Shareholders, over rolling five-year periods through dividends and buybacks. In line with this framework, the board has approved a buyback of INR 49.3 crore at INR 425 per share, funded from internal accruals. Today, I am joined by our CFO, Mr. Sandeep Daga. But before I hand over the call to him for the financial results, I will quickly walk you through some of the operational highlights for Q2 and H1 FY 2027. We spoke about how the India business is a stable platform and how two growth engines, which is the tech business and the international business, are helping us activate both growth and margin creation. We introduced this over the last few quarters. We started disclosing some of these numbers very specifically since the last quarter. Continuing on that trend today, most of the presentation that we have uploaded tries to present our business along the three dimensions, which is our India TPA and platform and health benefit administrator, and the international business. The consolidated income grew 13.8% in H1 to INR 492 crore. Our EBITDA grew 19% to INR 97.2 crore. Our reported PAT had a 60% growth and went up to INR 49.2 crore. Our EBITDA margin for H1 is 20.3%, and the reported PAT margin has reached back to the double digits at 10% with a 289 basis point year-on-year growth. All three dimensions of our business, the India TPA, and if you noted in the presentation, this is where we run it in India. The platform and HBA, the payers and the customers run it on their own, but on our technology platform. The international business, again, we run it, but worldwide. Along the three dimensions today, the India TPA clocked INR 437.5 crore of revenues in H1, 11.9% year-on-year growth, and contributed about 91.5% of revenues in H1. The premiums that we managed as a TPA were about INR 15,104 crore, with an 18.8% growth year-on-year. Our platform and HBA business clocked INR 19.8 crore in revenues, with a growth of nearly 70% year-on-year, and contributed over 4.2% of the consolidated revenues. Give us a moment. We are experiencing some technical issues. Excuse me, sir. Sir, do you want me to connect you back? No, we are good. Sorry about the issues today. On the platform model, we have managed premiums worth about INR 9,648 crores, which is a growth of 44.8% year-on-year. Lastly, on the international side, we clocked a revenue of INR 20.7 crores, a modest 1.1% year-on-year growth. But with all of the initiatives that we put in place, and where the membership is already added and the revenues is catching up to it is already a 4.3% of our revenues. To give you a sense of the size, beyond the premiums, we actually processed claims from 141 countries across 21,000 providers just within this half year. Collectively, the consolidated operating revenue is INR 478 crores in H1, with a growth of 13%. If you combine the premiums that we had access to, both between the TPA market and the HBA market, and the platform and the HBA market, nearly a third of India's health insurance premiums today are being served by the platform. On the margin front, we have continued to improve our margins as Paramount integration has reached an end. All of the group customers have been fully migrated to the Medi Assist platform, and all of the claims are running on our MAtrix platform today. The Q2 FY 2027 clocked a 20.4% consolidated EBITDA margin. If you went back to Q1 FY 2026, that was just before the Paramount acquisition, we were INR 190 crores revenue per quarter business. Today, we are at INR 241.5 crores of revenue and got back to our 20.4% EBITDA margin. With this, we conclude that the Paramount acquisition integration is fully complete. We continue to generate robust cash flows that we are deploying back in growing our growth businesses. In the interest of time, I am not going to go into each of the business segments, and we can answer that in the Q&A section. But I would like to take a couple of minutes to talk about three key things. One is our group business. The group business revenues were in H1 worth INR 334.7 crores, which is a 13.7% growth year-on-year. The premiums that we managed for the industry grew by 21.8% year-on-year, marginal increase in the lives from 4.54 crores to 4.75 crores. We continue to deliver outcomes to insurer partners and corporates through our fraud savings, which again moved up by almost 53%. Group is still our mainstay at about 70% revenue share, and our market share continued to improve to 34.1%. And of course one other question that we answered last time and we continue to look at is our retention rates in group. And we have seen strong growth and organic growth in the group business. Our retention held strong in H1, about 90.5%, marginally improving quarter-on-quarter. As discussed in the previous quarter's earnings call, the retention drop-down was partly due to the churn in the portfolio that we have integrated from Paramount. The same store growth, which used to be about 8% or 9% earlier, we are still seeing about a 7%, 8% same store growth on the retail business. Given the way we account for premiums, especially the installment premiums across multiple quarters, the depressed retention rate is likely to show up in the numbers for the next two to three quarters. In three to four quarters from now, we expect our retention rates to go back to what they were historically, to 93%- 94%. Today, we serve about 11,000 + corporates and across 25 + sectors, and fairly secure presence across multiple sectors today. Also allowing us to capture India's growth in sectors where the headcounts are