Question Bank › Relationships widening on the customers' initiat

Relationships widening on the customers' initiative, with the numbers still catching up

Calls Tested
449
Answered YES
5
Hit Rate
1.1%
rare by design

Nanobiotix S.A. (NBTX) — this company's answers

NO on the Q2 2023 call 2023-09-27 D
The model's full reasoning — Q2 2023 call → NOWe need to answer YES or NO based on the transcript. The question asks: Does management describe that SEVERAL of the company's EXISTING commercial relationships have RECENTLY GOTTEN BIGGER — counterparties the company had already won (customers, accounts, partners, distributors, members, or programs) that have, in the recent period, chosen to take a wider or deeper commitment than they had before — AND does management convey that the reported results reflect only the early part of these widenings, with most of their contribution still ahead? We need to check the transcript for evidence of multiple existing relationships widening recently, and that the reported results understate the committed business. Let's review the transcript. The call is about Nanobiotix's business update and financial results. Key points: They signed a global license agreement with Janssen. That's a new partnership, not an existing relationship getting bigger. They also have a collaboration with LianBio. They mention LianBio in the Q&A: "As part of the contract, there is a commitment from them to be at least participating to five registrational trials... And they do participate to the ongoing Phase 3 in head and neck cancer where they have the commitment to recruit 20% of the patient out of the 500 we have and the recruitment there is progressing well. Now for other indication, especially because the arrival of J&J in the game and now we have two other partners with Nanobiotix developing this product. So we are currently discussing beyond what is on the table and see what could be the next steps, but we have ongoing discussions specifically with the LianBio also to think about different options and different therapeutic activities we could benefit from in specific populations that exist in Asia." So LianBio is an existing partner, but the discussion about expanding beyond the current commitment is still in discussion, not a recent widening that has been decided. The question asks for "recently gotten bigger" - meaning the counterparty has chosen to take a wider or deeper commitment. Here, LianBio's expansion is still being discussed, not yet committed. So that doesn't count. What about MD Anderson? They have a strategic collaboration with MD Anderson.

← Back to the full NBTX 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 SEVERAL of the company's EXISTING commercial relationships have RECENTLY GOTTEN BIGGER — counterparties the company had already won (customers, accounts, partners, distributors, members, or programs) that have, in the recent period, chosen to take a wider or deeper commitment than they had before — AND does management convey that the reported results reflect only the early part of these widenings, with most of their contribution still ahead? Answer YES when management's own words convey BOTH halves of this one phenomenon, in whatever form fits the business: (1) MULTIPLE EXISTING RELATIONSHIPS HAVE RECENTLY WIDENED, BY THE COUNTERPARTY'S OWN CHOICE. Management recounts that more than one already-established counterparty has stepped up its commitment in the recent period — in whatever form fits the industry, such as: existing customers adding locations, sites, users, lines, units, or departments; accounts that started with one product or use now taking additional ones; partners or distributors extending the relationship into new territories, categories, or scope; early deployments being broadened by the same counterparty; repeat orders arriving meaningfully larger than the initial ones; or relationships moving from an initial phase into a bigger committed phase. The widenings must be described as real and recent — decisions the counterparties actually made, with the resulting business signed, ordered, begun, or already flowing — not hoped for, in negotiation, or merely a pipeline. The pattern should span more than one relationship rather than a single large deal, and the growth should come from the counterparties choosing to take more, not merely from price increases pushed onto the same volumes. (2) THE NUMBERS ARE STILL CATCHING UP, AND MANAGEMENT SAYS SO. Management conveys, directly or plainly in substance, that these widened commitments have contributed only partially to the results being reported — because the expansions began recently, are still ramping toward their intended level, or have most of their delivery, rollout, or volume scheduled ahead — so the just-reported numbers understate the level of business these relationships have already committed to. Management should treat this widening pattern as meaningful to where the company is heading, discussing it as part of the company's trajectory rather than as a passing detail. Answer NO if the growth discussed comes mainly from winning brand-new customers, new markets, or new logos rather than from existing relationships getting bigger. NO if only one relationship is described as widening, however large. NO if the widenings are only hoped for, proposed, in pilot with no commitment, or contingent on decisions not yet made. NO if the increase is chiefly price increases on unchanged volumes, ordinary reorders at the usual size, or routine fluctuations in order timing. NO if the widened business is already fully reflected in the reported results, with no meaningful contribution still ahead. NO if management attributes the step-ups mainly to a one-time event, catch-up, pull-forward, or temporary condition it expects to fade. NO if the pattern appears only in an analyst's question or model that management does not itself affirm. Use only the supplied transcript. Answer only YES or NO.

Companies that answered YES

TickerCompanyCallDateCall grade
DUOT Duos Technologies Group, Inc. Q4 2023 2024-04-01 F
ZVIA Zevia PBC Q1 2022 2022-05-12 B
ATI Allegheny Technologies Incorporated Q1 2018 2018-04-24 B
PTC PTC Inc. Q3 2017 2017-07-19 C+
GOGO Gogo Inc. Q1 2016 2016-05-06 C+

How the model reasoned

ATI · Q1 2018 → YESThe question is: Does management describe that SEVERAL of the company's EXISTING commercial relationships have RECENTLY GOTTEN BIGGER — counterparties the company had already won that have chosen to t...YES The transcript shows management describing multiple existing relationships (major engine OEM customers, Pratt & Whitney/UTC, Boeing, Airbus, and other aerospace/defense customers) that have recently widened commitments through production ramps, emergent demand above contractual share, and long-term agreements. It also conveys that these widenings are still ramping 2018 as an early phase of multi-year expansion, with most of the contribution ahead in 2019–2020.
GOGO · Q1 2016 → YESThe question is: Does management describe that SEVERAL of the company's EXISTING commercial relationships have RECENTLY GOTTEN BIGGER — counterparties the company had already won that have chosen to t...YES The transcript shows management describing multiple existing relationships that recently widened: Delta increased its commitment to more than 600 2Ku aircraft (bringing total awarded over 1,000), and Air Canada extended its relationship to the entire wide-body international fleet. These are presented as recent decisions by established counterparties.
ZVIA · Q1 2022 → YESThe question is: Does management describe that SEVERAL of the company's EXISTING commercial relationships have RECENTLY GOTTEN BIGGER — counterparties the company had already won that have chosen to t...

More from the question bank

Engine explained, runway namedDeliveries running ahead of the moneyInheritance being cashed inWhere the money wentRacing a clock somebody else setRepeat customers are now the ones asking forAll 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.