Question Bank › Customers eating the friction

Customers eating the friction

Customers eating the friction: buyers are visibly absorbing cost, delay, or inconvenience to keep this specific company

Calls Tested
990
Answered YES
23
Hit Rate
2.3%
rare by design

Steven Madden, Ltd. (SHOO) — this company's answers

NO on the Q1 2017 call 2017-04-21 C
The model's full reasoning — Q1 2017 call → NO我们根据指令,只使用提供的电话会议记录。问题:管理层是否描述了客户目前正在忍受实际成本、延迟或不便以继续与该公司做生意,并且管理层将此观察到的客户行为描述为当前业务中实际发生的事情? 扫描记录:管理层提到“我们的批发鞋类业务在季度内表现出色,因为我们的潮流产品系列使我们的品牌在竞争中表现优异。”他们提到“核心Steve Madden女装业务再次成为亮点”,并且“Steve Madden女装是最大的增长驱动力”。他们提到“尽管我们许多最大批发客户的总体开放购买预算在缩减,但这一表现证明了我们旗舰品牌比以往任何时候都更强大。”这暗示客户在预算缩减的情况下仍继续购买,但这是否是“摩擦”?没有具体描述客户正在忍受的延迟、成本或不便。管理层提到“我们继续努力敲定中国的新合资企业”,但那是关于扩张,不是客户摩擦。关于零售,他们提到“我们决定减少促销活动”,这影响了零售同店销售,但那是他们自己的决定,不是客户忍受摩擦。关于批发,他们提到“我们的核心Steve Madden女装业务继续受到新产品和关键补货款式畅销的推动”,但没有提到客户等待、接受分配或吸收价格上涨等。他们提到“我们的国际业务也实现了两位数的增长”,但没有具体摩擦。关于Schwartz & Benjamin,他们提到“整合进展顺利”,但没有客户摩擦。关于Madden NYC,他们提到“初始销售强劲”,但没有摩擦。关于欧洲合资企业,他们提到“结果远高于我们最初的预期”,但没有摩擦。关于中国,他们提到“希望能在2017年下半年开始”,但那是未来。关于零售,他们提到“同店销售额下降约6%”,但那是由于他们自己的促销减少,不是客户忍受摩擦。他们提到“我们相信这是正确的决定”,但那是他们自己的选择。没有提到客户等待、接受分配、吸收价格上涨或保持订单通过公司困难。管理层没有描述任何客户正在忍受的具体摩擦。他们只是说产品好,销售好。因此,答案应为NO。 但再仔细看:他们提到“我们的批发客户正在缩减预算,但我们仍然增长”,这暗示客户在缩减预算的情况下仍购买,但这是否是摩擦?客户缩减预算是他们自己的决定,不是公司造成的摩擦。管理层没有说客户因为公司而忍受不便。他们提到“我们减少了促销活动”,这可能导致零售客户支付更高价格,但那是零售,而且他们自己选择减少促销,客户可能转向别处,但管理层没有说客户仍然购买。实际上,零售同店销售下降,所以客户可能离开了。因此,没有证据表明客户在忍受摩擦。 因此,答案应为NO。

← Back to the full SHOO analysis

Show the exact prompt the model was given
Using ONLY the supplied earnings call transcript and no outside information: On this call, does management describe that the company's customers are CURRENTLY PUTTING UP WITH REAL COST, DELAY, OR INCONVENIENCE in order to keep doing business with THIS company specifically — that is, buyers are visibly absorbing friction rather than defecting, substituting, or walking away — and does management present this observed customer behavior as something actually happening now in the business? Answer YES when management's own words convey, in whatever form fits the industry, ONE coherent phenomenon: the customers' own actions — not management's assertions about loyalty — demonstrate that they consider this company's offering worth enduring friction for. Any genuine expression of this counts, and the form varies widely. For example — customers waiting through extended lead times, delivery delays, or waitlists without cancelling; customers accepting allocations, partial shipments, or rationed access and coming back for more; customers absorbing price increases, surcharges, or less favorable terms while continuing to order; customers keeping orders in place through the company's own stumble, transition, disruption, or capacity shortfall; customers taking on extra work, cost, or process on their side (qualifying a new version, adapting their own operations, traveling further, paying deposits, committing earlier) to secure or retain access to what the company provides; customers declining available alternatives or refusing substitutes even when the company cannot fully serve them; or management noting that despite the friction customers are experiencing, cancellations, defections, or churn have not materialized. Two things must come through in management's own voice. First, the friction must be REAL AND PRESENT — customers are actually experiencing some concrete cost, wait, or inconvenience now, described specifically enough that one can see what the customers are tolerating. Second, the evidence must be BEHAVIORAL AND CURRENT — management points to what customers are actually doing in the recent period (orders held, reorders placed, terms accepted, waits endured, alternatives declined) rather than merely asserting that customers are loyal, that the product is sticky or mission-critical, or that relationships are strong. Answer NO if management merely claims loyalty, stickiness, high retention, or strong relationships without describing any friction customers are currently absorbing. NO if customers are described as defecting, cancelling, trading down, or pushing back in response to the friction. NO if the tolerance is attributed by management chiefly to an industry-wide shortage in which customers have no alternative anywhere and are enduring the same friction with every supplier. NO if the friction is hypothetical, past and resolved, or merely feared for the future. NO if the only evidence is one isolated customer anecdote with no sense of a broader pattern. NO if the behavior appears only in an analyst's question or characterization that management does not itself affirm. Use only the supplied transcript. Answer only YES or NO.

