Technology
Alkami Announces Second Quarter 2024 Financial Results
Published
2 years agoon
By
PLANO, Texas, July 31, 2024 /PRNewswire/ — Alkami Technology, Inc. (Nasdaq: ALKT) (“Alkami”), a leading cloud-based digital banking solutions provider for financial institutions in the U.S., today announced results for its first quarter ending June 30, 2024.
Second Quarter 2024 Financial Highlights
GAAP total revenue of $82.2 million, an increase of 24.9% compared to the year-ago quarter;GAAP gross margin of 59.4%, compared to 53.9% in the year-ago quarter;Non-GAAP gross margin of 63.2%, compared to 58.7% in the year-ago quarter;GAAP net loss of $(12.3) million, compared to $(17.8) million in the year-ago quarter; andAdjusted EBITDA of $4.6 million, compared to a loss of $(2.5) million in the year-ago quarter.
Comments on the News
Alex Shootman, Chief Executive Officer, said, “In the second quarter, we delivered another quarter of tremendous operating and financial results. We ended the second quarter with 18.6 million live registered users, up 2.7 million compared to the prior-year quarter, and delivered excellent performance from new client wins, add-on sales and renewals. Alkami continues to lead the industry in terms of end user satisfaction and gains in market share, underscoring our commitment to deliver the best digital banking solution to regional and community financial institutions.”
Shootman added, “In the second quarter we signed eight new digital banking clients, including four credit unions and four banks. One of the wins was a tier one credit union that will be among our top clients in terms of ARR. We also won a large Midwestern bank that possesses a robust commercial banking growth strategy. The bank was an existing ACH Alert client where we cultivated a strong relationship and ultimately cross-sold our digital banking platform.”
Bryan Hill, Chief Financial Officer, said, “We achieved total revenue growth of 25% for the quarter, and more importantly, we achieved 28% subscription revenue growth. We exceeded our gross margin and adjusted EBITDA expectations, demonstrating continued progress towards our 2026 objectives of a non-GAAP gross margin of 65% and adjusted EBITDA margin of 20%.”
2024 Financial Outlook
Alkami’s financial outlook is based on current expectations. The following statements are forward-looking, and actual results could differ materially depending on market conditions and the factors set forth under “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”
Alkami is providing guidance for its third quarter ending September 30, 2024 of:
GAAP total revenue in the range of $83.8 million to $85.3 million;Adjusted EBITDA in the range of $5.8 million to $6.8 million.
Alkami is providing guidance for its fiscal year ending December 31, 2024 of:
GAAP total revenue in the range of $330.5 million to $333.5 million;Adjusted EBITDA in the range of $22.0 million to $24.0 million.
Conference Call Information
The Company will host a conference call at 5:00 p.m. ET today to discuss its financial results with investors. A live webcast of the event will be available on the Alkami investor relations website at investors.alkami.com. In addition, a live dial-in will be available domestically at 1-800-836-8184 and internationally at 1-646-357-8785 using passcode 83045. A replay will be available in the Investor Relations section of the Alkami website.
About Alkami
Alkami Technology, Inc. is a leading cloud-based digital banking solutions provider for financial institutions in the United States that enables clients to grow confidently, adapt quickly and build thriving digital communities. Alkami helps clients transform through retail and commercial banking, digital account opening, and data and marketing solutions. To learn more, visit www.alkami.com.
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains “forward-looking” statements relating to Alkami Technology, Inc.’s strategy, goals, future focus areas, and expected, possible or assumed future results, including its future cash flows and its financial outlook. These forward-looking statements are based on management’s beliefs and assumptions and on information currently available to management. Forward-looking statements include all statements that are not historical facts and may be identified by terms such as “expects,” “believes,” “plans,” or similar expressions and the negatives of those terms. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements, expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Factors that may materially affect such forward-looking statements include: Our limited operating history and history of operating losses; our ability to manage future growth; our ability to attract new clients and retain and expand existing clients’ use of our solutions; the unpredictable and time-consuming nature of our sales cycles; our ability to maintain, protect and enhance our brand; our ability to accurately predict the long-term rate of client subscription renewals or adoption of our solutions; our reliance on third-party software, content and services; our ability to effectively integrate our solutions with other systems used by our clients; intense competition in our industry; any downturn, consolidation or decrease in technology spend in the financial services industry, including as a result of recent closures of certain financial institutions and liquidity concerns at other financial institutions; our ability and the ability of third parties on which we rely to prevent and identify breaches of security measures (including cybersecurity) and resulting disruptions of our systems or operations and unauthorized access to client customer and other data; our ability to successfully integrate acquired companies or businesses; our ability to comply with regulatory and legal requirements and developments; our ability to attract and retain key employees; the political, economic and competitive conditions in the markets and jurisdictions where we operate; our ability to maintain, develop and protect our intellectual property; our ability to respond to evolving technological requirements to develop or acquire new and enhanced products that achieve market acceptance in a timely manner; our ability to estimate our expenses, future revenues, capital requirements, our needs for additional financing and our ability to obtain additional capital and other factors described in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law.
Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Key Business Metrics
The company reports its financial results in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, or GAAP. However, the company believes that, in order to properly understand its short-term and long-term financial, operational and strategic trends, it may be helpful for investors to exclude certain non-cash or non-recurring items when used as a supplement to financial performance measures in accordance with GAAP. These items result from facts and circumstances that vary in both frequency and impact on continuing operations. The company also uses results of operations excluding such items to evaluate the operating performance of Alkami and compare it against prior periods, make operating decisions, determine executive compensation, and serve as a basis for long-term strategic planning. These non-GAAP financial measures provide the company with additional means to understand and evaluate the operating results and trends in its ongoing business by eliminating certain non-cash expenses and other items that Alkami believes might otherwise make comparisons of its ongoing business with prior periods more difficult, obscure trends in ongoing operations, reduce management’s ability to make useful forecasts, or obscure the ability to evaluate the effectiveness of certain business strategies and management incentive structures. In addition, the company also believes that investors and financial analysts find this information to be helpful in analyzing the company’s financial and operational performance and comparing this performance to the company’s peers and competitors.
