Someone else already paid for the growth

Using ONLY the supplied earnings call transcript and no outside information: On this call, does management describe that AN OUTSIDE PARTY IS ALREADY BEARING THE COST, RISK, OR WORK OF EXPANDING THIS COMPANY'S BUSINESS — that is, someone other than the company is spending its own money, committing its own assets, or doing its own labor in a way that directly enlarges what this company sells, serves, or earns — and does management convey that this outside effort is real and underway now while the resulting business is still mostly ahead of the company? Answer YES when management's own words convey, in whatever form fits the business, ONE coherent phenomenon: the growth in front of the company is being financed or executed substantially by others, so the company's own reach is expanding faster than its own spending, headcount, or asset base. Any genuine expression of this counts, and the form varies widely across industries. For example — a customer, partner, or licensee funding, building, staffing, prepaying for, or dedicating its own facilities and capacity to work the company will perform or supply; franchisees, dealers, operators, agents, resellers, integrators, or distributors putting their own capital and people behind selling, installing, or serving the company's offering; a large counterparty running its own program, rollout, build-out, or launch at its own expense in which this company's product, technology, or capacity is already specified or embedded; a government body, institution, insurer, or program committing funding, reimbursement, or procurement that pays for adoption of what the company provides; another company manufacturing, hosting, distributing, marketing, or delivering on the company's behalf using its own plants, fleet, network, stores, or salesforce; a co-investor, joint-venture partner, or landlord paying for the assets the company's business runs on; or existing customers doing the recruiting, referring, or specifying that brings the next customers in without the company spending to acquire them. Three things should come through in management's own voice. First, THE OUTSIDE EFFORT IS REAL AND ALREADY IN MOTION — identifiable counterparties are actually spending, building, deploying, funding, or selling now, not merely negotiating, considering, or expressing interest. Second, THE COST OR RISK SITS ON THE OTHER SIDE — management conveys, directly or plainly in substance, that the company is not the one paying for or carrying the bulk of this expansion; it may be contributing its product, technology, brand, expertise, or existing assets, but the incremental money, capacity, labor, or market-development burden belongs to someone else. Third, THE PAYOFF IS MOSTLY STILL AHEAD — management indicates that the business this outside effort will generate is early, ramping, or scheduled, so the results just reported reflect the company before that effort pays off, and that it is meaningful relative to the company's current size. Answer NO if the company's growth is being funded and executed chiefly by its own capital, its own people, and its own assets, however efficient or profitable it is. NO if the outside parties are ordinary suppliers, vendors, or subcontractors filling routine input needs, or ordinary customers simply placing purchase orders, with no sense that they are carrying cost, risk, or work that would otherwise sit with this company. NO if the arrangement is only planned, being explored, piloted, announced as a future direction, or contingent on approvals, financing, or decisions not yet made. NO if partnerships, channels, or programs 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 grows. NO if the outside-funded effort is already mature and fully reflected in current results, with no ramp still ahead. 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 outside money is chiefly repairing the company's balance sheet, funding losses, or bridging a shortfall rather than expanding the business. NO if the only language is generic talk about partnerships, ecosystems, or being asset-light 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.