Welcome to the Recruit Holdings FY2025 Earnings Call. This call is a simultaneous translation of the original call in Japanese, and translation is provided for the convenience of investors only. I'm Mizuho Shen, Manager of Investor Relations and Public Relations. Earlier at 3:30 P.M., we disclosed the earnings release, earnings summary, and the presentation slides of this results call on our IR page. The video and transcript of this results call and the transcript of follow-up meeting and sell side follow-up meeting with sell side analysts, which will be conducted followed by this results call, will be posted promptly on our IR website after the session. Today's presenters are Hisayuki Idekoba, Representative Director, President and CEO, and Junichi Arai, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Hello, everyone. In the first 25 minutes, Deko and Jun will provide a presentation followed by a Q&A session. Now I'll turn the call over to Deko. I hope you can hear me. Hello, everyone. My name is Idekoba of Recruit Holdings. First of all, I'd like to start with this page regarding revenues and EBITDA+S. I spoke to you around this time last year. I mentioned that we are going to be engaged in various activities utilizing AI. You did not seem convinced yet. I think numbers are very important to validate this point. We have been utilizing AI in various areas. We are now showing results in numbers. For the period that just ended, we have achieved a record high profits for the fiscal year 2026. In terms of revenues as well as profits, we are now poised to further accelerate growth. We are adopting AI across many parts of our businesses. Today I would like to address HR Tech because this is an area we're receiving many questions. I would like to elaborate to you how we are utilizing AI to accelerate revenue growth. Recently, the other day, I recently bought a new tablet. Because I travel a lot for work, I often download movies onto my tablet. That means that plenty of storage will be required. At the same time, screen size is very important. It has to be reasonably large and easy to watch, not too small. I found that there is a big price gap between the expensive models and the cheap ones. It took about one hour, just going through the different offerings, and I found that it's very difficult to select a piece of electronics. Then it occurred to me, what if everything were offered for free? Now, if it were all free, deciding would be incredibly easy. It wouldn't take one hour. Just one click will suffice to find the best choice for oneself. I put this in the context of looking to changing jobs as well. I found that in a way, it's akin to a completely free e-commerce site. There might be various factors taken into consideration, but you can also apply for job that pays two or three times your current salary, or maybe two times or one day a week of working could be your condition. For Japanese people, we are very straightforward. Therefore, if it was conditions like this, there would be many applicants overseas. Please think about this. In the past, in a competitive site, when they started the job search, people said that Indeed and Recruit will be overwhelmed because if you ask AI, they can make recommendations in terms of jobs, and people were concerned about the future of Indeed. How algorithm is developed must be taken into consideration. Whether it is AI or machine learning, there is not much difference. The best job for one person, what is a job that one likes, what is popular, is data that is not so relevant, because web company or the employers might actually want to hire the person, regardless of your intention. HR matching may take significant data from the user side, but that is not significant. It depends on whether the employer will be impressed. It is two sides of matching that is required. Company or the employer side has many solutions as well. There is data showing the tendency of hiring, but appropriate matching cannot be made. This is a very unique modeling matching model that we have between job seeker and employer. Therefore, in the past several years, the employer side AI development has been areas where we have made investment. Of course, on the user side, the preference for jobs is also very important. The employer side to identify the tendency of hiring for certain positions for certain companies is also data that is required in order to have effective matching. That is the reason why we have been making investment on the employer side. This might be difficult to understand, so let me give you an example to illustrate my point. Let's imagine you're running a restaurant with two chefs and 10 servers. You are managers of this restaurant. At that time, if one of your servers quit, of course, there will be a concern on the part of the owner. It isn't as if the restaurant will remain closed for this purpose. There might be some instances where customers have to wait on certain weekdays. What would happen if one chef of the two chefs quits? The situation changes dramatically. In such cases, the owner doesn't care as much about cost. Their priority is to hire someone with solid experience and skills as quickly as possible. Otherwise, the restaurant cannot be operated. A truck company in the U.S. have more trucks than the drivers. Construction workers are hard to find because of construction of many AI centers. Hiring, which is directly related to value increase, is very important. What we are proposing is Sponsored Jobs. If it's keyword, search is very important. A French chef could be the keyword, and the result is where the job is posted. You might understand that the matching may not be impacted, but in fact, with AI, matching can become very effective. Keyword search is made. The result will be subject to jobs. However, the 30%, only 30% are responding to that. If AI sourcing, AI screening is utilized for certain companies, the recommendation will be made. Sending email that a company is looking for a person like you, as a pop-up. This is accounting for 70% recommendation and AI tools. This is reflection of the fact that AI is evolving. Furthermore, from last year, we are promoting the premium product. This is a Sponsored Job, and a better version of the product is offered as premium. Higher quality people can be hired, can apply with the utilization of this product. In the past, the chef might have to be hired expeditiously. Budget can be increased for this purpose. For one position, there could be 200 or 300 or 400 applicants. However, on the part of the restaurant, even if 500 people apply, it would be difficult to make the selection. It would be difficult to increase budget for this purpose. Now, if budget can be earmarked and payment can be made, AI matching can be enabled so that quality, high-quality applicants can be identified. This is how evolution has been made. The hiring period, as a result, has been reduced by 50%. This is becoming more effective with AI matching. Now, what about the job seeker side? What are the issues facing them? They apply to many ads but receive no replies. They have the concern that whether the employers are actually seeking for applicants. In order to resolve this problem, the premium ad, as well as AI matching, can be very effective. The chef could be needed immediately, the relevant person can be matched. That means that for the sponsored job, if utilized, can receive a response, the response will be provided 40% earlier. The motivation of the companies to hire is also very important. Crawling can be utilized from other sites to obtain data. The motivation to hire is very important to be identified. This is important for the user and for the job seekers as well. As a result, the March monthly active users was 18% higher than previous year. This is a record high for us. By utilizing AI, user experience can be enhanced in this way. If there is a intention to hire, then employers will be willing to pay more. Matching is enabled. That means that the RGF, the U.S. for fourth quarter, there has been growth significantly in the United States. Now, in this way, I would say that the 25% increase in price increase could be subject to criticism. We have to look at the content in more detail. We have to look at this market overall, the job market overall, globally. Online advertising as well as the job seeking is very small. It's only several percentage point even though we have 60%-70%. The placement and the recruitment offline matching is more significant in terms of market size. When we ask companies, they tell us that Indeed is a free service is utilized, and if a hiring cannot be made, even though a fee is expensive, the retained search could be utilized by to a placement recruitment agency. With Indeed, low-cost hiring can be enabled. Offline is more expensive, but because they are pressed for the need to hire, they have to resort to placement and recruitment agency. If we are able to provide AI matching in the appropriate way, and if we can provide applicants that companies would want to hire, then we will be able to capture more of this market. Now, when I became CEO, I have been emphasizing the Simplify Hiring. When a button is pushed, the next job should be realized as quickly as possible. This has been enabled by the evolution of technology. This is our mission. Utilizing AI, various manual work can be automated, which is a wonderful opportunity for all of us. This is also shown in the performance as well as the actual numbers. Now, in this way, utilizing AI, significant changes are being made, and it is reflected in our numbers as well. I feel more confident as management as well. I believe that the growth rate can be achieved, which is over 10%. 20%, 10% is conceivable. When the hiring demand recovers, I believe that 20% of revenue growth can also be achieved. We expect to exceed the margins above 50%. Currently, over the global platform, we are seeing 31 hires per minute, meaning that we are helping someone get hired roughly every two seconds. We would like to expand this globally so that we can do more to support people around the world finding their next job. We will continue to make our utmost efforts. Thank you. Good afternoon, I'm Arai. How was Deko's presentation? Since he became CEO, about three pages before, there was a big circle, he's been sharing that with you. He's been promoting Simplify Hiring. I think that the times have caught up with the ideal that Deko has been sharing with you. On Indeed, we have seen accumulation of unique data. We are seeing enrichment of this unique data. With the power of AI, I think, we have taken another step closer to realizing the world that Deko has envisaged. This is an exciting time for us. Since FY 2024, we have been talking about year zero, making preparations during year zero, gaining strength. That's what we've been saying over the past two years. I am very pleased to be able to report significant results, as our efforts have been reflected in the numbers. This makes me very happy as well. As you can see from the table of contents for my presentation, like last year, I will present the executive summary at the very top from here on stage. There will be a meeting with equity research analysts scheduled for later today. In that meeting, I will cover the remaining items in more detail. First, for FY 2025, I will cover the consolidated results, revenue, EBITDA+S, and Basic EPS. Each exceeded the revised guidance announced with our Q3 results in February and reached record highs on a full year basis. For FY 2026, we will see further acceleration of this growth based on the assumption of the exchange rate of JPY 154 per U.S. dollar. Although various changes are happening in the economy, we assume no major changes to take place, and we expect revenue and profit growth across all three segments, particularly driven by progress in business evolution and enhanced efficiency in HR Technology. Our assumption for consolidated revenue is to increase by 9.0% year-over-year to JPY 4.03 trillion. EBITDA+S is expected to increase by 19.5% year-over-year to JPY 949 billion, with margin expanding to 23.5%. Basic EPS is expected to increase by 27.8% year-over-year to JPY 447.0. The number of employees decreased from approximately 50,000 at the end of fiscal year 2024 to approximately 45,000 at the end of FY 2025. We do not currently plan any large-scale hiring in FY 2026, so the number of employees will stay almost flat. Next, I will talk about capital allocation. In FY 2025, we returned a total of JPY 713.1 billion to shareholders. This resulted in a total payout ratio of 143.5%. We have maintained a high payout ratio. Net cash at the end of March 2026 was JPY 765.9 billion. In May 2024, which is two years ago, I said that we would reduce the net cash from JPY 1,135.4 billion at the end of March 2024 to JPY 600 billion over the two-year period ending March 2026. Actually, we had already reached that level in the first half of FY 2025. However, second half results exceeded our assumptions. We ended the year above the JPY 600 billion level. ROE was 22.6% in FY 2024. Last year, it was 31.0%, which is a significant increase. As for our capital allocation policy for the next three fiscal years starting this fiscal year, we are making no changes to the current order of priorities. We intend to maintain year-end gross cash and cash equivalents at around JPY 750 billion. If we execute a strategic acquisition, we intend to fund most of the required amount with debt while taking our credit ratings into account. Based on our policy of stable and continuous dividends, our dividend outlook for this fiscal year is JPY 13 per share in the first half, JPY 13 in the second half, totaling JPY 26 for the full year. Regarding share repurchases, already a share repurchase program for a total of JPY 350 billion has started from April 1st this year. The current plan is to complete this program by the end of November. We will make appropriate decisions and act accordingly while monitoring seciond half cash flow generation, capital market conditions, and our share price level for the second round of share repurchases. Going forward, we believe that growth in net income and continued shareholder returns will of course result in higher ROE than 31%. We believe that such higher levels of ROE will be possible. As you are aware, we operate through three segments. Among them, HR Technology revenue growth, profit growth, and also margin expansion are substantially higher than those of the other segments. In FY 2026, HR Technology revenue is expected to reach a new record high of over $10 billion or JPY 1.5 trillion. This represents about 40% of consolidated revenue. A staffing, which accounts for 45% records approximately JPY 1.8 trillion in accounting revenue. The margin excluding wages paid to temporary staff. The margin substantially for our company is around JPY 300 billion annually. HR Technology accounts for approximately 65% of consolidated gross profit, which we believe better reflects its substantive contribution to consolidated revenue. Profits are even higher. HR Technology EBITDA+S accounts for about 70% of consolidated EBITDA+S, it is expected to continue to grow as the core driver of our earnings and value creation. As was mentioned before, as for staffing, we do not expect significant organic growth in staffing under the current business model. We will continue to focus on efficiency in our operation and strive to generate stable EBITDA+S margins. Marketing Matching Technologies or MMT will continue refining and evolving its business model to further strengthen its competitive advantages and uniqueness in Japan. By increasing revenue and improving operating efficiency, we expect EBITDA+S margin of 30% this fiscal year and aim to increase this to 35% by FY 2028. I will discuss each segment in more detail. First, HR Technology. Q4 results substantially exceeded the outlook disclosed in February in all regions, including the U.S., Europe, and others, which covers Canada and Japan. As a result, full year revenue in FY 2025 increased by 7.6% year-over-year to $9.67 billion. EBITDA+S margin reflects a progress in efficiency improvements, including lower personnel expenses and significantly exceeding the FY 2024 pro forma margin of 33%. The margin recorded was 37.7% despite FY 2025 being the first year of integration of HR Solutions of Matching & Solutions. For FY 2026, while U.S. revenue showed a strong year-over-year growth of 26% in March and 27% in April, our full year outlook, however, reflects the potential risk from the uncertain economic environment, including geopolitical tensions and commodity price volatility. In the U.S. and in Europe, Canada and other markets, we anticipate continued monetization development, including further growth of Premium Sponsored Jobs. In Japan, we expect steady performance of Indeed PLUS and the recovery of the placement business to FY 2024 levels. As a result, we expect revenue to increase by 11% year-over-year on a dollar basis to more than $10 billion, while EBITDA+S margin is expected to increase to 41%. As Deko mentioned earlier, over the medium- term, it is well within our reach to not only maintain double-digit annual revenue growth, but to achieve 20% or greater when hiring demand recovers. I also believe it is well within our reach, and at that time, we expect our EBITDA+S margin to exceed 50%. In the U.S. in FY 2025, amid stagnant hiring demand and while the total number of U.S. job postings on Indeed declined by approximately 7% year-over-year, monetization development resulted in revenue of $5.31 billion, an 8.8% year-over-year increase on a dollar basis with a U.S. ARPJ growth rate of 17%. In FY 2026, based on our assumption for the job market, that hiring demand will remain flat after bottoming out in Q4 of FY 2025. Assuming the total number of U.S. job postings on Indeed declined by approximately 4% year-over-year, our outlook is for revenue to increase by 13.6% year-over-year to $6.03 billion or JPY 929.3 billion. For U.S. ARPJ to increase by 18%. We've positioned this fiscal year as a year to steadily lay the groundwork and pave the way for further U.S. revenue growth from FY 2027 onwards. Keeping in mind the Japanese proverb, Haste makes waste, we intend to carefully consider the timing and pricing of new plans and product launches before executing them while maintaining close communication with our business clients. As for staffing, revenue in FY 2025 increased by 2.2% year-over-year to JPY 1,703.4 billion. By region, revenue in Japan was JPY 846.8 billion, and revenue in Europe, U.S., and Australia was JPY 856.5 billion. EBITDA+S margin was 5.9%, maintaining the FY2024 level. In FY 2026, while we do not expect major revenue growth in Japan, our outlook for Europe, U.S., and Australia is for revenue to increase by 5.8% year-over-year in JPY terms, supported by performance bottoming out in key markets and a gradual recovery trend. Our outlook is for EBITDA+S margin of 5.6%, broadly in line with FY 2025, and EBITDA+S of JPY 100.5 billion. Finally, MMT. In FY 2025, Lifestyle led by Beauty drove revenue growth, which increased by 4.7% year-over-year to JPY 564.6 billion, while EBITDA+S margin was 27.4%. In FY 2026, our outlook assumes continued growth in lifestyle, and we expect revenue to increase by 7.1% year-over-year to JPY 605 billion. By smoothing out quarterly seasonality in sales promotion and advertising expenses, our outlook is for EBITDA+S margin of 31% in the first half, 29% in the second half, and 30% for the full year. Recruit Holdings will continue to pursue its growth strategy as a global technology company consistently amid major changes in the business environment, while also working to continue to improve operational efficiency. We respectfully ask for the continued understanding and support of all stakeholders, including shareholders and capital market participants. That concludes my remarks. Now we'd like to proceed to the Q&A session. If you have a question, for one raising of the hand, one question is allowed with one follow-up question. If you have a question, please raise your hand. When you are appointed and microphone is provided, please introduce your company affiliation and the name before your question. Goldman Sachs, my name is Munakata. I thank you very much for this opportunity to ask a question. I would like to ask a question regarding the labor market, the macroeconomic conditions. You said that there is uncertainty, but strong growth is shown in your performance. In terms of labor shortage as well as the disruption caused by AI, what is the outlook of the labor market going forward? This has been a subject to discussion in the equity market. The U.S. labor market outlook is what I'd like to ask Mr. Idekoba. Thank you. Thank you for the outstanding question. It just so happens that today this morning at the Indeed Hiring Lab, the U.S. labor market outlook report is being published up to 2040. I am participating in Davos. I'm participating in meetings in the U.S. I have opportunity to speak at various conferences. Some people say that the AI will cause unemployment to reach 20% or 30% as headlines. It will attract more clicks. This is the stronger views. What I am saying is considered to be position talk and not so interesting. If you look at the actual data, I'd like to emphasize that by each segment with AI changes will be different from segment to segment. For example, restaurant is a good case in point. People working in the restaurant, with the utilization of AI, how is this going to have an impact on the labor as well as the construction, as well electricians? Plumbers. There are different professions that we have to consider, but apart from that, people who are working in the area of IT or working in the financial services, the impact will be different from industry to industry. Currently, how many people are working in this sector? We have such a data. It means that the 20% unemployment, 20% unemployment, we have to look at how it is calculated. There is no validating data. It's just being become the narrative of the AI experts. If you look at the IT industry, AI replacement case is presented in the IT industry. If you look into this area specifically, a 20% job reduction or an unemployment impact of 20% could occur. What is the ratio of people working in the IT industry within the total labor force? Percentage is very small. In the U.S. even, there is aging of the labor force more serious than Japan. Having said that, amongst the developed nations, the U.S. is a young country, relatively seeking. Up until 2030 or 2031, even in the U.S., the labor force is subject to decline. Baby boomers will be retiring at that point in time, and people 65 and above. Labor participation is much low in the U.S. compared to Japan. It's around 18%. In the area of healthcare, as well as attritions, they will be poised to retire. This impact is going to be more significant than the changes brought about by AI. This is proven by data demonstrated in numbers, which is clear to see. For example, I believe there is tailwind. Thank you. I understand I can present a follow-up question. Regarding Simplify Hiring, I would like to ask the following question. To Simplify Hiring means that the AI technological evolution could become more cumbersome. For example, you will be overwhelmed with the applications. From your point of view, what is the progress made in Simplify Hiring? In order to simplify further, what is lacking? What areas can further be improved? Where lies the business opportunity in this regard? Thank you for the outstanding question. For example, in U.S. startups, in many startups, if a payment is made on a monthly basis, AI can make application 1,000 times or 2,000 times on the part of AI instead of that person. It's automatic application that is made available in the United States. Companies do not like this, it's which is easy to understand. From the point of view of the employer side, if applications come in the thousands or 2,000, this will mean incremental cost. Therefore, on the employer side, a reCAPTCHA, I am not a robot, bot measures against AI have increasingly come to the fore. Furthermore, even if you like someone, some candidate, they may not come to the interview. Therefore, automatic application made by AI is not enhancing the efficiency. This is a good case in point. On our part, automatic applications are being tested, but we are conscious about both sides, not just being paying for an increasing number of applications. We have to identify what is good for the employers, what is good for the users, and providing appropriate matching. We are testing this process. If it's just utilizing AI for automation, it will just make the process more cumbersome. Thank you very much. Thank you. We will take the next question. Third row from the front. I am Oum from Nomura Securities. Thank you for picking me. I have two questions. When hiring demand normalizes, you mentioned that top line further accelerates. When will that happen? This year, you're expecting minus 4% in terms of volume. What about next year and the year after that? That's my first question. Thank you. Well, we are looking at various labor data, when it comes to economic data, I think you are the experts. As I said before, supply and demand determines this, basically. As you know, when it comes to hiring demand, it's not as strong. That situation that we are seeing today and perhaps will continue. Looking at the past economic patterns Maybe it's time that demand should start rebounding. More recently, the interesting data that we are looking at is over the past five years or so, we have seen continuous decline in hiring of software engineers. In the U.S., compared to pre-COVID, it has declined to about 50% and many people say AI is taking jobs away from people, but actually it's increasing in the past six months. If you look at the substance of this, AI is actually creating new job titles and new job types that we have not seen before. In that sense, it's not so much AI or the change brought on by AI, but post-COVID. Because of the pandemic, many people were fired, and afterwards, companies started hiring en masse, and now, they've hired too much. That kind of dynamism has somewhat stabilized. Over the next one to two years, I think the situation will further stabilize. In terms of labor situations, that's what we see. As for the economy, I'll leave that up to the experts. Thank you. My second question is regarding U.S. ARPJ increase by 18%, is what you mentioned. Next year and beyond, how sustainable is this? As was mentioned before, hiring directly relates to revenue. If that's the case, that you want to hire as soon as possible, I think this kind of story will be valid for next year and beyond. Given the demographics change and population aging, should we expect the same level of increase with the Premium Sponsored Jobs that has contributed to higher results this year? Thank you for the wonderful question. Personally, that's certainly an area that I would like to specifically address as well. Of course, if possible, we want to aim for 30%- 40%, but at the same time, we don't want to be caught speeding, because this directly drives costs up for our employer hiring clients, particularly if they're already paying so much. If the budget has to increase by 30%, that's something to be considered and be cautious about. As I said before, there are certain costs are being spent elsewhere, and clients are diverting these costs to this, JPY 20 million- JPY 30 million being spent. If this amount is to be increased by 20%, that means JPY 600 million- JPY 700 million increase. I don't think that will be possible as it is. In conversations with our customers today, especially in the U.S., the talent acquisition teams, the teams that have to receive the applications, go through the resumes, and decide who to contact and set up interviews. For example, in countries like India and the Philippines, they are increasingly outsourcing these tasks to these countries, and we are seeing an increase in the number of companies that are doing this, and they are diverting budgets from this task to the new area. Structurally, ultimately, employers are able to hire appropriate candidates, and this is reducing their hiring costs. We will be able to have nice growth. As I said, we are not pursuing or prioritizing our revenue first. We want to make sure that our customers are also being successful. In that sense, the employers that are currently using Premium Sponsored Jobs and their repeat ratio is higher than regular customers by about 20%, and this is an encouraging fact. Because they are paying more, they are getting better results. Of course, we have to look at the overall balance as we go along, but we are seeing good results. Thank you. Next question, please. Nikkei Shimbun, my name is Maruyama. In the United States, AI is become the reason for restructuring and losing jobs. Well, the Indeed U.S., as mentioned, the in-person hiring is high. On the part of Indeed, do you think this is a strength of Indeed that you're not impacted by AI restructuring? Now it's, you have to discern whether it's an impression or is it backed up by data as actual facts. Magnificent Seven is often talked about, and they are said to be involved in AI restructuring. It is in the news, several tens of thousands of people are being laid off. Actually, the number of employees is not really decreasing. What we are often saying is that AI is not a job killer. It is more of a job reorganizer. I'm sure this is also the case in your companies as well. Someone's job to be replaced by AI and this person being laid off is quite rare. This a certain process of a certain person can be automated. I think that is more prevalent, especially for IT companies, inclusive of our company. AI is now a part of a workforce, and in this overall context, job allocation must be revisited. This is what is occurring today. For example, a dashboard to view data for looking at charts as well as weekly revenues. We needed dashboards because it is viewed by people, humans. If it can be done by AI, it is no longer necessary. It doesn't have to be displayed. From the beginning to end, the overall process is where value has to be identified, whether it is contributing to increase in revenues. We shouldn't just focus on one certain area for restructuring purpose. Magnificent Seven, their employees have not decreased in numbers. They are restructuring certain areas, but they are also incorporating additional people, redesigning the whole process overall. I think this is more closer to the truth. I hope I'm making sense. For AI era as such, there will be changes in operation with the current Indeed structure. I believe you have unique strength and what is resilient against AI. Do you think that you want to increase jobs that is resilient to AI? It is not so much for us. Japan is a very good example. There is population decline in Japan, some people say that the hiring companies will not increase. It all depends on supply and demand because we have been able to increase revenues. As I mentioned earlier, for auto mechanics, as an example, they were working combustion engines, so they were working on gasoline-powered cars. If they continue to retire, then there will be no one left to repair the these cars. Supply and demand between the two, there is a mismatch. That is the reason why we are being requested on the part of Indeed. It isn't as if we are focused in terms of marketing specifically to that area. Thank you. Next person, second row from the front. I am Nagao from BofA. Thank you for this opportunity. I have two questions. First, regarding margins, 40%-50% is possible, as you said. What is the source of your confidence? Where is it coming from? Do you think you can further increase unit price, or do you think you can improve retention? Are you able to acquire larger enterprise customers? What is the background? Thank you for a wonderful question. First of all, I've briefly talked about this, the sale of AI tools is something we've started over the past year or so. Not maybe particularly because the AI tools that we've introduced, in case of large companies, the legal departments have to check everything, and through master agreements, everything is determined. In the U.S., this is a common practice, and it does take time. Conversely, as I gave an example earlier in case of restaurants, for instance, a restaurant may employ 10 some people. The accounting person is also doing the hiring, or the manager, the owner is doing the hiring, in many cases. For those people, if the price is increased by JPY 20,000- JPY 30,000, if they can free up the time and do something else, then they are more likely to introduce this service, and they will like the service and become repeat customers. This is something we've seen over the years. For SMEs, we provide a service, and if we see very nice repeat ratio. Of course, they recognize that the product is excellent, they have quite a stringent budget. In case of large companies, it does take time. Of course, when it comes to AI, different states have different laws and regulations. It is a time-consuming process, but we are seeing more acceptance by our clients. As you know, SMEs, when things go south, of course, they may no longer continue with the services. For large companies, usually they sign annual contracts, and this will certainly contribute to our revenue. As you know, sales efficiency is affected in terms of having 1 sales rep going to customers and signing contracts. The fact that we have a higher ratio of large companies, of course, adds to higher efficiency. Internally, there are many areas where AI could be used, if we introduce an AI agent in certain tasks and things could improve. This is something I think about every day, from morning to night. This is certainly enhancing our confidence. From a client's perspective, if the ROI exceeds what they're currently paying for, then they will continue with the service, and that's certainly adding to your confidence. Certainly. Perhaps I should not mention this. Please, by all means. Well, actually, for example let's say a sales manager has sales reps and the manager checks what kind of sales pitches were made or go to customers together with the sales reps and gives advice. Nowadays, everything can be recorded, AI can score and give advice as to what pitches should be made. If a sales person, sales reps, with good results, good performance, gather and bring back their data, everything can be checked and extracted. Of course, self-service customers can use this in the future. If that is possible, then maybe we can reach 50%. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's what I'm thinking right now. Thank you. Quickly, last question. Looking at your M&A history, when the economy is down, Indeed also was acquired right after the financial crisis. The software valuations are coming down nowadays. Perhaps this is the opportune timing for investing. What's your plan for M&As? Well, I think investors say whatever they want in some cases. Up to several years ago, some of the investors have told us to go ahead and buy. Now, they praise us, they commend us for not making any acquisitions. That is because the SaaS is coming down, and they commend us for our discipline. Over 1,000 unicorns exist. Of course, there are many companies that are struggling and that is why we are seeing the issue of the private credit. We are in conversation with many companies, but AI is bringing such a significant, dramatic change. A company that's been around for seven, eight, 10 years. The premium is nice and there are many excellent companies. If we can share the vision and if we are aligned, then certainly we are keen to pursue such opportunities, perhaps even more so than before. Thank you. Next question, please. Citigroup Securities. My name is Yoneshima. I have just one last question regarding ARPJ and the price as well as the take rate. For ARPJ, premium service is strong. AI tool is increasing. When you try to grow this business, how can the price be enhanced for premium? Service is higher by 50%, but will it stop there? Beyond that, what are ways to increase price? Is there a pricing rate or does it depend on supply and demand, a way you can continue to increase? What about take rate? After you started the internet service, 1% and below has continued for more than 10 years, in fact. How much progress has been made? Do you think it is possible to exceed 1%? It's very low. Is it not going to be exceeded in the 10 years or 20 years down the road? I don't really understand what is going to happen. Please clarify it. Thank you. I talked about the Premium Sponsored Jobs previously. In terms of increasing price, I mentioned something similar. On the part of customers, if they can hire in two or three weeks, let's say, and if we see a number of clients increase in this area, I think that there is more room to increase the price. It all boils down to supply and demand. The number of hiring is not changing. In the past, they could have been hiring and taking two months with a certain cost. If we have market share of 80%- 90%, then there is not room for growth. In many of the customers, they are utilizing other offline tools or requesting support. Therefore, we are able to capture this pie. I think that is very important for SMEs. They often have teams involved in the work process. For example, recently, a major company, globally or in the United States was sitting next to me at dinner, and I found out using AI how many applications sent. 3.5 million have been sent to this company. I asked the president, 3.5 million applications made. If it takes three minutes to check the resume, then it's tremendous time. There are AI screening tools that can be utilized. For example, reducing that to one half or one third, would you want such a service? He was interested. He was eager to discuss immediately. It isn't as if it's a matter of raising price or not. That is the reason why I have more confidence going forward. In terms of progress regarding 1%, the number of people hired is increasing as well. Denominator is also becoming large, so it's very difficult to respond. I can see that it is increasing. Do we capture the overall? Do we also take into consideration the free job or the sponsored job only? That will have an impact on the calculation. We have to look at that in detail. As I mentioned earlier, for the customers that are willing to have a serious intention for hiring and willing to pay, this is where we want to provide more support. This is the structure, the matching service. Is the take rate of that platform or is it the take rate for the customers that are eager to hire? This will also have a bearing as well. We will try to disclose better information going forward. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next question will be the last question. The person sitting in the front row, please. Thank you for the presentation, and thank you for picking me. I'm Yamamura of JPMorgan Securities. We are already past the allotted time, but I would like to ask two questions. The first one is something that's repeatedly been mentioned, the potential of large business clients. If it's simply the number times unit price, there will be a ceiling some time in the future. Maybe that's being discussed. Including the possibilities of monetization in new forms. In any case, we do have expectations for more large clients. On the other hand, your sales style has been very much supporting the SMEs, and the quality of sales necessary to go after large companies may be different. Where you excel, where you have strengths, large clients are matched with the strengths that you currently have. Thank you for the wonderful question. It seems like I'm asked questions by internal persons. That's an excellent question, particularly when it comes to Indeed. I know Recruit, so compared to the Japanese Recruit, sales to large clients is where we are somewhat weak. That's an understanding we have. When I became Indeed CEO last June, I started to work on rebuilding and to position us as a strategic partner to our business clients rather than being transactional in the partnership. We wanted to be strategic, a partner, we've made significant investments, and we've introduced change to the teams. We've implemented various measures. Looking at the current state, the newly developed AI tools are being quite effective. What I'm trying to say is that how are we going to present to clients the ROI? That's where we were weak in the past. I think we will be able to present this stuff soon. We've already developed the various parts. When we bring this to clients, how should the sales pitches go? When you ask the AI, everything will be given as advice from the AI. That's the kind of AI tool that we are developing, and that's where we see further potential for growth. I hope that answers your question. Yes. Thank you. This is my second question. You mentioned earlier the job postings market condition. It is true that the IT professionals account for a small percentage, and the shortage of labor basically exceeds that. The impact is small, as you said. Certainly market participants are gaining this medium to long-term perspective. If the negative becomes even bigger, then of course, they start to have this concern for Recruit. Hypothetically speaking, if in the future IT-related professionals are laid off, I think personally this will happen. Even after they are laid off, they will not become homeless and live on the streets. Rather, I think optimization will take place in the overall market. There will be more mobility of people. Then for people switching jobs, pursuing different careers, this is not all negative. I think in companies, they have a variety of talents and they want to focus more on the quality. I think both of these will be effective when it comes to Recruit's business, and that's reflected in the results that you've just presented. That's my view. What's your take? I would like to talk not based on impression, but on data. Certainly, Indeed Hiring Lab, the research data that we've published today, looking at this data, you will see which sector has which age group of professionals working. As you can imagine, it's not that we have more of 60s and above working in the IT sector. Where are they working? Maybe as mechanics in auto repair shops and in the healthcare sector as well. We have more of 60s and above. What if they leave? What if they quit? If we start thinking about this, the story is not as you described. It's not simply AI replacing people as a whole. I think we need to look in more depth. This is not something that is obvious today, but over the past several months, labor participation rate in the U.S. is declining. This is a rare situation. One thing, this is only a hypothesis, I'm not sure of whether this is true or not, one thing is that people with not so high salaries, if they are laid off and they cannot find a job, they'll be in trouble. If it's an IT professional or other professionals, even when they are laid off, they can spend the next one year until they find the next job. I don't know where exactly this labor participation rate is declining, the overall rate is declining, and this is also contributing to a lower unemployment. The denominator, in other words, job seekers are decreasing in number. The economy is not doing so great, we should not be seeing this kind of trend. This is a very strange trend we are seeing. I'm sure the U.S. government needs to look into this more. If we specifically talk about the past five years, this morning, the data published by the Hiring Lab, I think, is more accurate. In other words, realistically, truck drivers or construction workers and also there's the immigration policy that's at play here. The policy becoming more stringent, that's affecting the overall numbers. There are certain sectors with many immigrants working, and then they include healthcare, for example. Looking at these factors, unless that is the case, we should not seeing this strong results or there isn't really a relationship. I hope that I answered your question. I will try to put that in the report. Let me think some more about this. Thank you. I apologize for going over the scheduled time, but we would like to conclude the earnings call