The company defines “Non-GAAP Cost of Revenues” as cost of revenues, excluding (1) amortization and (2) stock-based compensation expense. The company believes that investors and financial analysts find this non-GAAP financial measure to be useful in analyzing the company’s financial and operational performance, comparing this performance to the company’s peers and competitors, and understanding the company’s ability to generate income from ongoing business operations.
The company defines “Non-GAAP Gross Margin” as gross profit, plus (1) amortization and (2) stock-based compensation expense, all divided by revenue. The company believes that investors and financial analysts find this non-GAAP financial measure to be useful in analyzing the company’s financial and operational performance, comparing this performance to the company’s peers and competitors, and understanding the company’s ability to generate income from ongoing business operations.
The company defines “Non-GAAP Research and Development Expense” as research and development expense, excluding stock-based compensation expense. The company believes that investors and financial analysts find this non-GAAP financial measure to be useful in analyzing the company’s financial and operational performance, comparing this performance to the company’s peers and competitors, and understanding the company’s ongoing expenditures related to product innovation.
The company defines “Non-GAAP Sales and Marketing Expense” as sales and marketing expense, excluding stock-based compensation expense. The company believes that investors and financial analysts find this non-GAAP financial measure to be useful in analyzing the company’s financial and operational performance, comparing this performance to the company’s peers and competitors, and understanding the company’s ongoing expenditures related to its sales and marketing strategies.
The company defines “Non-GAAP General and Administrative Expense” as general and administrative expense, excluding stock-based compensation expense. The company believes that investors and financial analysts find this non-GAAP financial measure to be useful in analyzing the company’s financial and operational performance, comparing this performance to the company’s peers and competitors, and understanding the company’s underlying expense structure to support corporate activities and processes.
The company defines “Non-GAAP Net Loss” as net loss, plus (1) provision for income taxes (2) (loss) gain on financial instruments, (3) amortization, (4) stock-based compensation expense, and (5) acquisition-related expenses. The company believes that investors and financial analysts find this non-GAAP financial measure to be useful in analyzing the company’s financial and operational performance, comparing this performance to the company’s peers and competitors, and understanding the company’s ability to generate income from ongoing business operations.
The company defines “Adjusted EBITDA” as net loss plus (1) provision for income taxes, (2) (loss) gain on financial instruments, (3) interest income, net, (4) depreciation and amortization (5) stock-based compensation expense, and (6) acquisition-related expenses. The company believes adjusted EBITDA provides investors and other users of our financial information consistency and comparability with our past financial performance and facilitates period-to-period comparisons of operations.
In addition, the Company also uses the following important operating metrics to evaluate its business:
The company defines “Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR)” by aggregating annualized recurring revenue related to SaaS subscription services recognized in the last month of the reporting period as well as the next 12 months of expected implementation services revenues in the last month of the reporting period. We believe ARR provides important information about our future revenue potential, our ability to acquire new clients, and our ability to maintain and expand our relationship with existing clients.
The company defines “Registered Users” as an individual or business related to an account holder of an FI client on our digital banking platform who has registered to use one or more of our solutions and has current access to use those solutions as of the last day of the reporting period presented. We price our digital banking platform based on the number of registered users, so as the number of registered users of our digital banking platform increases, our ARR grows. We believe growth in the number of registered users provides important information about our ability to expand market adoption of our digital banking platform and its associated software products, and therefore to grow revenues over time.
The company defines “Revenue per Registered User (RPU)” by dividing ARR for the reporting period by the number of registered users as of the last day of the reporting period. We believe RPU provides important information about our ability to grow the number of software products adopted by new clients over time, as well as our ability to expand the number of software products that our existing clients add to their contracts with us over time.
The company does not provide a reconciliation of our adjusted EBITDA outlook to GAAP net loss because certain significant information required for such reconciliation is not available without unreasonable efforts, including provision for income taxes, loss on financial instruments, stock-based compensation expense, and acquisition-related expenses, net, all of which may be significant.
