QUIC RESEARCH REPORT · advantage of the vast distribution networks some of their subsidiaries...

The information in this document is for EDUCATIONAL and NON-COMMERCIAL use only and is not intended to constitute specific legal, accounting,

financial or tax advice for any individual. In no event will QUIC, its members or directors, or Queen’s University be liable to you or anyone else for any loss

or damages whatsoever (including direct, indirect, special, incidental, consequential, exemplary or punitive damages) resulting from the use of this

document, or reliance on the information or content found within this document. The information may not be reproduced or republished in any part

without the prior written consent of QUIC and Queen’s University.

QUIC is not in the business of advising or holding themselves out as being in the business of advising. Many factors may affect the applicability of any

statement or comment that appear in our documents to an individual's particular circumstances.

© Queen’s University 2016

QUIC RESEARCH REPORT

QUIC Research Reports focus on

emerging investment themes that

affect current portfolio companies

and companies under coverage.

Consumers & Healthcare

Introduction

Mondelez is the market leader in the snack food segment. With a

strong brand portfolio that is well-positioned to capitalize on the

sector’s future growth, we believe that Mondelez will see significant

upside in the years to come. By adding Mondelez to our U.S portfolio,

we will be exposed to the lucrative snack foods segment and benefit

from their strong financial position.

Summary

- Mondelez operates in the global snack industry, competing with

names such as PepsiCo and Conagra Foods

- Mondelez has a wide range of brand offerings, led by its seven

“power brands”, each garnering over $1 billion in annual sales

- The company has begun to focus its investments to emerging

markets, which grow at fast rates while being driven by increasing

consumer demand for snacks

- The company’s increased focus on effective capital deployment will

increase margins and a result bolster company profitability

- Recent e-commerce expansion and a stronger focus on healthy

products serve as strong catalysts for the company

Mondelez (NASDAQ: MDLZ) Stock Pitch

A Stock as Sweet as it’s Oreo Cookies

May 23rd, 2016

Julie Vincent

Jon Allion

Andrei Florescu

Liam Smith

QUIC Research Report

May 23rd, 2016

Mondelez Stock Pitch (NASDAQ: MDLZ)

May 23rd, 2016

Table of Contents

Introduction 1

Company Overview 3

Industry Overview 4

Investment Thesis I: Strong Brand Profile 5

Investment Thesis II: Emerging Markets 6

Investment Thesis III: Margin Expansion 7

Catalysts and Risks 8

Portfolio Fit 8

Valuation 9

Appendix 11

References 12


May 23rd, 2016


May 23rd, 2016 3

Mondelez’s powerful presence in the snacking

category is led by 7 billion-dollar “Power Brands”

earning 68% of the company’s revenues. These

brands include Cadbury, Cadbury Dairy Milk, and

Milka chocolate; LU, Nabisco, and Oreo biscuits;

and Trident gum. Mondelez’s Power Brands benefit

from significant brand loyalty resulting in operating

margins that are 1 to 2% higher than other brands.

Power Brands also grow faster than the company

average, therefore Mondelez plans to have them

contribute to over 80% of total sales over time.

Mondelez is considered the worldwide leader in

biscuits, chocolate and candy, and holds a

dominate position in gum. Its competitive

advantage is that it sells snack items in

complimentary food segments. This results in cost

leverage, capability sharing and commercial

marketing benefits. Moreover, it is able to take

advantage of the vast distribution networks some

of their subsidiaries have.

Mondelez has operations in approximately 80

countries around the world and distributes its

products in over 165.

Management is in the midst of implementing an

aggressive growth strategy, which it hopes will help

to increase its competitive advantage in the ever-

growing space. Management hopes to grow

organic revenue at or above the company growth

rate, achieve operating income of high single digits

(and double digits where possible) across all brands

and double digit constant currency growth.

Company Overview

Source: Company Reports

Revenue Segmentation by Geography 2015A

EXHIBIT 2 EXHIBIT 3


Revenue Segmentation by Product 2015A

40%

30%

16%

9%

6%

Biscuits Chocolate Gum and Candy

Beverages Cheese and Grocery

34%

26%

14%

16%

10%

Europe North America Latin America

Asia Pacific EEMEA

EXHIBIT 1

Mondelez Popular Brands


May 23rd, 2016


May 23rd, 2016

Over the past 5 years, the snack food industry has

benefited from increased demand. This comes as a

result of a strengthened economy, leading to

higher discretionary spending levels.

