Question Bank › The open question just closed

The open question just closed

The open question just closed: management treats a doubt that used to hang over the business as now answered, and names

Calls Tested
467
Answered YES
7
Hit Rate
1.5%
rare by design

Mobileye Global Inc. (MBLY) — this company's answers

NO on the Q2 2023 call 2023-07-28 B+
The model's full reasoning — Q2 2023 call → NO我们根据规则判断。管理层是否承认一个具体的疑虑或未决问题,并表明该问题已以有利于公司的方式解决,且引用了具体证据。 在电话会议中,管理层讨论了多个话题。关键点:关于SuperVision和Chauffeur的进展,他们提到“我们注意到OEM的认真程度在过去一两年有所增加,一些看似远离我们的OEM迅速转向支持我们的方法。”这暗示过去存在疑虑,但现在已解决。然而,他们是否明确承认这是一个悬而未决的问题?他们提到“真实级别2+……是一个新的潜在巨大汽车术语,具有战略意义和复杂性,使决策过程比简单的ADAS项目更复杂。”这暗示过去存在不确定性,但现在他们看到进展。 更具体的是,关于ZEEKR的SuperVision,他们提到“ZEEKR系统在完成操作方面表现远好于其他NOT系统……影响者和媒体也强调了系统相对于竞争对手的优势。”这暗示过去存在关于系统性能的疑虑,现在已被证明。 但规则要求:管理层必须承认一个真实的未决问题,并表明它已解决,且引用具体证据。他们是否明确说“过去有一个疑虑,现在解决了”?他们提到“我们注意到OEM的认真程度增加”,但并未明确说“过去存在疑虑”。然而,他们确实说“一些看似远离我们的OEM迅速转向支持我们的方法”,这暗示过去这些OEM可能持怀疑态度,现在转向了。 另一个例子:关于SuperVision的2024年预测,他们提到“ZEEKR 001在2024年的需求速度低于2023年第四季度,这是一个风险。”这暗示一个未决问题,但尚未解决。 关于Mobileye drive,他们提到“我们决定不认证基于EyeQ 5的Neovasc车队,因为成本不合理。”这暗示过去有疑虑,但现在他们转向了不同的策略。 但规则要求:管理层必须承认一个具体的疑虑,并表明它已解决,且引用证据。我认为最接近的是关于SuperVision在真实世界中的表现。他们提到“ZEEKR系统在完成操作方面表现远好于其他NOT系统”,并引用媒体和影响者的反馈。这暗示过去存在关于系统性能的疑虑,现在已被证明。 然而,他们是否明确说“过去这是一个未决问题”?他们提到“我们注意到OEM的认真程度增加”,但并未明确说“过去存在疑虑”。他们提到“一些看似远离我们的OEM迅速转向”,这暗示过去这些OEM可能持怀疑态度,现在转向了。 但规则要求“管理层承认——直接或明确地——这是一个真正的未决问题或怀疑来源”。他们是否这样做?在关于竞争格局的讨论中,他们提到“我们看到了OEM的觉醒”,这暗示过去OEM可能尝试内部开发,现在转向他们。但并未明确说“过去存在疑虑”。 另一个例子:关于ZEEKR的SuperVision,他们提到“ZEEKR系统在完成操作方面表现远好于其他NOT系统”,并引用媒体反馈。这暗示过去存在关于系统性能的疑虑,现在已被证明。但管理层是否明确说“过去这是一个未决问题”?他们提到“ZEEKR系统在完成操作方面表现远好于其他NOT系统”,但并未说“过去我们不确定”。 我认为最接近的是关于SuperVision在真实世界中的表现。他们提到“ZEEKR系统在完成操作方面表现远好于其他NOT系统”,并引用媒体反馈。这暗示过去存在关于系统性能的疑虑,现在已被证明。但管理层是否明确说“过去这是一个未决问题”?他们提到“ZEEKR系统在完成操作方面表现远好于其他NOT系统”,但并未说“过去我们不确定”。 然而,规则要求“管理层承认——直接或明确地——这是一个真正的未决问题或怀疑来源”。他们是否这样做?在关于竞争格局的讨论中,他们提到“我们看到了OEM的觉醒”,这暗示过去OEM可能尝试内部开发,现在转向他们。但并未明确说“过去存在疑虑”。 另一个例子:关于SuperVision的2024年预测,他们提到“ZEEKR 001在2024年的需求速度低于2023年第四季度,这是一个风险。”这暗示一个未决问题,但尚未解决。 我认为没有明确承认一个具体的疑虑并表明已解决。他们提到“我们注意到OEM的认真程度增加”,但并未说“过去这是一个疑虑”。他们提到“ZEEKR系统表现良好”,但并未说“过去我们不确定”。 因此,答案应为NO。

