, natural gas and NGL revenues for the fourth quarter of 2024 were approximately $67.2 million, before the impact of derivatives. The Company realized a net gain on commodity derivatives of $4.1 million during the fourth quarter. Oil, natural gas and NGL revenues, net of realized hedges, decreased $3.3 million for the fourth quarter compared to the prior quarter.
The following table sets forth information regarding average realized sales prices for the periods indicated:
| Crude Oil ($/Bbl) | NGLs ($/Bbl) | Natural Gas ($/Mcf) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended December 31, 2024 | Three Months Ended September 30, 2024 | Three Months Ended December 31, 2024 | Three Months Ended September 30, 2024 | Three Months Ended December 31, 2024 | Three Months Ended September 30, 2024 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Average sales price exclusive of realized derivatives and certain deductions from revenue | $ | 66.82 | $ | 71.74 | $ | 23.46 | $ | 21.63 | $ | 2.52 | $ | 1.84 | |||||||||||
| Realized derivatives | 1.43 | (0.24 | ) | – | – | 0.76 | 1.38 | ||||||||||||||||
| Average sales price with realized derivatives exclusive of certain deductions from revenue | $ | 68.25 | $ | 71.50 | $ | 23.46 | $ | 21.63 | $ | 3.28 | $ | 3.22 | |||||||||||
| Certain deductions from revenue | – | – | (1.37 | ) | (1.33 | ) | (0.01 | ) | 0.00 | ||||||||||||||
| Average sales price inclusive of realized derivatives and certain deductions from revenue | $ | 68.25 | $ | 71.50 | $ | 22.09 | $ | 20.30 | $ | 3.27 | $ | 3.22 | |||||||||||
Costs and Expenses
Lease operating expenses in the fourth quarter of 2024 were approximately $35.1 million, or $20.57 per Boe, a $1.8 million increase compared to the prior quarter. Due to increased well failures in the fourth quarter, Beta lease operating costs were higher compared to the prior quarter. Lease operating expenses do not reflect $0.9 million of income generated by Magnify in the fourth quarter.
Severance and ad valorem taxes in the fourth quarter were approximately $5.4 million, a decrease of $0.6 million compared to $6.0 million in the prior quarter, and in line with expectations. Severance and ad valorem taxes as a percentage of revenue were approximately 8.0% in the fourth quarter.
Amplify incurred $4.5 million, or $2.62 per Boe, of gathering, processing and transportation expenses in the fourth quarter, compared to $4.3 million, or $2.45 per Boe, in the prior quarter.
Cash G&A expenses in the fourth quarter were $6.3 million, an increase of $0.1 million compared to the prior quarter and in-line with expectations.
Depreciation, depletion and amortization expense in the fourth quarter totaled $8.4 million, or $4.93 per Boe, compared to $8.1 million, or $4.62 per Boe, in the prior quarter.
Net interest expense was $3.7 million in the fourth quarter, a decrease of $0.1 million compared to $3.8 million in the prior quarter.
Amplify recorded a current income tax benefit of $2.1 million in the fourth quarter.
Fourth Quarter and Full-Year Capital Investments
Cash capital investment during the fourth quarter of 2024 was approximately $15.3 million. During the fourth quarter, the Company’s capital allocation was approximately 65% for Beta development drilling and facility projects, with the remainder distributed across the Company’s other assets.
The following table details Amplify’s capital invested during the fourth quarter of 2024:
| Fourth Quarter | Full-Year | ||||||
| 2024 Capital | 2024 Capital | ||||||
| ($ MM) | ($ MM) | ||||||
| Bairoil | $ | 0.2 | $ | 2.9 | |||
| Beta | $ | 10.0 | $ | 53.7 | |||
| Oklahoma | $ | 0.1 | $ | 3.2 | |||
| East Texas / North Louisiana | $ | 2.8 | $ | 5.6 | |||
| Eagle Ford (Non-op) | $ | 2.1 | $ | 4.1 | |||
| Magnify Energy Services | $ | 0.1 | $ | 1.1 | |||
| Total Capital Invested | $ | 15.3 | $ | 70.6 | |||
2025 Operations & Development Plan
The following table details Amplify’s 2025 projected capital investments of $70 – $80 million:
| Capital Investment by Type (% of Total): | ||||
| Beta Development | 41 | % | ||
| Beta Facility | 16 | % | ||
| Workovers & Other Facilities | 25 | % | ||
| Non-op Development | 18 | % | ||
| Total Capital Investments: | 100 | % | ||
Amplify’s 2025 operations and development plan is designed to continue unlocking the underlying value of the Company’s assets. To achieve this goal, we intend to 1) continue our development program at Beta, 2) execute on low-cost, high-return workover projects, and 3) reduce operating costs by increasing activity at Magnify.
At Beta, Amplify intends to complete six wells in 2025. The C48 well, the first of the six wells to be completed in 2025, was drilled in the fourth quarter of 2024 and completed in mid-February. Similar to the A50 and C59 wells drilled in 2024, the completion of the C48 well was initially designed to target the D-sand. However, drilling conditions encountered in the D-sand and the quality of the C-Sand observed while drilling through the formation, led the team to alter the completion design and target the C-sand instead. The C48 will be the first test of the horizontal potential of the C-sand and we will share the results of the C48 well after obtaining sufficient initial production data.
In 2024 Amplify brought online two new wells at Beta, the A50 well (brought online in June) and the C59 well (brought online in October), both of which exceeded internal projections and increased Beta’s overall production approximately 15% in January 2025 compared to January of 2024. Similarly, the six Beta completions planned in 2025 are expected to significantly increase Amplify’s oil production year-over-year. Additional information regarding the Beta development plan can be found in the investor presentation on the Company’s investor relations website.
In addition to drilling and completing the six wells, Amplify intends to make continued investments in Beta’s facilities. In 2025, the Company expects to invest approximately $8 million to upgrade a 2-mile pipeline that ships all produced fluid from platform Eureka to platform Elly.
At Bairoil, we continue to focus on enhancing water-alternating-gas injection performance through targeted well recompletions and conversions, which helps offset the asset’s nominal production declines. Our plan also includes an investment at our CO2 gas plant intended to reduce overall power usage and lease operating expenses in the second half of 2025.
Amplify’s operating strategy in Oklahoma remains focused on prioritizing a stable free cash flow profile by managing production through an active workover program, artificial lift enhancements, extending well run-times and continuing to reduce operating costs.
In East Texas, we are participating in the completion of four non-operated development projects, which we expect to be online by mid-year. The Company also continues to focus on prudent management of the field, such as optimizing field compression, artificial lift enhancement, and equipment insourcing, which is expected to improve the production profile and lower lease operating costs.
In late 2023, we formed Magnify to in-source specific oilfield services to improve service reliability and to reduce overall operating expenses for the Company. Since its inception, Magnify has generated $3.7 million of Adjusted EBITDA with a capital investment of only $1.7 million. In 2025, we expect to invest an additional $1.4 million of capital in Magnify and project 2025 Adjusted EBITDA of approximately $5 million (with an annualized run rate of $6 million by year-end). We are evaluating additional accretive services for Magnify to service Amplify operated assets.
In the Eagle Ford, we are participating in 14 gross (0.7 net) new development wells and two gross (0.4 net) recompletion projects. These non-operated wells, with highly accretive returns, are currently scheduled to be completed in the first half of 2025.
Full-Year 2025 Guidance
The following standalone guidance is subject to the cautionary statements and limitations described under the “Forward-Looking Statements” caption at the end of this press release. Amplify’s 2025 guidance is based on its current expectations regarding capital investment levels and flat commodity prices for crude oil of $71/Bbl (WTI) and natural gas of $3.75/MMBtu (Henry Hub), and on the assumption that market demand and prices for oil and natural gas will continue at levels that allow for economic production of these products. Additionally, the Company expects to invest approximately 90% of its capital in the first three quarters of the year primarily in connection with the Beta development program. Upon closing of the Transaction with Juniper, the Company will provide updated guidance to include the acquired assets.
A summary of the standalone guidance is presented below:
| FY 2025E | |||
| Low | High | ||
| Net Average Daily Production | |||
| Oil (MBbls/d) | 8.5 | – | 9.4 |
| NGL (MBbls/d) | 3.0 | – | 3.3 |
| Natural Gas (MMcf/d) | 45.0 | – | 51.0 |
| Total (MBoe/d) | 19.0 | – | 21.0 |
| Commodity Price Differential / Realizations (Unhedged) | |||
| Oil Differential ($ / Bbl) | ($3.25) | – | ($4.25) |
| NGL Realized Price (% of WTI NYMEX) | 27% | – | 31% |
| Natural Gas Realized Price (% of Henry Hub) | 85% | – | 92% |
| Other Revenue | |||
| Magnify Energy Services ($ MM) | $4 | – | $6 |
| Other ($ MM) | $2 | – | $3 |
| Total ($ MM) | $6 | – | $9 |
| Gathering, Processing and Transportation Costs | |||
| Oil ($ / Bbl) | $0.65 | – | $0.85 |
| NGL ($ / Bbl) | $2.75 | – | $4.00 |
| Natural Gas ($ / Mcf) | $0.55 | – | $0.75 |
| Total ($ / Boe) | $2.25 | – | $2.85 |
| Average Costs | |||
| Lease Operating ($ / Boe) | $18.50 | – | $20.50 |
| Taxes (% of Revenue) (1) | 6.0% | – | 7.0% |
| Cash General and Administrative ($ / Boe) (2)(3) | $3.40 | – | $3.90 |
| Adjusted EBITDA ($ MM) (2)(3) | $100 | – | $120 |
| Cash Interest Expense ($ MM) | $12 | – | $18 |
| Capital Expenditures ($ MM) | $70 | – | $80 |
| Free Cash Flow ($ MM) (2)(3) | $10 | – | $30 |
| (1) Includes production, ad valorem and franchise taxes | |||
| (2) Refer to “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for Amplify’s definition and use of Cash G&A, Adjusted EBITDA and free cash flow, non-GAAP measures (cash income taxes, which are not included in free cash flow, are expected to range between $0 – $2 million for the year) | |||
| (3) Amplify believes that a quantitative reconciliation of such forward-looking information to the most comparable financial measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP cannot be made available without unreasonable efforts. A reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures would require Amplify to predict the timing and likelihood of future transactions and other items that are difficult to accurately predict. Neither of these forward-looking measures, nor their probable significance, can be quantified with a reasonable degree of accuracy. Accordingly, a reconciliation of the most directly comparable forward-looking GAAP measures is not provided. | |||
Hedging
Recently, the Company took advantage of volatility in the futures market to add to its hedge position, further protecting future cash flows. Amplify executed crude oil swaps covering the second half of 2025 through year-end 2026 at a weighted average price of $68.10. The Company also added natural gas collars for a portion of 2027 with a weighted average floor of $3.63 per MMBtu and a weighted average ceiling of $3.98 per MMBtu.
