Ladies and gentlemen, good day and welcome to Go Fashion (India) Limited Q3 and 9 months FY26 earnings conference call. Before we begin, I would like to remind participants that this conference call may contain forward-looking statements which are based on the beliefs, opinions, and expectations of the company as of today. These statements are not the guarantees of the future performance and involve risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. As a reminder, all participants' lines will be in listen-only mode, and there will be an opportunity for you to ask questions after the presentation concludes. Should you need assistance during this conference call, please signal an operator by pressing star, then zero on your touch-tone phone. Please note that this conference is being recorded. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Gautam Saraogi, Promoter and CEO of Go Fashion (India) Limited. Thank you, and over to you, Sir. Good evening and a warm welcome to everyone present on the call. I have along with me Mr. R. Mohan, our Chief Financial Officer, and Strategic Growth Advisors. I hope you have all received our investor deck by now. For those who have not, you can view it on the stock exchange and the company website. Q3 has been a challenging quarter for the apparel industry, mainly due to lower footfalls. During Q3 FY26, revenues stood at INR 194 crores, with gross margins of 46.3%. EBITDA stood at INR 52 crores, and PAT stood at INR 7 crores. However, the company has demonstrated resilience in its core operational fundamentals, such as full-price sales ratio, items per transaction, and customer conversion rates, which have remained stable, reflecting continued consumer relevance and disciplined execution. The overall retail environment remains subdued, with discretionary consumption witnessing moderation across categories. Factors such as uneven festive demand, selective consumer spending, and lower footfalls resulted in a slower same-store sales growth during the quarter. The softness was largely industry-wide in nature. The company continued to prioritize full-price sales ratio by maintaining a full-price sales ratio of more than 95%. This disciplined approach helped us maintain healthy gross margins at a stable 64.3% in Q3 FY26, which further highlights the strength of our pricing of our brand. Q3 FY26 was deeply impacted by a slowdown in our LFS channel. One of our key LFS partners had a pause of fresh inventory intake across brands, which affected our LFS sale by 30%. We continue to engage closely with our LFS partners and expect this channel to normalize as we continue to supply inventory to them. We continue to engage with our LFS partners to ensure that these kinds of interim issues that we have faced, we don't face again. To drive improved same-store sales growth, the company has undertaken focused initiatives around customer engagement and new product launches. In parallel, we have recently collaborated with a leading influencer to showcase our bottom-wear collection and enhancing the brand visibility and relevance among a younger audience. Such initiatives are expected to support stronger customer traction and improve store-level performance over the coming quarters. Over the time, we have strengthened our position in the non-leggings category, and it has further strengthened today. Our non-leggings bottom-wear category gives us a 65% contribution in our sales, which in earlier times used to be less than 50%. Moving over to the operational metrics of Q3 FY26, our store expansion strategy continues to remain calibrated and selective, with a clear focus on entering high-potential markets. As of nine months of FY26, the company has added 49 stores, and we expect to close FY26 with a net addition of 60 to 70 stores. Our approach to network expansion remains very disciplined, with emphasis on store-level profitability and strengthening brand salience. We continue to keep a close watch on inventory levels, with inventory levels being at 114 days as of December 31, 2025. On the inventory fund, we have seen an increase in our inventory for our new concept, Daily Wear Concept, which has increased our inventory marginally from the earlier times. For the full year FY26, we anticipate inventory levels to stabilize at the range of 100 days, ensuring operational efficiency and healthy working capital management. Our strong focus on inventory and working capital efficiency will help us achieve the target of converting more than 50% of our EBITDA into pre-interest operating cash flows. On our new initiatives, including our international store in Dubai, and our Daily Wear Concept, are demonstrating healthy unit economics in early stages, and we remain excited about their performance in the coming quarters. As of now, we have opened six stores for our Daily Wear Concept, and we look to scale, make it about 10 stores by March 2026. In line with our commitment to shareholders, we've announced a buyback this quarter of 1,413,000 shares at a price of INR 460 per share, with a total size of INR 65 crores. Way forward, smaller format stores, the small-size stores, have been witnessing a sharp decline in performance because today's consumer is looking to shop in a larger store experience. So in line with that, we had consolidated some of our smaller stores last year, and we will look to continue some of our remaining smaller stores in the quarters to come. The company is taking a cautious approach on new store expansion, with a clear focus on strengthening same-store sales growth. Our priority is to improve performance across the existing store network through better execution, enhanced customer experience, and operational efficiencies. Our immediate objective is to move from negative same-store sales growth to flattish, and then eventually taking it to low single digit, supported by improvements in store-level productivity and throughput. This will not only be driven by external factors, but even by sharper execution at a store level, introducing new products and better engagement with our new audience. Second, our footprint expansion will be driven by careful selection of high-quality locations through picking and choosing the right location with strong unit economics. Lastly, recognizing retail is fundamentally a balance sheet business, we remain sharply focused on cash conversion, higher inventory turnover, and disciplined capital allocation, ensuring business remains profitable and is a very ROCE-centric business. With this, I would like to hand over the call to Mr. R. Mohan for an update for Q3 and 9 months FY26 results and financials. Thank you. Thank you, Gautam, and good evening, everyone. First, I'll give the Q3 financial numbers. Our revenue for the quarter stood at INR 195 crores. Gross profit stood at INR 125 crores, with a gross GP margins of 64.3%. Our EBITDA for the quarter stood at INR 52 crores. EBITDA margins are at 26.7%. PAT for the quarter stood at INR 7 crores. PAT margin is at 3.7%. Coming to the 9 months FY26 performance, revenue is at INR 642 crores. Gross profit stood at INR 406 crores. GP margin at 63.2%. EBITDA is at INR 187 crores, with EBITDA margin at 29.2%. PAT stood at INR 51 crores, with a PAT margin of 8%. ROCE and ROE, excluding Ind AS's impact, as of 9 months FY26, stood at 13.1% and 10.3%, respectively. Cash and cash equivalents stood at INR 256 crores, as of 31st December 2025. With this, now we'll open the floor for the questions and answers. Thank you very much. We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touch-tone telephone. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to use handsets while asking a question. Ladies and gentlemen, we will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. The first question is from the line of Devanshu Bansal from Emkay Global. Please go ahead. Yes. Hi, Gautam. Thanks for taking my questions. Firstly, I also wanted to understand how should we read your SSG performance? We were flat for a fairly long period of time, but now reporting in the negative trajectory for the last three quarters. Though you mentioned that from a retail parameter perspective, footfall is the only challenge. But my concern was that even footfall, we are attributing it to weak consumption, but is there a certain level of deterioration of brand strength so that it is not attracting the relevant amount of footfall? So your color on this will be very helpful. Yeah, I'll try to answer. No, I think, see, Devanshu, from a brand perspective, I don't see that. Yes, we want to, as a brand, increase our younger audience as a customer base. But from a brand strength and relevance perspective, I think we are very much there. See, even from a product mix perspective, if you see today, 65% of our sales are coming from the other value-added products, and that's how the bottom-wear market is heading in direction. So I think from a brand relevance and product relevance perspective, I don't think it is an issue. I think the overall footfall in Q3 has been very weak. See, we've done many channel checks also, and we have seen a similar kind of trajectory in other places as well. So the overall macro scenario, obviously, has had to do a lot. The footfall issue has had to do a lot with our SSG. Another thing which I mentioned in my speech, our SSG in a very small store. See, today, what has happened, because the bottom-wear market has become a wider market with so many products, the very small stores from an experience perspective becomes a little bit of an issue. And we have seen softer and larger degrowth in SSG in those very small stores. So I think the larger attribute to our negative SSG is obviously the overall macro scenario and footfall, and these small stores which have degrown a lot more than normal because of the size. Fair enough, Gautam. But this footfall issue, is it also related to consumers sort of preferring to show up more online or via quick commerce channels where our presence is very limited, right? So are you also thinking on ramping up our presence in these channels? Because footfalls, etc., may remain weak, right? So if the consumer preference is shifting towards other channels or maybe through formats where they are getting the entire wardrobe rather than preferring to go for a standalone bottom-wear store, so how are we sort of focusing on capturing such consumption occasions? Yes, see, in fact, yeah, I mean, rightly, you said, Devanshu. I think, look, online and quick commerce has always done well. And for us, because we are having a very small contribution, so that's a channel for us to build. So our online channel has seen decent traction. Our quick commerce also, we have been live on Blinkit and Zepto, and we've seen very good traction there. So I think as that channel picks up speed for the apparel category, our share also in the e-com space will organically grow. So from an e-com and quick commerce perspective, we are there present with our styles and inventory across all channels. I think it's just a matter of time. Once it picks up speed, it will also start reflecting in our revenue numbers. Fair enough, fair enough. Lastly, Gautam, a few clarifications from the LFS side. Our revenue mix has improved towards EBO, right? So it is 80% EBO this time around versus 74% last year. The gross margin for this channel is about, in my understanding, 35%-40% better versus the LFS channel, right? But if we see from a company-wide perspective, this should have reflected in 250-300 basis points better gross margin on a YOY basis, but this is flat, right, in this quarter. So is this largely due to deterioration in gross margin profile of LFS channel as well? So what explains that? So yeah. Yes, see, we are also studying that, Devanshu, and I will come back to you on that. But at the outset, when we are looking at it right now, last year, we had started EOSS a little late at the EBO level. This time, we had started a little earlier where usually we start. Last year, our EOSS start date itself was late. So because the quarter three had a weak, 10 days of more EOSS week, that could have had an impact on the EBO gross margin, which is not reflecting in the upside of the overall company gross margin because of low LFS. We are anyway studying this. We'll come back to you with more clarity around it. But at the outset, it looks because of the start of early EOSS, which is by a week, 10 days. Okay. From a model perspective, is your LFS SOR-based, or then the partners can return the inventory in case they are closing the store, or how is it? Yeah. So usually, it is like this, Devanshu. It is based on SOR. So what we do as per Ind AS is, because it's on SOR, we show it as debtors in our books. We show it as sales when we dispatch the goods. So it is debtors in our books. But because it is SOR, as per Ind AS 115, we have put a provision for sales return based on historical trends. So whatever is the last three years of historical trends of return, we provided on a quarterly basis. So the provision of sales return is inbuilt for any stock which is coming back through the year. No, that's fair. But what happens in terms of store closures, right? So we have had. Yeah, so if. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah. For example, yes, your question is right. Suppose today an LFS decides to shut 20 stores, those 20 stores' stock will come return, and it will be booked as a sales return. But what happens, such increase in returns will reflect in the next year's provisioning because you tend to usually take a three-year average for a provision of sales return perspective. But to your question, if an LFS shuts 30, 40 stores or whatever stores, the stock coming back will be shown as a sales return. Fair enough. Thanks for taking my questions. Gautam, sorry. Thank you. Thank you, Devanshu. Participants who wish to ask a question, you may press star and one at this time. The next question is from the line of Gaurav Jogani from JM Financial. Please go ahead. Hi. Thank you for taking my question. My first question is again with regard to the LFS channel only. This quarter, we have seen 137 odd LFS getting shut QOQ. So one, what is, was there anything specific this quarter that we saw such large closures? And how do we look for expansion in LFS going ahead? Yeah. So see, Gaurav, these stores are largely one of our key LFS partners. They have changed the format of that store, and they have changed it. They have rebranded and changed the format of the store. So when that happened, all the external brands had to move out of those particular stores, including us. So the reason we have exited the store is because that key partner had decided to change the format and rebrand it. Now, moving forward, LFS expansion from a store addition perspective, whenever we do get an opportunity for adding new stores, we will selectively choose which location makes sense, and then we will select. Like in Pantaloons, we have been expanding and adding stores over the last few quarters. Even in Reliance, we are getting new stores. So selectively, on the basis of what is being proposed to us, we will select those locations and move forward. As far as quarter three is concerned, our quarter three revenues were deeply impacted because for one of our key LFS partners, we were not able to dispatch stock for about close to 45 days. They were not taking inventory across brands for a period of 45 days, and because of that, we were not able to dispatch stock. And that is why we've lost 45 days of dispatches, which has resulted in a 30% drop in sales. And that's why our Q3 numbers, overall numbers have got deeply impacted because of this dispatch issue which happened in November and a little bit of December as well. Gautam, can we expect this to sales come back in Q4 in some chance because of? See, not really. Because see what happened, that 1.5 months which we have lost, see what happens, how do we replenish stock at an LFS store, right? We keep a base stock. We decide a maximum stock level. Now, based on the maximum stock level and the closing stock at an LFS store, you're basically only sending the difference. So in January or February, it's not that you're going to be sending additional stock. You're going to be sending stock only to the extent of the maximum stock level. So the 45 days what we have missed out, that increase in number will not see in January and February. But if that 45 days we have missed out, they would have again sold during. Yeah, yeah, I understand. But see, Gautam, ours is a replenishment business. The sales will happen, you keep replenishing the sales will happen, you keep replenishing that store, right? But your maximum base stock is only to a certain level. So if you have not replenished 45 days, you have to a large extent lost out on a lot of secondary sales. Now, we will not be able to recover those secondary sales in the coming months. So technically, you're sending only that much stock which is there in the base stock. Gautam, just commenting on that LFS opening part, so how many LFS now we can model into open at least for Q4 and the rest of the couple of years going ahead? It's difficult to say. It's difficult to give a guidance on how many LFS stores we will be opening next year. It all depends on how our partners expand. In that proposal of expansion, what we think would be relevant. So it's going to be very subjective to what is being proposed to us. See, sometimes a partner can decide to have 70 stores, 80 stores, but certain key markets, you wouldn't want to be part of that market. So it's very subjective to what is being proposed to us. So I think that we will be able to only know next year as we are proposed with a list of stores. Gautam, coming back to the EBOs, are you seeing any recovery in the momentum of any sorts in the months past by January to indicate that from a negative 4.5% SSG that you are dismissing Q3, probably you will go flattish on that thoughts or it continues to remain as it was? See, Gautam, I think we are seeing two trends, Gautam. I think what is happening is our mid-size stores, our stores which are slightly higher than 500 sq ft, 600 sq ft. See, because our product range has increased, right? 