ALKAMI TECHNOLOGY, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
(UNAUDITED)
June 30,
December 31,
2024
2023
Assets
Current assets
Cash and cash equivalents
$ 61,432
$ 40,927
Marketable securities
25,962
51,196
Accounts receivable, net
38,952
35,499
Deferred costs, current
11,478
10,329
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
14,132
10,634
Total current assets
151,956
148,585
Property and equipment, net
19,539
16,946
Right-of-use assets
15,180
15,754
Deferred costs, net of current portion
32,542
30,734
Intangibles, net
32,414
35,807
Goodwill
148,050
148,050
Other assets
4,176
3,949
Total assets
$ 403,857
$ 399,825
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Current liabilities
Accounts payable
$ 5,794
$ 7,478
Accrued liabilities
20,879
19,763
Deferred revenues, current portion
12,572
10,984
Lease liabilities, current portion
1,275
1,205
Total current liabilities
40,520
39,430
Deferred revenues, net of current portion
16,445
15,384
Deferred income taxes
1,760
1,713
Lease liabilities, net of current portion
17,736
18,052
Other non-current liabilities
212
305
Total liabilities
76,673
74,884
Stockholders’ Equity
Preferred stock, $0.001 par value, 10,000,000 shares authorized and 0 shares issued and outstanding as of
June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023
—
—
Common stock, $0.001 par value, 500,000,000 shares authorized; and 98,985,370 and 96,722,098 shares
issued and outstanding as of June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively
99
97
Additional paid-in capital
786,201
760,210
Accumulated deficit
(459,116)
(435,366)
Total stockholders’ equity
327,184
324,941
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$ 403,857
$ 399,825
ALKAMI TECHNOLOGY, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
(UNAUDITED)
Three months ended June 30,
Six months ended June 30,
2024
2023
2024
2023
Revenues
$ 82,160
$ 65,763
$ 158,287
$ 125,759
Cost of revenues(1)
33,389
30,289
65,484
58,147
Gross profit
48,771
35,474
92,803
67,612
Operating expenses:
Research and development
23,909
20,866
46,729
41,415
Sales and marketing
16,964
13,883
30,807
24,761
General and administrative
20,612
18,207
39,927
35,318
Acquisition-related expenses
135
34
195
220
Amortization of acquired intangibles
358
357
717
717
Total operating expenses
61,978
53,347
118,375
102,431
Loss from operations
(13,207)
(17,873)
(25,572)
(34,819)
Non-operating income (expense):
Interest income
1,261
2,016
2,343
3,742
Interest expense
(74)
(1,826)
(147)
(3,583)
(Loss) gain on financial instruments
(112)
10
—
220
Loss before income taxes
(12,132)
(17,673)
(23,376)
(34,440)
Provision for income taxes
185
88
374
284
Net loss
$ (12,317)
$ (17,761)
$ (23,750)
$ (34,724)
Net loss per share attributable to common stockholders:
Basic and diluted
$ (0.13)
$ (0.19)
$ (0.24)
$ (0.37)
Weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding:
Basic and diluted
98,103,527
93,334,725
97,524,379
92,868,623
(1) Includes amortization of acquired technology of $1.4 million for both the three months ended June 30, 2024 and 2023, and $2.7 million for both the six months ended June 30, 2024 and 2023.
ALKAMI TECHNOLOGY, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)
(UNAUDITED)
Six months ended June 30,
2024
2023
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net loss
$ (23,750)
$ (34,724)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization expense
5,175
5,146
Accrued interest on marketable securities, net
(787)
(1,179)
Stock-based compensation expense
28,565
24,399
Amortization of debt issuance costs
65
80
Gain on financial instruments
—
(177)
Deferred taxes
47
85
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
Accounts receivable
(3,453)
(1,906)
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
(3,790)
(1,882)
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
(653)
(2,126)
Deferred costs
(2,569)
(2,856)
Deferred revenues
2,649
(185)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
1,499
(15,325)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Purchase of marketable securities
(15,588)
(62,640)
Proceeds from sales, maturities and redemptions of marketable securities
41,609
65,622
Purchases of property and equipment
(731)
(417)
Capitalized software development costs
(3,015)
(2,661)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
22,275
(96)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Principal payments on debt
—
(1,063)
Debt issuance costs paid
—
(341)
Proceeds from Employee Stock Purchase Plan issuances
2,598
2,407
Payment of holdback funds from acquisition
—
(1,000)
Payments for taxes related to net settlement of equity awards
(12,795)
(6,825)
Proceeds from stock option exercises
6,928
2,802
Net cash used in financing activities
(3,269)
(4,020)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash
20,505
(19,441)
Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash, beginning of period
40,927
112,337
Cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash, end of period
$ 61,432
$ 92,896
ALKAMI TECHNOLOGY, INC.
RECONCILIATION OF GAAP TO NON-GAAP MEASURES
(In thousands, except per share data)
(UNAUDITED)
Three Months Ended
Six Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
2024
2023
2024
2023
GAAP total revenues
$ 82,160
$ 65,763
$ 158,287
$ 125,759
June 30,
2024
2023
Annual Recurring Revenue (ARR)
$ 321,284
$ 256,811
Registered Users
18,584
15,849
Revenue per Registered User (RPU)
$ 17.29
$ 16.20
Non-GAAP Cost of Revenues
Set forth below is a presentation of the company’s “Non-GAAP Cost of Revenues.” Please reference the “Explanation of Non-
GAAP Measures” section.
Three Months Ended
Six Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
2024
2023
2024
2023
GAAP cost of revenues
$ 33,389
$ 30,289
$ 65,484
$ 58,147
Amortization
(1,793)
(1,638)
(3,568)
(3,237)
Stock-based compensation expense
(1,347)
(1,487)
(2,525)
(2,633)
Non-GAAP cost of revenues
$ 30,249
$ 27,164
$ 59,391
$ 52,277
Non-GAAP Gross Margin
Set forth below is a presentation of the company’s “Non-GAAP Gross Margin.” Please reference the “Explanation of Non-GAAP
Measures” section.
Three Months Ended
Six Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
2024
2023
2024
2023
GAAP gross margin
59.4 %
53.9 %
58.6 %
53.8 %
Amortization
2.2 %
2.5 %
2.3 %
2.5 %
Stock-based compensation expense
1.6 %
2.3 %
1.6 %
2.1 %
Non-GAAP gross margin
63.2 %
58.7 %
62.5 %
58.4 %
Non-GAAP Research and Development Expense
Set forth below is a presentation of the company’s “Non-GAAP Research and Development Expense.” Please reference the
“Explanation of Non-GAAP Measures” section.
Three Months Ended
Six Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
2024
2023
2024
2023
GAAP research and development expense
$ 23,909
$ 20,866
$ 46,729
$ 41,415
Stock-based compensation expense
(4,256)
(3,963)
(8,254)
(7,738)
Non-GAAP research and development expense
$ 19,653
$ 16,903
$ 38,475
$ 33,677
Non-GAAP Sales and Marketing Expense
Set forth below is a presentation of the company’s “Non-GAAP Sales and Marketing Expense.” Please reference the
“Explanation of Non-GAAP Measures” section.