The industry is expected to grow at a 3.7% CAGR

over the next 3 years, with total revenue expected

to exceed $40B in 2016.

The biggest headwind for producers in the snack is

the ever-changing tastes and preferences of

consumers. With many consumers beginning to

embrace healthier lifestyles, snack food companies

are feeling the need to offer new health-conscious

items. Non-sugary snacks closely aligned with

meal-replacement foods are showing the strongest

growth of all areas, proving the movement by

consumers to healthier alternatives.

It is expected that improving economic conditions

throughout North America and Europe will lead to

increased demand for premium snacks. As such,

companies have begun producing organic and

whole food snack options to bring to the

marketplace.

There are four main drivers of the industry: per

capita disposable income, the healthy eating index,

the price of corn and the trade-weighted index.

Currently, there are three main companies

operating in this industry: Mondelez, PepsiCo and

ConAgra foods. Going forward, PepsiCo poses the

largest threat to Mondelez because of their

portfolio of household brands: Quaker’s, Lay’s,

Dorito’s and Fritos.

As of 2014, confections (which includes sugary

sweets such as chocolate, hard candy and gum)

represented the largest sales contribution in Europe

and the Middle East/Africa. Salty snacks were

favourites in North America, representing roughly

one-fifth of all snack consumption. Refrigerated

snacks were consumed the most in Asia-Pacific,

while cookies and snack cakes were best sellers in

Latin America.

4

Industry Overview

Food Percentage

Chocolate 64%

Fresh Fruit 62%

Vegetables 52%

Cookies / Biscuits 51%

Bread / Sandwich 50%

Yogurt 50%

Cheese 46%

Chips / Crisps 44%

Nuts / Seeds 41`%

Gum / Ice Cream 33%

EXHIBIT 5

Source: Nielsen

Percentage of Consumers Who Said They Ate

These Snacks in the Last 30 Days

28% 24%33% 36%

23%

24%

20%

33%19%

32%

31%

26%

17%

17%

17%

30%

17%28%

25%

20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Latin America Asia Pacific EEMEA Europe North America

Confection Salty Cookies and Cakes

Refrigerated Fruits and Vegetables

EXHIBIT 4

Geographic Snack Consumption Breakdown

Source: Nielsen


May 23rd, 2016


May 23rd, 2016 5

Mondelez’s powerful presence in the snacking

category is led by 7 billion-dollar “Power Brands”

earning 68% of the company’s revenues. These

brands include Cadbury, Cadbury Dairy Milk, and

Milka chocolate; LU, Nabisco, and Oreo biscuits;

and Trident gum. Mondelez’s Power Brands benefit

from significant brand loyalty resulting in operating

margins that are 1 to 2% higher than other brands.

Power Brands also grow faster than the company

average, therefore Mondelez plans to have them

contribute to over 80% of total sales over time.

In response to a shift in consumer preferences

towards healthier snacks, Mondelez expects 50% of

its product portfolio to be composed of “Well-

Being” offerings by 2020, up from 35% today,

aiming to become the global market leader in

better-for-you snack options. The recent U.S release

of Good Thins is the company’s first new snack

brand in over a decade and showcases their ability

to provide relevant, healthier snacks at competitive

prices. In order to retain future market share for the

Power Brands, Mondelez is focusing on more

aggressive marketing strategies (expected to climb

to 10% of sales in 2018, a gain of 2%) and simpler,

more nutritious ingredients.

Mondelez’s brands have seen shelf-space reduction

at some retailers over the past 2 years as they took

a price increase due to rising input costs earlier

than competitors such as Mars and Nestle. These

companies have hedges on their coca purchases

that are longer-term than Mondelez. However, the

pricing dynamics between Mondelez and their

competitors are beginning to normalize and

improve further into 2016. Mondelez has one of the

lowest exposure to private labels out of the

competition with just 10.6% of their portfolio

composing of private label brands. This means that

short-term increases in their cost base poses less of

a risk, and Mondelez will continue to benefit from

the strong brand loyalty which has been built over

many decades.