The following table reflects the hedged volumes under Amplify’s commodity derivative contracts and the average fixed floor and ceiling prices at which production is hedged for January 2025 through December 2027, as of March 4, 2025:
| 2025 | 2026 | 2027 | |||||||||
| Natural Gas Swaps: | |||||||||||
| Average Monthly Volume (MMBtu) | 585,000 | 500,000 | 87,500 | ||||||||
| Weighted Average Fixed Price ($) | $ | 3.75 | $ | 3.79 | $ | 3.76 | |||||
| Natural Gas Collars: | |||||||||||
| Two-way collars | |||||||||||
| Average Monthly Volume (MMBtu) | 500,000 | 500,000 | 87,500 | ||||||||
| Weighted Average Ceiling Price ($) | $ | 3.90 | $ | 4.06 | $ | 4.20 | |||||
| Weighted Average Floor Price ($) | $ | 3.50 | $ | 3.55 | $ | 3.50 | |||||
| Oil Swaps: | |||||||||||
| Average Monthly Volume (Bbls) | 128,583 | 72,750 | |||||||||
| Weighted Average Fixed Price ($) | $ | 70.85 | $ | 69.19 | |||||||
| Oil Collars: | |||||||||||
| Two-way collars | |||||||||||
| Average Monthly Volume (Bbls) | 59,500 | ||||||||||
| Weighted Average Ceiling Price ($) | $ | 80.20 | |||||||||
| Weighted Average Floor Price ($) | $ | 70.00 | |||||||||
Amplify has posted an updated investor presentation containing additional hedging information on its website, www.amplifyenergy.com, under the Investor Relations section.
Annual Report on Form 10-K
Amplify’s financial statements and related footnotes will be available in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, which Amplify expects to file with the SEC on March 5, 2025.
About Amplify Energy
Amplify Energy Corp. is an independent oil and natural gas company engaged in the acquisition, development, exploitation and production of oil and natural gas properties. Amplify’s operations are focused in Oklahoma, the Rockies (Bairoil), federal waters offshore Southern California (Beta), East Texas / North Louisiana, and the Eagle Ford (Non-op). For more information, visit www.amplifyenergy.com.
Conference Call
Amplify will host an investor teleconference tomorrow at 10 a.m. Central Time to discuss these operating and financial results. Interested parties may join the call by dialing (888) 999-5318 at least 15 minutes before the call begins and providing the Conference ID: AEC4Q24. A telephonic replay will be available for fourteen days following the call by dialing (800) 654-1563 and providing the Access Code: 71724906. A transcript and a recorded replay of the call will also be available on our website after the call.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, included in this press release that address activities, events or developments that the Company expects, believes or anticipates will or may occur in the future are forward-looking statements. Terminology such as “may,” “will,” “would,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “project,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “pursue,” “target,” “outlook,” “continue,” the negative of such terms or other comparable terminology are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These statements include, but are not limited to, statements about the Company’s expectations of plans, goals, strategies (including measures to implement strategies), objectives and anticipated results with respect thereto. These statements address activities, events or developments that we expect or anticipate will or may occur in the future, including things such as projections of results of operations, plans for growth, goals, future capital expenditures, competitive strengths, references to future intentions and other such references. These forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties and other factors that could cause the Company’s actual results or financial condition to differ materially from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statements. These include risks and uncertainties relating to, among other things: the Company’s ability to successfully complete the proposed business combination between the Company and certain of Juniper’s portfolio companies, or the “Mergers”; the Company’s evaluation and implementation of strategic alternatives; risks related to the redetermination of the borrowing base under the Company’s revolving credit facility; the Company’s ability to satisfy debt obligations; the Company’s need to make accretive acquisitions or substantial capital expenditures to maintain its declining asset base, including the existence of unanticipated liabilities or problems relating to acquired or divested business or properties; volatility in the prices for oil, natural gas and NGLs; the Company’s ability to access funds on acceptable terms, if at all, because of the terms and conditions governing the Company’s indebtedness, including financial covenants; general political and economic conditions, globally and in the jurisdictions in which we operate, including the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and ongoing conflicts in the Middle East, and the potential destabilizing effect such conflicts may pose for the global oil and natural gas markets; expectations regarding general economic conditions, including inflation; and the impact of local, state and federal governmental regulations, including those related to climate change and hydraulic fracturing, and the current administration’s potential reversal thereof. Please read the Company’s filings with the SEC, including “Risk Factors” in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, and if applicable, the Company’s Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K, which are available on the Company’s Investor Relations website at https://www.amplifyenergy.com/investor-relations/sec-filings/default.aspx or on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov, for a discussion of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from those in such forward-looking statements. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this press release. All forward-looking statements in this press release are qualified in their entirety by these cautionary statements. Except as required by law, the Company undertakes no obligation and does not intend to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future results or otherwise.
No Offer or Solicitation
A portion of this press release relates to a proposed business combination transaction between the Company and certain Juniper portfolio companies. This communication is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities or a solicitation of any vote or approval, in any jurisdiction, pursuant to the proposed business combination transaction or otherwise, nor shall there be any sale, issuance, exchange or transfer of the securities referred to in this document in any jurisdiction in contravention of applicable law. No offer of securities shall be made except by means of a prospectus meeting the requirements of Section 10 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
Important Additional Information Regarding the Mergers Will Be Filed With the SEC
In connection with the proposed transaction, the Company has filed a definitive proxy statement. The definitive proxy statement will be sent to the stockholders of the Company. The Company may also file other documents with the SEC regarding the proposed transaction. INVESTORS AND SECURITY HOLDERS OF AMPLIFY ARE ADVISED TO CAREFULLY READ THE DEFINITIVE PROXY STATEMENT AND ANY OTHER RELEVANT MATERIALS FILED WITH THE SEC WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE MERGERS, THE PARTIES TO THE MERGERS AND THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH THE MERGERS. Investors and security holders may obtain a free copy of the definitive proxy statement and other relevant documents filed by Amplify with the SEC from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Security holders and other interested parties will also be able to obtain, without charge, a copy of the definitive proxy statement and other relevant documents (when available) by (1) directing your written request to: 500 Dallas Street, Suite 1700, Houston, Texas or (2) contacting our Investor Relations department by telephone at (832) 219-9044 or (832) 219-9051. Copies of the documents filed by the Company with the SEC will be available free of charge on the Company’s website at http://www.amplifyenergy.com.
Participants in the Solicitation
Amplify and certain of its respective directors, executive officers and employees may be considered participants in the solicitation of proxies in connection with the proposed transaction. Information regarding the persons who may, under the rules of the SEC, be deemed participants in the solicitation of the stockholders of Amplify in connection with the proposed transaction, including a description of their respective direct or indirect interests, by security holdings or otherwise, is included in the definitive proxy statement filed with the SEC. Additional information regarding the Company’s directors and executive officers is also included in Amplify’s Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders and 2024 Proxy Statement, which was filed with the SEC on April 5, 2024. These documents are available free of charge as described above.
Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
This press release and accompanying schedules include the non-GAAP financial measures of Adjusted EBITDA, Adjusted net income, free cash flow, net debt, PV-10 and cash G&A. The accompanying schedules provide a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable financial measures calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. Amplify’s non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered as alternatives to GAAP measures such as net income, operating income, net cash flows provided by operating activities, standardized measure of discounted future net cash flows, or any other measure of financial performance calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. Amplify’s non-GAAP financial measures may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies because they may not calculate such measures in the same manner as Amplify does.
Adjusted EBITDA. Amplify defines Adjusted EBITDA as net income (loss) plus Interest expense; Income tax expense (benefit); DD&A; Impairment of goodwill and long-lived assets (including oil and natural gas properties); Accretion of AROs; Loss or (gain) on commodity derivative instruments; Cash settlements received or (paid) on expired commodity derivative instruments; Amortization of gain associated with terminated commodity derivatives; Losses or (gains) on sale of assets and other, net; Share-based compensation expenses; Exploration costs; Acquisition and divestiture related expenses; Reorganization items, net; Severance payments; and Other non-routine items that we deem appropriate. Adjusted EBITDA is commonly used as a supplemental financial measure by management and external users of Amplify’s financial statements, such as investors, research analysts and rating agencies, to assess: (1) its operating performance as compared to other companies in Amplify’s industry without regard to financing methods, capital structures or historical cost basis; (2) the ability of its assets to generate cash sufficient to pay interest and support Amplify’s indebtedness; and (3) the viability of projects and the overall rates of return on alternative investment opportunities. Since Adjusted EBITDA excludes some, but not all, items that affect net income or loss and because these measures may vary among other companies, the Adjusted EBITDA data presented in this press release may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. The GAAP measures most directly comparable to Adjusted EBITDA are net income and net cash provided by operating activities.
Adjusted Net Income. Amplify defines Adjusted Net Income as net income (loss) adjusted for loss (gain) on commodity derivative instruments, acquisition & divestiture related expenses, unusual and infrequent items, and the income tax expense or benefit of these adjustments using our federal statutory tax rate. Adjusted Net Income (Loss) excludes the impact of unusual and infrequent items affecting earnings that vary widely and unpredictably, including derivative gains and losses. This measure is not meant to disassociate these items from management’s performance but rather is intended to provide helpful information to investors interested in comparing our performance between periods. Adjusted net income (loss) is not considered to be an alternative to net income (loss) reported in accordance with GAAP.
Free cash flow. Amplify defines free cash flow as Adjusted EBITDA, less cash interest expense and capital expenditures. Free cash flow is an important non-GAAP financial measure for Amplify’s investors since it serves as an indicator of the Company’s success in providing a cash return on investment. The GAAP measures most directly comparable to free cash flow are net income and net cash provided by operating activities.
Net debt. Amplify defines net debt as the total principal amount drawn on the revolving credit facility less cash and cash equivalents. The Company uses net debt as a measure of financial position and believes this measure provides useful additional information to investors to evaluate the Company’s capital structure and financial leverage.