65% of our sales are coming from the non-leggings category, the value-added categories. So today, the consumer wants display and experience of shopping when you're seeing so many products. So we are seeing two trends, right? The smaller stores, the very small stores are obviously seeing a decline because we are not able to display all the new products. The slightly larger stores, which are the 600-700 sq ft stores, they are seeing good increase. Some of the stores are actually showing very good positive SSG as well. So I think over a period of time, as our small stores phase out of the system and the newer stores what we cautiously add becomes of a relevant size, you will also see improvement in SSG from that perspective. But largely, the improvement of SSG is going to be obviously relating to footfalls. So I think both these things hand in hand will play a very important role in the recovery of the SSG from being negative to a mid-single digit of positive. Gautam, in this scenario that the expectation, then there could be a possible drag on the margins because cost will keep on escalating at a certain pace. So would it be fair to assume that at least over the next 3-4 quarters, you might see a decline in the EBITDA margin just because of the negative leverage? See, I'll tell you what we are planning to do as a company, right? Right now, we are being very careful with expansion. So right now, we are prioritizing thinking how do we get the SSG back to positive. Today, we are at -5%. Our aim is to get to mid-single digit to 5%, right? So from -5, we have to take it to +5. So all our efforts right now as a company is to see how we can fix this and get this into positive. Of course, the overall footfalls is going to make a very big contribution to this, but we are also going to be putting in smaller efforts at new products, looking better-looking stores to fuel that. So our first priority over the next one year is to definitely put entire focus on improving SSSG and maintaining margins. So on the expansion front, we are going to be very selective in our expansion in the coming quarters so that because of expansion, there should not be an EBITDA hit in the P&L. See, because what happens, Gautam, when we are seeing new stores, immature stores which are not matured, they are a load on the P&L because you're paying the full rent and salary without the store being matured. So we are taking one step back and saying, "Look, hey, we will be very careful in our expansion, not go overboard with the expansion so that margins don't get compromised during this recovery period. So then can we expect the store opening to even come down next year in the EBO format versus the 60-70 that we're expecting this year? See, honestly, Gautam, we are not guiding it. We are not giving unlike earlier times, right? Earlier times, we used to be very clear with our guidance on how many stores opening. This time, we have seen that our margins because of negative SSGs, margins have taken a hit. So under the management, we have taken a conscious call to slow down the store expansion and do it selectively. See, that does not mean that we will not expand. See, wherever we are getting a very good opportunity and where we feel that we should be there, we will also expand. But we are not setting ourselves a target. During this recovery period of taking SSSG from -5% to +5%, we don't want to compromise on the health of the P&L. Got it, Gautam. Thank you, and that's all. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Ankit Kedia from PhillipCapital. Please go ahead. Gautam, just continuing from the previous question, is it fair to assume next year's store opening could be around sub-50 stores or even lower than that? Because this year with 60-70 stores, also your margins have been hit. And next year also, the recovery is question mark. So definitely, the store opening would be below 50? So Ankit, I know where you're coming from, and honestly, it's very difficult for me to give a guidance right now. It all depends when does the SSG pick up speed, right? And suppose if things go well and next year, by I'm just giving you a hypothetical example, by next year, middle or maybe the Second Quarter, we come back to positive SSSG, then maybe we also start increasing our footprint as well. So it all depends on the recovery of the SSSG. So it's very difficult to give a number for next year, whether it will be below 50 or above 50, it's very difficult to predict. But as management, we feel that we will not go to an extreme of not opening also. For example, if we get a good mall which is coming up in Mumbai or Bangalore or any other city where it's a prospective mall or very prospective high street, we will definitely go and open there. But we will not go overboard and try to open everywhere also at the same time. So we'll keep a good blend. Given that it takes 3 months to 6 months to open a store, and today with you at minus 5, 6% like-for-like growth, next 6 months store opening will be muted, at least that we can assume? Yes, it will be muted. So it's difficult to give a number, but I can tell you it will be muted for sure because we are going to be very cautious in our approach. Sure. Second is on that. Also, sorry, sorry, Ankit, just extending to the sea, we'll also be doing a lot of relocations, Ankit. So what will happen sometimes, like I explained to you, right? We have some sometimes very small stores which are not doing well. Today, the consumer wants a slightly better experience. So in the same market, we might shut the older store and open a new store. So there might be some relocations which will have a positive impact on the revenue number as well. Gautam, we would appreciate if you can share the area of the stores today. At an 800-900 store network, we don't know what is the area. Given that bulk of the store closures, smaller stores are behind us, and now you're opening 600 stores. What I'll do, Ankit, in the next probably after this earnings call, once we have calibrated the entire data, we will share the data with everyone how many stores are there which are the smaller stores so everyone has clarity on that. How many more store closures are remaining for the smaller stores? And can you just share the decline you are seeing in the smaller stores? Yeah, we will share. First, we are calibrating the data. Once we have calibrated the data, we'll be happy to share. Okay. No, because on the previous question, you said that the smaller stores are significantly negative SSSG are declining. So, at least some data you would have to pass that comment, right? See, we've seen no, I'll tell you. For example, where our company average level is -5%, the smaller stores we have seen are slightly higher degrowth of more than 9%-10% SSSG. And sometimes numbers are not fully reflected even when we are visiting stores and when we are interacting with the consumers. The consumer feels that, okay, in a slightly larger store of a 500-600 sq ft, the newer bottoms, the newer styles are better on display. So it becomes easier to shop. In a very compact store of 200 sq ft, it becomes very difficult to display all the items to the consumer. So from an experience perspective also, it hampers. I agree because your core moat was a smaller store, high throughput, high margin business. Now that is getting disrupted because your average store size is becoming 600, at least incremental store size. No, no, see, Ankit, the unit economics of a 600 sq ft store and a 300 sq ft store is not different. Even a 600 sq ft store from a unit economic perspective comes under the same category as well. So it's not that my EBITDA unit economics