Operating leverage on someone else's dime

Using ONLY the supplied earnings call transcript and no outside information: On this call, does management describe that a meaningful and growing part of how the company delivers, sells, or expands its business is being carried by RESOURCES OTHER PARTIES OWN AND PAY FOR — that is, capital, facilities, equipment, inventory, people, sales effort, or customer relationships that sit on someone else's books rather than the company's — and does management present this borrowed capability as something already operating and growing now, so that the company can expand its reach or output faster than its own spending, headcount, or asset base is growing? Answer YES when management's own words convey, in whatever form fits the business, ONE coherent situation: the company's expansion is increasingly powered by other people's resources, and this is already visible in how the business currently runs. Any genuine expression of this counts, and the form varies widely across industries. For example — outside parties putting their own capital into building, buying, owning, or operating the assets the company's business runs on, while the company keeps the economics of the activity; partners, franchisees, licensees, operators, agents, contractors, dealers, resellers, integrators, or channel firms employing their own people and funding their own operations to sell, install, service, or deliver on the company's behalf; customers or counterparties funding, hosting, staffing, or supplying part of the work themselves; another company's manufacturing plants, fleet, network, real estate, stores, salesforce, or distribution being used instead of the company building its own; the company monetizing something it already owns — technology, a brand, data, a process, a library, a permit, a design — through others who bear the cost of deploying it; or management explaining that the number of people or dollars working on the company's behalf is now far larger than what the company itself employs or spends. Two things should come through in management's own voice. First, the outside resources must be REAL AND ALREADY WORKING — actual partners, operators, or counterparties currently doing the work, funding the assets, or carrying the cost, described as part of how the business operates today rather than as a model the company intends to adopt. Second, management must convey, directly or plainly in substance, that this arrangement lets the company get BIGGER OR REACH FURTHER THAN ITS OWN RESOURCES WOULD ALLOW — for example that growth from here requires little incremental capital or headcount from the company, that its effective footprint or salesforce vastly exceeds what it directly owns or employs, or that it is expanding into places, volumes, or markets it could not fund on its own. Answer NO if the company's growth is delivered chiefly through assets it owns and people it employs, however efficient or profitable it is. NO if outside parties are merely ordinary suppliers, vendors, or subcontractors filling routine input needs, with no sense that they carry capability or cost that would otherwise sit with the company. NO if the arrangement is only planned, being explored, piloted, or announced as a future direction rather than already operating. NO if partnerships or channel relationships are mentioned only in passing, as logos on a slide, or as a small side activity that management does not connect to how the company scales. NO if management is chiefly describing the reverse — insourcing, buying out partners, taking distribution or manufacturing in-house, or replacing outside operators with its own. NO if the only "leverage" described is generic language about partnerships, ecosystems, or asset-light strategy without concrete outside resources actually doing the work. 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.