In order to focus on the core snacks portfolio and

boost growth, Mondelez engaged in a spin-off of

its coffee business in 2015 with D.E Master Blenders

to create Jacobs Douwe Egberts (JDE). The new

company, of which Mondelez has a 43.5% equity

stake in, will leverage both company’s share of the

coffee market and cost savings are expected to

total $1.5 billion by 2018. JDE sells coffee through

industry leading brands such as Gevalia and Jacobs

which achieve similar brand loyalty to Mondelez’s

Power Brands.

Mondelez has the advantage of product offerings in

complementary food categories, resulting in cost

leverage and capability sharing. For example, in

2012 Mondelez launched Stride in China using its

distribution network in biscuits.

Investment Thesis I: Strong Brand Profile


Leading Brands by Category

EXHIBIT 6 EXHIBIT 7

Source: Bernstein

Brand Exposure to Private Labels vs. Peers

19.5%

16.6%

14.6%13.2% 13.1%

11.9%10.6% 10.2%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

KRFT MKC CAG SJM CPB GIS MDLZ K


May 23rd, 2016


May 23rd, 2016 6

Mondelez generates approximately 80% of its

revenues from outside the U.S. It operates in more

than 80 countries around the world, and sells

products in over 165 countries. It is estimated that

approximately 40% of Mondelez’s revenues come

from Brazil, Russia, China, India and Southeast Asia

(BRIC nations).

Over the past three years, we have seen numerous

food and beverage companies move into the

emerging markets as a result of their low per-capita

consumption. This means that they have significant

growth potential and are expected to gravitate

towards name brands.

Moreover, with a fast-growing middle class, the

BRIC nations have increasing demand for

convenience food and beverages. Snack food

producers with strong brand portfolios will excel in

this environment,

In 2010, Mondelez acquired Cadbury limited, one of

the world’s largest chocolate manufacturers. In the

years prior to the acquisition, Cadbury worked

tirelessly to develop production and distribution

networks in the BRIC nations. By acquiring Cadbury,

Mondelez is able to tap into the vast distribution

networks in these emerging nations. So far,

Mondelez has seen a 15% increase in its emerging

market sales. Furthermore, Cadbury has significant

presence in India which Mondelez is looking

forward to capitalizing on.

One of Mondelez’s strategic objectives stated in

their 2015 Annual Report is to revolutionize it’s

selling. To do so, they have made large changes to

their marketing campaigns and have invested

significantly in their BRIC nations marketing. This

will help their access to key emerging markets. In

2015, Mondelez acquired an 80% stake in a

Vietnamese biscuit manufacturer. This has helped

them to expand operations and distribution routes

in the Asia-pacific region.

Moreover, Mondelez has invested significantly in it’s

e-commerce platform. They believe that a strong e-

commerce platform will allow them to reach new

customers, and increase margins. They hope that

fuelling money into this platform will strengthen

brand recognition in it’s new key markets.

Investment Thesis II: Emerging Markets

EXHIBIT 8

Source: Company Filings, Nielsen

2014 – 2015 Sales Growth by Geography

6%

20%

2%

(2%)

1%

4%

9%

5%

0%2%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Asia Pacific Latin America EEMEA Europe North America

Mondelez Net Revenue Global Snack Sales


May 23rd, 2016


May 23rd, 2016 7

Under pressure from activist investor Nelson Peltz

and more recently Bill Ackman, Mondelez is

undergoing a restructuring plan to expand the

company’s margins. In 2013, the plan was initially

an increase of 3% to EBITDA margins. The key

drivers in Mondelez’s revamped plan for margin

expansion lies in plant efficiency, reducing its

complex system of 100,000 suppliers and 74,000

SKUs, and integrating Lean Six Sigma practices.

First, Mondelez reduced the number of its

employees in September 2015 in order to reduce

the over-allocation of its work force. Analysts

believe that a ~30% reduction of Mondelez’s

employees would bring their revenues on par with

their Multinational peers who also operate in the

emerging markets. However, this is a large target to

hit, thus the management team has planned for

other efficiency implementations to reduce costs.