Three Months Ended
Six Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
2024
2023
2024
2023
GAAP sales and marketing expense
$ 16,964
$ 13,883
$ 30,807
$ 24,761
Stock-based compensation expense
(2,291)
(1,813)
(4,322)
(3,403)
Non-GAAP sales and marketing expense
$ 14,673
$ 12,070
$ 26,485
$ 21,358
Non-GAAP General and Administrative Expense
Set forth below is a presentation of the company’s “Non-GAAP General and Administrative Expense.” Please reference the
“Explanation of Non-GAAP Measures” section.
Three Months Ended
Six Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
2024
2023
2024
2023
GAAP general and administrative expense
$ 20,612
$ 18,207
$ 39,927
$ 35,318
Stock-based compensation expense
(7,119)
(5,489)
(13,464)
(10,222)
Non-GAAP general and administrative expense
$ 13,493
$ 12,718
$ 26,463
$ 25,096
Non-GAAP Net Loss
Set forth below is a presentation of the company’s “Non-GAAP Net Loss.” Please reference the “Explanation of Non-GAAP
Measures” section.
Three Months Ended
Six Months Ended
June 30,
June 30,
2024
2023
2024
2023
GAAP net loss
$ (12,317)
$ (17,761)
$ (23,750)
$ (34,724)
Provision for income taxes
185
88
374
284
Loss (gain) on financial instruments
112
(10)
—
(220)
Amortization
2,151
1,995
4,285
3,954
Stock-based compensation expense
15,013
12,752
28,565
23,996
Acquisition-related expenses
135
34
195
220
Non-GAAP net loss
$ 5,279
$ (2,902)
$ 9,669
$ (6,490)
Adjusted EBITDA
Set forth below is a presentation of the company’s “Adjusted EBITDA.” Please reference the “Explanation of Non-GAAP
Measures” section.
Three Months Ended
Year Ended
June 30,
June 30,
2024
2023
2024
2023
GAAP net loss
$ (12,317)
$ (17,761)
$ (23,750)
$ (34,724)
Provision for income taxes
185
88
374
284
Loss (gain) on financial instruments
112
(10)
—
(220)
Interest income, net
(1,187)
(190)
(2,196)
(159)
Depreciation and amortization
2,613
2,560
5,175
5,146
Stock-based compensation expense
15,013
12,752
28,565
23,996
Acquisition-related expenses
135
34
195
220
Adjusted EBITDA
$ 4,554
$ (2,527)
$ 8,363
$ (5,457)
Investor Relations Contact
Steve Calk
ir@alkami.com
Media Relations Contacts
Marla Pieton
marla.pieton@alkami.com
Valerie Kerner
alkami@fullyvested.com
View original content:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/alkami-announces-second-quarter-2024-financial-results-302211396.html
SOURCE Alkami Technology, Inc.
You may like
Technology
Truth-seeking: the Turning Point in Zunyi
Published
25 minutes agoon
October 19, 2026By
BEIJING, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — An interview from China.org.cn with Wang Xiaohui and David Ferguson on the Long March:
Wang Xiaohui:
When you march toward your ideals but encounter repeated setbacks and failures, do you have the courage to pause, reflect on the path taken, and chart a new way forward?
David Ferguson:
If I continually encountered setbacks on the road to my ideals, I would stop and reflect seriously on whether my methods need adjusted or my direction needs corrected. This is a matter of being honest with oneself and honest about one’s shortcomings. Granted, this requires as much courage as setting out in the first place — because what you have to confront is not only the judgment of others, but your own ingrained reluctance to accept that you might have got it wrong.
Wang Xiaohui:
The waters of the Xiangjiang River ran crimson in the winter of 1934.
To cover the Red Army’s main force as they crossed the river, Chen Shuxiang, then Commander of the 34th Division of the Fifth Army Corps, led his troops to fight against vastly superior enemy forces until they ran out of ammunition and supplies. Severely wounded, Chen was captured alive. On the way to the enemy camp to be paraded for merit, Chen seized a moment of the enemy’s unawareness, tore his own intestines through his abdominal wound, and died a heroic death. He was only 29 years old.
The Battle of Xiangjiang River was the deadliest campaign for the Red Army since the start of the Long March. In less than two months, their troop strength plummeted from over 86,000 to just over 30,000.
At that critical moment, doubts and discontent among officers and soldiers with the military leadership peaked.
During the fights against the previous four Kuomintang (KMT) “encirclement” campaigns, the Red Army adopted Mao Zedong’s strategy of “luring the enemy in deep.” With flexible tactics in mobile warfare, the Red Army worked miracles of defeating superior enemies time and again. Yet, the tide turned completely during the KMT’s fifth “encirclement.”
At that time, the CPC was a branch of the Communist International (Comintern). After 1927, the Comintern instructed the CPC to adopt an urban-centered path in its revolution, for it was how Russia’s October Revolution had achieved victory. Affected by this directive, during the Fifth Counter-Campaign against “Encirclement and Suppression”, Bo Gu and Otto Braun, who held actual command of the Red Army, insisted on launching offensive operations to seize major cities.
Otto Braun also mechanically applied European conventional warfare tactics, forcing the Red Army into rigid positional and fortress battles. In the Battle of Guangchang, the poorly equipped Red Army fought head-on against enemy tanks and artillery on open terrain, resulting in more than 5,000 casualties, about one-fourth of all participating troops.
Successive military defeats forced the Red Army to launch a strategic shift. However, Bo Gu and Otto Braun insisted that everything be evacuated, including heavy equipment: printing presses, currency-making machines, and arms-manufacturing facilities… When crossing the Xiangjiang River, troops were slowed down by these cumbersome supplies, and numerous soldiers even laid down their lives for protecting these assets. Chen Shuxiang and his 34th Division wrote the gravest footnote to this bloody sacrifice.
By the banks of the Xiangjiang River, the spark of hope in the eyes of the Red Army soldiers was nearly quenched by the cold water. Could the rigid foreign doctrines truly guide the Red Army and China’s revolution? What path lay ahead?