PV-10. PV-10 is a non-GAAP financial measure that represents the present value of estimated future cash inflows from proved oil and natural gas reserves that are calculated using the unweighted arithmetic average first-day-of-the-month prices for the prior 12 months, less future development and operating costs, discounted at 10% per annum to reflect the timing of future cash flows. The most directly comparable GAAP measure to PV-10 is standardized measure. PV-10 differs from standardized measure in its treatment of estimated future income taxes, which are excluded from PV-10. Amplify believes the presentation of PV-10 provides useful information because it is widely used by investors in evaluating oil and natural gas companies without regard to specific income tax characteristics of such entities. PV-10 is not intended to represent the current market value of our estimated proved reserves. PV-10 should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the standardized measure as defined under GAAP.
Cash G&A. Amplify defines cash G&A as general and administrative expense, less share-based compensation expense; acquisition and divestiture costs; bad debt expense; and severance payments. Cash G&A is an important non-GAAP financial measure for Amplify’s investors since it allows for analysis of G&A spend without regard to share-based compensation and other non-recurring expenses which can vary substantially from company to company. The GAAP measures most directly comparable to cash G&A is total G&A expenses.
Contacts
Jim Frew — Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(832) 219-9044
jim.frew@amplifyenergy.com
Michael Jordan — Director, Finance and Treasurer
(832) 219-9051
michael.jordan@amplifyenergy.com
Selected Operating and Financial Data (Tables)
| Amplify Energy Corp. | |||||||
| Selected Financial Data – Unaudited | |||||||
| Statements of Operations Data | |||||||
| Three Months | Three Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s, except per share data) | December 31, 2024 | September 30, 2024 | |||||
| Revenues: | |||||||
| Oil and natural gas sales | $ | 67,189 | $ | 68,135 | |||
| Other revenues | 1,832 | 1,723 | |||||
| Total revenues | 69,021 | 69,858 | |||||
| Costs and Expenses: | |||||||
| Lease operating expense | 35,100 | 33,255 | |||||
| Pipeline incident loss | 2,405 | 247 | |||||
| Gathering, processing and transportation | 4,468 | 4,290 | |||||
| Exploration | 10 | – | |||||
| Taxes other than income | 5,356 | 5,997 | |||||
| Depreciation, depletion and amortization | 8,418 | 8,102 | |||||
| General and administrative expense | 9,486 | 8,251 | |||||
| Accretion of asset retirement obligations | 2,156 | 2,125 | |||||
| Realized (gain) loss on commodity derivatives | (4,052 | ) | (6,375 | ) | |||
| Unrealized (gain) loss on commodity derivatives | 13,357 | (18,672 | ) | ||||
| (Gain) loss on sale of properties | (1,367 | ) | – | ||||
| Other, net | 334 | 38 | |||||
| Total costs and expenses | 75,671 | 37,258 | |||||
| Operating Income (loss) | (6,650 | ) | 32,600 | ||||
| Other Income (Expense): | |||||||
| Interest expense, net | (3,684 | ) | (3,756 | ) | |||
| Other income (expense) | (113 | ) | (130 | ) | |||
| Total other income (expense) | (3,797 | ) | (3,886 | ) | |||
| Income (loss) before reorganization items, net and income taxes | (10,447 | ) | 28,714 | ||||
| Income tax benefit (expense) – current | 2,132 | (412 | ) | ||||
| Income tax benefit (expense) – deferred | 886 | (5,650 | ) | ||||
| Net income (loss) | $ | (7,429 | ) | $ | 22,652 | ||
| Earnings per share: | |||||||
| Basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share | $ | (0.19 | ) | $ | 0.54 | ||
| Selected Financial Data – Unaudited | |||||||
| Operating Statistics | |||||||
| Three Months | Three Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s, except per unit data) | December 31, 2024 | September 30, 2024 | |||||
| Oil and natural gas revenue: | |||||||
| Oil Sales | $ | 50,817 | $ | 54,353 | |||
| NGL Sales | 6,602 | 6,096 | |||||
| Natural Gas Sales | 9,770 | 7,686 | |||||
| Total oil and natural gas sales – Unhedged | $ | 67,189 | $ | 68,135 | |||
| Production volumes: | |||||||
| Oil Sales – MBbls | 760 | 758 | |||||
| NGL Sales – MBbls | 299 | 301 | |||||
| Natural Gas Sales – MMcf | 3,883 | 4,165 | |||||
| Total – MBoe | 1,706 | 1,752 | |||||
| Total – MBoe/d | 18.5 | 19.0 | |||||
| Average sales price (excluding commodity derivatives): | |||||||
| Oil – per Bbl | $ | 66.82 | $ | 71.74 | |||
| NGL – per Bbl | $ | 22.09 | $ | 20.29 | |||
| Natural gas – per Mcf | $ | 2.52 | $ | 1.85 | |||
| Total – per Boe | $ | 39.37 | $ | 38.88 | |||
| Average unit costs per Boe: | |||||||
| Lease operating expense | $ | 20.57 | $ | 18.98 | |||
| Gathering, processing and transportation | $ | 2.62 | $ | 2.45 | |||
| Taxes other than income | $ | 3.14 | $ | 3.42 | |||
| General and administrative expense | $ | 5.56 | $ | 4.71 | |||
| Realized gain/(loss) on commodity derivatives | $ | 2.38 | $ | 3.64 | |||
| Depletion, depreciation, and amortization | $ | 4.93 | $ | 4.62 | |||
| Selected Financial Data – Unaudited | |||||||
| Asset Operating Statistics | |||||||
| Three Months | Three Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| December 31, 2024 | September 30, 2024 | ||||||
| Production volumes – MBOE: | |||||||
| Bairoil | 293 | 294 | |||||
| Beta | 308 | 304 | |||||
| Oklahoma | 436 | 454 | |||||
| East Texas / North Louisiana | 609 | 638 | |||||
| Eagle Ford (Non-op) | 60 | 62 | |||||
| Total – MBoe | 1,706 | 1,752 | |||||
| Total – MBoe/d | 18.5 | 19.0 | |||||
| % – Liquids | 62 | % | 60 | % | |||
| Lease operating expense – $M: | |||||||
| Bairoil | $ | 11,800 | $ | 13,164 | |||
| Beta | 12,113 | 9,520 | |||||
| Oklahoma | 3,948 | 3,644 | |||||
| East Texas / North Louisiana | 5,887 | 5,592 | |||||
| Eagle Ford (Non-op) | 1,351 | 1,335 | |||||
| Total Lease operating expense: | $ | 35,099 | $ | 33,255 | |||
| Capital expenditures – $M: | |||||||
| Bairoil | $ | 190 | $ | 1,224 | |||
| Beta | 10,001 | 12,047 | |||||
| Oklahoma | 168 | 1,449 | |||||
| East Texas / North Louisiana | 2,758 | 2,303 | |||||
| Eagle Ford (Non-op) | 2,125 | 1,157 | |||||
| Magnify Energy Services | 82 | 44 | |||||
| Total Capital expenditures: | $ | 15,324 | $ | 18,224 | |||
| Selected Financial Data – Unaudited | |||||||
| Balance Sheet Data | |||||||
| (Amounts in $000s) | December 31, 2024 | September 30, 2024 | |||||
| Assets | |||||||
| Cash and Cash Equivalents | $ | – | $ | – | |||
| Accounts Receivable | 39,713 | 32,295 | |||||
| Other Current Assets | 32,064 | 37,862 | |||||
| Total Current Assets | $ | 71,777 | $ | 70,157 | |||
| Net Oil and Gas Properties | $ | 386,218 | $ | 378,871 | |||
| Other Long-Term Assets | 289,081 | 290,188 | |||||
| Total Assets | $ | 747,076 | $ | 739,216 | |||
| Liabilities | |||||||
| Accounts Payable | $ | 13,231 | $ | 18,107 | |||
| Accrued Liabilities | 43,413 | 36,699 | |||||
| Other Current Liabilities | 11,494 | 11,362 | |||||
| Total Current Liabilities | $ | 68,138 | $ | 66,168 | |||
| Long-Term Debt | $ | 127,000 | $ | 120,000 | |||
| Asset Retirement Obligation | 129,700 | 127,556 | |||||
| Other Long-Term Liabilities | 13,326 | 10,822 | |||||
| Total Liabilities | $ | 338,164 | $ | 324,546 | |||
| Shareholders’ Equity | |||||||
| Common Stock & APIC | $ | 440,380 | $ | 438,709 | |||
| Accumulated Earnings (Deficit) | (31,468 | ) | (24,039 | ) | |||
| Total Shareholders’ Equity | $ | 408,912 | $ | 414,670 | |||
| Selected Financial Data – Unaudited | |||||||
| Statements of Cash Flows Data | |||||||
| Three Months | Three Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s) | December 31, 2024 | September 30, 2024 | |||||
| Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities | $ | 12,455 | $ | 15,737 | |||
| Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities | (19,379 | ) | (18,078 | ) | |||
| Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities | 6,924 | 1,839 | |||||
| Selected Operating and Financial Data (Tables) | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Unaudited GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures | |||||||
| Adjusted EBITDA and Free Cash Flow | |||||||
| Three Months | Three Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s) | December 31, 2024 | September 30, 2024 | |||||
| Reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to Net Cash Provided from Operating Activities: | |||||||
| Net cash provided by operating activities | $ | 12,455 | $ | 15,737 | |||
| Changes in working capital | 4,770 | 5,937 | |||||
| Interest expense, net | 3,684 | 3,756 | |||||
| Cash settlements received on terminated commodity derivatives | – | (793 | ) | ||||
| Amortization of gain associated with terminated commodity derivatives | 159 | – | |||||
| Amortization and write-off of deferred financing fees | (315 | ) | (310 | ) | |||
| Exploration costs | 10 | – | |||||
| Acquisition and divestiture related costs | 1,424 | 186 | |||||
| Plugging and abandonment cost | 754 | 372 | |||||
| Current income tax expense (benefit) | (2,132 | ) | 412 | ||||
| Pipeline incident loss | 2,405 | 247 | |||||
| (Gain) loss on sale of properties | (1,367 | ) | – | ||||
| Adjusted EBITDA: | $ | 21,847 | $ | 25,544 | |||
| Reconciliation of Free Cash Flow to Net Cash Provided from Operating Activities: | |||||||
| Adjusted EBITDA: | $ | 21,847 | $ | 25,544 | |||
| Less: Cash interest expense | 3,598 | 3,721 | |||||
| Less: Capital expenditures | 15,324 | 18,224 | |||||
| Free Cash Flow: | $ | 2,925 | $ | 3,599 | |||
| Selected Operating and Financial Data (Tables) | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Unaudited GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures | |||||||
| Adjusted EBITDA and Free Cash Flow | |||||||
| Twelve Months | Twelve Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s, except per share data) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | |||||
| Reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA1to Net Cash Provided from Operating Activities: | |||||||
| Net cash provided by operating activities | $ | 51,293 | $ | 141,590 | |||
| Changes in working capital | 32,272 | (8,517 | ) | ||||
| Interest expense, net | 14,599 | 17,719 | |||||
| Cash settlements received on terminated commodity derivatives | (793 | ) | (658 | ) | |||
| Amortization of gain associated with terminated commodity derivatives | 159 | 658 | |||||
| Amortization and write-off of deferred financing fees | (1,233 | ) | (1,980 | ) | |||
| Exploration costs | 61 | 57 | |||||