A new, 250 acre lower-cost plant was established in

Salinas, Mexico in the second half of 2015. Due to

its proximity to suppliers, transportation routes, and

a built-in distribution center, the plant requires 1/3

of the staffing of a regular manufacturing plant to

produce the same capacity. The purpose of this

plant is to help fuel growth in the Americas, and

analysts believe that if 40% of sales in North

America are produced in Salinas, the company will

benefit from a 4% increase in gross margins. This

year, Mondelez is expected to open two more

similar plants in Russia and India, and by 2018 70%

of Power Brands are expected to be produced in

these lower-cost plants (an increase of ~45%).

Moreover, one of Mondelez’s goals is to increase

efficiencies in plants which were garnered through

acquisitions, yet never optimized. 40 “advantage

lines” have been installed up to 2015, and 35 more

lines are to be added by 2018. These lines are much

more efficient due to a modular design that

requires less production time, resources, as well as

space. The implementation of these new advantage

lines is expected to cut conversion costs by 20%

around the globe.

Overall, these cost-cutting efforts seem reasonable

as Hershey, a competitor, achieved similar gains

through almost identical procedures over the

period of 2010 to 2014, even as cocoa prices

doubled. Today, Mondelez faces less pressure from

key input costs like coca, making their restructuring

plan much more achievable. If Mondelez fails in its

efforts, it will face pressures from the

aforementioned activist investors to sell itself to

Kraft-Heinz. However, a successful execution of this

plan could lead to a merger with PepsiCo’s Frito

Lay; this has been discussed in depth in the past.

Investment Thesis III: Margin Expansion

EXHIBIT 9

Multinational Revenue per Employee vs. Peers


EXHIBIT 10

Gross Margin Growth Over Efficiency Improvement Plan


$224 $244 $265$299

$371

$436

$693

$0

$150

$300

$450

$600

$750

BN ULVR NESN MDLZ HSY KHC PG

$ T

ho

usa

nd

s

36.8%

38.8%

40.3%

41.1%

41.9%

38.9%

42.8% 42.4%

43.6%

45.9%

35%

40%

45%

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Mondelez Hershey


May 23rd, 2016


May 23rd, 2016

We believe that Mondelez would be an excellent

addition to the Consumers and Healthcare U.S

portfolio. MDLZ has exposure to the fast growing

snack food segment, and is also a financially stable

company. Mondelez owns many “power brands”

which are household staples across North America

and Europe, while gaining massive growth in the

emerging markets.

Mondelez will serve as additional exposure to the

food segment within our portfolio, which currently

holds fast-serve companies in Starbucks and

McDonald’s.

Lastly, we believe Mondelez provides durability in

the consumer space that is currently experiencing

massive threats to e-commerce. As a supplier of

food products that does not sell in brick and mortar

stores, we believe Mondelez will not only weather

the storm, but also thrive in the ever-changing retail

environment.

With intentions to sell, we propose a 15% stake in

Mondelez for our current U.S portfolio, representing

roughly a $4,000 investment.

8

Catalysts and Risks

Portfolio Fit

1. E-Commerce Expansion: On April 7, 2016

Mondelez formed an e-commerce partnership

with China’s leading online and mobile

commerce company, Alibaba Group Holding

Limited. The strategic deal is in line with the

company’s plans to expand e-commerce

platforms and generate more online sales.

2. New Snack Brand Launch: On March 7, 2016

Mondelez announced the launch of its first new

snack brand in more than ten years, named

Good Thins. The new brand will offer low-fat

and low-sugar snacks to meet the growing

consumer demand for healthier products.

3. Healthy Eating: As part of the company’s plan

to offer healthier foods, Mondelez set 2020

goals of reducing sodium and saturated fat by

10%, increasing whole grains by 25% and

placing calorie labeling on the front of packs of

all relevant products by YE 2016.

1. Volume Trends: Since it’s split from Kraft Food,

Mondelez has seen weaker volumes as a result

of higher pricing and category weakness. If this

continues, they could experience a slowdown

across all categories, which would lead to

weakening revenues.

2. Venezuela Operations: Sugar supply in

Venezuela has become scarce, forcing Coca-

Cola to halt production of its sugary drinks.

Although Mondelez has deconsolidated

operations in the area at an impairment cost of

$788 million, the location still remains a risk.

Mondelez may have to freeze its production in

the area as well and earn less cash from the

new Venezuelan subsidiary

3. Foreign Exchange: With 80% of Mondelez’s

revenues coming from outside the U.S, foreign

exchange will hurt the company’s bottom line.