History often unfolds in paradoxes: when all hope seems lost, a historical turning point is quietly emerging.
After the Battle of Xiangjiang River, Mao firmly opposed the original plan drafted by Bo Gu and Otto Braun to march towards Hunan. Instead, he proposed to advance to Guizhou where enemy defenses were weak. There, the Red Army broke through the natural barrier of the Wujiang River, and captured Zunyi. On Jan. 15, 1935, the CPC Central Committee convened an enlarged Political Bureau meeting in an old mansion, later known to the world as the Zunyi Conference.
Inside the modest living room on the second floor, a charcoal brazier expelled the winter chill. The CPC leadership sat around a long table to review why the Red Army had fallen into passive positions since 1933. Bo Gu attributed the defeats solely to the enemy’s overwhelming strength, while other leading officials like Zhou Enlai and Zhang Wentian pinpointed flawed military command as the fundamental cause.
Mao Zedong also made a pivotal speech.
As a revolutionary forged in rural base-area practice, Mao always sought truth from real combat experience. Citing victories from the previous four counter-“encirclement” campaigns, he rebutted Bo Gu’s opinions and criticized the flawed strategies of passive defense and abandoning mobile warfare tactics. In plain, incisive language, he pointed out that “the soldiers also needed to march, eat and sleep,” and that Braun’s rigid commands were completely divorced from the realities of China’s revolutionary warfare.
Throughout the whole meeting, Bo Gu remained dejected; Braun sat near the door and lit one cigarette after another. Never had these “true Bolsheviks” faced such rigorous criticism before.
The intensive confrontation lasted three days. In the end, Mao Zedong was elected to the leadership of the Red Army and the CPC Central Committee, putting an end to the wrong guidance. This marked a life-and-death turning point in the history of the Communist Party of China.
The Zunyi Conference freed the CPC from the Comintern’s intervention, enabling the Party to independently master the destiny of China’s revolution. From then on, the Red Army turned peril into safety, and China’s revolution emerged from despair toward new life.
David Ferguson:
When faced with major setbacks, the Communist Party of China was not crushed; instead, it demonstrated the courage to confront and correct its own mistakes, thereby turning adversity into opportunity. For any ruling party, this kind of courage is exceptionally rare.
Throughout history, guided by the principle of seeking truth from facts, the Party has always corrected errors, updated systems and adjusted course. By doing so, it has guaranteed social progress. This is precisely the secret to success that has made the Party resilient and invincible.
Wang Xiaohui:
No grand undertaking advances without setbacks. Faced with obstacles and defeats, the CPC demonstrated extraordinary courage and wisdom. They sought truth from facts, corrected wrong courses, and led the revolution towards triumph.
The Zunyi Conference Spirit, embodied in firm conviction, adherence to truth, independence and self-reliance, solidarity and unity, was forged amid blood and fire. It has shaped the unique spiritual character of the CPC. In the years that followed, these timeless values continued to evolve and sustain the Party in the face of trials and challenges, endowing it with enduring vitality.
China Mosaic
http://www.china.org.cn/video/node_7230027.htm
Faith: The Spark Born by the Yudu Riverside
http://www.china.org.cn/2026-10/17/content_118737624.shtml
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/truth-seeking-the-turning-point-in-zunyi-302912139.html
SOURCE China.org.cn
Technology
Truth-seeking: the Turning Point in Zunyi
Published
25 minutes agoon
October 19, 2026By
BEIJING, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — An interview from China.org.cn with Wang Xiaohui and David Ferguson on the Long March:
Wang Xiaohui:
When you march toward your ideals but encounter repeated setbacks and failures, do you have the courage to pause, reflect on the path taken, and chart a new way forward?
David Ferguson:
If I continually encountered setbacks on the road to my ideals, I would stop and reflect seriously on whether my methods need adjusted or my direction needs corrected. This is a matter of being honest with oneself and honest about one’s shortcomings. Granted, this requires as much courage as setting out in the first place — because what you have to confront is not only the judgment of others, but your own ingrained reluctance to accept that you might have got it wrong.
Wang Xiaohui:
The waters of the Xiangjiang River ran crimson in the winter of 1934.
To cover the Red Army’s main force as they crossed the river, Chen Shuxiang, then Commander of the 34th Division of the Fifth Army Corps, led his troops to fight against vastly superior enemy forces until they ran out of ammunition and supplies. Severely wounded, Chen was captured alive. On the way to the enemy camp to be paraded for merit, Chen seized a moment of the enemy’s unawareness, tore his own intestines through his abdominal wound, and died a heroic death. He was only 29 years old.
The Battle of Xiangjiang River was the deadliest campaign for the Red Army since the start of the Long March. In less than two months, their troop strength plummeted from over 86,000 to just over 30,000.
At that critical moment, doubts and discontent among officers and soldiers with the military leadership peaked.
During the fights against the previous four Kuomintang (KMT) “encirclement” campaigns, the Red Army adopted Mao Zedong’s strategy of “luring the enemy in deep.” With flexible tactics in mobile warfare, the Red Army worked miracles of defeating superior enemies time and again. Yet, the tide turned completely during the KMT’s fifth “encirclement.”
At that time, the CPC was a branch of the Communist International (Comintern). After 1927, the Comintern instructed the CPC to adopt an urban-centered path in its revolution, for it was how Russia’s October Revolution had achieved victory. Affected by this directive, during the Fifth Counter-Campaign against “Encirclement and Suppression”, Bo Gu and Otto Braun, who held actual command of the Red Army, insisted on launching offensive operations to seize major cities.
Otto Braun also mechanically applied European conventional warfare tactics, forcing the Red Army into rigid positional and fortress battles. In the Battle of Guangchang, the poorly equipped Red Army fought head-on against enemy tanks and artillery on open terrain, resulting in more than 5,000 casualties, about one-fourth of all participating troops.