| Acquisition and divestiture related costs | 1,633 | 219 | |||||
| Plugging and abandonment cost | 1,640 | 2,239 | |||||
| Current income tax expense (benefit) | 232 | 4,817 | |||||
| Pipeline incident loss | 3,859 | 19,981 | |||||
| (Gain) loss on sale of properties | (1,367 | ) | – | ||||
| LOPI – timing differences | – | (4,636 | ) | ||||
| Litigation settlement | – | (84,875 | ) | ||||
| Other | 686 | 1,418 | |||||
| Adjusted EBITDA: | $ | 103,041 | $ | 88,032 | |||
| Reconciliation of Free Cash Flow to Net Cash Provided from Operating Activities: | |||||||
| Adjusted EBITDA1: | $ | 103,041 | $ | 88,032 | |||
| Less: Cash interest expense | 14,438 | 16,263 | |||||
| Less: Capital expenditures | 70,644 | 33,744 | |||||
| Free Cash Flow: | $ | 17,959 | $ | 38,025 | |||
| (1) | Adjusted EBITDA includes a revenue suspense release of $8.4 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2024. See “Revenue Payables in Suspense” table for additional information. | |
| Selected Operating and Financial Data (Tables) | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Unaudited GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures | |||||||
| Adjusted EBITDA1 and Free Cash Flow | |||||||
| Three Months | Three Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s) | December 31, 2024 | September 30, 2024 | |||||
| Reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to Net Income (Loss): | |||||||
| Net income (loss) | $ | (7,429 | ) | $ | 22,652 | ||
| Interest expense, net | 3,684 | 3,756 | |||||
| Income tax expense (benefit) – current | (2,132 | ) | 412 | ||||
| Income tax expense (benefit) – deferred | (886 | ) | 5,650 | ||||
| Depreciation, depletion and amortization | 8,418 | 8,102 | |||||
| Accretion of asset retirement obligations | 2,156 | 2,125 | |||||
| (Gains) losses on commodity derivatives | 9,305 | (25,047 | ) | ||||
| Cash settlements received (paid) on expired commodity derivative instruments | 4,052 | 5,582 | |||||
| Amortization of gain associated with terminated commodity derivatives | 159 | – | |||||
| Acquisition and divestiture related costs | 1,424 | 186 | |||||
| Share-based compensation expense | 1,686 | 1,815 | |||||
| (Gain) loss on sale of properties | (1,367 | ) | – | ||||
| Exploration costs | 10 | – | |||||
| Loss on settlement of AROs | 334 | 38 | |||||
| Bad debt expense | 28 | 26 | |||||
| Pipeline incident loss | 2,405 | 247 | |||||
| Adjusted EBITDA1: | $ | 21,847 | $ | 25,544 | |||
| Reconciliation of Free Cash Flow to Net Income (Loss): | |||||||
| Adjusted EBITDA: | $ | 21,847 | $ | 25,544 | |||
| Less: Cash interest expense | 3,598 | 3,721 | |||||
| Less: Capital expenditures | 15,324 | 18,224 | |||||
| Free Cash Flow: | $ | 2,925 | $ | 3,599 | |||
| Selected Operating and Financial Data (Tables) | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Unaudited GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures | |||||||
| Adjusted EBITDA and Free Cash Flow | |||||||
| Twelve Months | Twelve Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s, except per share data) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | |||||
| Reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA1to Net Income (Loss): | |||||||
| Net income (loss) | $ | 12,946 | $ | 392,750 | |||
| Interest expense, net | 14,599 | 17,719 | |||||
| Income tax expense (benefit) – current | 232 | 4,817 | |||||
| Income tax expense (benefit) – deferred | 2,196 | (253,796 | ) | ||||
| Depreciation, depletion and amortization | 32,586 | 28,004 | |||||
| Accretion of asset retirement obligations | 8,438 | 7,951 | |||||
| (Gains) losses on commodity derivatives | 2,047 | (40,343 | ) | ||||
| Cash settlements received (paid) on expired commodity derivative instruments | 17,617 | (8,273 | ) | ||||
| Amortization of gain associated with terminated commodity derivatives | 159 | 658 | |||||
| Acquisition and divestiture related costs | 1,633 | 219 | |||||
| Share-based compensation expense | 6,799 | 5,280 | |||||
| (Gain) loss on sale of properties | (1,367 | ) | – | ||||
| Exploration costs | 61 | 57 | |||||
| Loss on settlement of AROs | 470 | 1,003 | |||||
| Bad debt expense | 80 | 98 | |||||
| Pipeline incident loss | 3,859 | 19,981 | |||||
| LOPI – timing differences | – | (4,636 | ) | ||||
| Litigation settlement | – | (84,875 | ) | ||||
| Other | 686 | 1,418 | |||||
| Adjusted EBITDA: | $ | 103,041 | $ | 88,032 | |||
| Reconciliation of Free Cash Flow to Net Income (Loss): | |||||||
| Adjusted EBITDA1: | $ | 103,041 | $ | 88,032 | |||
| Less: Cash interest expense | 14,438 | 16,263 | |||||
| Less: Capital expenditures | 70,644 | 33,744 | |||||
| Free Cash Flow: | $ | 17,959 | $ | 38,025 | |||
| (1) | Adjusted EBITDA includes a revenue suspense release of $8.4 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2024. See “Revenue Payables in Suspense” table for additional information. | |
| Selected Operating and Financial Data (Tables) | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Unaudited GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures | |||||||
| Net Income (Loss) to Adjusted Net Income (Loss) | |||||||
| Three Months | Three Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s, except per share data) | December 31, 2024 | September 30, 2024 | |||||
| Reconciliation of Adjusted Net Income (Loss): | |||||||
| Net income (loss) | $ | (7,429 | ) | $ | 22,652 | ||
| Unrealized (gain) loss on commodity derivatives | 13,357 | (18,672 | ) | ||||
| Acquisition and divestiture related costs | 1,424 | 186 | |||||
| Non-recurring costs: | |||||||
| Income tax expense (benefit) – deferred | (886 | ) | 5,650 | ||||
| Gain on sale of properties | (1,367 | ) | – | ||||
| Litigation settlement | – | – | |||||
| Tax effect of adjustments | (12 | ) | (39 | ) | |||
| Adjusted net income (loss) | $ | 5,087 | $ | 9,777 | |||
| Selected Operating and Financial Data (Tables) | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Unaudited GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures | |||||||
| Net Income (Loss) to Adjusted Net Income (Loss) | |||||||
| Twelve Months | Twelve Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s, except per share data) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | |||||
| Reconciliation of Adjusted Net Income (Loss): | |||||||
| Net income (loss) | $ | 12,946 | $ | 392,750 | |||
| Unrealized (gain) loss on commodity derivatives | 20,457 | (47,958 | ) | ||||
| Acquisition and divestiture related costs | 1,633 | 219 | |||||
| Non-recurring costs: | |||||||
| Income tax expense (benefit) – deferred1 | 2,196 | (253,796 | ) | ||||
| Gain on sale of properties | (1,367 | ) | – | ||||
| Litigation settlement2 | – | (84,875 | ) | ||||
| Tax effect of adjustments3 | (56 | ) | 17,778 | ||||
| Adjusted net income (loss) | $ | 35,809 | $ | 24,118 | |||
| (1) | In 2023, we achieved three years of cumulative book income which resulted in the release of our valuation allowance of $284.9 million. | |
| (2) | In 2023, non-recurring costs included a litigation settlement with the shipping companies and the containerships whose anchors struck the Company’s pipeline. | |
| (3) | The federal statutory rates were utilized for all periods presented. | |
| Selected Operating and Financial Data (Tables) | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Unaudited GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures | |||||||
| Cash General and Administrative Expenses | |||||||
| Three Months | Three Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s) | December 31, 2024 | September 30, 2024 | |||||
| General and administrative expense | $ | 9,486 | $ | 8,251 | |||
| Less: Share-based compensation expense | 1,686 | 1,815 | |||||
| Less: Acquisition and divestiture costs | 1,424 | 186 | |||||
| Less: Bad debt expense | 28 | 26 | |||||
| Less: Severance payments | — | — | |||||
| Total Cash General and Administrative Expense | $ | 6,348 | $ | 6,224 | |||
| Selected Operating and Financial Data (Tables) | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Unaudited GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures | |||||||
| Cash General and Administrative Expenses | |||||||
| Twelve Months | Twelve Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2023 | |||||
| General and administrative expense | $ | 35,895 | $ | 32,984 | |||
| Less: Share-based compensation expense | 6,799 | 5,280 | |||||
| Less: Acquisition and divestiture costs | 1,633 | 219 | |||||
| Less: Bad debt expense | 80 | 98 | |||||
| Less: Severance payments | 344 | 965 | |||||
| Total Cash General and Administrative Expense | $ | 27,039 | $ | 26,422 | |||
| Selected Operating and Financial Data (Tables) | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Unaudited GAAP Financial Measures to Non-GAAP Financial Measures | |||||||
| Revenue Payables in Suspense | |||||||
| Three Months | Twelve Months | ||||||
| Ended | Ended | ||||||
| (Amounts in $000s) | December 31, 2024 | December 31, 2024 | |||||
| Oil and natural gas sales | $ | – | $ | 4,023 | |||
| Other revenues | – | 4,829 | |||||
| Severance tax and other deducts | – | (433 | ) | ||||
| Total net revenue | $ | – | $ | 8,419 | |||
| Production volumes: | |||||||
| Oil (MBbls) | – | 33 | |||||
| NGLs (MBbls) | – | 31 | |||||
| Natural gas (MMcf) | – | 441 | |||||
| Total (Mboe) | – | 138 | |||||
| Total (Mboe/d) | – | 0.38 | |||||
| As of | As of | ||||||
| December 31, | December 31, | ||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | ||||||
| Standardized measure of future net cash flows, discounted at 10% ($ M) | $608,239 | $626,131 | |||||
| Add: PV of future income tax, discounted at 10% ($ M) | $127,526 | $130,882 | |||||
| PV-10 ($ M) | $735,765 | $757,013 | |||||
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
Achieved record gross bookings of $65.8 million and revenue of $59.7 million in full-year 2024
Signed 46 new customers in 2024 and expanded relationship with existing customers across key markets including power, automotive, memory, foundry, and display
Expanded Product Portfolio with the Acquisition of Cadence’s Process Proximity Compensation Product Line
SANTA CLARA, Calif., March 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Silvaco Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SVCO) (“Silvaco” or the “Company”), a provider of TCAD, EDA software, and SIP solutions that enable innovative semiconductor design and digital twin modeling through AI software and automation, today announced its fourth quarter and full year 2024 results.
