Hi everyone. Good evening, participants, and welcome to the Q3 FY25 Earnings Call of eClerx Services Limited. Please note that this webinar will be recorded. To take us through the results and to answer your questions, we have with us the top management of eClerx, represented by Kapil Jain, Managing Director and Group CEO, and Srinivasan Nadadhur, Chief Financial Officer. We will start the call with a brief opening remark by Kapil, followed by Srinivasan, who will be sharing the financial update, and then we will open the floor for a Q&A session. As usual, I would like to remind you that anything that is mentioned on this call that gives any outlook for the future or which can be construed as a forward-looking statement must be viewed in conjunction with the risks and uncertainties that we face. These risks and uncertainties are included but not limited to what we have mentioned in the prospectus filed with SEBI and subsequent annual reports, which you can find on our website. Having said that, I will now hand over the floor to Kapil. Over to you, Kapil. Thank you, Asha, and good evening, everyone. Let me share highlights of our performance in FY25 Q3. Operating revenue in Q3 was $100.7 million, up 1.8% sequentially, driven by growth in our digital and financial markets business. For the nine-month period, dollar revenue was up 11.7%. In INR terms, Q3 operating revenue was INR 8,538 million, up 2.6% quarter-on-quarter and 14% for the nine-month period. As we had indicated, margins in Q3 were lower and in line with our Q2 commentary. This is because of the removal of one-offs in Q2 and the lower utilization in Q3, which is in line with our long-term average. EBITDA for Q3 was INR 2,281 million at a margin of 26.1%, while PAT for the quarter was INR 1,371 million at a margin of 15.7%. Our Analytics and Automation business is at $20.8 million this quarter, up 9% sequentially, driven by pickup in change and transformation work. We saw growth in the non-top 10 clients in this quarter, analytics and martech services within digital group, and we also saw growth in creative services, albeit on the lower base of Q2. Growth in financial markets was predominantly in the trade lifecycle segment. ACV of the deal wins for the quarter was $33 million, up sequentially. We continue our efforts to further strengthen the pipeline to focus on our technology business and on large deals and cross-sell efforts. Let me also provide some commentary and outlook for the three businesses. We continue to see opportunities in financial markets, in client lifecycle, compliance, onshore delivery, and technology services. In the digital business, after the challenging Q2, fashion and luxury showed a minor recovery in Q3, with the industry expecting demand in the low single digits for CY 2025. High-tech retail and manufacturing and distribution performed in line with the industry growth. In customer operations, we are seeing momentum around new logo acquisition and are seeing early success in cross-sell of our care business into other verticals. An important strategic initiative of geo-diversification is successfully underway. We have set up a subsidiary in Peru and will launch operations in late Q4. We also expect to start providing care support from our Manila delivery center. As I have mentioned earlier, the cable and telecom industry continues to be under pressure, and there is a lot of focus on the subscriber retention by our clients. On technology and analytics, we see continued traction with banking, high-tech, and retail clients, with wins in change data engineering and productized services. Finally, I'll conclude with awards and recognition and hand it over to Srini for more detailed commentary. We were recognized as a major contender in the experience-driven integrated BFS operations PEAK Matrix and assessment 2024. We are also now certified for ISO 42001, a very recent standard focusing on AI management systems, which was only introduced in December 2023. As of last month, we were one of the five global companies to have received this certification and recognition. In conclusion, crossing the 400 million run rate is a significant milestone for us. We are immensely grateful to our customers, employees, investors, and partners for their trust in us, and we look forward to the support of all our stakeholders as we navigate the future. Thank you, and over to you, Srini. Thank you, Kapil. Good evening, everyone. Just to provide a little more color on our financial performance, so the operating revenue was $100.7 million, up 1.8% sequentially and 2.2% in constant currency terms. On a YOY basis, the revenue increased by 11.2%. Total revenue for this quarter was $87.52 million, up 3.6% sequentially and 13% YOY. Other income for the quarter was $2.14 million, largely due to revaluation income on the back of INR depreciation. The EBITDA of $22.81 million at 26.1% margin is flat both sequentially and YOY. The PAT of $13.71 million for the quarter is at 15.7% margin. The reasons for sequential reduction in EBITDA percentage are largely because of the one-offs in Q2 and the lower utilization in Q3 as compared to Q2. We also incurred higher legal fees related to setting up the new entity and to tax consulting services. You would have noticed in the business