Successive military defeats forced the Red Army to launch a strategic shift. However, Bo Gu and Otto Braun insisted that everything be evacuated, including heavy equipment: printing presses, currency-making machines, and arms-manufacturing facilities… When crossing the Xiangjiang River, troops were slowed down by these cumbersome supplies, and numerous soldiers even laid down their lives for protecting these assets. Chen Shuxiang and his 34th Division wrote the gravest footnote to this bloody sacrifice.
By the banks of the Xiangjiang River, the spark of hope in the eyes of the Red Army soldiers was nearly quenched by the cold water. Could the rigid foreign doctrines truly guide the Red Army and China’s revolution? What path lay ahead?
History often unfolds in paradoxes: when all hope seems lost, a historical turning point is quietly emerging.
After the Battle of Xiangjiang River, Mao firmly opposed the original plan drafted by Bo Gu and Otto Braun to march towards Hunan. Instead, he proposed to advance to Guizhou where enemy defenses were weak. There, the Red Army broke through the natural barrier of the Wujiang River, and captured Zunyi. On Jan. 15, 1935, the CPC Central Committee convened an enlarged Political Bureau meeting in an old mansion, later known to the world as the Zunyi Conference.
Inside the modest living room on the second floor, a charcoal brazier expelled the winter chill. The CPC leadership sat around a long table to review why the Red Army had fallen into passive positions since 1933. Bo Gu attributed the defeats solely to the enemy’s overwhelming strength, while other leading officials like Zhou Enlai and Zhang Wentian pinpointed flawed military command as the fundamental cause.
Mao Zedong also made a pivotal speech.
As a revolutionary forged in rural base-area practice, Mao always sought truth from real combat experience. Citing victories from the previous four counter-“encirclement” campaigns, he rebutted Bo Gu’s opinions and criticized the flawed strategies of passive defense and abandoning mobile warfare tactics. In plain, incisive language, he pointed out that “the soldiers also needed to march, eat and sleep,” and that Braun’s rigid commands were completely divorced from the realities of China’s revolutionary warfare.
Throughout the whole meeting, Bo Gu remained dejected; Braun sat near the door and lit one cigarette after another. Never had these “true Bolsheviks” faced such rigorous criticism before.
The intensive confrontation lasted three days. In the end, Mao Zedong was elected to the leadership of the Red Army and the CPC Central Committee, putting an end to the wrong guidance. This marked a life-and-death turning point in the history of the Communist Party of China.
The Zunyi Conference freed the CPC from the Comintern’s intervention, enabling the Party to independently master the destiny of China’s revolution. From then on, the Red Army turned peril into safety, and China’s revolution emerged from despair toward new life.
David Ferguson:
When faced with major setbacks, the Communist Party of China was not crushed; instead, it demonstrated the courage to confront and correct its own mistakes, thereby turning adversity into opportunity. For any ruling party, this kind of courage is exceptionally rare.
Throughout history, guided by the principle of seeking truth from facts, the Party has always corrected errors, updated systems and adjusted course. By doing so, it has guaranteed social progress. This is precisely the secret to success that has made the Party resilient and invincible.
Wang Xiaohui:
No grand undertaking advances without setbacks. Faced with obstacles and defeats, the CPC demonstrated extraordinary courage and wisdom. They sought truth from facts, corrected wrong courses, and led the revolution towards triumph.
The Zunyi Conference Spirit, embodied in firm conviction, adherence to truth, independence and self-reliance, solidarity and unity, was forged amid blood and fire. It has shaped the unique spiritual character of the CPC. In the years that followed, these timeless values continued to evolve and sustain the Party in the face of trials and challenges, endowing it with enduring vitality.
China Mosaic
http://www.china.org.cn/video/node_7230027.htm
Faith: The Spark Born by the Yudu Riverside
http://www.china.org.cn/2026-10/17/content_118737624.shtml
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/truth-seeking-the-turning-point-in-zunyi-302912139.html
SOURCE China.org.cn
Technology
GMIF2026: AI Inference Powers the “Token Factory” and Drives System-Level Rethinking of Memory & Storage
Published
25 minutes agoon
October 19, 2026By
SHENZHEN, China, Oct. 18, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — The 5th GMIF Innovation Summit (Global Memory Innovation Forum 2026, GMIF2026) recently concluded at the Renaissance Shenzhen Bay Hotel. Co-hosted by the Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA) and the School of Integrated Circuits at Peking University, the summit was themed “The Future Built on AI Memory and Storage.” Now in its fifth edition, GMIF has grown from a regional industry gathering into a benchmark for the global semiconductor memory ecosystem, with diversified programs including keynote sessions, an investment forum, product exhibitions, a global livestream, and a golf friendship match, all centered on the value of memory and storage in the token economy and the AI inference era.
In the opening remarks by Rixin Sun, President of Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA), GMIF’s growth over five consecutive editions was traced from its early days to today. As a platform for global exchange, GMIF is built around the memory value chain, linking wafer IDMs and players in controllers, modules, packaging and testing, equipment and materials, and end applications to promote technical exchange, supply-demand matching, and ecosystem cooperation.
President Sun noted that as AI evolves from generative to agentic, inference efficiency, data scheduling, and system coordination have become shared priorities. Collaboration across the value chain is no longer a traditional supply-demand relationship, but a deeper partnership built around workload requirements, joint product definition, and scenario validation. Looking ahead, GMIF will pursue a more specialized and differentiated format, connecting memory companies with AI compute and end-application players worldwide.
Capital Meets Technology: Memory & Storage Moves to the Center of AI Infrastructure
As AI shifts from model training to large-scale commercial inference, the token is becoming a new unit of value. Inference demands low latency, high concurrency, and sustained throughput, which places memory and storage bandwidth, capacity, and energy efficiency among the variables that shape overall system efficiency and cost.