will go down because I'm opening a 500, 600 sq ft store. See, if today I would have gone and opened, say, 2,000, 3,000 sq ft store, that's a completely different unit economics. But stores which are sub 1,000 sq ft have similar unit economics for a 200 sq ft also and for a 550, 600 also. Gautam, at least last three years since we started opening bigger stores, sales per sq ft has declined, if you see. Now that could be due to market environment, or it could be due to loss of market share, or could be due to loss of footfalls. It could be either of it. But at least on the face of it, we have seen a decline in sales per sq ft. So yeah, so your question is right, Ankit. So the sales per sq ft would be more because of the footfalls in the overall macro scenario. It is not because we have gone into a larger store and the unit economics are not as good as a smaller store. It's not because of that. Sure. My second question is on LFS. You made a comment that one of the large retailers is switching the stores which had third-party brands to a private label brand. Now, do we have visibility that next year that won't happen from the retailer, or it's going to continue and we have been said that a few hundred more stores could be closed in the medium term? We are also trying to get that clarity, Ankit. But honestly, if you ask me the truth, I don't know. Can it happen next year? Maybe yes. So we are also speaking to our partner and trying to get that clarity so that we are also prepared on if there are going to be such format changes at their end, we will know about it. So we are trying to find out the minute I have some clarity on that, maybe in the next earnings call or maybe in between that, I'll definitely guide everyone on that. Sure. On the inventory part, right, our gross margins have expanded, but with the change in format and other things, how are the commodity prices placed today? And with the GST pricing being more favorable, at least for higher price points above INR 1,000 rupee products, going forward, do you feel the need to reduce the discounting which you are giving to the consumer or the new labels have come up? How will that pricing change and how are the commodity prices? Honestly, Ankit Kedia, you're talking about the GST reduction, right? Those products you're talking about, right? Yes. Yeah. So we were giving the benefit to the consumer. We have not changed our MRP for such products. So we are continuing to give the benefit to the consumer. There might be a time where we feel instead of taking a price hike for those products, we'll just remove the discount what we were giving for the GST benefit. So in short, we have not taken the price hike, but we'll get the benefit of that eventually. But when we are going to start doing it, we are deciding it internally once. So to answer your question, we are not changing the MRP of those products where the GST was reduced. Wherever the GST was reduced, we were passing on to the consumer. Eventually, instead of taking a price hike of those products which were due, we would just remove that benefit without taking a price hike. In the other products, sub-INR 1,000 where the discount was not available, 5% remains 5%. Are you considering taking a price increase? No, not right. See, Ankit, we are in a volume-led business, right? So our entire company focuses to drive volumes. I have reviewed the products under INR 1,000. We have made very small corrections in certain products where we have increased the pricing because it was underpriced to begin with. But those are very, very few products. Largely, we have not touched anything under INR 1,000 because we feel we are well priced. Last question is on the A&P spend. Do you think at this point of time, you need to be aggressive in A&P? Because previously, you always said when demand is not there, you don't want to spend because if the demand is not there, consumers are not going to walk in. But has that mind shifted that you have to go aggressive at this point of time? See, I think no, I don't think we have to spend more, honestly. So I think that logic of 2% of revenue still holds good. This time, it shows a little more because our revenue this year has stayed flat, but we had marketing budgets allocated for a growth revenue, right? So that's why the percentage of revenue is so slightly still higher. But from how much we want to spend, I don't think that number will increase. We are just transitioning our digital marketing to a very different methodology where we are reaching out to the younger audience and the millennial audience by different types of personalized marketing. See, our marketing team to begin with was a very old-school, orthodox type of marketing. It's now changed. Over a period of time, it started pivoting towards more and more digital. So I think the way of marketing is going to evolve. But from a spend perspective, I don't see our spend decreasing. We used to spend 2, 2.5% or 2%-2.2%. We are going to be around that number. So as a quantum of spend, it's not going to increase. Sure. Can I ask another question since I've taken a lot of time? Yeah, sure. It's just on the top wear. Given that bottom wear is under pressure, which is the Core, bread, and butter, do you think it's prudent now for you to continue to expand top wear aggressively or concentrate more on bottom wear? No, no. See, let me tell you. The top wear project what we have done, the everyday concept, that's just a pilot. And I cannot see the pilot needs its time, right? So now we've opened six stores. So that will take its own journey. And that decision-making in that pilot is independent of bottom wear. So we are not going to speed up that in any way to show growth. So that pilot will go in its own speed. It's going to take some time, and it's for the future. As far as bottom wear is concerned, we are very, very bullish on the category. Yes, this has been a time. This has been a very tough time for the category and the brand where we've seen headwinds, and it's not reflecting in numbers. But our conviction in bottom wear is very much there. Even our recent Technopak study also emphasizes how large that category is. So even from a short-term, mid-term, and long-term perspective, our entire energy and strategy for bottom wear is very much intact. Sure, Gautam. Thank you very much. So over the next couple of years, Ankit, if we have to show growth and the numbers have to come, it has to come from bottom wear. We cannot expect the pilot to take care of the gap of growth. The pilot is there, and it will take the pilot in its own sweet time. We cannot rush the pilot. Otherwise, we won't do justice to that project as well. Bottom wear is our main business, and we'll fix it, and we'll bring it to growth. We are very bullish. Noted. Noted. Thank you, Gautam. Yeah. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, in order to ensure that the management is able to address questions from all participants in the conference, please limit your question to two per participant. The next question is from the line of Vaishnavi Mandhaniya from Anand Rathi. Please go ahead. Hi. Thank you for taking my question. I just wanted to understand how much of this SSSG decline can be attributed to the entire store size issue that we faced because you said that the smaller stores saw a relatively negative SSSG, or rather the larger stores saw better SSSG performance versus the footfall in general being weaker? See, I would say it's very difficult to quantify it. I would say largely this SSSG is negative because of the slowness in footfall and the overall weak environment. It's very difficult to quantify, but I would put it more towards the overall macro scenario. So what I'm trying to get to is that, let's say in H2, right, where we I think almost shot almost 40 to H2 FY25, we shot I think almost 40-50 of the smaller store formats. We said that the store closures are almost done. But again, now in this quarter, we're coming up and we're seeing that we're still seeing the performance of the smaller stores not being up to the mark, which is why we're shutting them again. So I'm just trying to understand where are we coming in this entire small store, large store, medium store, and how should we look at this in terms of our performance as well? See, the stores what we shut last year, yes, we did shut those stores, and we have seen that when we shut those smaller stores, the revenue moved to the nearby larger stores. So we saw that. It didn't have a very big impact on SSSG because 40 stores as a base on such a large number of stores will not move the SSSG needle so much. Now, as