metrics slide that the seating capacity has increased by 1,800 seats as new facilities in Mohali, Pune, and Mumbai have gone live. This has also led to an increase in facility housekeeping, security, and associated transportation costs. The three facilities went live in the latter part of Q3, so the full impact of this cost increase will be felt in Q4. The exit headcount increased by about 400 to 1,842. Attrition is at 19%, well within control. Top 10 client concentration is about 62%. DSO is 83 days as compared to 77 in the previous quarter. Thank you, everyone. And with this, we conclude our prepared remarks. We can now move on to the Q&A. Over to you, Asha. Thank you, Srinivasan. Thank you, Kapil. We will open the floor for a Q&A session. Request to all participants to click on the raise hand button for any questions. We'll wait for a moment till the questions line up. We have the first question from the line of Sandeep Shah. He is from Equirus Securities. Sandeep, please go ahead. I have unmuted your line. Sandeep, you are on mute. The roll-ups have started in Q2, which will have a full impact in Q3. So can you give us some update whether these roll-ups may continue in Q4 at a higher or lower level, and that may give us confidence in terms of Q4 growth could be better because the ACV deals as well as employee addition has been good? Yeah, so yeah, roll-ups in Q2, as we had noted, were on the higher side. That has come down in Q3, and everything else being equal, then that should result in better performance in Q4 than in Q3. Okay. And Srini, do you expect further margin downside because of the new facility which has been commenced, both in terms of G&A as well as in terms of depreciation in the Q4? And when do you believe those costs will normalize? Is it fair to assume those costs will be stable to increase with the revenue increase from Q1 of next year? To answer your first question first, the G&A cost should be nearly the same or maybe 10-20 basis points higher than Q3. And the reason for that is while the housekeeping, transportation, etc. costs will go up, but that will be offset by a reduction in the rent of the temporary facilities which we have given up. But on a below the EBITDA level, there will be, I think, somewhere around 50 basis points impact because of the new facilities. The normalization should happen in line with revenue. So we are looking at at least one quarter away, if not two. Okay, and just last question, then I will come in a follow-up. Kapil sir, because some of your IT services peers are saying clients are asking for productivity gains because of the automation. So what is our experience? And is it possible to quantify GenAI-related revenue scale-up as of today and where it can go on a going-forward basis? Will it impact the sales growth or it can increase the volume? So Sandeep, thanks. So Sandeep, like I had mentioned in prior calls also, all our services have an underlying technology component built in it. And where required, and we are able to drive the productivity and efficiency, we have passed on the benefits to the client. So in terms of GenAI, we have had a number of pilots, but the potential monetization in terms of are we seeing a significant uplift in terms of monetization and getting revenue, that we have not seen. But all our services are staying relevant because of the underlying technology that we have and enhancements we have done to bring in GenAI. And we are also using it in delivering our services to our clients. Okay. Thanks. I will come in the follow-up. Thank you, Sandeep. Reminder for participants, please click on the raise hand button to ask questions. We have a question from Shradha Agarwal. She's from AMSEC. Shradha, please go ahead. Yeah. Am I audible? Yes. Yeah. Hi, Hi, sir. Congratulations on a very strong deal TCV win. Two questions. First is, if I look at the growth, the growth has come through largely from the non-top 10 clients. So anything to read for the top clients as to why have they not grown? Was the roll-up impact felt higher in these top five, top 10 accounts? So I think if you look at the portfolio mix, Shradha, I think quarter on quarter, there will be some aberrations. And also, given the size of our book, which is relatively small, this is the Q1 where we have crossed the $100 million mark. So I think we always take a view of medium to long term. We haven't seen any aberration in terms of what the norm is in terms of. And our focus on driving cross-sell opportunities and also where we had invested earlier in the sales are resonating well in the market and with our clients. So I wouldn't take anything in terms of any directional view in terms of whether the top 10 growth or upside of non-top 10. But there's no weakness in any particular account in the top five or top 10 category that you would want to highlight? No. Right. And sir, on the ACV of new deals, which is at a strong ACV win, and what is the pipeline looking like versus what it was a quarter back? And any commentary on the deal win, pipeline to order book conversion, that would be helpful. So I think we are seeing, as in my opening remarks, the change work that we are seeing on the discretionary spend. I think that it's slightly opening up, and pipeline continues to be healthy. And across our service lines is where the pipeline is around, as well as the wins have been across financial markets, digital, and customer operations. So I think in terms of the service portfolio mix that we have and the client that we have, we feel that we have a healthy pipeline, and we are cautiously optimistic about the future. Yeah. Yeah. That's helpful. I'll come back in the follow-up questions if you want. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Shradha. Reminder to participants to please raise hands for questions. We have follow-up questions from the line of Sandeep Shah. Sandeep, please go ahead. Yeah, sir. Thanks for the opportunity again. Kapil sir, this would be almost a Q4 of a QQ1 increase in the ACV of new business. So looking at your pipeline, looking at your investment in sales, marketing, branding, do you believe this trend may continue year after year or quarter after quarter till the time we hit the peak based on whatever investment we might have done? And that helps us to enter FY26 with a very high confidence. So Sandeep, I think, like I said, we are cautiously optimistic because of three reasons. One, our pipeline is healthy. Our service kit, where every service that we sell has an underlying technology, productized services is resonating well with the clients. As well as the cross-sell opportunities, which I had laid out as one of the strategic pillars when we had made a presentation to all of you in May, we are seeing some green shoots around it. It's still too early. So that would be my comment. And like I said, I think it's difficult to predict in terms of what the future outcome would be, but we are cautiously optimistic about the future. Okay. And sir, any investments trying to bring the results are bearing fruits in terms of better pipeline and the conversion of pipeline into deal wins, which is leading to better order book. Do you believe this margin range of 24%-28%, which we have given in FY25, can have an upside entering into FY26 because FY26 may not see an incremental investment like FY25? Sandeep, I think we will continue to make investments in the business in terms of because the view we are taking is, which is what I had told you earlier, is medium to long term, be it opening up of new centers, which will again enhance our ability to cross-sell, upsell with existing clients, bring new clients. We'll continue to invest in sales. The leadership hiring, we had said we were done with. I think at this point in time, I would say that we will continue to stay in the range that we had given you, 24%-28%. And predicting beyond that, given the overall size of the book, which is about $100 million, a small movement can have a big impact on the EBITDA. So I think we'd like to stay in the range and look at medium to long-term view from a growth and EBITDA perspective. Okay. Fair enough. And Srini sir, I think DSO has increased materially, which has led to slightly below, though it has been still heavy in terms of cash generation. Do you believe it may normalize in the Q4? I think we'll have to take a look. Some of our invoicing processes are manual. We're trying to strengthen them. We're trying to put more governance on how we can consistently keep these numbers down. But I think we'll have to see if we are able to bring it down consistently. Okay. And the last question, sir, with the change in the president in the U.S. and election headwind being behind, is it client are more open in terms of discussion and conversion of pipeline into deal wins, or they are slightly cautious on outsourcing now? I think the clients are also waiting. I think if you look at from an H-1B perspective, we don't have any reliance on H-1B because we are able to hire local talent. So that is not going to impact us. In terms of client decision-making, we haven't seen any shift. I think it's still too early for us to exhibit any view or for the clients to change any of their behavior in terms of the decision cycle times. Okay. Thanks. Thank you, Sandeep. We have next question from the line of Jasdeep Walia. Jasdeep, please go ahead. Hi. Can you hear me? Yeah. Hi, Jasdeep. Thanks for taking my question. Sir, during your previous remarks, you mentioned that you have used GenAI to deliver some services to your clients. How has your experience been? What kind of productivity gains were you able to achieve? And with respect to that, what do you think will be the deflationary impact of AI on your sales going forward? Jasdeep, in terms of its difficulty, it's not the productivity. See, productivity, people were talking about in olden days, right? It's more in terms of effectiveness on a BPaaS. If, let's say, you were charging a client X dollars a widget because of technology, now how are you charging a fraction of X? Those are the discussions we are having, not like 20 FTEs and now I can deliver with 18. I think the discussion has moved to a very different level. A lot of work that we do impacts the business and involves a lot of domain. I think to quantify that, what is the benefit of productivity? It's not like if you ask me what is the incremental value we have been able to add to the clients, which is reflected in our pipeline, which is reflected in our growth momentum, that's, I think, is what we are focusing on as