improving. In retail, we continue to see the shift to a hybrid model where part of the work is done in the TPA model and part of the work is done in the platform model. The premiums managed through the TPA model were about INR 1,164 crores, while the platform premiums were almost INR 9,648 crores. We also have contracted, from an H1 basis of the insurers that we contracted, about INR 758 crores of incremental premiums, with four of those insurers going live in this quarter. Today, if you looked at both the TPA and the platform models, our retail market share is about 34.1% from a premium access perspective. Of course, the fundamental difference here is that in a TPA model, the fee is already fixed at a certain percentage, whereas in the platform model, it is about deploying more and more services and delivering more and more value to the insurers and continuously improving our revenue outcomes within the premiums that we serve. On the whole, that leads us to the technology business. The tech business revenue share has substantially improved. As a platform, we today process over 7 million claims in the first half of this year. For those of you who are keen on understanding what kind of issues insurers today are looking at us to solve and how we are solving them at scale, the page number 15 on the investor presentation talks about some of the core issues that the industry has today and how our AI-powered platforms today are managing or helping insurers address some of these issues at scale. This is no longer a platform that is in a pilot phase or an experimental phase. It is a platform that is touching over a million claims a month and delivering outcomes with a fairly fair sense of explainability, supervision, and grounded and fair and auditable AI outcomes. Lastly, this brings us to the international business. We have been adding more books, we have been adding more membership, we have grown our group membership, we have added more travel premiums in India. The Indian insurer contribution in international business is substantially high, with more and more of the insurers working with us, both on the IPMI products, the group business outside India, and also retail, especially around the travel business outside India. We have tried to give you a sense of the kind of opportunities that are emerging in the international business. While group and marine were the largest contributors, you can now see that the retail and travel are taking a substantial portion, and the technology business outside India beginning to show up in the revenue numbers today. The platform is today live in Southeast Asia. Lastly, before I hand over the call to Sandeep for a quick review of the financials, we have a capital allocation policy in place. Starting the current financial year, Medi Assist plans to return about 50% of its cumulative adjusted free cash flows to shareholders over rolling five-year periods using dividends, could be ordinary or special, and share buybacks. The 50% ensures, and the way we look at the adjusted cash flows ensures, that we first invest in where we need to invest, we grow where we can compound the platform, and ensure that our balance sheet remains strong, and then return the surplus cash. The first step today, we have announced a share buyback of up to INR 49.3 crore at INR 425 per share. With that, I will hand over the call to Sandeep for a quick review of the financials. Thank you, Satish. Good morning and a warm welcome to all the participants. I am pleased to take you through the financial highlights for quarter two and H1 FY 2027. Starting with the revenue profile, the total income for Q2 was INR 245.4 crore, with a YoY growth of 4.5%. The total income for H1 was INR 492.4 crore, a growth of 13.8%. The operating revenue, which we call it as revenue from contracts with customers and excluding other income, was INR 241.5 crore during Q2, which was higher by 3.9% year-on-year, and INR 478 crore in H1, higher by 13.0% year-on-year. Dealing with the split of line of business for the operating revenue, starting with the Indian TPA business, the revenue for this cohort was INR 219.6 crore in quarter two, a growth of 1.2% year-on-year, and INR 437 crore in H1, a growth of 11.9%. This contributed to 91% of our consolidated quarter two operating revenue and 91.5% for H1 operating revenue. Within the TPA revenue, the government business, the H1 revenue was INR 57.3 crore, which was up 14% year-on-year. As Satish mentioned, the group business generated H1 revenue of INR 334.7 crore, which was up 13.7%, while retail revenue was INR 45.5 crore, down 1.8% from previous year corresponding period. Coming to Platform & HBA revenue was INR 11.2 crore during Q2, up 94.8% year-on-year, and INR 19.8 crore in H1, up 69.8% year-on-year. This cohort contributed roughly around 4.6% of the revenue during Q2 and 4.2% of the H1 operating revenue. The international revenue was INR 10.7 crore during Q2, up 7.7% year-on-year, and INR 20.7 crore in H1, up 1.1%. This contributed to 4.4% of the quarter two operating revenue and 4.3% of H1 operating revenue. Moving on to the margin profile. EBITDA for quarter two was INR 49.2 crore. In absolute value, it was a growth of 23.9% year-on-year. For H1, the corresponding number for EBITDA was INR 97.2 crore, which was up 19% year-on-year. The margin percentage during Q2 was 24.4%, which expanded by 331 basis points year-on-year. Whereas the H1 EBITDA profile, margin profile was 20.3%, an improvement of 103 basis points year-on-year. The improvement reflects the completion of the