far as how many stores we are going to be shutting, we are calibrating the data of the smaller stores because we can't just shut those stores just like that. We'll have to also see when the reschedules are coming up. So, as we get more clarity on that, we'll definitely guide the market on how many such stores in the smaller bucket is there, and how many of the smaller stores will be shutting in the short term. We will also guide that once we have calibrated the entire data. So from your end, you'll also have clarity on what's happening. All right. And one more thing is we can also get some more inputs in terms of how does the unit economics, etc., move for the slightly larger stores, like what the earlier participant was also suggesting because when. Very similar, Vaishnavi. I'll tell you why. See, you understand, I'll tell you why a 500, 600 is very similar to a 200, and I'll tell you why. When we sign a store, we sign on a rent-to-revenue ratio. So if the rent-to-revenue ratio is in our budget, whether it's a 600-sq ft store or whether it's a 200-sq ft store, your EBITDA prior to staff expenses will be the same. Now, coming to staff expenses, because that is the real difference between a 600-sq ft store and a 200-sq ft store. In a 600 and a 200, the number of people you employ for managing the store are the same. Your operating expenses also are pretty much the same. So a 600-sq ft store from a unit economics delivers the same unit economics what a 200 will deliver. The difference always what happens is when you go past 1,000 sq ft, suppose you open a 1,500 sq ft, the unit economics dramatically changes because the electricity cost dramatically goes up. The number of people you're going to be keeping in the store dramatically goes up. Then you'll have to keep separate housekeeping staff. The entire mathematics on employee cost dramatically changes when it crosses 1,200 sq ft, 1,300 sq ft. Sub 1,000 sq ft, you're keeping the same number of people what you're keeping in a 200, 300 sq ft. So the difference is really those other operating expenses in which the staff cost is the highest. Okay. Understood. Also, one last question. In terms of the newer stores that we're opening, which are slightly larger in the size, are they again in the nearby vicinity of the smaller stores, or are we targeting different clusters or in the same clusters? No, no. See, one more thing is, see, definitely during these times where SSSG is off, we are ensuring that we are not giving any room for cannibalization. So now when we are opening stores, we are very careful that we are trying to open in different clusters where even the smallest remote chance of cannibalization should not happen. And that is why we are extremely selective and cautious in our approach of store opening. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, you are requested to restrict your question to two per participant. The next question is from the line of Prerna Jhunjhunwala from Elara Capital. Please go ahead. Thank you for the opportunity. I just wanted to understand your revenue mix also this quarter. You have given verification wherein from non-legging sales is around 65%. Correct. As a category, that category is not seeing that kind of difficult time in our opinion. So I wanted to understand which category is seeing slowdown, or is it an overall all categories are seeing decline at the same time, or what is the? See, yeah, yeah, yeah. I'll tell you. So Prerna, I'll tell you. See, the product mix change has very little to do with the negative SSSG. And I'll tell you why. Pre-COVID, when we had SSSG of more than 15%, or we were double-digit SSSG, even that time, the product mix was evolving and changing. See, product mix is something which evolves even when your SSSG is positive or negative. So that has nothing to do with that. The real reflection of SSSG being negative is more to do with the footfalls. The main reason is that it is not because this product has gone down and this product has slightly improved that it is reflecting a negative SSSG. The main reason of SSSG decline is because of the decline in footfalls. Suppose if you are having -5% SSSG today, our footfalls are down by -5%. So what directly correlates with negative SSSG is the footfalls and not the product mix. Because what we've seen in the past, even in the good times when we had double-digit SSSG during pre-COVID, our leggings-to-tops contribution was falling at that point of time, and our other product sales was improving. That was something which we had envisioned that was anyways going to happen, that leggings as a category is going to continue to decline even in the future. Okay. Understood. But then just trying to understand because other apparel players have not been declining every quarter the way you have been declining. So and footfall in this quarter, especially given that the season has been decent and the footfalls have not been a complaint by many other categories in the fashion segment as well. So why would footfall be a problem for you for more than three quarters now? See, difficult to answer this question, Prerna, but see, in quarter three, of course, our numbers are weak, right? So the first thing what we do is we do some channel checks. So we have seen a decline everywhere, but the women's category, we've seen a bigger decline. And this I'm saying about in general overall women's apparel. Irrespective of top wear, irrespective of bottom wear, irrespective whether it's ethnic kurtis or fusion, whatever, a little bit channel checks as a company we've done, we've seen slowness everywhere. Also, is there any strategy change with respect to ownership of stores because all your stores are on your books and any franchisee options that you are evaluating so that the capex is getting better? No. See, the COCO model works very well for us, Prerna, and it gives us better control from a hygiene perspective also. We've realized that COCO stores deliver a much better customer experience because we have SOPs in place. So for us, we are largely going to go to the COCO route. Franchisee route, we are not against, but we will do franchisees very selectively in markets where we are not having operational control, very similar to what I've narrated earlier. From a ROCE perspective, see, as the business improves, once growth comes back onto the tables, the margins improve, automatically the ROCE will start showing a better figure than what it is currently. But from a strategy of COCO versus FOCO, I feel we are going to continue with the COCO because that's a model that works for us. Because sometimes we feel from a COCO perspective, the store experience, the store look, look and feel, everything will be well maintained in the COCO model. Understood. Thank you and all the best. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Prerna. Ladies and gentlemen, in order to ensure that the management is able to answer all the questions from the participants, please limit your question to two per participant. The next question is from the line of Resha Mehta from GreenEdge Wealth Services. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thank you for the opportunity. The first question is basically on the market share data. As for the latest Technopak report, can you call out what's your market share? Yeah. So the report says that we are having the same 8% market share in FY24 what we had earlier. And it shows that the branded market for bottomwear is about, it's a INR 10,000 crore branded bottomwear market as of 2024, in which we have an 8% market share. Okay. And can you just call out the initiatives taken to drive footfalls as far as customer engagement goes? See, I think driving footfalls to a very large extent is determined on the consumer sentiment. So that's not very much in our hands. So what best we can do from our end is to ensure that our product mix is good, our stores are well located, and our digital marketing is strong. These type of levers are in our control, but the overall consumer sentiment which is there in the market is something which we'll have to wait and watch how that improves. These initiatives of just ensuring that we have the right product mix and we're doing right digital marketing is what we can do at our end to ensure that we deliver best SSSGs. When you say customer engagement, what you're essentially referring to is the digital marketing. Yeah. See, we started a lot of personalized digital marketing works very well. See, today, a lot of our digital marketing has moved to personalized customer where today a consumer who's shopping in a Go Colors who's buying certain