Daniel Yen of Morgan Stanley projected that global data center capital expenditure will stay strong in the coming years, with more than half of cloud data center capex expected to go to memory & storage (excluding HBM) by 2027. Yen identified six innovation paths to overcome the “memory wall” challenge: process migration, design changes, advanced packaging, memory peripherals, PIM/CIM, and new materials.
Prof. Yimao Cai, Dean of the School of Integrated Circuits at Peking University, pointed out that HBM remains central to high-end AI compute, but yield, cost, and thermal constraints limit broader adoption. NAND-based high-bandwidth technologies such as HBF have become a major research focus because of their cost advantage, and hybrid multi-media architectures could balance performance, capacity, and cost for deploying models with hundreds of billions of parameters.
Kevin Yoon, CVP & CTO of Samsung Memory China at Samsung Electronics, described how agents are generating massive KV cache demand and driving rapid iteration of tiered storage, citing Samsung’s work on Z-NAND, PCIe Gen6 SSDs, and ultra-high-capacity data center SSDs. Maya Zhang, Senior Director of Product Marketing from Sandisk, called this the first year of the “inference boom.” As inference reaches commercial scale, AI data centers are shifting from cost centers to value and capacity centers, and the evaluation framework is moving from TCO to TVO. NAND is becoming a strategic core component of AI, and the SSD is becoming a “token battery” that greatly improves the economics of the industry through token reuse.
Solidigm and Arm focused on the evolution of system-level design. Benny Ni, GAR Sales VP at Solidigm, noted high-capacity QLC SSDs are being adopted faster, and that memory offloading has moved from an alternative to a core design paradigm for data centers, while liquid cooling has become a prerequisite for unlocking high-end storage performance. John Xavier Lionel, Head of Global Storage Business at Arm, shared competition in the AI era is shifting from simply chasing higher TOPS to building a more efficient system balance among compute, memory, storage, and data movement. Arm’s cloud-edge-device continuum framework balances power, capacity, bandwidth, latency, security, and cost constraints at each tier, so that “the right AI workload runs in the right place.”
Moving from the cloud to the edge, Stanley Huang, AVP of Silicon Motion, stressed that devices are the ultimate carrier of AI experiences and that intelligent storage directly determines real-world device performance. Its PerformaShape technology allocates resources flexibly across different agents and greatly improves read/write consistency.
Sam Sun, Chairman of BIWIN, explained that large-scale AI inference is extending memory demand from data centers to the edge and endpoints, where differing needs in capacity, performance, power, size, and reliability are pushing storage from general-purpose specifications toward deep matching with specific scenarios and platforms. Drawing on full-stack capabilities from media selection and controller and firmware development to advanced packaging, testing, and volume delivery, BIWIN works closely with customers, platforms, and chip makers to tailor products to each use case, shortening development and validation cycles and improving system space, energy efficiency, and performance.
Token Factories Move Enterprise AI from Pilot to Production
As the token becomes the core unit of value, producing tokens efficiently and at low cost has become a shared challenge for enterprise AI adoption worldwide, and the “token factory” is emerging as a new industry paradigm. Tao Zhou, General Manager of the Server Division of Lenovo ISG China, said 80% of enterprises have deployed at least one type of agent, yet fewer than 40% of projects can scale and deliver positive ROI. Lenovo has built a full-stack “token factory” paradigm spanning data governance, compute optimization, and security management to address this.
A solid token factory depends on underlying storage media and architecture. Numbers Law’s PMD (Parallel Magnetic Drive) technology and NEXWISE‘s “KuberCloud” token factory solution contributed to full-stack capability from hardware to compute scheduling and model operations. Infplane, Maxio, and Genstoraige lowered the deployment threshold for large on-device models through AI SSD tiered offloading and memory expansion.
Real-world applications are also deepening. SYNCORE has achieved vehicle-cloud embodied intelligence across the whole vehicle. Dify, with its private agent architecture, and Paratera, with its MaaS compute service platform, are moving AI from basic compute supply toward deeper industry intelligence services, accelerating the industrialization of AI.
40 Companies Showcase the Core of the AI Memory & Storage Chain
The concurrent exhibition brought together 40 companies across the full value chain, from memory chips and controllers to compute servers, AIDC services, packaging and testing equipment, and system applications, presenting the latest advances in AI memory and storage from around the world.
Memory IDMs and controller makers led with new products. SanDisk featured its iNAND AT EU752 automotive UFS 4.1, SN861 enterprise NVMe SSD, and BiCS8 QLC NAND. Silicon Motion introduced the SM8466 PCIe Gen6 16-channel controller and the SM2524XT controller for edge SSDs. Maxio, YEESTOR, and other Chinese controller makers showed flagship PCIe Gen4/Gen5 and UFS controllers with enhanced LDPC, a sign that China’s controller portfolio is taking shape and benchmarking itself against leading international standards.
Compute and token factory solutions were another highlight. Lenovo exhibited its WenTian series of AI training-and-inference integrated servers. NEXWISE presented its full-stack token factory hardware and software, with heterogeneous compute management and token-based billing. Paratera showed its intelligent compute cloud and supercomputing cloud services, and Numbers Law demonstrated its PMD (Parallel Magnetic Drive) technology, aimed at sharply raising HDD IOPS and throughput. Infplane, Genstoraige, and Quanxing introduced KV cache offload and memory-fusion AI SSD solutions that use storage to share the compute load and significantly cut deployment costs.
Module makers and full-scenario solution providers brought a wide range of products. BIWIN exhibited enterprise SSDs, CXL products, wide-temperature industrial storage, and embedded products spanning AI cloud, edge, and device. KingSpec, POWEV, Topdisk, Barycn, Jielong Storage, HIKSEMI, and others presented industrial-grade, automotive-grade, server, and embedded product families, demonstrating strong volume production and reliable delivery.