opposed to driving productivity. Because the business that we are in, clients are looking at, can you reduce my risk? Can you ensure that I am compliant with the regulation? Can you help me increase my sales? Can you help me increase my product launches? Can you help me get better, right? Today, if I have X number of SKUs, can you get me to 10X? So I think if I'm able to deliver that but using technology and bring that alpha, that's what clients are looking at us. Got it. So basically, GenAI as of now has broadly helped you increase your pipeline with your clients. That would be the correct understanding, right? I wouldn't say just GenAI alone. I am saying technology, GenAI domain, a combination of all this together is a unique value proposition, which has helped us, yes, enhance our pipeline and the ACV of the deals. Got it, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Jasdeep. We have next question from the line of Rahul Jain. He's from Dolat Capital. Rahul, please go ahead. Yeah. Hi. Hope my line is okay. Yeah. Yes. Yeah. So just wanted to understand how our onshore delivery mix is working. If I see the number of people that we have on-site versus the total strength of base delivery staff, it is a much smaller number versus the contribution from the on-site. So is it that a significant amount of subcon is happening in the on-site market or any other reason to reconcile it back? So one is that the onshore staff that we have, for the most part, they have consulting skills. So they are also problem solvers. They are providing much higher value, typically than what we would see in an offshore agent. So the billing rates are definitely much different when you adjust for the skill difference. And that explains most of the difference between the headcount and the revenue. But also, it is also difficult for us to find good quality resources onshore. So our subcontracting is also higher onshore. So both reasons are in play. I would say the first one is the more meaningful reason. And we also, just to add, Rahul, to what Srini is saying, we also keep a healthy mix between subcon and employees, and we monitor it very closely. And we believe that we are in that range given the projects and the work we are delivering for our clients. And we always have the option to bring subcons as an employee. And hence, it's also the portfolio view that we take. Right, so just to Srini's earlier remark of average profile of those would be much better. But our basic rule of thumb of 3X on a like-for-like basis and slightly more because of better service mix, is that the right way to look at that number to understand what should be the ideal billing rate in the market? I'll have to look at that number in more detail, but maybe I can come back to you offline. Sure. Sure. And the reason of getting into this is to understand that how much margin leverage this could be because our understanding from other companies is that generally on-site third party is significantly premium in terms of manpower costs. So is it more a leverage for us because of the volatility in the requirement of the talent mix, or till the time we scale it up, we might have to be dependent on such an arrangement? Right. So just to answer the question on which I said I'll come back, the onshore rate for us is actually more like 3.5-4X. Obviously, the subcontractors are more expensive, and therefore we are very judicious about when we use them and how we use them. And it really depends on a case-to-case decision, how much growth are we supposed to deliver, and whether the client has urgent requirements that we are trying to fulfill at very short notice. So we engage subcontractors when we feel that there is really a necessity for us to do that. Right. Right. Of course, I understand. And last bit for Kapil, of course, you alluded your response to Sandeep's question, but still, it would be just a thought that if we could, if we are able to refine that band slightly more when we announce it in the Q4 or any subsequent period, because it gives a very wide point as you could understand that it may operate. So I'm sure you now would have a much better grip on that investment versus revenue potential versus what you might had four quarters back. So that's just a thought for sure. So Rahul, if I heard you correctly, you are saying for us to revisit the EBITDA guidance, which currently we are giving between 24% to 28%, can we narrow that range is what you're asking? Yeah. Yeah. That's a small thing because I'm sure you have a much better handle than that. And that uncertainty four quarters back, we could clearly understand because it's like your first few steps of gauging the situation. But I'm sure the way ACV has responded, the way we are investing, I think you have a far better understanding of it in terms of what would be the true end of it. So that's the thought. Thank you. Sure. Rahul, we'll consider your request. That's it from me. Thank you. Thank you, Rahul. We have next question from the line of Jalaj Manocha. He's from Svan Investment. Jalaj, please go ahead. Yeah. Am I audible? A little distant. Yeah. Yes. Is it any better? Yeah. Better. Go ahead. Hello. Yeah. Go ahead, Jalaj. Hello. Is it better? Yes. We can hear you. Jalaj, go ahead. Yeah. I hope it is better