“We are proud to close out the year with strong momentum and growing customer traction, including 46 new customer wins in 2024 and multiple bookings on our AI based, flagship FTCO platform,” said Dr. Babak Taheri, Silvaco’s Chief Executive Officer. Dr. Taheri continued, “Our first acquisition as a public company marks a significant milestone in executing our M&A strategy for talent, technology and expanding through inorganic growth. With a continued focus on innovation and execution, we are well-positioned to build on this success and drive further growth in 2025 for our EDA and TCAD product lines.”
Fourth Quarter 2024 and Recent Business Highlights
Full Year 2024 Business Highlights
Fourth Quarter 2024 Financial Results
GAAP Financial Results
Key Operating Indicators and Non-GAAP Financial Results:
Full Year 2024 Financial Results
GAAP Financial Results
Key Operating Indicators and Non-GAAP Financial Results:
For a discussion of the non-GAAP metrics presented in this press release, as well as a reconciliation of non-GAAP metrics to the nearest comparable GAAP metric, see “Discussion of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and “GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation” in the accompanying tables below.
Supplementary materials to this press release, including our fourth quarter 2024 financial results, can be found at https://investors.silvaco.com/financial-information/quarterly-results.
First Quarter and Full Year 2025 Financial Outlook
As of March 5, 2025, Silvaco is providing guidance for its first quarter of 2025 and its full-year 2025, which represents Silvaco’s current estimates on its operations and financial results. The financial information below represents forward-looking financial information and in some instances forward-looking, non-GAAP financial information, including estimates of non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss) and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share. GAAP gross margin is the most comparable GAAP measure to non-GAAP gross margin, GAAP operating income (loss) is the most comparable GAAP measure to non-GAAP operating income (loss). GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share is the most comparable GAAP measure to non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share. Non-GAAP gross margin differs from GAAP gross margin in that it excludes items such as stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets, and payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release. Non-GAAP operating income (loss) differs from GAAP operating income (loss) in that it excludes items such as acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs, stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets, payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release, IPO preparation costs, and executive severance costs. Non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share differs from GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share in that it excludes certain costs, including IPO preparation costs, acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs, stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets, payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release, executive severance costs, change in fair value of contingent consideration, foreign exchange (gain) loss, loss on debt extinguishment, and the income tax effect on non-GAAP items. Silvaco is unable to predict with reasonable certainty the ultimate outcome of these exclusions without unreasonable effort. Therefore, Silvaco has not provided guidance for GAAP gross margin, GAAP operating income or GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share or a reconciliation of the forward-looking non-GAAP gross margin or non-GAAP operating income or non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share guidance to GAAP gross margin or GAAP operating income or GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share, respectively. However, it is important to note that these excluded items could be material to our results computed in accordance with GAAP in future periods.
Based on current business trends and conditions, the Company expects for first quarter 2025 the following:
For full year 2025, the Company expects:
Q4 2024 Conference Call Details
A press release highlighting the Company’s results along with supplemental financial results will be available at https://investors.silvaco.com/ along with an earnings presentation to accompany management’s prepared remarks on the day of the conference call, after market close. An archived replay of the conference call will be available on this website for a limited time after the call. Participants who want to join the call and ask a question may register for the call here to receive the dial-in numbers and unique PIN.
Date: Wednesday, March 5, 2025
Time: 5:00 p.m. Eastern time
Webcast: Here (live and replay)
About Silvaco
Silvaco is a provider of TCAD, EDA software, and SIP solutions that enable semiconductor design and digital twin modeling through AI software and innovation. Silvaco’s solutions are used for semiconductor and photonics processes, devices, and systems development across display, power devices, automotive, memory, high performance compute, foundries, photonics, internet of things, and 5G/6G mobile markets for complex SoC design. Silvaco is headquartered in Santa Clara, California, and has a global presence with offices located in North America, Europe, Brazil, China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan.
Safe Harbor Statement
This press release contains forward-looking statements based on Silvaco’s current expectations. The words “believe”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intend”, “anticipate”, “plan”, “project”, “will”, and similar phrases as they relate to Silvaco are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements reflect the current views and assumptions of Silvaco and are subject to various risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations.
These forward-looking statements include but are not limited to, statements regarding our future operating results, financial position, and guidance, our business strategy and plans, our objectives for future operations, our development or delivery of new or enhanced products, and anticipated results of those products for our customers, our competitive positioning, projected costs, technological capabilities, and plans, and macroeconomic trends.
A variety of risks and factors that are beyond our control could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements including, without limitation, the following: (a) market conditions; (b) anticipated trends, challenges and growth in our business and the markets in which we operate; (c) our ability to appropriately respond to changing technologies on a timely and cost-effective basis; (d) the size and growth potential of the markets for our software solutions, and our ability to serve those markets; (e) our expectations regarding competition in our existing and new markets; (f) the level of demand in our customers’ end markets; (g) regulatory developments in the United States and foreign countries; (h) changes in trade policies, including the imposition of tariffs; (i) proposed new software solutions, services or developments; (j) our ability to attract and retain key management personnel; (k) our customer relationships and our ability to retain and expand our customer relationships; (l) our ability to diversify our customer base and develop relationships in new markets; (m) the strategies, prospects, plans, expectations, and objectives of management for future operations; (n) public health crises, pandemics, and epidemics and their effects on our business and our customers’ businesses; (o) the impact of the current conflicts between Ukraine and Russia and Israel and Hamas and the ongoing trade disputes among the United States and China on our business, financial condition or prospects, including extreme volatility in the global capital markets making debt or equity financing more difficult to obtain, more costly or more dilutive, delays and disruptions of the global supply chains and the business activities of our suppliers, distributors, customers and other business partners; (p) changes in general economic or business conditions or economic or demographic trends in the United States and foreign countries including changes in tariffs, interest rates and inflation; (q) our ability to raise additional capital; (r) our ability to accurately forecast demand for our software solutions; (s) our expectations regarding the outcome of any ongoing litigation; (t) our expectations regarding the period during which we qualify as an emerging growth company under the JOBS Act and as a smaller reporting company under the Exchange Act; (u) our expectations regarding our ability to obtain, maintain, protect and enforce intellectual property protection for our technology; (v) our status as a controlled company; (w) our use of the net proceeds from our initial public offering, and (x) our ability to successfully integrate, retain key personnel, and realize the anticipated benefits of the acquisition of Cadence’s PPC product line.
It is not possible for us to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results or outcomes to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements we may make. Accordingly, you should not rely on any of the forward-looking statements. Additional information relating to the uncertainty affecting the Silvaco’s business is contained in Silvaco’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. These documents are available on the SEC Filings section of the Investor Relations section of Silvaco’s website at http://investors.silvaco.com/. These forward-looking statements represent Silvaco’s expectations as of the date of this press release. Subsequent events may cause these expectations to change, and Silvaco disclaims any obligations to update or alter these forward-looking statements in the future, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
Discussion of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
We use certain non-GAAP financial measures to supplement the performance measures in our consolidated financial statements, which are presented in accordance with GAAP. These non-GAAP financial measures include non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss), and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share. We use these non-GAAP financial measures for financial and operational decision-making and as a mean to assist us in evaluating period-to-period comparisons.
We define non-GAAP gross profit and non-GAAP gross margin as our GAAP gross profit and GAAP gross margin adjusted to exclude certain costs, including stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets and payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release. We define non-GAAP operating income (loss), as our GAAP operating income (loss) adjusted to exclude certain costs, including IPO preparation costs, acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs, stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets, payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release, and executive severance costs. We define non-GAAP net income (loss) as our GAAP net income (loss) adjusted to exclude certain costs, including IPO preparation costs, acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs, stock-based compensation expense, amortization of acquired intangible assets, payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release, executive severance costs, change in fair value of contingent consideration, foreign exchange (gain) loss, loss on debt extinguishment, and the income tax effect on non-GAAP items. Our non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share is calculated in the same way as our non-GAAP net income (loss), but on a per share basis. We monitor non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss) and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share as non-GAAP financial measures to supplement the financial information we present in accordance with GAAP to provide investors with additional information regarding our financial results.
Certain items are excluded from our non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss) and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share because these items are non-cash in nature or are not indicative of our core operating performance and render comparisons with prior periods and competitors less meaningful. We adjust GAAP gross profit, GAAP gross margin, GAAP operating income (loss), GAAP net income (loss), and GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share for these items to arrive at non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss), and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share because these amounts can vary substantially from company to company within our industry depending upon accounting methods and book values of assets, capital structure and the method by which the assets were acquired. By excluding certain items that may not be indicative of our recurring core operating results, we believe that non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating income (loss), non-GAAP net income (loss) and non-GAAP diluted net income (loss) per share provide meaningful supplemental information regarding our performance.