In 2015, FX hurt revenue growth by 6%.

EXHIBIT 11

Proposed Consumer and Healthcare U.S Portfolio Allocation

Source: QUIC Data

Mondelez

International, Inc.

15%

CVS Health

Corporation

24%The Home

Depot, Inc.

19%

McDonald's

Corp.

17%

Starbucks

Corporation

12%

Merck & Co.

Inc.

12%


May 23rd, 2016


May 23rd, 2016

Catalysts and Risks

9

Comparable Company Analysis

EXHIBIT 11

Mondelez is trading at a small premium on a Price/Earnings, EV/EBITDA and Net Debt/EBITDA basis, and

pays a lower yielding dividend than its peers. The company is slightly undervalued with regards to EV/Sales

however, a ratio that indicates its future position if manufacturing efficiency is improved according to plans.

Company Name Market Enterprise EV / EBITDA Price / Earnings Net Debt / EBITDA EV/ Sales Dividend

Cap

($MM) Value ($MM) LTM 2016E 2017E 2016E 2017E 2016E 2017E 2016E 2017E Yield

The Kraft Heinz Company $100,219 $129,744 20.4x 16.9x 15.2x 26.7x 21.5x 2.7x 2.5x 4.9x 4.8x 2.8%

Kellogg Company $26,009 $33,955 16.6x 13.4x 12.8x 20.1x 18.6x 3.1x 3.0x 2.6x 2.5x 2.7%

General Mills Inc. $37,120 $46,307 13.4x 13.7x 13.4x 21.8x 20.6x 2.4x 2.3x 2.8x 2.8x 2.9%

The Hershey Company $19,368 $21,722 13.0x 12.6x 12.1x 21.4x 19.9x 1.3x 1.3x 2.9x 2.8x 2.6%

PepsiCo Inc. $144,586 $167,502 13.9x 13.3x 12.6x 21.2x 19.6x 1.8x 1.7x 2.7x 2.6x 3.0%

Mean $65,460 $79,846 15.5x 14.0x 13.2x 22.2x 20.1x 2.3x 2.2x 3.2x 3.1x 2.8%

Median $37,120 $46,307 13.9x 13.4x 12.8x 21.4x 19.9x 2.4x 2.3x 2.8x 2.8x 2.8%

Mondelez International Inc. $67,297 $83,425 18.4x 17.1x 15.1x 23.6x 20.8x 3.3x 2.9x 3.1x 3.1x 1.6%

42 44 46 48 50 52 54

Goldman Sachs

JP Morgan

Credit Suisse

Consensus

Barclays

RBC

Bernstein

QUIC


May 23rd, 2016


May 23rd, 2016

We value Mondelez using comparable companies

and a discounted cash flow model analyses. Cost of

equity is derived by using a 10-year treasury yield

of 1.85% and a market risk premium as calculated

by Aswoth Damodoran. The cost of debt was

calculated using the weighted average yield of

MDLZ’s debt.

Combined, MDLZ’s WACC is 5.7% - a low number

due to the company’s below average beta and cost

of debt. We assumed a 2% terminal growth rate

due to global expansion and MDLZ’s particularly

strong brand presence in emerging Markets. Our

target share price implies a total return of 24.4%

(capital gain of 22.8% and a dividend yield of 1.6%).

Valuation

10

WACC Calculation

Risk-Free Rate 1.85%

Market Risk Premium 6.12%

Levered Beta 0.92x

Cost of Equity 7.50%

Cost of Debt 3.64%

Tax Rate 22.00%

After Tax Cost of Debt 2.84%

Capital Structure

Debt 39%

Equity 61%

Total: 100%

WACC 5.70%

Share Price Calculation

PV of UFCF 19,686

Terminal Year Growth Rate 2.00%

Discount Rate 5.70%

PV of Terminal Value 81,252

Enterprise Value 100,938

Enterprise Value 100,938

Less: Total Debt 17,517

Plus: Cash and Cash Equivalents 1,338

Implied Equity Value 84,759

Shares Outstanding 1,598

Implied Share Price $53.03

Current Price $43.19

Target Price $53.03

Dividend Yield 1.6%

Total Return 24.4%

Discount Rate (%)

$53.03 4.70% 5.20% 5.70% 6.20% 6.70%

Term

inal

Gro

wth

(%

)