← Back to the full MBLY 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 identify a SPECIFIC DOUBT OR OPEN QUESTION that until recently hung over the business — something that was genuinely uncertain or unproven about the company in the recent past — and convey that this question has NOW BEEN ANSWERED IN THE COMPANY'S FAVOR, pointing to real, recent evidence from the business itself as what settled it? Answer YES when management's own words convey, in whatever form fits the business, ONE coherent shift: something that used to be an "if" for this company is now discussed as settled fact, and management can say what settled it. The doubt may take many forms, and any genuine version counts — for example: whether customers would actually buy, adopt, renew, or return; whether a product, technology, process, or service would work at real-world scale outside the lab or pilot; whether the economics of the model could ever be attractive; whether a new market, channel, geography, or customer type would accept the company; whether a ramp, launch, transition, integration, or turnaround would actually take hold; whether demand was a one-time spike or durable; whether the company could operate profitably, fund itself, or stand on its own. Management should (a) acknowledge — directly or plainly in substance — that this was a real open question or source of skepticism until recently, whether raised by investors, customers, or the company itself; (b) state that the question is now resolved in the company's favor, speaking about it in the settled, matter-of-fact register of something proven rather than argued; and (c) ground the resolution in concrete recent evidence from the business — actual repeat behavior, real performance in the field, sustained results across customers or periods, completed proof in live operation, or other observed outcomes from the recent past — rather than in confidence, projections, or plans. It strengthens a YES when management describes what the company is now doing differently because the question is closed — planning, investing, or committing on the assumption of the answer. Answer NO if no prior doubt or open question about the business is ever acknowledged — a strong company reporting another good quarter in the usual confident way is not this phenomenon. NO if the doubt is described as still open, only partially answered, or expected to be resolved by future results, trials, or milestones. NO if the claimed resolution rests on management's confidence, belief, or optimism rather than on named recent evidence from the business. NO if the "proof" cited is only a single quarter's financial beat with no underlying business evidence described. NO if management is still actively arguing, defending, or pleading the very point it claims is settled, so the register remains persuasion rather than settled fact. NO if the resolved question is trivial or peripheral to the company rather than a doubt that mattered to what the company could become. 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.

Companies that answered YES

TickerCompanyCallDateCall grade
ALL The Allstate Corporation Q3 2023 2023-11-02 C+
CUE Cue Biopharma, Inc. Q3 2022 2022-11-14 D
EGY VAALCO Energy, Inc. Q2 2021 2021-08-12 B
AMC AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc. Q2 2021 2021-08-09 D
IRT Independence Realty Trust, Inc. Q2 2018 2018-08-02 B
BCOV Brightcove Inc. Q1 2018 2018-04-26 B+
LBTYK Liberty Global's Q1 2016 2016-05-10 C+

How the model reasoned

IRT · Q2 2018 → YESThe question is: Does management identify a SPECIFIC DOUBT OR OPEN QUESTION that until recently hung over the business, and convey that this question has NOW BEEN ANSWERED IN THE COMPANY'S FAVOR with ...YES Management explicitly frames the value-add program as having resolved a prior open question about whether renovations would deliver sustainable long-term growth after short-term disruption. Scott notes the Q2 results "confirmed our confidence and excitement about our ability to generate outsized returns from our value-add program." Farrell directly acknowledges the temporary occupancy impact but states that "our thesis that the short-term pain will yield long-term growth is validated by these returns," citing concrete recent evidence: renovated units generating $186/month rent premiums (21% ROI), a backlog of ~100 pre-leased units, and leasing faster than completion.
BCOV · Q1 2018 → YESThe question is: Does management identify a SPECIFIC DOUBT OR OPEN QUESTION that until recently hung over the business, and convey that this question has NOW BEEN ANSWERED IN THE COMPANY'S FAVOR, poin...YES The transcript shows management explicitly identifying the commodity pricing reset in the media business as a prior open question that had been hanging over retention performance. Andrew Feinberg directly ties the 103% recurring dollar retention rate to “our success and working through the final quarter of our commodity pricing reset,” then states they have “now completed that process” and have “a healthier stickier and higher value added revenue base.” Kevin Rhodes reinforces that they are “now through the commodity pricing reset” and expect sustained 91-94% retention going forward.
EGY · Q2 2021 → YESThe question is: Does management identify a SPECIFIC DOUBT OR OPEN QUESTION that until recently hung over the business, and convey that this question has NOW BEEN ANSWERED IN THE COMPANY'S FAVOR, poin...YES George Maxwell directly acknowledges that the feasibility of reaching the Venus discovery zone from the shelf (rather than deeper water) was a genuine open question that had to be resolved before proceeding: “we had to try and determine was it possible to meet the targeted zones from the shelves… Having established that, that was possible.

More from the question bank

Operating in the future tenseSold before it existsDisproportional responseAnswers go deeper than the scriptSequential re-ratingBreak from their own historyAll 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.