We believe these non-GAAP financial measures are useful to investors and others because they allow for additional information with respect to financial measures used by management in its financial and operational decision-making and they may be used by our institutional investors and the analyst community to help them analyze our financial performance and the health of our business. However, there are a number of limitations related to the use of non-GAAP financial measures, and these non-GAAP measures should be considered in addition to, not as a substitute for or in isolation from, our financial results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Other companies, including companies in our industry, may calculate these non-GAAP financial measures differently or not at all, which reduces their usefulness as comparative measures.
| SILVACO GROUP, INC. | |||||||||
| CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS | |||||||||
| (Unaudited, in thousands except share and par value amounts) | |||||||||
| December 31, | December 31, | ||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | ||||||||
| ASSETS | |||||||||
| Current assets: | |||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 19,606 | $ | 4,421 | |||||
| Short-term marketable securities | 63,071 | – | |||||||
| Accounts receivable, net | 9,211 | 4,006 | |||||||
| Contract assets, net | 11,932 | 8,749 | |||||||
| Prepaid expenses and other current assets | 3,460 | 2,549 | |||||||
| Deferred transaction costs | – | 1,163 | |||||||
| Total current assets | 107,280 | 20,888 | |||||||
| Non-current assets: | |||||||||
| Non-current marketable securities | 4,785 | – | |||||||
| Property and equipment, net | 865 | 591 | |||||||
| Operating lease right-of-use assets, net | 1,711 | 1,963 | |||||||
| Intangible assets, net | 4,369 | 342 | |||||||
| Goodwill | 9,026 | 9,026 | |||||||
| Non-current portion of contract assets, net | 12,611 | 6,250 | |||||||
| Other assets | 1,698 | 1,825 | |||||||
| Total non-current assets | 35,065 | 19,997 | |||||||
| Total assets | $ | 142,345 | $ | 40,885 | |||||
| Liabilities and stockholders’ equity | |||||||||
| Current liabilities: | |||||||||
| Accounts payable | $ | 3,316 | $ | 2,495 | |||||
| Accrued expenses and other current liabilities | 19,801 | 10,255 | |||||||
| Accrued income taxes | 1,668 | 1,626 | |||||||
| Deferred revenue, current | 7,497 | 7,882 | |||||||
| Operating lease liabilities, current | 744 | 735 | |||||||
| Related party line of credit | – | 2,000 | |||||||
| Vendor financing obligations, current | 1,462 | – | |||||||
| Total current liabilities | 34,488 | 24,993 | |||||||
| Non-current liabilities: | |||||||||
| Deferred revenue, non-current | 3,593 | 5,071 | |||||||
| Operating lease liabilities, non-current | 946 | 1,198 | |||||||
| Vendor financing obligations, non-current | 2,928 | – | |||||||
| Other non-current liabilities | 307 | 221 | |||||||
| Total liabilities | 42,262 | 31,483 | |||||||
| Commitments and contingencies | |||||||||
| Stockholders’ equity | |||||||||
| Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value; 10,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2024; no shares authorized as of December 31, 2023 | – | – | |||||||
| Common stock, $0.0001 par value; 500,000,000 shares authorized; 28,526,615 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2024; 25,000,000 shares authorized; 20,000,000 shares issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2023 | 3 | 2 | |||||||
| Additional paid-in capital | 130,360 | – | |||||||
| (Accumulated deficit) Retained earnings | (28,012 | ) | 11,392 | ||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (2,268 | ) | (1,992 | ) | |||||
| Total stockholders’ equity | 100,083 | 9,402 | |||||||
| Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity | $ | 142,345 | $ | 40,885 | |||||
| SILVACO GROUP, INC. | |||||||||||||||
| CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME | |||||||||||||||
| (Unaudited, in thousands except share and per share amounts) | |||||||||||||||
| Three months Ended December 31, | Twelve months Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | ||||||||||||
| Revenue: | |||||||||||||||
| Software license revenue | $ | 13,870 | $ | 8,738 | $ | 43,991 | $ | 39,331 | |||||||
| Maintenance and service | 3,989 | 3,748 | 15,689 | 14,915 | |||||||||||
| Total revenue | 17,859 | 12,486 | 59,680 | 54,246 | |||||||||||
| Cost of revenue | 2,422 | 2,682 | 12,042 | 9,354 | |||||||||||
| Gross profit | 15,437 | 9,804 | 47,638 | 44,892 | |||||||||||
| Operating expenses: | |||||||||||||||
| Research and development | 5,283 | 3,337 | 20,740 | 13,170 | |||||||||||
| Selling and marketing | 3,983 | 3,833 | 18,300 | 12,707 | |||||||||||
| General and administrative | 7,529 | 4,570 | 37,571 | 17,881 | |||||||||||
| Estimated litigation claim | (3,782 | ) | – | 11,306 | – | ||||||||||
| Total operating expenses | 13,013 | 11,740 | 87,917 | 43,758 | |||||||||||
| Operating (loss) income | 2,424 | (1,936 | ) | (40,279 | ) | 1,134 | |||||||||
| Loss on debt extinguishment | – | – | (718 | ) | – | ||||||||||
| Interest income | 1,077 | 2 | 2,976 | 6 | |||||||||||
| Interest and other expenses, net | (67 | ) | (95 | ) | (899 | ) | (630 | ) | |||||||
| (Loss) income before income tax provision | 3,434 | (2,029 | ) | (38,920 | ) | 510 | |||||||||
| Income tax provision (benefit) | (723 | ) | 218 | 484 | 826 | ||||||||||
| Net (loss) income | $ | 4,157 | $ | (2,247 | ) | $ | (39,404 | ) | $ | (316 | ) | ||||
| (Loss) earnings per share attributable to common stockholders: | |||||||||||||||
| Basic and diluted | $ | 0.14 | $ | (0.11 | ) | $ | (1.53 | ) | $ | (0.02 | ) | ||||
| Weighted average shares used in computing per share amounts: | |||||||||||||||
| Basic and diluted | 28,734,082 | 20,000,000 | 25,672,845 | 20,000,000 | |||||||||||
| SILVACO GROUP, INC. | |||||||
| CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS | |||||||
| (Unaudited, in thousands) | |||||||
| Year Ended December 31 | |||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | ||||||
| Cash flows from operating activities: | |||||||
| Net loss | $ | (39,404 | ) | $ | (316 | ) | |
| Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash (used in) provided by operating activities: | |||||||
| Depreciation and amortization | 1,285 | 601 | |||||
| Stock-based compensation expense | 26,915 | – | |||||
| Provision for credit losses | 351 | 220 | |||||
| Accretion of discount on marketable securities, net | (1,685 | ) | – | ||||
| Estimated litigation claim | 11,306 | – | |||||
| Loss on debt extinguishment | 718 | – | |||||
| Change in fair value of contingent consideration | (27 | ) | 325 | ||||
| Changes in operating assets and liabilities: | |||||||
| Accounts receivable | (5,971 | ) | 1,378 | ||||
| Contract assets | (10,293 | ) | (5,208 | ) | |||
| Prepaid expense and other current assets | (790 | ) | 133 | ||||
| Other assets | 57 | (267 | ) | ||||
| Accounts payable | 1,326 | 156 | |||||
| Accrued expenses and other current liabilities | (2,160 | ) | 2,015 | ||||
| Accrued income taxes | 74 | (23 | ) | ||||
| Deferred revenue | (1,585 | ) | 2,268 | ||||
| Other non-current liabilities | 109 | (102 | ) | ||||
| Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities | (19,774 | ) | 1,180 | ||||
| Cash flows from investing activities: | |||||||
| Purchases of marketable securities | (99,630 | ) | – | ||||
| Maturities of marketable securities | 33,600 | – | |||||
| Purchases of property and equipment | (505 | ) | (339 | ) | |||
| Net cash used in investing activities | (66,535 | ) | (339 | ) | |||
| Cash flows from financing activities: | |||||||
| Proceeds from initial public offering, net of underwriting fees | 106,020 | – | |||||
| Proceeds from issuance of convertible note, net of debt issuance costs | 4,852 | – | |||||
| Proceeds from loan facility | 4,250 | – | |||||
| Repayment of loan facility | (4,250 | ) | – | ||||
| Proceeds from related party line of credit | – | 1,000 | |||||
| Repayment of related party line of credit | (2,000 | ) | (1,000 | ) | |||
| Proceeds from issuance of common stock for share-based awards | 315 | – | |||||
| Payroll taxes related to shares withheld from employees | (4,575 | ) | – | ||||
| Deferred transaction costs | (2,649 | ) | (650 | ) | |||
| Contingent consideration | (74 | ) | (1,002 | ) | |||
| Payments of vendor financing obligation | (588 | ) | – | ||||
| Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities | 101,301 | (1,652 | ) | ||||
| Effect of exchange rate fluctuations on cash and cash equivalents | 193 | (246 | ) | ||||
| Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | 15,185 | (1,057 | ) | ||||
| Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period | 4,421 | 5,478 | |||||
| Cash and cash equivalents, end of period | $ | 19,606 | $ | 4,421 | |||
| SILVACO GROUP, INC. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| REVENUE | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Unaudited) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| 2023 | 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Year | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Year | |||||||||||||
| Revenue by Region: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Americas | 35 | % | 29 | % | 31 | % | 29 | % | 31 | % | 27 | % | 51 | % | 31 | % | 40 | % | 38 | % | ||
| APAC | 51 | % | 62 | % | 61 | % | 63 | % | 59 | % | 62 | % | 41 | % | 58 | % | 52 | % | 53 | % | ||
| EMEA | 14 | % | 9 | % | 8 | % | 8 | % | 10 | % | 11 | % | 8 | % | 11 | % | 8 | % | 9 | % | ||
| Total revenue | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | ||
| Revenue by Product Line: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| TCAD | 62 | % | 62 | % | 52 | % | 62 | % | 59 | % | 66 | % | 69 | % | 59 | % | 71 | % | 68 | % | ||
| EDA | 29 | % | 20 | % | 31 | % | 22 | % | 26 | % | 30 | % | 20 | % | 24 | % | 24 | % | 24 | % | ||
| SIP | 9 | % | 18 | % | 17 | % | 16 | % | 15 | % | 4 | % | 11 | % | 17 | % | 5 | % | 8 | % | ||
| Total revenue | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | ||
| Revenue Item Category: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Software license revenue | 75 | % | 71 | % | 74 | % | 70 | % | 73 | % | 77 | % | 74 | % | 62 | % | 78 | % | 74 | % | ||
| Maintenance and service | 25 | % | 29 | % | 26 | % | 30 | % | 27 | % | 23 | % | 26 | % | 38 | % | 22 | % | 26 | % | ||
| Total revenue | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | ||
| Revenue by Country: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| United States | 34 | % | 28 | % | 28 | % | 28 | % | 30 | % | 51 | % | 30 | % | 39 | % | 39 | % | 37 | % | ||
| China | 19 | % | 29 | % | 16 | % | 29 | % | 23 | % | 17 | % | 25 | % | 23 | % | 23 | % | 18 | % | ||
| Other | 47 | % | 43 | % | 56 | % | 43 | % | 47 | % | 32 | % | 45 | % | 38 | % | 38 | % | 45 | % | ||
| Total revenue | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | ||
| SILVACO GROUP, INC. | |||||||||||||||
| GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation | |||||||||||||||