Equipment, testing, and materials suppliers rounded out the floor. Attach Point, MICROVIEW, and Maxwell Technologies showed die attach and bonding equipment for 2.5D/3D advanced packaging. OKN Technology, Acroview Technology, Hongjingwei, and Tytantest introduced test and burn-in systems covering SSD, DRAM, and NAND that can accurately reproduce high-load AI I/O scenarios. Hemei Jingyi and Silergy brought storage IC package substrates and dedicated power management ICs. From advanced packaging equipment to test validation to core components, this supporting ecosystem lays the manufacturing foundation for volume production of AI memory and storage and for Chinese suppliers expanding overseas.
GMIF2026 Annual Awards Unveiled: Global Memory & Storage Leaders Build an Open, Collaborative Ecosystem
To recognize companies that have made outstanding contributions to the memory and storage value chain, the summit established the GMIF2026 Annual Awards, which cover memory, compute, packaging and testing equipment, test systems, and end applications across AI infrastructure, and were judged on technological innovation, industry contribution, market service, and real-world results.
Honorees, including Samsung Semiconductor, SanDisk, Solidigm, CXMT, Arm, Lenovo, Dify, Silicon Motion, Infplane, Genstoraige, Numbers Law, Paratera, SYNCORE, NEXWISE, Maxio Technology, BIWIN, Topdisk, KingSpec, POWEV, Quanxing Technology, OKN Technology, Attach Point, COMIX, Barycn, LKAUTO, Maxwell Technologies, Hemei Jingyi, Silergy, Heyan Technology, ExTripod Electronics, UNIMOS, GBAT, and Tytantest, were recognized for standout achievements in technology breakthroughs, product deployment, ecosystem building, and the industry chain.
Global Livestream and Golf Friendship Match Extend the Boundaries of Industry Cooperation
To join the global ecosystem and expand international cooperation, the summit featured a special Global Livestream by Memory Brands on LinkedIn, Facebook, and YouTube. Eight brands presented online: BIWIN, Silicon Motion, Quanxing Technology, OKN Technology, KingSpec, Maxwell Technologies, ExTripod Electronics, and Silergy. They gave overseas audiences a direct look at China’s latest advances in memory chips, advanced packaging, test systems, and other core AI infrastructure components, connecting technology standards, supply chain resources, and market demand across regions.
The momentum carried into the next day. The GMIF2026 “BIWIN Cup” golf friendship match, exclusively sponsored by BIWIN, brought senior executives from across the global memory value chain to the course. After a day of intensive discussion at the main forum, the setting was more relaxed, but the conversations among technology, capital, and markets carried on, helping speed practical cooperation across borders and sectors.
Conclusion
Across the GMIF program, one message stood out: global AI competition is moving beyond the “single-point era” of peak GPU performance into a “system-level era” that integrates storage, compute, networking, and software. In the token economy, memory and storage is shedding its auxiliary role and becoming the strategic foundation of AI inference.
This edition of GMIF brought together capital outlook, frontier technology, product innovation, real-world practice, and ecosystem collaboration, and, with the awards, livestream, and networking events, carried the conversation from ideas to product showcases, overseas exposure, and business deals. Going forward, GMIF will stay focused on the industry’s frontier issues and connect key players across the global memory value chain, promoting joint standards, technology development, and market expansion to open a new chapter for the AI memory and storage industry.
About GMIF
Global Memory Innovation Forum (GMIF) is a premier annual gathering that connects the global memory and storage community. Featuring diverse activities including keynote speeches, roundtable dialogues, supply-demand match-making, product showcases, industry rankings, awards programs, and global livestreaming, GMIF brings together key enterprises across the memory and storage chain, technical experts, terminal companies and investment institutions to exchange insights, build partnerships, and create business opportunities. Learn more about GMIF, please visit https://www.gmif.com.cn/. Follow us on LinkedIn, YouTube and Facebook.
Media Contact:
Carina Gu, wenjing.gu@gmif.com.cn
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gmif2026-ai-inference-powers-the-token-factory-and-drives-system-level-rethinking-of-memory–storage-302912123.html
SOURCE Shenzhen Memory Industry Association (SMIA)
Truth-seeking: the Turning Point in Zunyi
Truth-seeking: the Turning Point in Zunyi
GMIF2026: AI Inference Powers the “Token Factory” and Drives System-Level Rethinking of Memory & Storage
Send Rakhi to UK swiftly with UK Gifts Portal
Whiteboard Series with NEAR | Ep: 45 Joel Thorstensson from ceramic.network
Nullmax and Renesas Forge Strategic Partnership to Deliver Competitive ADAS Solutions for the Global Market
Why You Should Build on #NEAR – Co-founder Illia Polosukhin at CV Labs
Whiteboard Series with NEAR | Ep: 45 Joel Thorstensson from ceramic.network
NEAR End of Year Town Hall 2021: The Open Web World, MetaBUILD 2 Hackathon and 2021 recap
Trending
-
Coin Market5 days ago‘Bunker mode’ won’t protect your crypto, critics say
-
Technology5 days agoSolidion Technology Reaffirms Commitment to Address Growing Energy Storage Needs of AI Data Centers
-
Technology5 days agoTVU Networks to Showcase Connected Live Video Ecosystem at Broadcast India Show 2026
-
Technology5 days agoPEGATRON Brings AI Infrastructure from Design to Deployment at OCP Global Summit 2026
-
Coin Market4 days agoOrganizations join forces to fight Illinois crypto tax, after 6-month pause
-
Technology5 days agoSUS ENVIRONMENT Draws International Attention for Transforming Waste-to-Energy Plants into Sustainable Urban Assets
-
Coin Market5 days agoCan crypto users trust the supply chain behind hardware wallets?
-
Technology5 days agoA $2.1 Trillion Wellness Industry Never Built a Daily Practice for Black Children. So This Atlanta Family Did.