Paramount integration, lower people cost and the rationalization, and the deployment of the AI tools for the Paramount plan. With the completion of the three aspects, we recovered almost 330 basis points of the margin during the last four quarters. For context, EBITDA margin moved from 22.1% in quarter one last year before acquisition of the Paramount. It moved to 17.1% in quarter two, immediately after the acquisition, and since then recovered to 20.4% in quarter two this year on a much larger revenue base. Reported PAT for quarter two was INR 21.6 crore, a growth of 167% year-on-year. Reported PAT for H1 this year was INR 49.2 crore, which was up 60.2%. The underlying PAT for H1 FY 2027, excluding the one-time derivative gain on the call put options, which was classified as exceptional last quarter, was INR 46.1 crore. This compared to INR 30.7 crore during H1 of last year. Moving on to the key balance sheet and the operating metrics as at end of H1. The cash and the cash equivalent as on September 26th was INR 268.3 crore compared with INR 260.5 crore at the end of FY 2026. Net worth was INR 886.8 crore compared with INR 852.4 crore at the end of FY 2026. The contract liability was INR 321.7 crore versus INR 280.2 crore at the end of FY 2026. The company continues to have a strong and a zero-debt balance sheet. The revenue per average headcount, excluding government business headcount, was INR 13.7 lakhs on an annualized basis compared to 3.1% in FY 2026, up 4.5%. With this, I hand over the call back to Satish. Thank you. Thank you, Sandeep. Moderator, we can open up for questions now. Thank you very much, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin with the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask questions may please press star and one on the touchtone phone. If you wish to withdraw yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to use only handsets while asking a question. We will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. You may please press star and one to ask questions on your touchtone phone. The first question is from the line of Navid Virani from Bastion Research. Please go ahead. Hello, am I audible? Yes, Navid, you are. Yeah. Hi, team. Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity. My first question is regarding the organic growth or the like-to-like growth. I think since the last few quarters, we are seeing that this is something which has not been up to the mark or in line with our expectations. What I want to understand is, can you give us a sense of how, in this particular period, the industry has performed in terms of the premium growth and how we as Medi Assist have performed like-to-like? That is one. An attached question to that is, now given this particular scenario right now, how are we positioning ourselves to grow at rates which are at least in the low double digits, as far as the organic growth is concerned? These are my two questions. Thank you. Thank you, Navid. Just as a refresher, just to get some of the terminologies aligned, our growth typically comes from, one is the minus the churn on what is retained, there is a same store growth, and I am assuming that is what you are referring to. Historically, we were a 93%-94% retention business, and for reasons that I explained in the previous quarter and now, there has been a marginal drop in the retention percentage, which we expect to get back in the next three to four quarters as the Paramount integration is complete. There is no standalone Paramount account that is left. All groups are now migrated to Medi Assist, so that is the new base on which we are operating. The second is, for the retained accounts, typically because these are annual renewals, there is an inflation in premium. We have seen over the last three years from a steady state, same store growth of about 13%, 14%. We are currently running close to, say, 8%- 9% as an industry as well, on the employer-employee segment. When the industry reports group business, the group includes employer-employee, Bancassurance, and multiple other product lines. We are at this point very fairly heavily predicated on the employer and employee segment when we report our TPA business. The split is not available at the industry level. If you look at the overall GI Council numbers for H1, the group premiums in the industry grew at about 15.8%, and we grew over 21%, between the acquisitions and our own growth. We continue to grow ahead of the industry premium growth rates in the group business. Now, coming back to same store growth, historically, about half of the same store growth came from lives expansion, which is the underlying employee and the dependent headcount moving up, and the other half was sort of equally split between the inflation adjustment for medical inflation and some kind of benefits expansion. Right now, we see a substantial amount of growth coming from benefit expansion and the inflation adjustments. Clearly, the IT/ITeS industry is not a net contributor to employee headcount growth in the country today. Having said that, in the last two years, we have substantially expanded our presence into multiple other sectors. We today serve over 11,000 corporates across 25 sectors. We continue to see addition of employees in manufacturing. We continue to see addition of employees in consumer goods. We continue to see in, say, oil and gas and some of the other sectors. However, the IT/ITeS is a very large contributor to employee headcount in the country today. There is going to be a timing lag for the other industries to