| (Unaudited, in thousands except per share amounts) | |||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | Twelve Months Ended | ||||||||||||||
| 12/31/2024 | 12/31/2023 | 12/31/2024 | 12/31/2023 | ||||||||||||
| GAAP Cost of revenue | $ | 2,422 | $ | 2,682 | $ | 12,042 | $ | 9,354 | |||||||
| Less: Stock-based compensation expense | (194 | ) | – | (2,974 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: Amortization of acquired intangible assets | (249 | ) | – | (747 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: Payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release | (80 | ) | – | (80 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Non-GAAP Cost of revenue | $ | 1,899 | $ | 2,682 | $ | 8,241 | $ | 9,354 | |||||||
| GAAP Gross profit | $ | 15,437 | $ | 9,804 | $ | 47,638 | $ | 44,892 | |||||||
| Add: Stock-based compensation expense | 194 | – | 2,974 | – | |||||||||||
| Add: Amortization of acquired intangible assets | 249 | – | 747 | – | |||||||||||
| Add: Payroll tax from the IPO lockup release | 80 | – | 80 | – | |||||||||||
| Non-GAAP Gross profit | $ | 15,960 | $ | 9,804 | $ | 51,439 | $ | 44,892 | |||||||
| GAAP Research and development | $ | 5,283 | $ | 3,337 | $ | 20,740 | $ | 13,170 | |||||||
| Less: Stock-based compensation expense | (535 | ) | – | (5,091 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: Executive severance | (215 | ) | – | (215 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: Payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release | (397 | ) | – | (397 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: Amortization of acquired intangible assets | (43 | ) | (82 | ) | (206 | ) | (339 | ) | |||||||
| Non-GAAP Research and development | $ | 4,093 | $ | 3,255 | $ | 14,831 | $ | 12,831 | |||||||
| GAAP Sales and marketing | $ | 3,983 | $ | 3,833 | $ | 18,300 | $ | 12,707 | |||||||
| Less: Stock-based compensation expense | (388 | ) | – | (4,319 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: Payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release | (85 | ) | – | (85 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: IPO preparation costs | – | – | (178 | ) | – | ||||||||||
| Non-GAAP Sales and marketing | $ | 3,510 | $ | 3,833 | $ | 13,718 | $ | 12,707 | |||||||
| GAAP General and administrative | $ | 7,529 | $ | 4,570 | $ | 37,571 | $ | 17,881 | |||||||
| Less: Stock-based compensation expense | (1,410 | ) | – | (14,531 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: Acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs | (523 | ) | (515 | ) | (4,629 | ) | (1,707 | ) | |||||||
| Less: Executive severance | (200 | ) | – | (200 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: Payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release | (163 | ) | – | (163 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: IPO preparation costs | – | (45 | ) | (695 | ) | (1,221 | ) | ||||||||
| Non-GAAP General and administrative | $ | 5,233 | $ | 4,010 | $ | 17,353 | $ | 14,953 | |||||||
| GAAP Estimated Litigation claim | $ | (3,782 | ) | $ | – | $ | 11,306 | $ | – | ||||||
| Add (Less): Acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs | 3,782 | – | (11,306 | ) | – | ||||||||||
| Non-GAAP Litigation claim | $ | – | $ | – | $ | – | $ | – | |||||||
| GAAP Operating expenses | $ | 13,013 | $ | 11,740 | $ | 87,917 | $ | 43,758 | |||||||
| Less: Stock-based compensation expense | (2,333 | ) | – | (23,941 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: Acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs | 3,259 | (515 | ) | (15,935 | ) | (1,707 | ) | ||||||||
| Less: Executive severance | (415 | ) | – | (415 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: Payroll tax from the IPO lock-up release | (645 | ) | – | (645 | ) | – | |||||||||
| Less: IPO preparation costs | – | (45 | ) | (873 | ) | (1,221 | ) | ||||||||
| Less: Amortization of acquired intangible assets | (43 | ) | (82 | ) | (206 | ) | (339 | ) | |||||||
| Non-GAAP Operating expenses | $ | 12,836 | $ | 11,098 | $ | 45,902 | $ | 40,491 | |||||||
| GAAP Operating (loss) income | $ | 2,424 | $ | (1,936 | ) | $ | (40,279 | ) | $ | 1,134 | |||||
| Add: Stock-based compensation expense | 2,527 | – | 26,915 | – | |||||||||||
| Add (Less): Acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs | (3,259 | ) | 515 | 15,935 | 1,707 | ||||||||||
| Add: Payroll tax from the IPO lockup release | 725 | – | 725 | – | |||||||||||
| Add: Executive severance | 415 | – | 415 | – | |||||||||||
| Add: IPO preparation costs | – | 45 | 873 | 1,221 | |||||||||||
| Add: Amortization of acquired intangible assets | 292 | 82 | 953 | 339 | |||||||||||
| Non-GAAP Operating (loss) income | $ | 3,124 | $ | (1,294 | ) | $ | 5,537 | $ | 4,401 | ||||||
| GAAP Net (loss) income | $ | 4,157 | $ | (2,247 | ) | $ | (39,404 | ) | $ | (316 | ) | ||||
| Add: Stock-based compensation expense | 2,527 | – | 26,915 | – | |||||||||||
| Add: Amortization of acquired intangible assets | 292 | 82 | 953 | 339 | |||||||||||
| Add (Less): Acquisition-related estimated litigation claim and legal costs | (3,259 | ) | 515 | 15,935 | 1,707 | ||||||||||
| Add: Payroll tax from the IPO lockup release | 725 | – | 725 | – | |||||||||||
| Add: Executive Severance | 415 | – | 415 | – | |||||||||||
| Add: IPO preparation costs | – | 45 | 873 | 1,221 | |||||||||||
| Add: Loss on debt extinguishment | – | – | 718 | – | |||||||||||
| Add (Less): Change in fair value of contingent consideration | (9 | ) | (7 | ) | (27 | ) | 325 | ||||||||
| Add (Less): Foreign exchange (gain) loss | (14 | ) | (3 | ) | 404 | 335 | |||||||||
| Add: Income tax effect of non-GAAP adjustment | (566 | ) | (27 | ) | (831 | ) | (169 | ) | |||||||
| Non-GAAP Net (loss) income | $ | 4,268 | $ | (1,642 | ) | $ | 6,676 | $ | 3,442 | ||||||
| GAAP Net income (loss) per share: | |||||||||||||||
| Basic and diluted: | $ | 0.14 | $ | (0.11 | ) | $ | (1.53 | ) | $ | (0.02 | ) | ||||
| Non-GAAP Net income (loss) per share: | |||||||||||||||
| Basic | $ | 0.15 | $ | (0.08 | ) | $ | 0.26 | $ | 0.17 | ||||||
| Diluted | $ | 0.15 | $ | (0.08 | ) | $ | 0.25 | $ | 0.17 | ||||||
| Weighted average shares used in GAAP and non-GAAP net income (loss) per share: | |||||||||||||||
| Basic | 28,734,082 | 20,000,000 | 25,672,845 | 20,000,000 | |||||||||||
| Diluted | 28,849,041 | 20,000,000 | 26,841,901 | 20,000,000 | |||||||||||
Investor Contact:
Greg McNiff
investors@silvaco.com
Media Contact:
Farhad Hayat
press@silvaco.com
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Commonwealth of Virginia Mark R Warner
WASHINGTON – Today, Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Vice Chairman Mark R. Warner (D-VA) released the following statement:
“The Trump administration has followed its recent ill-advised and weak decision to cut off military assistance to Ukraine by now also callously shutting off intelligence sharing with the hard-pressed Ukrainians as they continue to defend their country against the ongoing military onslaught of Vladimir Putin’s army. Instead of standing up to Putin, President Trump has given away American power to Russia – from voting at the UN with Russia and North Korea and against all of our allies, to directly negotiating with Russia at the highest levels while excluding Ukraine, to refusing to condemn Vladimir Putin’s dictatorship while unjustly calling the democratically elected Ukrainian president a ‘dictator’ and ejecting him from the White House. And, all the while, Putin has not let up on his illegal assault against Ukraine. Allied intelligence support has been crucial to enable Ukraine to defend itself from the first days of the conflict in February 2022, to unmask Russian invasion plans and intentions, and to save countless innocent lives. Let me be clear: Cutting off intelligence support to our Ukrainian partners will cost lives.”
Source: US House of Representatives – Democratic Caucus
The following text contains opinion that is not, or not necessarily, that of MIL-OSI – March 04, 2025
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar and Vice Chair Ted Lieu were joined by Congressional Progressive Caucus Chair Greg Casar and New Democrat Coalition Chair Brad Schneider for a press conference highlighting House Democrats’ unity against the Republican Budget that cuts Medicaid to pay for tax cuts for billionaires.
CHAIRMAN AGUILAR: Good morning. Pleased to be joined with my colleague Ted Lieu, Vice Chair of the Democratic Caucus, as well as Greg Casar, the Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus and the Chair of the New Democratic Coalition, Brad Schneider.
Last week, House Democrats from every corner of our Caucus voted against the House Republican Budget, which cut Medicaid $880 billion to pay for tax cuts for billionaires. We want to make health care more affordable and more available to the American people. This is in stark contrast to Republicans who voted to kick children off their health care and to put seniors at risk.
As President Trump prepares for tonight’s speech, it’s clear that Democrats are on the side of working people, while Republicans are only looking out for their billionaire friends. Trump and Republicans have broken their promise to lower costs on day one, which was his commitment, to focus on tax giveaways for corporations and billionaires who don’t need any more help. In fact, Trump’s reckless tariffs, just announced last night, will raise prices on gas, produce at grocery stores, beer, lumber to build homes, crude oil and parts that make cars.
As families struggle to make ends meet, Democrats are united against Trump and Elon Musk dismantling the services that families rely on, while steering more taxpayer dollars to themselves and their billionaire friends. They’re dismantling the VA health care and laying off thousands of veterans, as Trump stands with Putin and risks our national security. Tonight, we expect the President to put on a master class in dishonesty. We expect the President will focus not on everyday Americans, but on his friends and his ego. No matter what he says, he cannot change the damage he’s done already and the fact that his agenda is going to raise prices for everyday Americans.
Vice Chair Ted Lieu.
VICE CHAIR LIEU: Thank you, Chairman Aguilar. Honored to be here with Representatives Greg Casar and Brad Schneider. I want to tell you about a meeting I had today with Vote Vets. They brought in a number of veterans who were fired, and I want to tell you a story about one of them. Her name is Eileen. She is an Air Force veteran. She then went to work for FEMA. She’s in a rural part of Alabama. She was one of the first to volunteer with FEMA to deploy to Hurricane Helene. On President’s Day, she got an email firing her with no notice, and she couldn’t even go back to her office. They sent her UPS boxes saying, ‘You put your government cell phone and laptop in this box and you ship it back to us.’ A few days later, she had to go out to a field where her supervisor from FEMA had to walk out and give her her box from her items at her office. She has two kids, four and 10. She now has no job.