Companies that answered YES

TickerCompanyCallDateCall grade
PFIE Profire Energy, Inc. Q1 2023 2023-05-13 B
A Agilent Technologies, Inc. Q4 2022 2022-11-21 B+
PLOW Douglas Dynamics, Inc. Q3 2022 2022-11-01 B+
CRL Charles River Laboratories International Q2 2022 2022-08-03 C
ZBRA Zebra Technologies Corporation Q2 2022 2022-08-02 C+
ZVIA Zevia PBC Q1 2022 2022-05-12 B
CLAR Clarus Corporation Q1 2022 2022-05-09 B
RYAM Rayonier Advanced Materials Inc. Q1 2022 2022-05-04 D
NGVT Ingevity Corporation Q4 2021 2022-02-25 B
FLUX Flux Power Holdings, Inc. Q2 2022 2022-02-10 D
GFS GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc. Q3 2021 2021-11-30 A
CROX Crocs, Inc. Q3 2021 2021-10-21 B+
DOV Dover Corporation Q2 2021 2021-07-20 B+
IRT Independence Realty Trust, Inc. Q2 2018 2018-08-02 B
FSS Federal Signal Corporation Q1 2018 2018-05-12 A
JAZZ Jazz Pharmaceuticals plc Q1 2018 2018-05-08 B
SHEN Shenandoah Telecommunications Company Q1 2018 2018-05-03 C+
BPMC Blueprint Medicines Corporation Q1 2018 2018-05-02 C+
RACE Ferrari N.V. Q3 2017 2017-11-02 C+
LIND Lindblad Expeditions Holdings, Inc. Q2 2017 2017-08-06 C
THG The Hanover Insurance Group, Inc. Q2 2017 2017-08-06 B
ARKR Ark Restaurants Corp. Q1 2016 2016-05-13 B
LBTYK Liberty Global's Q1 2016 2016-05-10 C+

How the model reasoned

NGVT · Q4 2021 → YESThe question is: Does management describe that the company's customers are CURRENTLY PUTTING UP WITH REAL COST, DELAY, OR INCONVENIENCE in order to keep doing business with THIS company specifically —...YES Management describes customers absorbing real friction—price increases averaging over 20% in Performance Chemicals, freight and energy costs up sharply, and supply-chain constraints—while continuing to order and accept terms. They explicitly tie share gains in adhesives to customers enduring the dynamic, stressed environment and choosing Ingevity when others could not deliver, and they note customers are already seeing the benefit of those price increases flowing through in 2022. This is presented as current behavior, not hypothetical or industry-wide only. The answer is therefore YES. No, the tolerance is not chiefly attributed to an industry-wide shortage; the transcript shows customers actively accepting the friction with Ingevity specifically. No, there is no isolated anecdote or future fear; the evidence is behavioral and current. No, customers are not described as defecting or cancelling. No, the friction is not merely feared for the future.
GFS · Q3 2021 → YESThe question is: Does management describe that the company's customers are CURRENTLY PUTTING UP WITH REAL COST, DELAY, OR INCONVENIENCE in order to keep doing business with THIS company specifically —...YES Management describes customers enduring real, current friction—capacity shortages, allocations, and extended lead times for 2022 supply—while still committing to long-term agreements, prepayments, and access fees to secure GF’s capacity. They explicitly note customers accepting rationed access and continuing to order rather than defecting, framing 2022 demand as robust and GF-specific through single-source wins and differentiated platforms. This behavioral evidence (prepayments, LTAs, and continued ordering) is presented as occurring now, not merely asserted as loyalty or industry-wide necessity. The transcript shows customers visibly absorbing these costs to retain access to GF’s offerings.
FLUX · Q2 2022 → YESThe question is: Does management describe that the company's customers are CURRENTLY PUTTING UP WITH REAL COST, DELAY, OR INCONVENIENCE in order to keep doing business with THIS company specifically —...YES Management describes customers enduring real, current friction—production and shipping delays from supply chain disruptions—while continuing to place orders, maintain long-term relationships, and keep orders in place without cancellations or defections. They explicitly note that despite these delays, they did not lose customers or orders, and they are securing inventory specifically to protect customer orders and relationships. The backlog is growing to a record $31.4 million, with new orders of $19.8 million received, and customers are waiting for batteries due to production constraints.

More from the question bank

Buying its own future outputOperating without a netDeliberately different by designMid-ramp quarter: contribution has started bNumbers reset the ceilingEcosystem forming: independent outsiders areAll questions →
Not investment advice. Artul.ai publishes AI-generated earnings-call quality grades and expected-volatility estimates — never buy or sell recommendations. We tested over 1,600 predictive hypotheses against 165,000 transcripts; the honest result, including what failed, is documented in our methodology.