catch up in terms of the contribution from a headcount perspective. We expect that same store growth will probably continue in the 8%- 9% range, with our retention rates going back to 93%, 94% in the next three to four quarters. The last piece in the group business is where we do not currently do much, which is typically the product platforms like Bancassurance or any other products that are historically being done in an in-house template. With our tech platform deployments, like we spoke about the hybrid as a model in retail, we expect to be able to capture that part of the group market through our platform and the hybrid approach. These are early days, but this should sort of summarize where we are on the group business. At the same time, we are also growing other lines of business at a fairly rapid pace, both between the technology business and the international business, so that the overall growth rates continue to be healthy. Thank you. Thank you for that detail. Sorry, please go on. No, I think that was it, Navid. Okay. Sir, thank you for that detailed clarity, because from the outside, it looks like that in the group business, which is the largest part of our business, we have kind of saturated. Retail is something where there is not enough happening, and technology and the international piece, which are sort of growing really fast, are not large enough currently to create an impact. That is the kind of view that we are getting from the outside. Can you help me understand if this view is correct, or is there another way to look at it? No, group obviously is our mainstay. That's what brought us to where we are today. Clearly improving retention, ensuring that we improve our economics, and we don't have control on employment growth in the country. However, what we have control on are the retention and the value add that we are able to deliver, and how we capture the non-employer employee segment within the group business. Because we present our market share as a percentage of the overall group business in the country without excluding areas that we don't operate. As you have noticed, we have always grown faster than the market for many years now in the group business, and we'll continue to take substantial market share in the group business. We also expect that there could be further expansion of benefits in the group business on account of the recent GST-related announcements, where the corporates will get the input tax credit benefit even in the group business. While the GST is not going away, we will be getting ITCs on the GST spends. With substantial amount of increase in benefits, we expect the same store growth to continue to drive the business. Sir, thank you for answering all my questions, and wish you all the best. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from the line of Vikas Sharda from NT Asset Management. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi. Thanks for the opportunity. Satish, could you just talk about the Q2 revenue growth, let's say, for India TPA? Because that looks like to be in low single digits, 2%-3%. So, how does the industry growth and your premium growth translate into revenue growth for this particular quarter? Because Q1, including at the Paramount acquisition benefit, so Q2 like-to-like comparison would be more useful. Thanks, Vikas, for that question. So, you are aware that we book and report on a 1/365 basis. So, all losses in Q1 and then their corresponding, say, installment premiums, their corresponding revenues in the quarter continue to have an impact in the way we report our numbers. But to give you some comfort, we were able to replace about 80% of the retention losses through new business additions, except that we have a timing challenge in the way we recognize our revenues. They will catch up, and hence our guidance on the numbers sort of normalizing over the next three to four quarters, both from a retention perspective and revenue growth perspective. But if you have seen the premium growth, for example, we still continue to grow faster than the market from our premium growth perspective. The accounting revenue translation will typically lag by two to three quarters, and you should see that in the numbers going forward. Okay. Why have the retention rates gone down? Who have you lost the business to? We spoke about this in detail in Q1. The reasons remain the same. One, an extremely large book of corporates from Paramount, and there was a churn in the tail end, not in the core constituency that Medi Assist has always been strong in. The second, the cyber incident in the Paramount systems last year, in December, also had an impact in some of the renewals in January through April in the erstwhile Paramount book. Of course, we're beginning to see the accounts actually come back, and we're fairly confident that in the new base that we are sitting on, we will get back to our retention rates, like I said, in the next three to four quarters. Okay. What would be your growth expectations of revenues, let's say, for the second half and next year, FY 2028? Vikas, we don't provide specific guidance. I think on the TPA business, we've always mentioned that we will grow at par or faster than the market from a premium share perspective. Depending on the timing, it will accrue into revenues, right? If you look at Q1 of last year to Q2 of this year, our monthly revenues have gone up by nearly INR 50 crores from a size perspective. If you look at the contract liability, that I think has gone up, which is the unearned revenue equivalent down to INR 40, INR 50 crores from just like March till September. Those are contracts that are already won that we're servicing, and the revenue is just not in the P&L yet. All right. Thank you. I will come back for any follow-ups. No, thanks, Vikas. Thank you. A reminder to all the participants that you may please press star and one to ask questions. The next question is from the line of Prithvish Uppal from Nuvama. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi, sir. Am I audible? Yes, you are. Okay, great. Just a few questions from my side. First is, on Paramount integration, though you have highlighted some parts on the retention dropping, you said that over next few quarters this will sort of normalize. Just if you can help us understand how that will sort of play through, what are the steps to help the retentions move back to around, say, the 93%-94% odd percent that we were running. That was the first question. The second is just a sort of follow-up on that is around the PSU allocation. Have we lost some share there as well, which would probably have some explanation in terms of the overall retention dropping, or is it just a few sort of clients that have sort of moved out for us? And third would be on the EOM, that IRDAI come out with the consultation paper for insurers. Any early discussions or signs where insurers probably face EOM pressures and any signs in terms of the pricing discussions here? And just lastly, on the Paramount post-integration, the margin is now about 20.4% odd. Any more levers left here, or this should be probably the kind of margin expectation that we should sort of expect going forward from here? These are my questions. All right, Prithvish, I will do my best to answer, but may not be necessarily in the same sequence. I think we spoke about the reasons for retention drops in the previous questions. What are we doing to get it back? It is always a challenge to run two extremely large systems and two extremely large processes in any integration. Like I mentioned, the cyber incident in the Paramount system set us back by another quarter in our integrations. But as of early part of this quarter, 100% of the corporates are served by Medi Assist now, and 100% of the claims are running in MAtrix and our claim system. So the systems, processes, call centers, people, offices, all of them stand fully integrated, and there is just one organization that is delivering in the same model, right? As we acquired some other companies, they have very different operating models, and that was obvious from, say, the first major vendor items, its costs and revenues, which were a lot more people-driven. Today, I think from the numbers that we presented as headcounts from, say, three, just at the time of Paramount acquisition, and Paramount came in as is, to now, we are probably about 800+ people lower in headcount today. Clearly, the whole integration and consolidation and presenting a united front and having a common tech platform, they are in place, and that is what gives us the absolute confidence that we will get back to our retention percentages. Secondly, it is not just about consolidation. It is also about the continuous innovation that we are bringing to group customers. Group is under pressure for various reasons, very complex benefits, extension of benefits, very significant changes in the network pricing, inflation, fraud. We are absolutely improving our right to win in the group business. Clearly, as the leaders in the group market with over 34% of India's group premiums, right? Without even excluding Bancassurance and other products are managed by us today. Clearly, the second part of why we are very gung-ho about the group business is how we are continuously investing and improving our right to win, right? Whether it is letting employees and their dependents walk out of the hospitals even without a bill or giving them absolute financial certainty before they walk in. We are doing a whole lot of things just to improve the way the group is actually serviced, right? The group business really is not dependent on any reallocation at an insurer level. Group is largely won based on the end employer having a view on whether our service levels are okay or not okay. There is a substantial amount of group, the employer's influence in the choice of the TPA as per the regulation. They have a right to do so, and they actually exercise that right exceptionally well. Which leads us to, say, the margin question. Today, I know we are at about 20.4% at a quarterly level. As mentioned, we are also growing two lines of business. We are growing the tech business, we are growing the international business. There are overlapping costs as we have moved our international business leadership and the operating structure, and we are onboarding customers. We have onboarded new corporates and, sorry, new insurers onto our platform business. Revenues are yet to kick in, but the implementations are in progress. We have not presented any of those adjustments today. Today, what you are seeing as the margin for Q2 absorbs all of these initiatives and all of the investments, and then that is where we are at. But we still sort of stand by that our steady state margins are 22%-23% in the core business, and that continues to be a focus area to get back there at the earliest. Lastly, on the EOM paper, I think in some ways, the TPA industry has already gone through changes like this over the years. You have seen our yields decline. You have seen insurers and the regulator, especially through the previous master circular, hold