Management's own scoreboard moved

Using ONLY the supplied earnings call transcript and no outside information: On this call, does management convey that the company has crossed an internal threshold in what it is now trying to prove — that the question the organization is organized around answering has shifted from "will anyone buy this / does this work" to "how big can this get / how fast can we serve it" — and does management describe the company's own internal goals, milestones, hiring priorities, capital allocation, or way of measuring itself being reset around that new, larger question? Answer YES when management's own words convey, in whatever form fits the business, ONE coherent transition: the existential or proof-of-concept phase is described as essentially settled — the product works, customers want it, the model is validated, the science is proven, the market is real — and the company's own agenda has visibly moved to the next problem, which is scale: management talking about what it will take to serve a market they now treat as established rather than speculative; describing internal targets, plans, or resource commitments that only make sense if the demand question is already answered; saying the debate inside the company is no longer about whether but about how much, how fast, or how to keep up; or describing that they have stopped spending energy proving the concept and are now spending it on capacity, reach, hiring, distribution, or execution at a larger size. What matters is the described change in what the company is trying to demonstrate — to itself and to investors — presented as a current reality about where the company now stands, not as ambition language about a big market. Answer NO if management is still primarily trying to convince the audience that the product works, that demand exists, that the model is viable, or that the market is real — that is the old question, not the new one. NO if management simply reports strong demand, a good quarter, or a big addressable market without conveying that the company's own internal agenda has moved past proving and onto scaling. NO if the only scale discussion is generic aspiration ("huge opportunity ahead") with no sense that internal goals, resources, or self-measurement have actually been reset around it. NO if the company has always been at scale and there is no transition to describe. 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.