now. Yes. Yeah. So thanks for the opportunity. Kapil and sir, I have one question particularly with regards to the deal win. Has there been a change in the tenure or per se of the deal wins or the nature of the deals we are winning as such? Indeed. So So let's compare them a few quarters back. Sorry. What are you saying? Has there been a change in the tenure? Yeah. Tenure or the nature of the deals? I think some small, but I think I wouldn't say that there has been a directional shift in the tenure of the deal. There has been marginal increase in per deal, per ticket size, but not something which is substantial to talk about. Okay. And nothing per se in the pipeline also, as in the short-term deals are getting more of discussions are around the short-term deals, nothing of that sort? No. It's not changed in either direction. So broadly, I would say it's neutral to positive, not that there are more short-term deals. Okay. Okay. And just one more point. If I were to check, looks like the BPaaS as a practice, there has been a sort of a degrowth or the pace isn't as great as the company's average growth rate. So how should I understand this? Is it by choice or the offering? The acceptance is reducing in the market, or there is some client-specific issue there? No. I don't think there is any client-specific issue or there is any lesser acceptance. I think we are revisiting in terms of how we would like to report for FY26 onwards. Because like I said, see, if you look at how the street reports on digital revenue or BPaaS, every of our service, we are using underlying technology. Every service kit that I have, I have an underlying technology, either deployed at the client site or our employees are using it to deliver that alpha to the clients. So in that sense, I can say 100% of our business is digital and is akin to BPaaS. But we were very conservative in the way we were reporting BPaaS. So we will revisit the definition. It doesn't concern me in terms of if that number is going up or down. What we are looking for is, am I using technology to deliver value to the clients along with the domain that I have? And as long as that is there and that allows us to win the deal, that's really what our focus is on. Understood. And could you talk a little more about the discussions we are having in the digital vertical specifically? Because I guess there were some client-specific issues or the slowdown per se in some specific pockets there. So, I think on the overall digital, like as I said, we are having discussions with clients in terms of how do we make them more efficient, effective, how we can help them grow their top line, how we can help them stay more relevant by having a higher and a better product mix that they are selling to their end customers, how we can help them on their campaign operations, how we can help them get better ROI on their marketing spend, how we can help them on their customer journeys, reduce the friction points. So, what we are beginning to see is, which I alluded earlier also on the cross-sell, some of these services are resonating well outside of the digital industries that we were traditionally selling them to. It's still very early days, but I think we are cautiously optimistic in taking some of our digital service kit into other industry verticals. Understood. Thanks, Madam Asha. Thank you. Thank you, Jalaj. We have next question from the line of Gokul Maheshwari. Gokul, please go ahead. Hi. Am I audible? Yes. Yes. Gokul. Okay. I just wanted to understand that of the three verticals which you are present in, the objective of hiring sales leadership was to get better to sell these products to your clients, cross-sell, etc. Have you been making any pricing changes to accelerate this growth rate or what you were charging, you are charging the same? So, I think it's so, Gokul. We always have said that we have to look at total cost of ownership. It's not like price for FTE or because I'm the cheapest cost provider and hence I should get the business. No client gives business because of cost. It's a value game. And particularly in the services that we are offering to our clients. The sales team, I think you asked two questions. One was on the pricing. So, I think, yes, we are pricing efficiently and in terms of what will help us win the deal. But we are not seeing any downward pressure on the pricing because tech, we are pricing tech, people, domain, the block, and then pricing it efficiently and effectively. To answer your first question on the sales team in terms of how we are hiring and who we are hiring, see, we have a lot of capability that exists within the organization from a domain perspective, practice perspective. We are hiring people who are a little more generalist and who can take our services across the client segment along with the people and capability that already exist within the organization. Okay. So in that context, if you are assuming you're successful in terms of the investments which you're doing that brings in more business and there is better cross-sell, which is pretty evident given the growth in the pipeline in the last few quarters, logically speaking, over time, your sales sorry, your profit should grow faster than your sales once you get the benefits of the operating leverage for the