categories, we promote the other categories to WhatsApp, to Instagram. So our entire digital marketing has become more personalized around the products with our existing customers and new customers. So we are leading, our digital marketing is more transitioning into product-led communication than just brand communication. For example, if you are a user, you're a customer of Go Colors, you've been buying X number of products, but you don't know that this product is available at a Go Colors. Through our data, we will know that X person is buying this. So what we've seen in recent past, when we are personalizing advertising communication for that person, that person is able to see, okay, this product is also available. So you're able to get that customer back to the store. So we are just creating our digital is moving more personalized product lead, which works for us very well. So we do it direct, and we also do it through influencer. Understood. You've made these product changes, right? Sorry to interrupt. To your product launch. No, no, madam. No, no, madam, please let her continue. Oh, okay. Madam, please let her continue. No problem. Yeah, please go ahead and finish. Yeah. With all these new product launches which we can see out there in the stores, right, would you say you've spoken that, okay, brand dilution is not an issue, other issues are not there, but do you see that somewhere the value proposition for the customer has become a little bit weaker? Because if I see as we have westernized our portfolio, right, western wear is somewhere where there is a lot of competition. So if I just compare the merchandise for the new product launches that we have done with, let's say, an offline store like a Westside or even if we go lower on the value side, Zudio, etc., at least Westside probably would have similar merchandise, but at a much lower price point, right? So then, your customer is probably. You're not seeing footfalls not because of other reasons, but just because the value proposition has weakened with. Yeah. Yeah, I understood your question. In fact, I'll tell you, this was something which we covered in the Technopak. So in fact, we added this in our presentation recently. So we put a triangle chart in that updated slide on market size and our share. In that, what the study says is that more than 500, 500-1,000 and 1,000 and above contributes to more than two-thirds or maybe more than 70% of the bottomwear market. The less than 500 category is a very small category compared to the mid-premium and the premium category. See, the bottomwear category, when you take the value-added products like trousers, palazzos, it's very difficult to price it sub-500. The sub-500, to what I have studied, is a very leggings market, leggings-oriented market. So even in that study. Sorry to interrupt. I'm not referring to the sub-500 market. Okay. So now let me be very specific. For example, the wider bottom denims, right, which have been launched, right? So now, for example, our MRPs, let's say, are INR 1,300, but if I put similar merchandise in, let's say, a Westside, it's priced at INR 1,000, right? Then clearly, I mean, this is just one example that I'm giving you, right? So then clearly, the value proposition for the customer becomes far superior with our. Oh, you're saying from our competitor side, see, you're saying. Yes, yes. And this is just I'm talking about, let's say, offline competition, right? And if we move to online, it's a much wider world out there, right, with a plethora of options there, right? So then with that, do you think? Let me put it this differently: that if, let's say, if you were to drop your prices, okay, on some of your specific merchandise, right, by X%, do you think that is going to boost footfalls or do you think that is not the case? Okay. So yeah, I understand your question, Resha, and I'll clarify this. See, what we try doing is when we launch a product, we try benchmarking it at what prices will a like-to-like product or a similar product be selling in the market. So maybe this one product which you're mentioning, maybe we have overpriced it by INR 200. Maybe that's a one-product phenomenon. I'm not going into the specifics of that product. In general, when we are releasing products, we benchmark to see that we are not very expensive compared to competition. We should be either on par or maybe lesser, and that's how our pricing strategy is. So we don't want to put ourselves in a situation where we've launched a product at a premium, realized that it is very expensive to other competitors, what you mentioned, and then we drop the prices. So to begin with, we are ensuring that we are not pricing ourselves so much higher than what is available in the market. So I'll give you another example. What happened in our new concept, what we opened, the new Daily Wear Concept. So certain products of menswear, what we launched in the Linking Road store and the other five stores as well, we had priced it a little higher. When we realized that we had priced it a little higher than what is available in the market, we immediately changed the pricing because that's a new category and segment for us. So we are also learning. In bottomwear, because we have done it over so many years, when we are releasing a product, we keep studying what our pricing is versus what is there available on the outside. Maybe an exact product is not available, but at least a like-to-like or similar product, what price it is selling. So we try keeping that price parity to begin with. Sometimes we make mistakes like that one product maybe you mentioned we did go wrong. I don't want to be specific about that product, but in general, it's a conscious effort that we get our pricing right from day one. Right. So you don't believe that if we bring our prices down, we are going to be seeing more footfalls, right? Not at all. Not at all. To begin with, we are pricing our product very sharply. It's in line with if that product is available out there, it's in line with that. Right. Yes, and. I'll give you a basic example, right? Let's take our leggings product. So you'll have leggings of different price ranges. For a product of our spec, and I'm taking leggings because that contributes to 35% of the business, I'm taking that product as an example. If you take a product of similar spec, you will see brands selling between INR 549 and INR 649. So we are somewhere in between. We are at INR 599. So we are very mindful of that, how we price ourselves. We want to always ensure that, okay, we are giving good comfort and quality, but the pricing should be sharp. Right. And I do acknowledge the fresh merchandise and the new product launches. They're very much visible in your stores in Mumbai, at least, right? So I do acknowledge that, right? And I have one more question if I can squeeze in. Sure, sure. Please go ahead, Resha. Please go ahead. Thank you. That's the last one. So a lot was spoken about the store sizes, right? So typically, we've been in that 300-600 sq ft kind of store size. So now the new stores that whatever calibrated muted store count that we would be opening, they are all at 1,000+. And also a related question that when you say small stores, I mean, do we have definitions of small, medium, large stores internally? See, so the new stores what we are opening for the bottomwear stores I'm not talking about the pilot. So for the new stores what we are opening for the bottomwear will be below INR 1,000, largely. So it will be in that range between INR 500 and INR 1,000. It will be mostly in that range, but we are unlikely to cross INR 1,000 unless it's a very good rental deal we're getting. But we are largely going to be in that bracket of less than INR 1,000. When I talk about a small store, yes, any store which is effectively lower than a 300 or 350 sq ft store comes down to being a small store. So it also depends on the depth and the width of the store, but without being too technical, anything below 350 and 300 is regarded as a small store. But today, we are not able to display those products in a very small store. Sure. We'll look forward to more granular data on the store sizes in your next presentation. Thank you so much and all the best. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Sameer Gupta from IIFL Securities. Please go ahead. Hi. Good evening, everyone. Thanks for taking my question. Gautam, firstly, on the LFS channel, now, even if we exclude the anomaly of this quarter, the growth or the performance in this channel has always been volatile. Some quarters, it is up more than 20%-30%. Some quarters, it is a decline. So if this is a replenishment model, which you alluded to in Second Quarter and earlier participants' question, technically, growth should be smoother like the way we witness in our EBOs because that will be the capturing the end-level consumer. And just a follow-up on this again, the LFS key partner that you're talking about changes formats, not buys for 45 days, and they don't really inform us beforehand so that you can plan better? Well, so I'll answer your second question. Yes, we were obviously not informed once Festive got over. EBOs were on hold. We couldn't send stock. It was something which came up. We didn't know about it. We obviously couldn't foresee it. As far as format changes also concerned, I think format changes is very common, not for this one LFS part. It happens anywhere. Brands are always informed only at a particular point of time. They will never be well-informed in advance, but that's how retail works. But on the PO part, definitely, we should have been informed that this was coming, but we weren't. Luckily, we were able to solve those things post-December 15th, and as of now, things are running smoothly. And we are trying to work with the LFS partner to ensure that such operational issues don't happen in the future. On the volatility part, Sameer, see, I think, look, there are two things, right? Where can we have volatility in LFS? One, A, if there is a fall in secondary sales because of footfalls, or B, we have not replenished the stock properly. I think the volatility in Q3, what we have seen was a point that we were not able to get the purchase order, and we were not able to replenish. I think the volatility depends on which aspect, whether it is secondary related or whether it is primary related. So this quarter, we have seen that it was more around the perspective of that we were not able to dispatch. That's why we saw a fall in revenue in LFS. In previous quarters, there were some quarters where the secondary sales itself were low, and we could only replenish based on what is sold. So I think that was a very different reason altogether. This issue, what has happened in Q3, is more of a very direct operational issue rather than, I would say, a consumer sentiment or market issue. Got it. But the previous quarters were more reflective of the consumer demand. Yeah. Yeah. That's why I'm saying it's not an absolute surface comparison, but yeah, I mean, at the outset, it looks okay. LFS has regrown. I think the underlying reasons in what was maybe in the early quarters and what is today are different. Fair point. Fair point. Second question, again, it's a follow-up on an earlier participant's question. So brand relevance and strength. Now, it's been 11 quarters of flattish same-store sales, and you're confident that this brand strength is still very, very relevant and strong. And you alluded to the brand market share is intact at 8%. So the last three years, then only two of these things can happen. One is that people have stopped buying branded bottomwear, or they are basically shifting to unorganized. Is there a third thing that I'm missing? See, I'll tell you from a brand relevance perspective, Sameer, see, we are very closely in touch with the consumers who are walking into Go Colors and buying, right? So we are very clear whether we are meeting the needs of the consumer who's buying. The consumer who's coming in is definitely buying, and we are very, very relevant. Yes, in the last few years, when the overall footfalls have been low, our new customer acquisitions have been slightly on the lower side. But the actual quantum of new customer acquisitions has increased, but because the base has increased, the percentage has fallen slightly. So what we are also trying to do as an audience is to push up how we can push newer customers, newer audience acquisition, especially the younger age group. That is what we are focusing on. Got it. Wish you all the best for the future. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Participants, you are requested to restrict your question to two per participant. The next question is from the line of Akhil Parekh from B&K Securities. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thanks for the opportunity. And again, my questions are around the competition and the gross margin part. Gautam, there was an interesting comment made by one of the largest consumer PE friends yesterday on television that there's a silent shift happening in the consumer categories from organized listed traditional players to, say, understated, agile, smaller players, basically. And this is happening even in the apparel category, where he cited an example of a few unlisted players like Snitch, Souled Store, Bombay Shirt Company, Rare Rabbit. These four brands combined have added INR 2,000 crore of revenue last year, basically, while some of the listed players are still struggling. So my first question is, how are we measuring this shift, basically? Because I think there's something missing, right? Because as other participants have also highlighted, last 11, 12 quarters, SSG has been muted. So there's definitely some sales happening, but that has been taken away by some of these unlisted players. That is my first question. Second, a corollary to it, whether high gross margin is an issue for us, basically. Being a listed player, gross margins are very much visible and public domain and have been an inclining trend for the last five years now. And we are seeing a similar trend happening in other listed apparel retailers who have very high gross margins, basically, and they are kind of struggling with their sales growth. So yeah, those are the two questions from my side. See, I think you're definitely right. I mean, see, if you compare pre-COVID and post-COVID, right, the number of brands in the retail industry, whether unlisted, whether listed, whether digital, whether offline, has significantly increased. Right now, and I'm speaking this from a generic perspective. I'm not talking about bottom wear, women's wear, men's wear. There is a lot more supply of different brands across different categories of apparel, and the number of players today are far higher than what it was pre-COVID. So that definitely makes an impact on its individual categories. As far as gross margin is concerned, see, we are in a high gross margin category because of the kind of category we are in. We are in a very full-price sales category. So because we are able to achieve and keep that 95% of the sales ratio going, that is a very clear indicator in our gross margins. So the gross margins what we are having is a very clear indication of full-price sales ratio and lesser of discounting. Now, the question is whether we should reduce the selling price and push for volume. Even if we had to reduce the selling price, how much would we reduce? If we would have reduced probably by INR 100 or INR 200, that does not really change the customer's decision to buy that product. But then you'll end up taking a gross margin hit. So from a product pricing perspective, like I also mentioned to Resha, we are keeping the price of the product very sharply priced. It reflects in high gross margins because of lower, I would say, negligible discounting. Okay. But there's no way to kind of do the pilot project where we can kind of cut pricing around certain products and see if that increases the footfall. Because as I said, there is a similar problem with one of the other listed player in apparel segment. See, from a price reduction perspective, I'm very clear here. Look, we don't have to really rework on our pricing. Our pricing is very sharp. Maybe in a few products, maybe we are overpriced by INR 100 or INR 200. Maybe those are exceptions. Largely, I would say more than 90% of our products are very, very sharply priced. I don't really think that we need to take a price cut to boost volumes. I don't think that is required. Sure. That's all from my side. Best luck for coming quarters. Thank you so much. Thank you, Akhil. Thank you so much. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Balaji Vaidyanath from NAFA Asset Managers Private Limited. Please go ahead. Good evening. You mentioned that it's a little difficult to guide on store openings, which is fine, but I'm still unable to figure out why I'm unable to guide on store closures in the sense that if there are stores which are double-digit SSSG for, say, a couple of quarters or three quarters, aren't they a no-brainer call to shut them down? And if so, how many such stores are there which are on the double-digit SSSG category? Yeah. So yeah, see, I think I don't know. We are happy to guide. We are just celebrating the data. And the minute the data is ready on the smaller stores or maybe negative stores, we will definitely pass on the data to everyone. It is not that we don't want to disclose the data. We are just celebrating the data and seeing different cuts of it. And we are also seeing what is the least period of it before we take a call. So once we have full clarity on that data, we will definitely communicate it. Secondly, on the gross margin side, with the mix towards the value-added compared to the traditional. So of course, given the previous caller's question as well, we have seen the best of gross margins, right? So we can't expect any expansion or anything of that sort from here on. Yeah. No, see, I think looking at the EBITDA, see, currently at the company here, between around 62%-64% gross margin, we are delivering right now. See, from a gross margin delivery perspective, we are very happy. And I don't see any expansion there, right? What will really create an uptick in the EBITDA margins is that our sales improve, our SSGs improve, and our operating cost as a percentage of revenue falls. So I think that is where the work has to be done. From a GM perspective, we are very happy with what kind of gross margins we are currently delivering. Okay. And in terms of your CapEx per store on the incremental, the large-format stores, I mean, suppose if you are present in a very nice area where you already have a couple of, say, small-format stores, which for some reason, or for negative SSG, you decide to close that. So to find an equivalent, a larger store in a similar area, wouldn't that be a challenge in the sense that the rent per square feet, etc., would be slightly higher than the smaller-format store? Is that a right understanding? No. And see, in such locations, right, for us, rent-to-revenue ratio is what we look at rather than rent per sq ft. So even if we are taking a slightly larger store, we make a projected revenue for that particular and see what will be our delivered EBITDA on a steady-state basis. So it will not be relocating a store from a smaller store to a mid-sized store will not really result in the drop in EBITDA margins. So that we are very careful. That's one thing which I also explained earlier in the call that 600, 700 sq ft store, if I'm opening, from a unit economics, it will not really change much from a smaller-store perspective. Are we changing anything on the agreement side in terms of the lock-in period, etc., compared to what it was earlier? No, no. Our agreements are very standardized. We do the lease from anywhere from 9 years to 12 years. And our lock-in periods are very standardized what the industry follows. So I think those are going to be very similar to what we used to do earlier. Thank you so much. Wish you all the best. Thank you. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, due to time constraint, that was the last question. No, no, madam. If there are more questions, please proceed. From my side, it's not a problem. If there are more questions, happy to answer. Okay. Please, you can let the call continue if there are more questions. No problem. Okay. Okay. So the next question is from the line of Manjeet Buaria from Solidarity Investment Managers. Please go ahead. Hi. Thank you for taking my questions. First, I wanted to understand from the online channel perspective, is that product structurally not suited for the channel from a unit economics perspective? And is that why it's been such a small share over the years? Well, I think we have checked that. See, I think our category is a very offline category. Because of the colors, the touch and feel, the fitting, I think women in general prefer and try the product out in a physical store. I remember even during the first wave or second wave of COVID, when our offline stores were shut but our e-commerce up, it's not that we saw a sudden boost in our e-commerce sales. In fact, when the stores started again post the lockdown, we saw a sudden shift in, and surge in the store sales as well. So why I'm giving you such an old example is because we've seen this product category is a very touch-and-feel category. And what we've also seen, right, I mean, and I'll be honest with you, we did this customer feedback where we asked the consumer, "Why are you not shopping at a Go Colors?" So that few customers said, "Your store is very close by. It's faster for the consumer to go to the store, try it, rather than wait for the online order to get delivered." So sometimes what happens is when you have a very large network of stores, the consumer can very easily say, "Look, hey, I'll go to the store nearby and get it. It's much faster than me ordering it online. Okay. Got it. My second question is, as the mix has shifted from about, let's say, 60% on Churidar leggings about five years back to a much lower level now, I would presume the fashion element of our portfolio has gone up, right? And typically, when I think about it, a higher fashion element brings more supplies and complexity and a higher risk of dead stock in the apparel retail business. So am I thinking of it in the right direction, or am I missing something over there? No, no. Your question is very, very valid. Yes, when you move from churidar to leggings to other value-added bottomwear products, it will not be as core as leggings and churidars. What you're saying is right. Having said that, even then, the product, the category is still largely core. It is not as fast as fast fashion where every season you are procuring, and then you might end up with dead inventory. If a leggings churidar stayed in season for three years, four years, maybe other value-added products will be for more than a year and closer to two years. So I think the time period of its relevance reduces, but it's not fast fashion. It's not as risky as fashion where you can end up with unsold inventory. That's not really the case. But yes, your question is right. The relevance, the fashion portion slightly increases when we are talking about non-leggings and churidars, for sure. That goes without saying. Okay. My last question was on the inventory risk. We have seen over the years, and I think I've read your comments on it over the last few years since we are listed. But I see some apparel brands who can work with a significantly lower inventory day number, right? So what is different in our category? Because that's one thing which sort of keeps our return on capital quite suppressed overall despite having reasonably good margins, right? Even in the best of the dealership, that was only 20%. So that's where the question is. Yeah. Yeah. I think, look, we studied our sourcing model and our product portfolio. We feel on a steady-state basis, 85-90 days of inventory is what is up from a product perspective. Because we have so many sizes, size, and colors, it will be very difficult to operate below 85 or 90 days. Yes, there is room of efficiency. We will keep improving, but that is that number. So currently, we are at about 114 days. And the reasons why inventory has slightly gone up is because of muted sales. Your inventory days have increased because of muted sales, which I think in the coming quarters, it will stabilize. See, we've been very sharp with inventory. So this is a very temporary increase in the inventory days what we are seeing in this quarter. It will stabilize in the coming quarters to come. From an efficiency perspective, I think we can bring it down to about 85-90 days, which we have done it in the past. I think we'll be able to bring it down to that level. Now, whether going below 85-90 days for our kind of category and our kind of SKUs is a little tough to go below 85 days. Got it. Lastly, related to working capital, is there any leverage here on payable days, or is that we get a better pricing, and that's where the payable days stay in the longer run? Yeah, we get a better pricing. That's why we keep our payable days low. That reflects in the gross margin. Okay. Thank you for taking my questions. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, as there are no further questions, I would now like to hand the conference over to the management for the closing remarks. I'd like to thank everyone for being part of the call. We hope that we've answered all your questions. If you need more information or any other questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Deven Dhruva from SGA, our investor relations advisors. Thank you so much. On behalf of Go Fashion (India) Limited, that concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines.