Hello, so it is time. We'd like to start this session. It is late, but thank you very much for participating at this hour. Also, we have Mr. Sawada and Mr. Toyama, and thanks to the two gentlemen for participating today. Today, we'll have a small meeting, fireside chat, with the independent outside directors for Panasonic Holdings, and it is just for an hour. But we would like to hear from the two directors on what is discussed in the board meeting. There are investors from Japan and outside, and we would like to have questions from the investors, the participants, and we would like to have a frank Q&A session today. The setting, so there is an interpreting button. So there's the original and English, so it is simultaneously interpreted in English. So those who want to listen in English, please choose the English button. And the questions from the participants, I will be the, on behalf of you, reading the questions or posing the questions, so please use the Q&A function, Q&A button, and if you could post your questions there, I will be reading the questions out, and so I'd like to start. So first question. So the, what I'm most interested in is in the... So the two years that the company was working on improving the competitiveness and, not working on the, portfolio, business portfolio, but from outside, it seemed like nothing was happening on the surface, so, because we wouldn't know what's going on. But it seems that there has been movement, and that has led to what the company has decided on the automotive business. But what I'm interested in is, what kind of discussion has been made in the past two years, and what would have been the qualitative, say, difference in the type of discussion that was been done in the board? So Toyama-san being in the board for eight years. So actually, at the same time, we moved to a holding company structure. So how are we going to manage the business? So what organization, what form the company is going to take? So of course, we did the discussion on the substance, but and so that was actually done in line with how we're going to establish the management under Mr. Kusumi. So basically, under the holding company. And the philosophy, the management philosophy was very important, so we had a discussion on that. So that's close to the purpose, and also on the financial side or the strategic side, so that discussion was made. So those two pillars, so there was a lot of discussion there. And what was discussed in there was that, so the business, the. So we sort of classified the business like core and perhaps not so, and also company as a whole, the operating cash flow, we were going to place more importance there. The background to that is that given the environment, we need to make investment into innovations, where there's a stress, innovation stress, and there's risk there, which means that we need to generate a lot of operational cash flow. If we don't have that, we need to borrow. The financial sort of management, how to manage that, that would be the financial sort of mission for each of the operating companies. And also the sustainability, and that would be underpinning the strategy there, the sustainability of the business. And with the discussion there, and the results of that, the outcome was that of what we've decided to do for the automotive business. And so the increasing the competitiveness, that would be done on the front line. So they've been doing that there. But what the board meeting was doing, so on the competitiveness side, each of the businesses was working on that, and the board meeting was working sort of more on high level there, as I've just mentioned. And the second question, and this, I would like to ask Mr. Sawada, and from the outside investors. Panasonic Holdings has so many businesses, and it's difficult to see the direction, what you want to do, and that will probably be the reason why there's a discount there in value. So, and Sawada-san being relatively new to the board, having a fresh views there, what was your impression of the board, the company and, and the board, what's been discussed there? So Panasonic, it's over 100 years or more of history, and the corporate philosophy, they have that at its core of their business. And it seemed that they want to revert to that philosophy and move by that. The mission of the company, just mentioning that, basically, the product and the mental side, we want to, the company wants to achieve a very rich society on both. And what would that mean in this context, would be to on the well-being and also contribute to the environmental issues that we're facing right now. So that has come together as one strategy right now, and through product and service, and to contribute to the challenges we are facing. Being a company, we need to have the capability to generate profit, and that is being very, we're coming in tackling that. And that will lead to the company increasing its competitiveness. And also, business portfolio management will be management, and to be speedy and to have ownership on this will be very important. To take ownership, so in order to do that, we've moved to a holding company and having operating companies under that because that was the most effective way of doing that. So basically, to have that philosophy and actually seriously take that on in their management. So basically, the ingenuity of, say, what makes Panasonic, Panasonic, and that is when the employees take ownership of what they're doing and to lead the society. And again, this is rather abstract or philosophic, but I think Panasonic wants to become that once again. That is the impression that I got of what the company was doing and where they were going. And actually, there is a question to, actually, to Mr. Toyama. So the price-to-book ratio, and so how do you value that is below the topic underperforming? I understand that eight years ago, the company was in a difficult position, but as you look to the past, what, where do you think the company has come, how Panasonic's values evaluate that? Now, this is rather a big story. Panasonic was mass produced and mass selling, basically. That was what was they doing. The philosophy hasn't changed, but how you actually realize that. It used to be a home appliance and mass producing for the mass. Actually, the businesses that could be profitable in the mass producing, mass selling is shrinking. That's the same for Sony, that's the same for Hitachi. So, so the company needs to fundamentally change its business and the area being environment or lifestyle, it's the same thing. It's the same challenge that the company faces. So to this, the company needs to change the business while the size is very big, and we have different businesses. And to actually fundamentally change that, so it'll be from product to services, it needs to be a change there. And in that sense, so a big change would take time and say... Simply put, Sony has changed quite extensively, and I think, and so it was from 1995 when Idei-san talked about digital-driven change, but 2010, Sony was in a difficult time, I think. And that actually happens when someone tries to change. What would be simple is actually just changing the portfolio in the mass producing, mass selling. But so Sony was facing a difficult time when they were actually really trying to change. And so and under Tsuga, Tsuga actually knew that that challenge, and he was seriously trying to take on corporate transformation. And Sony and Hitachi were ahead of us there, but so we were trying to do that with on a 15-year perspective. I think there are things that are moving and not, but I think it is a decade project. But what's important is that the direction-wise, the change that Panasonic should take, and that's important and to see whether that's taking place is important. What we're seeing as a phenomenon, I think we are seeing changes there. So it's very difficult. I'm already working here for eight years, and this is a type of the businesses that takes most time, most longest time. Therefore, as me, I would like to persevere and tolerate and go blaze the way... So I think I have two follow-ups on that. You just mentioned about Tsuda-san, Tsuda-san taking the lead first, and then when you got the baton and Panasonic Denko has come in, and then you must work integratedly. Therefore, you have been running, spearheading with the automobile businesses. But infotainment and the automobile have been maybe making a judgment for some detachment, however, focusing on the other areas. And the battery part, this is for relationship with the Tesla, and there's also the Blue Yonder issues. And from the outside, we understand that you're trying to make the change. However, I think, the investors will not be able to see clearly what you are aiming for. Sawada-san mentioned about the well-being and the conceptual issues. Conceptual part is easy to understand. However, from the perspective of Toyama-san, are, where are you heading for? Where are you spearheading for? We just mentioned about the battery, and in regards with that, the intrinsic goal is energy management businesses. And so when we became a holding company, we did not put it into the automotive, and we put it in the energy businesses because the environment is going to be important. And in order to make that business buoyant, there is many, competence that should be put in the battery, and there's many factors that needs to be thought. And right now, the automobile is now in the front, forefront, and we committed in there. Therefore, the automobile that we commit is or else maybe the CO2 reduction and the energy management is a real issue, the core issue, and I think we are within the good direction. However, how are we going to be overcoming all the issues? Here is the problem. And around the Blue Yonder, hardware creating at massive quantity, I think the area that we can be selling is going to be scaling down, and that's going to be in the trend. So within the soft layer, how are you going to be making buoyant businesses? So I think this is about the organizational capability, and how the group is going to be handling this is going to be our topic. And as you know, this is not an easy thing, and we need various type of investment as well. This is an innovation, the high-stress area. Therefore, we have to be thinking about our funding, too. Therefore, we must think about the funding, meaning that we must be looking into any opportunity that we might be able to have. And basically, what I'm thinking is that, the environment issue and the energy part, those are the area that we will focus. And the other pillar is not just only the hardware layer, but we would like to build up on the software layer as well. And as you can see, you say, it is very easy to understand about the manufacturing, like TV and the other issues. In hindsight, when Sony was sluggish, people were thinking, saying that, "What is going to happen next?" But that, in Sony, that that was a Final Fantasy, like it happened in Numata, in Hitachi as well. So showing the direction is important, it is essential. Therefore, we have to show it within our actions, how we are and where we are heading for. Thank you very much. If so, you're not—you're now moving into the holding systems, and then as a group CEO and a leader, CEO Kusumi has been appointed. Mr. Sawada, you're the head of the Nomination Advisory Committee, so why was it Mr. Kusumi, and what is your evaluation about Mr. Kusumi? So first, this question goes to Sawada-san, and after that, maybe ask Toyama-san. So the reason why Mr. Kusumi was discussed when I was not here within the company. I think Mr. Toyama should be explaining where the expectation was for Mr. Kusumi. Various pillars were discussed, and I was related with the discussions for around five years. At least, the clear part of the discussion was that Tsuda-san has been lengthy working for the company, and he was not able to do everything that we have been expected. We have been mentioning about the mass production and mass selling. This is the Showa type of the battery selling company, and now we have to be changing and transforming the company into a 21st century type company. Who is going to be the appropriate person was our question. Simply put, we needed person who had a strong logical sense, and Panasonic is a very emotional company. I mean, cherishing the human relationship within the company. So in one sense, we need transformation, so we needed a logical person. And then this is going to be a person who could be making sometimes a very harsh decision. And of course, the in-vehicle issues the company needed to make some difficult decisions along with the partnership and along with the customerships. And this company, Panasonic, is a global company as well. Therefore, within this front, who was going to be the right person, was our discussion. And then, first of all, the transformation pivotal, pivot, and other pivot were the perspectives that we have been focusing on, and meaning that, Kusumi-san was a very cool-headed, logical person, and we thought he was appropriate. So there's many other reasons for his goodness. However, if just to mention one, that was it. And for myself, I had an image of Mr. Kusumi, and I would like to share that vision. There were five impressions. One of them was, he had an atmosphere that he can change the Panasonic Group. Of course, Mr. Tsuga has created and blazed the foundation, and that is because Mr. Kusumi can work upon that. The second issue is that he is very good at prioritizing things. Then third, he does not change his mind. He's very settled, and so he is based; his action is based on the reality, and he is also based on the foundational philosophy of the company. And number four, he thinks in a very fast way. He is very bright, and at that, at the same time, he has great experience as well. When management design is created by such people, usually they create a very, complicated design. However, in the case of Mr. Kusumi, his design was very clear, very simple and very understandable. So along with the company president, company CEOs and other members, are easy to understand what Mr. Kusumi is saying and is easy to put this into action, what Mr. Kusumi wants to do. So in that way, his words are easy to understand, easy to embrace. And the other reason... I don't know if my way of explanation is right or not, but then he is a very lucky person, and I've been working as a president for 12 years in my company, and even if we make a lot of effort, there's a lot of differences because of the luck that the people could have. Of course, luck is just not luck. Luck is drawn by a background of various experiences. However, I think he is a person of luck, and with these five reasons, I think he is going to be a very beneficial person to lead the Panasonic. And two years, I think Kusumi-san had to work, or will have to work for a very tough time. And during the two years discussion about the external directors, and Panasonic became an holding company and the board of directors meetings discussions, is it the case that you bring the topics to the board members, or else, are there anything that you find different with the other companies that you are engaged with, for instance, pros and cons? So, Toyama-san, are there anything that you brought up to the board of directors from your side and discussed? Just for example, the discussion on the business portfolio, we have been proposing that to do it from an early stage. And of course, we can't just start discussion, but to actually think of the universe, how, how we want to be. So that is something that we discussed in the board. And the prehistory, say? So of course, we didn't just come to a discussion on the automotive. So we have a prehistory to that, leading up to that. We've discussed it for some time. So actually it was, it came in due course. It wasn't just suddenly, it wasn't a sudden surprise to us. It wasn't. So Athena, anything from your side? So just conceptually, so the Panasonic, the past Panasonic. So the Panasonic Corporation was actually leading the other businesses, and people were just trying, trying to keep up. So that was the image. Perhaps this may not be the appropriate way to put it, but... So the operating company was saying, "Well, this is what is required, and they should just do what they are expected." So not taking it as their own issue, like having ownership, but now having a holding company, this structure. So it wasn't the holding, it wasn't someone leading it, but the operating company, of course, they have their own ownership. They need to lead their own business. And the head or the holding company doesn't really give any orders. Basically, keeping them as they wish to do. If they're not doing as expected, they might be sort of encouraging them. And if you're doing what is good, it's they're being left on their own. So I think before, I think the agenda items are actually. So basically, we don't have as many agenda items to brought to the board, because if it's something that's not appropriate to be discussed in the board, we just push it back. So the themes that are discussed in the board will be more. It'll be less short term, because those items would be discussed in the operating- company level. Because we need to be profitable to grow and the well-being and environment, and how to move forward in both sort of axis or pillars. So those are the themes that is discussed in the board meeting. Of course, what we decided for the automotive business has been discussed in the Holdings board meeting. But so there are. So actually, there are items that the operating company brings to the board to actually get advice from the board, because board has specialists there. But actually, they're pretty harsh advice coming from the holding company board. So there is an active, a very active discussion there, and I think. So I think, Toyama-san, it was mentioned in the integrated report that the discussion in the board meeting was sort of, sort of preset kind of discussion, but now it's less so? So yes, that is the case. And, we have several more questions coming our way. So Tsuga-san still being a member of the board, and I think you mentioned that Kusumi-san was pretty cool-headed, but is it good that Tsuga-san is still part of the board? Well, actually, Tsuga-san's role is actually limited to the role of chairing it. He's. So Tsuga-san doesn't really voice his own opinions. He's constraining himself in the board. That's how I see it. So I don't see Kusumi-san sort of being concerned or of what Tsuga-san might think. So actually, Tsuga-san's role is to chair the board. So that. And actually, he's sort of more supporting what Kusumi-san. I do think that Tsuga-san has his own opinions and would wish to voice his opinion, but we don't see that happening. Just changing the topic and from the investors, and Toyama-san mentioned Sony and Hitachi, what happened there? So the cash cow in Hitachi, that's IT, and Sony has intangible IPOs, but for Panasonic, HVAC and the lifestyle. And actually, the market actually thinks Panasonic as a battery name, but what do you think of that? That's true, to an extent. So the battery area is an area we still need to invest. So it's an exploratory, not exploiting, but exploratory area. Exploitation and exploration. But the cash cow, so the existing or the businesses that we have history, we need to strengthen so that they could generate more cash. So it could be industry and also the white goods, the areas that we're winning. So there are those areas that we have. Of course, we need to strengthen the capability to generate, but there are businesses that don't have that cash-generating capability, and we're still trying to sort that out. And we need to get the source of investment from those businesses. So there's a big, larger level, sort of, portfolio, business portfolio management. And also, on the operating company, we need to prioritize and do portfolio management there. So from the holding point of view, we're not going to intervene in what the operating company is doing. We just want to see the results coming from the operating company and for them to change their operation and make the necessary sort of prioritization or portfolio management. And Panasonic, as a company, so what kind of company we are? I think the market doesn't fully see it, but it is a company, so of course, we need to be profitable. Of course, that's very important, and there are areas that still need to improve and to... That is the discussion that take place in the board. But what Panasonic wants to be or how? So the philosophy or purpose, that needs to be communicated externally, effectively.... Sony more on get to entertainment and Hitachi. It's pretty clear the message, but the message of Panasonic or where we position ourselves. So we have worked to make lives richer for people, to enrich people's lives, and that may have been home appliances, but right now, when we think about the rich living, being mindful of the environment and that what actually enrich us and how how that's going to be accomplished, and this is the business that we're doing is just the way to accomplish that. Now, so in order to drive that, perhaps we may need to think of other businesses that would enable us to do so, and that leads to the discussion on the business portfolio. So the earnings power, the capability, there are severe discussions in the board on what's the fixed cost and things like that. But as Sawada-san mentioned... So we're a business company, operating company, so what are we going to become? Where are we to by making ourselves more profitable? And so that is very important from that standpoint. And of course, so while there are different businesses, how are we going to connect with that? And portfolio management would actually show what would be important there. And as we move forward in the portfolio management, I think it would become clearer. We can actually show a clearer picture or externally, and I think that's positive. So that means, the two years ceiling is now open, and based on the plan, I think we have yet another year. So within that framework, maybe you might see the direction more clearer, and there could be some more centrifugal force within the company. Do you feel that? Yes, we both feel so. So this time, the automotive issue has been raising up, and this is a big topic for us. So within that context, within various businesses, within operating company systems, the portfolio management and the narrow down of their businesses will be done, and that's going to be happening in chains. Of course, maybe there could be some acquirement, and there could be maybe a transfer going forward. Thank you. So within that context, I would like to deep dive a little bit regarding the human talents. So the performance of the company is not that strong currently, and maybe is that the case that you don't have the necessary human talent pool sufficiently to go over beyond, to carry over to the future? So any comments from your side, please, Mr. Sawada? So I, too, visiting various, companies and various operating company, and I do feel that there's many talented people here in Panasonic. By taking communications and having some relationship, we do feel that strongly. However, at the board of directors meeting today, we had a discussion, too, about utilizing these talented talents and to connect with the, robust businesses. We discussed where there should be much more thing to be done. So the corporate human relations people has been making discussions, and we have been deeply, thinking about that, too. So it is about raising the potentiality of the people, the human talent, and including their potential opportunity. These human talents needs opportunity to open up their talent, and without them being, feeling that they are forced to do any actions, it is very, very important for all of the operating companies to work and try to utilize the human talent that they have. We have to be raising the human talent issues to a potential area where these people are fit to work for. If they are seeing that direction, people will be seeing the future of the company, too. Along with that, this is Toyama speaking. We changed it to holding company and strategic HR company. Those maneuvers are controlled by the operating company. Although those, philosophy-wise, we are facing the same way, however, by business, it could be very different by businesses. But therefore, at least the way to handle human talents could be very different from, like, athletes playing baseball and soccer are different. So after we have been coming into this new operating company system, this is all delegated to the businesses, the operating company themselves. And as a Panasonic Corporation, we cannot say much about this. For instance, the home appliances and the Connect People, they could be handled very differently. So the next question is that based on each of the operating companies, their strategic environment and the model, business model that they are facing for and heading for, including what challenges they hold and the companies, each of them are going to be having to think about their strategy. So in another way, we can say that all the companies were not able to think to that extent. And so if we have been done everything that we can for the HR system, and then if the, performance of the whole group is not that good, then there's no hope, but then there's much more that we can do. So, now, currently, we have to be prioritizing on the HR system. And when I go and visit the operating companies, you just feel very much about this issue. So the direction of the companies, they're all delegated for themselves work. And there are some, businesses that were very sensitive about this. And Energy company, they were very advanced, so they were thinking that they have a sense of crisis, and if they are not leading way to a good, human talent management, they are not able to overcome their difficulties. That, therefore, according to the understanding of, of each of the corporations, maybe the growth of the talent, of the human talent could be changing, too. So I think we ourselves should really make the say, too. So if you go to the on-site, to the forefront, you really feel that, okay, so being, having an ownership and being independent, this is a very good direction that the operating company is heading for. However, the second step for the human talent management is that, what is the PEC? The PEC is energy businesses, and there's two layers, and there could be some conflicts happening. So who, the supervision and the holding side, how are they going to be making the work? And what kind of a discussion is going on? What does that... So regarding the energy, you have to reduce the cost, any functions that could be overlapping. What I mean to say is that, the holding side is going to be streamlining. So the holding side, there could be many of these segments that we must be rethinking of, so it could be small or so it could be the case that. So the ideal status will be that the organization could be very small, however, it is full of talented people, and that is very clear. Another way to say this is, we are sharing the large philosophy and the larger direction and to create a group. However, both at the same time, each of the corporations, operating companies has different way of a strategy. Then I think, maybe if that becomes totally different from the direction that the headquarters could be heading for, maybe there could be this detachment or a spin-off, too. So the holding type of a group, the ideal way for the holding group is to be having a group entity that is coming together, that feels that they are to be working. I mean, they are having a benefit in working together. Regarding the issue of the PEC energy, we must be thinking about how to organize this within this area, because this is a shared service in a sense, and so it has no sense if this shared business is not going to be afloat. So let's say there's too much people working, and we had to have a restructuring going on. That was in the past, but going forward, we're going to be lacking the workers, the laborers, for sure. Therefore, we have to be making a right size, a very small organization, but an effective one. So we have to be having a common direction. If that is launched, I think we are okay. So understanding the common direction should be shared, and at each of the forefront, the site, must be thinking about the, problems. And then all the problems and what they have been responding should be absorbed to learn, and then that's going to be, repetitive in order to improve ourselves. At the forefront on-site, we must, ask them to be creative in order to, improve themselves. So it's not that we want them to be waiting for some instructions, to ask them to, what to do, but we ask them to think about what they can do. ... Other questions? That, so it'll be for nomination and remuneration, and governance. So Kusumi-san, in this phase, you said that he was, a good as a CEO, so to the succession plan and nurturing the next, management and, the thinking around nomination and remuneration. So that's Sawada-san part. Yes, from me. So I think we are having a very fruitful discussion. So that is what I think as head of the committee. Now, for the nomination committee, so to actually have a shortlisting of people for the next CEO and how actual, how to actually strengthen, the board, and, those are the discussions that we're having in the committee. What the committee needs to do is, discuss with people who could become candidates for the next CEO. So we've done a lot of discussions there. It's, it's pretty, it's in the future, distant future, but we are actually having discussions to the younger generation. So actually, having a discussion with an individual for an hour or two, you can sort of get an idea and sort of shortlist from there. And actually, to those people, what kind of experience do we want to have, these people to have, to make them ready for the next management? So the candidates for the CEO are all CEO. That is something that the Holdings is leading. But when you think of how old Mr. Kusumi is, it's not in the near future. It's... So we need to think in ages. So in the midterm, longer term, and generation-wide, we need to have candidates in different generations, younger and even younger. The member of the board, we need to make it more diverse on. So we're actually discussing that, and we are continuing discussion on different candidates. As a result of that, we're going to have Nishiyama San on board. So actually, the independent outside directors are actually we have the committee actually working on the standard and what kind of people that we want. It's not that the executive side actually makes proposals. So we don't actually take the candidates from the executive side. Now, that was on the nomination, but this is on compensation or remuneration. The structure right now was a result of a thorough discussion, and I think the structure that we have is something that the shareholders could accept as well. But from our side, I think we need to show some incentive, because we need to bring the carrot in front of the horse for the horse to run. So I think we need to have that incentive or the balance. That is something that will be... And actually, ourselves, the outside independent directors, actually, are talking about more of that. So the ratio of the restricted share of the RS to increase that, and that's been revised. And not just the financial incentives, but non-financial KPIs. We need to incorporate that. So without incorporating that, that won't be linked to corporate value. I mean, without that, it will be difficult. So I think it says under financial, so not non-financial. So the manufacturing company this size, it actually takes time to actually see results. There's that time gap. So if we just look at the financial results, we can only... It tends to be short-termism, doing only marginal things. So we need to look at indices that is not necessarily reflected in financials, including the philosophical. So it's not non-financial, but pre, so it would be precursor to the financials. So that is not reflected, or not yet reflected in the financial numbers. So perhaps it would relate it to what you just mentioned. Another question on that. So the management says that people have this sense of ownership in people like Panasonic. So it'd be JPCism or Japanism. And so it's like a family business. I think they're confusing, like, a family business to a business that is centered on purpose. Actually, that is the point that is most important and difficult in the transformation, and that relates to the human capital to actually resonate with the philosophy and to remain in the company is good, but not to be sort of to actually believe in the philosophy because you've joined, so that's not the good way. So we're on the way to transforming that. But having mentioned that, Panasonic has been recognized as a company managing like a family business and actually succeeding that way. So in the 21st century, so the human capital, people-centric management kind of... So to actually remain or be retained in the company as their own, as their own decision, and to actually engage the employees that way, we still have a business to that. And I think it starts from the management recognize that, and the younger people actually recognize that, because with the younger people not resonating with the philosophy of the company, they're actually leaving. I think to actually have that healthy sense of tension, and the younger people actually leave the company, and those capable people who actually can't resonate with the philosophy actually leave. So I think management needs to be aware of that, and how can the management sort of retain the talented people? I think that's very important, and that is a subject that we discussed in there. Because, I mean, in this day and age, it's not, you're not safe and secure once you've started to work for Panasonic. That's not the case. I think the way to think of it is that there are things that you can do because you're in Panasonic, to make society more rich and contribute to there. That would actually make the people, make the employees more engaged in the business. To have the employees think in that way, it's not just one-way communication, but the dialogue is important. Actually, Kusumi, the CEO, is actually doing that kind of dialogue, but we're actually working on that as well. To actually the employees to become aware there. But it is still a sort of old school sort of part is left, and we have incidents happening because of that, but we need to change from the Showa era to the Reiwa era. But I think this is something that would take some time. It's like a marathon. We need to keep on working on that. It's not something that, you think, that I need to change, and it just change overnight. That's not the case. So what I am focusing on now is that since we're operating in an operating company, and I think, so those. So I think the operating company, to become competitive, can actually attract, better, talent. Now, you mentioned that for the holdings, it would become like a small government. But, I think Panasonic, the operating company, has not had experience to win. They're sort of more of a follower than a leader. And so besides, the, philosophy, and the, the revision side, how is Panasonic going to make a structure to have the operating company sort of lead or win? Also, I think, you're investing a lot in the battery side, and perhaps that is for the operating company to make endeavors. But under the Panasonic Holdings, you have the energy company, and right now, people can't be confident that the company could win against, like, South Korean, and China. How do you actually see that? So especially you're talking about the in-vehicle battery, I suppose. And regarding that, starting from the result, the top, so you have to be within the top three of the world, or else you will not be able to, survive, and we need a fast investment and speed. And that all relates to, what Mr. Tadanobu says. So, his leadership and the speed, it should be very crucial. And if he can pull that through, it is going to be making the differences. So I am, or we are encouraging him. So we already know the room game rules. So you have to be making a case for winning. So winning case is very important. Yes, that is so. So So the... Yes, that business model, you all have to work on the business model that we already have in that area in order to win, regarding that issue that you're talking about. So of course, several patterns there are already existent within the home appliances and others.... For instance, for the home appliances, the washing machines are the winning patterns. And the common is, the common thing is that it is based on time. So meaning that it is going to be, contributing to shortening the household chores of the females who are very, very, busy these days. So regarding those corporate operating company, the consumers are the people who makes the judgment, and the operating company systems are following the needs of the customers, and now they need the values, and they understand and recognize about the value that they can propose, and they're working on that. However, on the other hand, maybe the Panasonic still has to renew itself. So, there's still some area where it is within working within the very old type of a mindset. However, they must make the value proportion or proposals, and then, those two needs to be balanced out, and right now, the company is underway to reform itself. The winning path is very important. So, if a Panasonic Group company, if they do not be, accustomed to winning, it is difficult for forging and raging for, the future path? So you have to be focused, and you have to be betting on what you're doing. So for the in-vehicle, I come from the technical issues, therefore, I've been going very much and making confirmation of the in-vehicle businesses, and I think and believe that there is a winning pattern already at the operating company. Therefore, you have to take time and have it launched very speedily. And batteries, there's technology; however, manufacturing is very difficult. And especially Japan has been working on very various things, therefore, I'm sure they can make it and produce them nicely. However, when it bring over the businesses overseas, the point is that it has to be created and manufactured by everyone in a speedy way. So how to do this is going to be crucial, and for that sake, we need discussions, especially Tadanobu-san is mentioning about that, too. It's also related about the production safety issues, too. The battery and the drive is mostly made within the advanced nations. Then if the business model, the business model is totally not based on manufacturing, based on cheap labor model, therefore, those are the issues that we must think of. The company is already having a high technology level, and the businesses is stay focused on that, based on that. Therefore, I think going forward, after this, I think you must interview Mr. Tadanobu. Thank you so much. One point, the original part of Panasonic is manufacturing, and another part that you invest very much is Blue Yonder. How do you think the Blue Yonder should be? For Panasonic perspective, Blue Yonder is something very different, but then Higuchi-san is working for Connect, and we brought something very new to the Panasonic philosophy. So Mr. Higuchi-san mentioned, or maybe puzzled, so what is the Panasonic position? From the investor for the Panasonic, Blue Yonder means something very different from Panasonic that used to be. What do you think about this? I'm sorry for bringing up other companies' cases. And Sony has been acquiring Columbia Pictures, and they didn't get synergy for a very long time and were criticized wrongly. And university? Universal. So it could be Universal. And whoever does this, it takes a long time. And so making some connections and to make a business on this, it is very difficult. On the case of Panasonic and full software and the cloud-based, the businesses, how should it be management? This needs some management capability over the organization. So this is about the matter for Higuchi-san, so I should not be mentioning things. However, if he has an organized mindset, it's okay. So Blue Yonder should be having a competitive edge, and if that's going to be prioritized, I think he should be focusing on that. And so you should not be focusing on the synergizing forcibly, but if you're going to be focusing on winning the game within Blue Yonder, maybe Blue Yonder could be the focus. Because he was part of such a business, it's really depending on his judgment, because he already has both experiences. So if he is going to be making such judgment regarding this operating company system, I think Panasonic will be following his thoughts. And it's different from eight years since you have been working on this Panasonic. So within that experience, do you think the company has changed? At that time, there was no Higuchi-san, so you mean the organization is changing, and then Panasonic is just at the entrance of getting changed? Yes. So the history of Panasonic, within the model of the hardware production and selling, they have been changing ways during that way. This is a company that has been always changing its portfolio, replacing within the restructuring of Nakamura-san. And the in-vehicle, I think that's the extension of what the company has been doing. However, now it's globalization, digitalization, and it's an innovation going on, and automobile itself is now engaged. Therefore, Tier One, Tier Two companies are having difficulties. So within the automobile areas, the robotics and IoT is always coming in. Therefore, within the electronics area and the Panasonic area, those are impacted. Therefore, the company must be working on the, digitalizations and changing themselves. That has been experienced by my experience here, eight years. And regarding portfolio, business portfolio management, that that is why Panasonic is now working, starting to work on it, and then hard, layer, the soft layer. The want to be is focusing on the, lifestyle scenario. So we have to be focusing on the betterment of the managing the organizations. And if it's going to be a business that is working on a cash cow businesses, then cash cow business will be staying here. But the policy is, I think people are now having common understanding which business to work on. But then if the baseball player, if the Panasonic is focusing on the baseball player to be able to be an athlete for any other sports, like soccer or climbing or any other things, I think the group should be streamlining, and that is what we're doing here. And if we're not going to be making that streamlining, the company is not going to be buoyant going forward. And because such an action was not taken, many companies in Japan has been changing their way of work. I think this restructuring or the way that we are streamlining ourselves should be continued. Thank you very much, and this was a very, very, meaningful discussions, and Panasonic should be changing. If not, Japan will not be able to change, and you're the symbol of Japan being changed. Therefore, I would like Panasonic people to make the stretch and to speedily take on these actions, and we're very much expecting on you that the change is now becoming evident. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much for staying with us for a very long time and at a very late night. With this, we would like to close our small meeting. Thank you so much.