Growing out of the old self

Using ONLY the supplied earnings call transcript and no outside information: On this call, does management convey that THE COMPANY TODAY IS RUNNING ON A DIFFERENT BASIS THAN THE COMPANY ITS REPORTED RESULTS AND REPUTATION WERE BUILT ON \u2014 that is, does management itself describe the company as having crossed, recently and substantially, into being a different kind of business than it was, while making clear that this change is not yet what the reported numbers or the outside picture of the company reflect? Answer YES when management's own words convey, in whatever form fits the business, ONE coherent posture with BOTH halves present as a present-tense reality: (1) A CHANGE OF BASIS, ALREADY REAL. Management describes the company as now operating on a foundation that is genuinely different from what it used to run on \u2014 in whatever form fits the industry: what it sells, who pays it, how it earns, what it owns, what it can do, or what drives its results has changed at the root, and management treats this as an accomplished condition of the company today, grounded in things already happening or already in place (real current activity, completed work, business already being won or delivered), not as a plan, a launch announcement, or a vision. The change may have built over several periods or arrived recently; what matters is that management speaks about the new basis as how the company actually works NOW, not as where it is headed. (2) MANAGEMENT SAYS THE RECORD AND THE PERCEPTION LAG THE CHANGE. Management conveys \u2014 directly or plainly in substance \u2014 that the results being reported, or the way outsiders still see and measure the company, belong to the OLD basis: the new basis contributes only early or partially to the numbers just presented; the metrics, mix, or storyline people associate with the company describe what it was; or management indicates that what the company has already become will only become visible in results from here. The essence is a management team telling investors, in its own voice: the company you are grading is not quite the company we are now running. Answer NO if the call is ordinary reporting of a company continuing in its established form, however strong or confident. NO if the change described is a routine product refresh, a normal line extension, ordinary mix improvement, or incremental progress within the same basis. NO if the new basis is only planned, being tested, launching soon, or described as a future direction rather than as already how the company operates. NO if management describes the change but conveys no sense that the reported results or outside perception lag it \u2014 for example if the new basis is already fully reflected in the numbers and fully understood. NO if the only contrast is between a bad quarter and a good quarter, or between this year and last year, within an unchanged business. NO if the framing is generic transformation, journey, or evolution boilerplate without a concrete description of what is different about how the company now works. NO if the idea 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.