This is not how we should treat veterans, not how we should treat federal employees, not how we should treat any American. And this is what Donald Trump did to her. And he’s done that to a large number of federal employees. And if you look at the federal workforce, about one in four are veterans. This is not how they should be treated, and most of these actions are simply brazenly illegal. We have a number of court cases being filed. We’re winning a number of those cases. Others are going to go into litigation, and I call on the Administration to stop illegally firing our veterans and other federal employees.
I also now want to touch on the subject of tariffs. You’ve seen with the indiscriminate tariffs that the President has both imposed and threatened to impose, that not only is the stock market tanking, but also inflation is up, consumer sentiment is down, and the Atlanta Fed has now predicted that we’re going to contract this quarter in terms of GDP. That is shocking, and that is all because of actions of one person, the President, who is massively harming our economy.
And then, I’d like to conclude now on Ukraine. I don’t know why Donald Trump is scared of Putin. He clearly is. He acts like he’s scared of Putin. And right now, with his pause in funding to Ukraine, I just want to let Ukrainians know to please hang in there. The President of the United States cannot extend that pause because it would be illegal. Congress, on a bipartisan basis, appropriated that funding to Ukraine. Ukraine is going to get that funding. And with that, I’d like to introduce our amazing Representative from Austin, Texas, Greg Casar. He has done a fantastic job as leader of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
REP. CASAR: Thank you so much Vice Chair Lieu and Chairman Aguilar. I also want to thank New Dems Chairman Brad Schneider, who I’m proud to call a partner in the fight to protect Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and the American people.
Tonight, millions of Americans will tune in to watch the President address a Joint Session of Congress. I do not know what Trump will say, but I can guarantee you that he is going to lie to the American people and not tell the truth about what MAGA Republicans in Congress want to do to you right now. So let me say it clearly, whatever political games that Donald Trump plays tonight, whatever lies he tells and whatever show he puts on, people watching at home should know that Trump and House Republicans want to steal your health care, steal your taxpayer money and hand it over to their billionaire buddies and to their donors.
In Congress, Republicans are advancing a budget that would end Medicaid as we know it. And Elon Musk is trying to cut your Medicare and your Social Security. Social Security that seniors earned throughout their lifetime is what Elon Musk just recently called a ‘Ponzi scheme.’ I’ll say it again. Elon Musk just called Social Security, ‘the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time.’ That’s right, a guy that makes $8 million per day from federal government contracts thinks that seniors getting $65 a day from Social Security is a ‘Ponzi scheme.’ Their plan is plain and simple: guys like Elon Musk get richer and you get screwed.
But here’s the good news, Democrats are united and fighting back to protect your Social Security, your Medicare and your Medicaid. New Democrats, Congressional Progressive Caucus Democrats, the two biggest ideological caucuses here in the Congress, have put out a joint letter that includes 100% of our members from our two Coalitions saying we will not vote to cut your Medicare, your Medicaid and your Social Security. Over 200 House Democrats showed just in a matter of days that we are united with the American people in this fight. So while we may not all agree on every single issue, we are saying with one voice, hands off Medicare, hands off Medicaid and hands off of Americans’ Social Security.
So now the question becomes: will any three House Republicans grow a backbone? Will any three House Republicans do the right thing and act like U.S. Representatives instead of like Trump employees, and join us? Because if three Congressional House Republicans join together with Democrats to do the right thing, there will be no Social Security cuts. We can prevent cuts to Medicaid and Medicare and to Social Security. But if House Republicans choose instead unanimously to come after Social Security and Medicaid and Medicare, then they will own the terrible consequences for working people.
Thank you so much. And now I’d like to hand this over to my partner, the Chairman of the New Democratic Coalition, Brad Schneider.
REP. SCHNEIDER: Thank you Chair Casar, Chairman Aguilar, Vice Chair Lieu. It’s good to be standing here with you in one common voice.
Before I read my prepared remarks and talk about our joint letter, I want to touch on what Vice Chair Lieu talked about, veterans. I have the privilege of representing Naval Station Great Lakes in North Chicago, Illinois. Every single sailor, recruit, who enlists in the Navy shows up in North Chicago for 10 weeks of basic training. I’ve had the privilege of attending those graduations. I see those 17-, 18-, and 19-year-old young people, men and women, who say, ‘I want to serve my country. I want to put on the uniform of the United States, go to places I do not know, do things I have no idea if I’ll be able to do, to protect the American people and the American way of life.’ Many of those people serve two years, four years. Many serve 20 years or more. All of them, committed and dedicated to bettering our country. And many of them, when they finish their service, are not done serving our country. They go to work with the federal government.
They’re dedicated federal workers who are serving their nation in their local communities, many here in Washington. They’re the people who work in Social Security, the Forest Rangers in our national parks, the folks who provide care at VA hospitals, and they are the ones who are getting the letters from Elon Musk and DOGE in the middle of the night saying, ‘Your service is no longer desired and we no longer value your performance.’
This is wrong, and this is weakening our country, and this is why we are standing before you united to say it has to stop. I’m very proud that the CPC, Congressional Progressive Caucus, New Democrat Coalition, others have come together. We’ve made a very strong statement. I’m proud to lead 110 members of the New Democrat Coalition in joining in that statement, saying, ‘We cannot allow dangerous cuts to programs that Americans have actually paid for out of their hard earned dollars.’ Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security.
The headline is and should be, House Democrats are united, in deep contrast to what we’re seeing from our Republican colleagues. While the Democrats are focused on lowering costs, Republicans are pushing a budget that will result in cuts to health care and benefits that have been earned by hard working Americans. While Democrats are focused on making our community safe, Musk and DOGE are firing thousands of employees who help keep planes in the sky, prevent diseases like bird flu and measles from spreading and serve our veterans after they complete their service to our nation.
Democrats are working tirelessly to bring down prices of everyday products, while President Trump, just today, levied 25% taxes on the American consumer that will raise costs for groceries, for cars and trucks, gasoline, new construction for houses and many other everyday products. Meanwhile, President Trump and Congressional Republicans are doing everything they can to give a free ride to oligarchs like Elon Musk and his wealthy billionaire friends, and they’re putting the burden for all of this on our seniors, our children, our first responders, on people who educate our children, build our houses, work on the factory floor, who take care of our communities and tend to us when we are sick. It is these hard working people who are in the crosshairs of the Republicans’ actions.
One of these people is my guest tonight. Adam Mulvey is a 20-year Army veteran who served three tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. He’s one of 6,000 of these veterans we’ve talked about who was fired between February 13th and 24th. He works, or worked, at Lovell Federal Health Care Center. James A. Lovell Center is the only hospital in our country that serves both veterans and active military and every one of those recruits I just mentioned. His job was to help provide emergency management services, planning and preparing in the case of a tornado or another emergency or even an active shooter. He served 35,000 veterans in our area, tens of thousands of active duty sailors and other military members and the 40- to 50,000 people each year who go through Naval Station Great Lakes.
We all believe government should be efficient, but Trump and Musk are taking a sledgehammer to Americans’ lives and our livelihoods. And I am proud to stand with all of my colleagues here today saying it has to stop. Thank you, and I am proud to yield back to Chairman Aguilar.
Video of the full press conference can be viewed here.
###
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator MarkWayne Mullin (R-Oklahoma)
“Promises made, promises kept, is what the President has been doing.”
Washington, D.C. – Tuesday night, U.S. Senator Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) joined Fox News’s Laura Ingraham on-set of The Ingraham Angle to preview President Trump’s Joint Address before Congress. The senator stressed the importance of using the president’s peace through strength message to end the war in Ukraine, echoed the need for Elbridge Colby to serve as Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, and pointed out the lack of leadership in the Democratic Party.
Sen. Mullin’s full interview can be found here.
On why Zelensky should have thanked President Trump:
“Well, he messed up, and fortunately, it’s going to work out in our favor, especially with the mineral deal. Zelensky bit the hand that was trying to feed him, and when the President was ready to make a deal. Zelensky, unfortunately slapped the hand down, and now he’s going to he’s going to be negotiating from a point of weakness…
“The President is right. Let’s make a mineral deal. Let’s negotiate peace and stop the killing. Promises made, promises kept, is what the President has been doing.”
On the only reason for Elbridge Colby’s opposition is because of President Trump:
“Bridge did a phenomenal job as he was sitting there, he showed that he was very capable of articulating the message that need to be said, but he also had a strong grasp on the issues. Anyone that’s going to oppose him is doing it just because of their hatred for President Trump. That’s it. You can’t get anybody more qualified than Bridge Colby, it doesn’t happen…”
On the absence of leadership on the Left:
“That’s why you’re having all these messages they try to resonate. Hillary Clinton, that didn’t work. Joe Biden was not cognitively there. Harris couldn’t lead herself out of a paper bag. And now you have a bunch of people, a bunch of Democrats, audition for 2028 and for some reason…”
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-000818/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Emmanouil Fragkos (ECR)
In January, Russia exported record volumes of natural gas to Europe via the TurkStream pipeline, exceeding 50 million cubic metres (mcm) a day, following the closure of the gas corridor through Ukraine. Türkiye is now the only transit route for Russian gas to Europe after the five-year transit agreement between Russia and Ukraine expired on 1 January and was not renewed. According to data from the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas (ENTSOG), in January, Russian gas exports via the TurkStream pipeline increased by 26.8 % year on year. They now stand at 50.6 mcm/day, up from 39.9 mcm/day in January 2024. According to Gazprom data and Reuters calculations, Russia supplied Europe with a total of around 63.8 billion cubic metres (bcm) of natural gas via various routes in 2022. This dropped to 28.3 bcm in 2023 before rising again to around 32 bcm in 2024.
Türkiye is a dictatorial country that is illegally occupying the northern part of the Republic of Cyprus, it attacks neighbouring countries and is responsible for the ethnic cleansing of Christians and Kurds.
In view of the above, can the Commission answer the following:
Submitted: 23.2.2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-000683/2025/rev.1
to the Commission
Rule 144
Roberto Vannacci (PfE)
On 12 February 2025, the President of the United States, Donald Trump, stated that he was aiming to put an end to the war in Ukraine in separate phone calls with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
In a meeting of the Ukraine Defence Contact Group held on the same day, the US Secretary of Defence, Pete Hesgeth, said that obtaining NATO membership for Ukraine and re-establishing its pre-2014 borders were ‘illusory’ goals[1]. He also ruled out sending US troops to the country.
The Commission’s policy of unconditionally supporting Ukraine until it wins the war[2] and restores its territorial integrity[3] has always been heavy on ideology and short on pragmatism.
In the light of the above:
Submitted: 13.2.2025