1.00% $ 57.32 $ 48.62 $ 41.82 $ 36.38 $ 31.93

1.50% $ 66.21 $ 55.13 $ 46.76 $ 40.22 $ 34.98

2.00% $ 78.38 $ 63.69 $ 53.03 $ 44.97 $ 38.68

2.50% $ 96.10 $ 75.41 $ 61.27 $ 51.02 $ 43.26

3.00% $ 124.24 $ 92.46 $ 72.55 $ 58.94 $ 49.08


May 23rd, 2016


May 23rd, 2016

Appendix: Discounted Cash Flow

11

Historical Period Projection Period

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016E 2017E 2018E 2019E 2020E

Revenue 35,810 35,015 35,299 34,244 29,636 26,672 25,339 26,226 27,012 27,823

Year over Year Growth % (2.2%) 0.8% (3.0%) (13.5%) (10.0%) (5.0%) 3.5% 3.0% 3.0%

Cost of Sales 22,710 21,939 22,189 21,647 18,124 15,923 14,925 15,237 15,667 16,137

% of Revenue 63.4% 62.7% 62.9% 63.2% 61.2% 59.7% 58.9% 58.1% 58.0% 58.0%

Gross Profit 13,100 13,076 13,110 12,597 11,512 10,749 10,414 10,989 11,345 11,686

Margin % 36.6% 37.3% 37.1% 36.8% 38.8% 40.3% 41.1% 41.9% 42.0% 42.0%

Operating Expenses 9,382 9,176 8,679 8,457 7,577 6,788 6,449 6,675 6,875 7,081

% of Revenue 26.2% 26.2% 24.6% 24.7% 25.6% 25.5% 25.5% 25.5% 25.5% 25.5%

EBITDA 3,718 3,900 4,431 4,120 3,935 3,961 3,965 4,314 4,470 4,604

Year over Year Growth % 4.9% 13.6% (7.0%) (4.5%) 0.6% 0.1% 8.8% 3.6% 3.0%

Less: Depreciation and Amortization 225 217 217 206 181 164 156 161 166 171

% of Revenue 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6%

EBIT 3,667 3,894 4,465 4,182 3,862 3,797 3,809 4,153 4,304 4,433

Year over Year Growth % 6.2% 14.7% (6.3%) (7.7%) (1.7%) 0.3% 9.0% 3.7% 3.0%

Less: Income Taxes 932 1,057 760 1,238 745 835 838 914 947 975

Effective Tax Rate 25.4% 27.1% 17.0% 29.6% 19.3% 22.0% 22.0% 22.0% 22.0% 22.0%

Net Operating Profit After Taxes 2,735 2,837 3,705 2,944 3,117 2961 2971 3239 3357 3458

Year over Year Growth % 3.7% 30.6% (20.5%) 5.9% (5.0%) 0.3% 9.0% 3.7% 3.0%

Plus: Depreciation and Amortization 225 217 217 206 181 164 156 161 166 171

Less Capital Expenditures -1,771 -1,610 -1,622 -1,642 -1,514 1,283 1,218 1,261 1,299 1,338

% of Revenue 4.9% 4.6% 4.6% 4.8% 5.1% 4.8% 4.8% 4.8% 4.8% 4.8%

Less: Change in Net Working Capital 423 1,116 -1,063 -426 -623 -114.6 -114.6 -114.6 -114.6 -114.6

Unlevered Free Cash Flow 1,612 2,560 1,237 1,082 1,161 4,293 4,231 4,547 4,708 4,852

Discount Period 0.5 1.5 2.5 3.5 4.5

Discount Factor 97.3% 92.0% 87.1% 82.4% 77.9%

Present Value of Unlevered Cash

Flows 4,176 3,893 3,958 3,878 3,781


May 23rd, 2016


May 23rd, 2016 12

References

1. Bloomberg

2. Capital IQ

3. Company Filings

4. IBIS World

5. Nielsen

6. JP Morgan

7. Morgan Stanley

8. RBC Capital Markets

9. Scotiabank Global Banking and Markets

10. UBS Securities

QUIC RESEARCH REPORT · advantage of the vast distribution networks some of their subsidiaries...

Documents

Transcript of QUIC RESEARCH REPORT · advantage of the vast distribution networks some of their subsidiaries...