investments made. I'm not putting on a number, but more just as a broader direction from the next two- to three-year perspective. Absolutely. I think if you look at two- to three-year point of view, Gokul, we do expect the bottom line to have a better gradient than the top line, right, is what we are also working towards. Great, sir. Thank you and all the best. Thank you, Gokul. Thank you, Gokul. Reminder for participants to please click on raise hand button to ask questions. We have next question from the line of Nitish Rege from ChrysCapital. Nitish, please go ahead. Hi. Hope I'm audible? Yes. Yeah. So my question is on the EBITDA margin. Now that majority of our investment phase is done, should we start seeing an increase in operating EBITDA? I'm talking about EBITDA excluding interest income. EBITDA margins over there from Q4 and in FY26? So, Nitish, I think it's not. I would agree that all, you see, we are not a mature business that all investments are done and now growth. You have to see, are you putting us as a mature business or a growth business. Now, if so, I wouldn't say that all investments are done. We spoke about the new centers that we have opened up. We are exploring opening up another center as well. So we will continue to invest for growth for us to stay relevant for our clients. And that will continue to happen. And, however, as I had said, we will ensure that we operate in the margin band that we have given you. I have also noted the request that you guys have asked us. And we will continue to be sequentially positive on EBITDA. The gradient on the bottom line will be higher than the top line. What kind of growth are we envisioning, doubling the revenues in around four to five years from here? I think, Nitish, let's see. I think it's a little difficult to predict four to five years in terms of what the outlook would be. But I think, yes, we are working towards accelerated growth, firing from all cylinders. And also cross-sell, the franchise we have of our clients, delivery is very strong, strong reference ability. But to predict four to five years depends upon a lot of macroeconomic factors which are beyond our control. Got it. And just a suggestion, could we start giving our operating EBITDA margin guidance? That would be quite helpful because to compare with other peers. I think, Nitish, the guidance we have given a band, and as I was telling earlier, because of the small book and high volatility that we encounter, we have traditionally not given guidance both on the top line and the bottom line. We will continue to stay. So if you give guidance on operating EBITDA, don't give on EBITDA including other income. Sorry? So I think, Nitish, what you want is the guidance on operating EBITDA and not EBITDA including other income as what you. Yes. Yes. [crosstalk] Yeah. No, but I'm saying even for operating EBITDA, Nitish, because of the volatility that we have in our business, at this stage, we are not looking to give quarter-on-quarter guidance. We have given you a broad range, and we will revisit the request that you guys have made that when we come for our full-year results, whether we can look at giving you a smaller band than what we have given. Yeah. No, the request was that we can give an operating EBITDA band as a full-year margin, removing the other income. Okay. For the full year, you are saying instead of the full-year EBITDA, can we give it? Yeah. That's something we will revisit and come back to you in our next earnings call. Okay. Thank you. All the best. Thank you, Nitish. Thank you, Nitish. We have next question from the line of Sameer Dosani from ICICI. Sameer, please go ahead. Yeah. I'm audible? Yes, Sameer. Yeah. So any color on what's happening on partnerships and alliances? That is also one of the focus areas, if I remember correctly from your strategy presentation. Any updates on that? I think we are continuing to work on it, Sameer, but nothing substantial that we would like to report currently, and as and when we have some developments, we will inform you. Okay. And also, in last nine months, we have invested in S&M as a percentage of revenue, if I'm not wrong. It has not moved that much versus the last year. It's still at same percentage. Do we think it will inch up from here? S&M, sales and distribution, not S&M, but sales and distribution expenses. Sorry, Sameer. I didn't understand the question. I'm saying sales and distribution expenses are at same 12.5%, 12%-13% range, which is same as last year. So what is that? We have made investment in that, so this number should have gone up, or we think it will go up from here on? Sameer, if it had gone up and we would have gone below 24, then you would have said, "What have you guys done?" No, jokes apart. I think we do expect the S&M to be in the range in which you are seeing it currently. So we don't expect it to go up. Okay. Okay. No, if it's required for the business, I mean, it's your prerogative, actually. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. you. Thank you, Sameer. We have next question from the line of Girish Pai. Girish, please go ahead. Girish, we can't hear you. Can you hear me? No, not yet. Can you hear me now? Yes. Okay. Thanks for the opportunity. Again, we can't. The commentary on GenAI seems to be a little circumspect. So do you think you're investing enough in GenAI capabilities, capability building? Because a lot of your peers seem to be waxing quite a bit on that. So I was just wondering whether you're investing enough. Girish, yes, we are investing in GenAI, agentic AI. So we are investing. We are taking use cases. What I said was there is investments in GenAI. There is investments in enhancing our product and bringing in GenAI. We are also investing and have built our agentic AI platform. What I said was that we are not seeing deals in that area or monetization of the investments and efforts that's going in. In terms of direct, that look, you have won X million dollars in GenAI business. Are we seeing the value lever in the pipeline or winning additional businesses because of the underlying technology? The answer is yes. So I hope I've answered your question. Okay. Regarding budgets for 2025, since we are close to end of January, what are you hearing from your clients for 2025? I think the budgets we have heard, we are hearing neutral to positive momentum. I think if you see in financial markets, a lot of our clients have delivered excellent results on the street. I think what they are worried about is the policies, and that's what they are cautious about, and which is why I think there is a think tank in every company that is working in most of our large clients to understand, analyze the impact of the current administration and the policies it will have on their businesses, so that's really on one side, the tailwinds is that the results were extremely very good, and the headwind is the policies and what some of the surprises can come from there, so that's really what we are seeing. I think it's a little too early because it's not even just about 10 days from the time the new administration has come in. My last question is on your financial markets clients. A lot of them have operations in India through the GCC format. Are you working with any of these GCC setups? Yes. We work and collaborate with all our clients' GCC. So that's an opportunity, and we are in a unique position to work, and the value they see in our coexistence is huge. What would that GCC percentage be of your financial markets turnover like? When you say what would, sorry, just like. The collaborative work you're doing with the GCCs, how much would that be of your total financial markets revenue? It's not collaborative work. The work is in terms of they see us as a value player in terms of the services they are rendering and the services we are providing. It's not that there is a Venn diagram in terms of where there is intersection. That intersection will be very small. That's what you were asking. But I think the clients, the GCC, and us coexist in the ecosystem, and there is a value for the three players to exist. So you're not directly doing any business with GCCs? We are doing some, but we, yeah, very little, but I think we consider it's not like that GCC is a separate entity. Clients see GCC as an extension of themselves. They see our ODCs as an extension, and the three coexist in an equilibrium manner. I think if your question, Girish, is whether we are directly contracting with the GCC, that's not the case. I mean, our preference in any circumstance would be to directly contract with the client entity, which is US or UK based. Okay. Thank you. Thanks, Girish. Thank you, Girish. We have next follow-up question from the line of Sandeep Shah. Sandeep, please go ahead. Yeah. Thanks. Thanks. Sir, just on the Agentic AI, you said you have developed one platform. So is it still in a pilot phase or in terms of production phase? And if it goes into production phase, what is our savings we are able to generate for the client? I think it's not at a stage where we can comment in terms of the savings we will be able to generate for our clients. As you know, we had our Roboworx platform, which was an RPA platform. We have enhanced its functionality and built the agentic AI platform on that. And we have called it Roboworx CogniFlows. And I think the use cases that we will be working on are on internal, in terms of shared services functions, to see how we can enhance value. As well as on the digital side, we would be leveraging it. It's not at a stage where we are saying that this is the level of productivity we can deliver to our client. Because I think, see, the difference, Sandeep, in the way we sell our services versus the other players is that we are not selling agentic AI as an offering that, "Look, I'm giving you agentic AI. I'm giving you BPO. I'm giving you technology. I'm giving you SI. I'm giving you change." Our ability to bring it all together and sell it as a service is the unique value proposition that we deliver. And that's what resonates well with our clients. So I think it's difficult to answer your question in terms of exactly how much productivity benefit we can give. Okay. Thanks. Sir, generally, we speak that rollouts are 15%-20% of the top line. Whether that range remains same or further increase, decrease. And why I'm asking is now the ACV of new business, roughly on a yearly basis, 30% of the top line. So 30 minus 15 or 20, we can still achieve a double-digit kind of a growth CAGR in the coming years. Is it a fair way directionally