Sold-out economics

Using ONLY the supplied earnings call transcript and no outside information: On this call, does management describe that WHAT THE COMPANY SELLS IS NOW FETCHING MATERIALLY MORE PER UNIT THAN IT RECENTLY DID, while THE COST OF PRODUCING OR DELIVERING THAT UNIT IS ALREADY SET AND NOT RISING WITH IT — so that the additional money coming in from the higher realization lands on a cost base the company has already committed to and paid for? Answer YES when management's own words convey, in whatever form fits the business, ONE coherent situation with both halves present as a present-tense reality: (1) REALIZATION PER UNIT HAS STEPPED UP AND IS BEING CAPTURED NOW. Management indicates that the amount the company actually receives for each unit of what it sells has moved up meaningfully versus its own recent experience, and that this is already flowing into current activity rather than being hoped for. "Unit" and "realization" may take whatever form fits the business — the price of a commodity, product, contract, service, day, room, seat, ton, barrel, megawatt, load, procedure, subscription, or transaction; the rate, spread, fee, royalty, day-rate, or margin per job the company is now signing or renewing at; a mix shift toward materially better-priced work; or repricing of existing business onto higher terms as it rolls over. What matters is that management conveys the company is now realizing distinctly more per unit than it was, and that this improvement is already showing up in what is being sold, booked, renewed, or contracted. (2) THE COST OF SERVING THAT UNIT IS ALREADY FIXED, OWNED, OR CONTRACTED. Management conveys that the resources needed to produce or deliver that volume are already in place and largely locked — the assets are built and owned, the capacity exists, the workforce is in place, the inputs or key costs are hedged, contracted, or otherwise not moving with the higher realization, the development or drilling or build phase is behind them, or the cost per unit is flat, declining, or known. The point management makes, directly or plainly in substance, is that the company does not have to spend proportionally more to earn the higher amount: the incremental money is largely additive because the cost side is already settled. The essence is ONE phenomenon: a company whose selling price or realized rate is climbing against a cost base that is already sunk and static, so that each additional dollar of realization drops through with unusual force. The industry, the form of the price move, and the reason costs are fixed may vary widely. Answer NO if management is chiefly describing higher prices being passed through to recover rising costs — inflation, wages, freight, materials, energy, or currency moving against the company — since that is cost recovery, not the widening gap this question is about. NO if the cost base is itself rising with volume, or if management is in the middle of a heavy build, hiring wave, or investment cycle whose spending grows alongside the business. NO if the improvement in realization is only expected, contracted for a future period, contingent on market conditions, or something management hopes will materialize. NO if pricing is described as competitive, under pressure, discounted, or set by others in a way the company cannot capture. NO if management discusses only company-level profitability or margins without conveying that per-unit realization has moved up against a settled cost base. NO if the company's costs are known but its realization is flat or declining. NO if the idea 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.