us accountable for service delivery, outcomes, and reducing customer grievances. I think we are in a good place from a service perspective. Our view is that irrespective of how the rationalization happens and eventually the final results come out, the core issues that the insurers need to solve are going to remain the same. They will need better quality claims, they need better claims control, they need better customer experience. There is hope, possibly there is some inefficiency in their existing cost structures that are related to the servicing side of claims, which we strongly believe we are in a better place to support insurers and probably take on more of the work than we currently do. While the numbers are not in the public domain, we are fairly confident that at our blended 2.7% TPA fee on group and retail is an exceptional value for money from an insurer perspective. We intend to be able to engage with each of the insurers, understand how we can help better in their journey to drop the expenses management issues. Also, Satish. Then more of the same questions, so essentially can take. Prithvish, go ahead. Yeah. So, sir, as I understand, you see that the EOM can also be an opportunity from, let's say, outsourcing from in-house for at least on the retail side. The cost benefit that probably you offer at about 2.7% is better than what insurers are sort of doing in terms of the entire claim processing function in-house. So that can be an opportunity for you or as another sort of way to look at the EOM. No, I think there are two parts to it, right? Unlike the other costs. So today, the policyholder knows the TPA fee. The TPA fee is transparent with the policyholder. In fact, the premiums are grossed up to collect the TPA fees today. So we are sort of, very loosely, we are part of premiums and not expenses, right? Because the policyholder is actually grossing up the premiums and then paying us the TPA fee, right? So it's disclosed, it's transparent, there's a choice, and there are expectations in SLAs, right? So, from that perspective, I'm not specifically concerned about what changes happen. All I'm stating is that there are two levers that the insurers have. One is the operating cost, which potentially may or may not be as efficient in certain areas, especially just in the pure operations side, where we can step in either through our platform model or through the TPA model, and hopefully, we can deliver more value to our insurer partners in certain areas where we have not been working with them, right? Second, I think the bigger challenge for insurers is, what do you do with the claims control and while balancing the customer experience, right? I think that's where a lot of work we've done in the last four to six quarters in building our AI to solve for the right things from a claims control perspective while improving customer satisfaction. We believe, I think these are the two levers that we've built that potentially of interest to insurers in the new regime. Okay. Understood. And, sir, you had mentioned on the international side, a large part of- Sorry, Prithvish, would it be okay if we took questions from the others and come back to you, please? Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. We will take the next question from the line of Dhiraj Kaswan from InCred. Please go ahead. Hello? Am I audible? Yes. Hello, sir. Congratulations on the Q2 results. Can you start with the technology segment that we are giving more and more information every quarter about it, and as a retail TPA business is now, we are losing share that our main focus is just increasing our technology revenue and gaining share with the retail segment there. We are increasing our revenues every quarter there, and we have onboarded three clients already, and four are going to be onboarded in H2. Can you give the scope, how many claims do these seven insurers control, administer every year, among the entire industry? Are the volumes going to be almost like 30%, 40%, or any kind of thing like that? Dhiraj, without going into specific guidance, I will take a step back and see where is this whole hybrid approach working for us, right? One, of course, up to, let us say, less than two years ago, the only model that we could offer to our insurer partners was, you hand over the customer to us, and we manage everything end-to-end. That was the TPA model, right? I think from there, today, where we are, and for various reasons, right or wrong, is debatable, but there are portfolios, there are cohorts where insurers said, "No, we want to be the customer-facing entity. We want to own the customer. We want to own the customer experience," right? I think we did not have an answer on how to make that happen. Today, I think we have enough solutions that are available where the insurer can continue to front-end and differentiate from a customer experience perspective, and while not having to do everything on their own. I think that is a solution we have been able to create. These typically are those four, five segments that we actually detailed out on what are the areas that the insurers, what are the typical challenges that exist in the health insurance business, and how we are helping solve some of those issues today, right? It was on page number 15, whether it is intelligently adjudicating claims, understanding OCR, understanding context, or handling the complexity of policy terms and benefits, and maintaining a system of records and audit trail in a manner that it is explainable to the member, and it meets all of the regulatory bars that exist today on how claims are adjudicated, or fighting fraud, waste, and abuse, or simply just delivering far superior experience to members, especially at admissions and discharges. We today have solutions that work independent of our TPA offering, right? I think that was the step one. Most of the revenues we are currently reporting are pure platform SaaS revenues, which is just a claim passing through the platform, which is just enforcing policies and tariffs. Much of the revenues related to our other value-adding bundles, whether it is intelligent claims adjudication or network as a service, or fraud, waste, and abuse, are still not in the revenue numbers right now. While there are contracts that are kicking in and slowly sort of inching up, these contracts potentially from a per-claim revenue perspective could be anywhere from, say, five to 10 times the current revenue per claim construct, which is the pure SaaS platform. That is the opportunity we see. Of course, we focused on retail first, and like I mentioned, even within the group business, we see an opportunity to work on the hybrid model for the non-employer and employee models. As we, I think, deliver value to more and more of these cohorts, hopefully that will translate directly into our revenues and growth in the technology business. Okay. Just a quick follow-up on that. In a technology segment, is the 100% of the revenue from our claims, like from the MAtrix software only, or are there other revenues included too? Other revenues are contracted, Dhiraj, but bulk of the revenues that we are reporting today are only from the pure SaaS platform. The other revenues are add-ons on top of it, and hopefully in the coming quarters, you will see them accruing. Okay, sure. My second question would be regarding the group segment. Q1, we reported a very high market share, almost 37% of the group segment. But Q2, we saw that there was Q2 is, of course, the weakest quarter when it comes to the premiums. But still, we saw kind of a de-growth there, that industry has grown 15%, 17%, and our premiums managed has increased by around 12%. We also noticed revenue has not increased on the same par at 12%. It has just been increased by 4%. Can you give some reason for this? Has there been ticket compression due to the clients that have left from the Paramount book? What is the guidance going forward for the group premium? I think, Dhiraj, I addressed some of these in the previous three questions, but I'll quickly summarize it. We do not obviously provide a revenue guidance at this point in time, but we've always said that we will grow at par or faster than the market. I think from an H1 to H1 perspective, leave the Q2 out because we've got our own seasonality in the business. Second, industry reports, including Bancassurance and other areas, which is not currently a cohort that we process. We are purely employer-employee in our group reporting today, right? Having said that, we've talked about the reasons for the attrition or the losses, the higher churn rates, on migrating some of the talent from Paramount and then the cyber incidents of Paramount, leading to some issues in April renewals. Many of the large corporates, let's say, that have an installment premium, we also recognize that installment in Q2 as a loss in Q2. The revenues, of course, of customers that are lost on 1st of April will continue to be in the reported numbers for the next 365 days because we report our revenues on a one by 365 basis. We've replaced between 75%- 80% of the premiums that were lost in this year through our new corporate additions. Again, it has its own timing of how the revenue accrues over 365 days. Hence, our sort of overall guidance on two things, that we'll get back to our historical retention rates in the next three to four quarters as reported numbers. Okay, just a final quick question. In the past five quarters, our expenses have been kind of at the same place. It has been kind of flat. Going forward, is our current expenses, like the current employees, everything we have, are they going to stay constant at this pace? Of course, other expenses will increase a bit, but other than that, can we manage higher revenues from the same base as more and more, now there's going to be growth for both the group segment and the technology segment? Dhiraj, it is very hard to follow the question. My apologies, but is it okay if you take this offline and just get the other questions? Yeah, yeah, sure, definitely. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thanks. You may please press star and one to ask questions. The next question is from the line of Mihir Shah from Meritus Capital. Please go ahead. Hi, Satish. Am I audible? Yes, Mihir. Thanks for taking my question. One question that I had is, given all of the investments you all are making in technology, cashless, fraud, waste, and abuse, why does that not show up in a group retention rate higher than, say, 93%-94%? That's a great question, Mihir, and I think in an ideal world, it should be 100%. Today, couple of disclaimers. One is we don't do any adjustments in the way we present our retention. For example, there are small companies that just fall away. They don't even exist the second year. Or there are companies that shut down their premiums, or because of wage code, maybe some of the factories have moved more and more people to the ESIC covers and not the premium cover. Or some companies have merged and then become new. Today, we just look at whether there was an entity and a certain gain in the previous reporting period, and then whether that entity is traceable in this period. It's a fairly stringent bar that we set for ourselves on how we report our premiums. That's one of the main reasons why. We could actually go into each account and then potentially just the explanation alone will move up by 100, 200 basis points. That's one part of the retention. Second is, we also have a responsibility towards picking up accretive accounts and accounts that make sense. Some of our churn in April also included a small portion where we could say, "Since this is commercially not viable." Sometimes it is also important to take that stance. Again, we don't split that number, but there is a second big reason is the commercial viability. The third is we are not perfect. There will always be a small percentage of clients where their expectations and our focus may or may not align. Often we can resolve that. That results in higher retention rates. By the way, 93%, 94%, I think is, well, it's relatively low for what we do, but in absolute terms, I think it's fairly high from an industry perspective, because most TPAs that we acquired, the highest was about 82%, 83%. That's, in fact, how we've improved our market share. If you go back to my answer three, four questions ago, we're absolutely focused on improving our right to win and improving the desire for corporates to continue to stay with us from a service perspective. We have a good sense of what we need to focus on from a group business, especially in the way, in the changing job market, changing priorities, changing globalization from a headcount perspective. I think we have a reasonable game plan, Mihir, and hence the confidence in, I think, three to four quarters on such a large and consolidated basis that we will get back to our retention rates, and then we'll aim for something higher. Thanks a lot, Satish. The other question I had was, obviously retail is an under-penetrated opportunity, and depending on how things play out, could be a leg of growth. There, if you look at your share of premium processes, obviously low, but if we include the platform business, your share is quite high, or much higher. How should we think about your journey in the retail business? Do you see it largely as a platform play on the retail side versus, say, the group side? If so, how should we look at the monetization journey on the platform side, whether it is number of products, penetration, ultimately then pricing as a percent of the claims volume that you are processing is how we look at it on the group side, but how should we really look at it on the retail side? No, very fair question, Mihir. Like I said, we didn't have an answer unless somebody hired us as a TPA, so now we have an answer. We've layered the answers in a manner that we understand are the key areas of concern for an insurer, right? Which is just while we underestimate the value of it sometimes, just a system of records, your ability to configure a policy and all of the nuances of the terms and conditions and post-path history adjudication, right? Being able to explain why they did what they did to a customer and to the regulator and all the other stakeholders, it itself is a big challenge, right? That's where our MAtrix platform comes in, which, like I said in the previous conversations, think of it as INR 100, INR 120 bucks a claim, like a base, just for the claim to go through the system of records, right? Bulk of our revenues that we are reporting today point to the platform capabilities alone, right? Now, there are other things that the insurers need, which is the fraud-based interviews or the auto-adjudication or intelligent adjudication, managing cashless and network, managing member experiences. We have those bundles. Different bundles are in different levels of activation and contracting. We expect those, and we do have contracts, right? The contracts will actually cover these bundles. Hopefully, as insurers use more and more of those will be incremental revenues from each of these existing customers who are on the platform. The third thing we did was that we decoupled the bundles from MAtrix. Now we're enabling insurers to use the bundles on their own core systems without having to migrate to MAtrix, right? We have one such sign-up now, where they continue to use their core system, but they're saying, "Okay, I will use your intelligence bundle on top of my core system." Then that sort of becomes one more opportunity. Going back to the EOM questions that came up a few minutes ago, we also think that there'll be a little bit of a rethink from the cost that insurers want to keep or want to optimize or want to change. I think hopefully that will improve our ability to go engage with them deeper and then find better solutions. In summary, Mihir, I think the way to look at it is, within each account, how much more can you do within retail? It is not about just how many more rupees of premiums you can add. Thank you, sir, for answering those questions. Ladies and gentlemen, we will take that as the last question for today. I would now like to have the conference over to the management for closing comments. Thank you, and over to you. With that, we would like to conclude the Q2 earnings call. Thank you to all the participants who joined. You may disconnect your lines. Thank you. Thank you, members of the management. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of Medi Assist Healthcare Services, that concludes this conference. We thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines. Thank you.