in terms of thought process? So, Sandeep, to your two questions, one is we are not seeing any substantial change in the rollout in around what you numbered, you said, 15%-20%. And in terms of to answer your second question, yes, if the pipeline continues to be in the range in which it is, and like I had mentioned earlier, we are cautiously optimistic about it, then yes, the way you are looking at it is the right way to look at it. Okay, and sir, last question, if I could. You mentioned pressure in the cable and wireless business, so can you explain what kind of a pressure? Is it more competitive pressure, or it's a client-specific pressure? No, it's across the industry. You see, telecom industry has been going through tough times, right? Because the Moore's Law, the technology cost is declining exponentially. And all of us, as subscribers, want to pay higher bandwidth and pay lower cost. And that's the challenge that all tech companies are facing. And they're trying to reinvent themselves by looking at more as a tech solution provider as opposed to just being a cable provider or a tech company or a telecom company. I think in terms of the subscriber shift that is happening because of the price competitiveness is what that's not a particular client of ours that they are facing. It's an industry-wide phenomenon. So they are doing efforts on client retention and ensuring that the client churn does not happen. Okay. Thanks and all the best. Thank you. Thank you, Sandeep. We have next question from the line of Jalaj from Svan Investments. Jalaj, please go ahead. I think Jalaj, we have lost his line. We'll take next question from the line of Girish Pai. Girish, please go ahead. Yeah. Thanks for the opportunity again. Kapil, I just wanted to pick your brains on agentic AI, not so much an eClerx question, but an industry question. Does agentic AI mean that reliance on software packages kind of go down, say, Salesforce or any ServiceNow, any of those kind of packages? When you say reliance, what do you mean? Sorry, I am not. Usage of these packages, do you think that is going to go down? Or rather, it's going to be more customer application development which is going to come to the before? No, I think to answer your question, Girish, I think wherever applicable, if clients have already deployed Salesforce or Copilot, they would want to leverage that and use it as opposed to build custom-built applications because it's easier to build on the top of what already exists. The foundation layer, the pipelines is already all built in. But where Salesforce or Copilot, Microsoft is not there, then obviously you would build custom applications. But I don't think that because of agentic AI, the usage of these software will come down. But I'm not an authority in this area, but that's my personal view. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you, Girish. We have a question from Jalaj Manocha. Jalaj, please go ahead. Yeah. I hope I'm audible. Yes. Yeah. So, Kapil, just one point onto if I were to look at the utilizations of the delivery staff in particular, since the past three, four quarters, they have been on a decline, and still we have been adding people. So has there been a shift structurally the way delivery is being done right now as in we are keeping bench on a higher level right now? Or how should I understand this? So I think, Jalaj, utilization, but what we have reported in Q3 is in line with our medium to long-term average. Are we investing and bringing people ahead of the demand when we see so as not to cannibalize any top-line growth? The answer is yes. But it's not that utilization is lower because there was a lot of investments that were made for the demand. Because I think it is in line with our medium to long-term average. Got it. Got it. And one last question, maybe. So margins, I know there's been a lot of discussion, and you have given us directional 24%-28%. But the investments, until when do you see that they'll continue in the system? So sales and marketing eventually will start to show up in revenue. So as a percentage, that should start to fall. But other investments in the delivery or the other guys, tech side, until when do you feel that they'll keep the margins as a drag down? And what sort of timelines are you seeing? I'm not asking for next quarter or something. Maybe you can talk about next year or somewhere in 2027. When do you see the impact coming in? Like I said, we are a growth business. Until such time we see growth, we'll continue to invest in the business. Sorry, Jalaj. And we will stop investing when we see growth momentum coming down. And I hope that doesn't happen. So we will continue to invest in the business till such time we are seeing growth by expanding into new geographies, bringing new capabilities, new offerings. Like I said, again, to stay relevant for our clients and also to all the stakeholders that we deliver to. Got it. Thank you. Thanks. Thank you, Jalaj. As there are no further questions, I would now like to hand over the call to Srini for closing remarks. Thank you. Thank you, everyone, for joining the call today. And we'll see you again next quarter. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, everyone. Thank you, everyone. Have a good day and disconnect now.