Someone else's clock has started running against them

Using ONLY the supplied earnings call transcript and no outside information: On this call, does management describe that ITS COUNTERPARTIES ARE ALREADY LOSING SOMETHING REAL AND ONGOING — money, output, access, standing, time, or an opportunity of their own — FOR AS LONG AS THEY DO NOT HAVE WHAT THIS COMPANY PROVIDES, and that this accumulating loss on the other side is ALREADY VISIBLE in how those parties are behaving toward the company today? 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) A RUNNING METER ON THE OTHER SIDE. Management describes a cost, loss, or forfeited gain that the customer, partner, or other counterparty is CURRENTLY ACCUMULATING and that only stops once the company delivers. The essential feature is that the counterparty's clock is already running: waiting is not neutral for them, it is expensive. Any genuine expression of this counts, and the form varies widely across industries — for example: a buyer whose own plant, fleet, site, network, program, or operation cannot run at full value, or cannot start at all, until the company's product, capacity, material, service, people, or approval arrives; a counterparty whose own revenue, production, or output is being left on the table each period they go without it; a party carrying penalties, idle-asset costs, higher operating costs, rework, downtime, spoilage, or losses that persist until the company's solution is in place; a counterparty racing its own competitors, its own market window, its own funding period, or its own customers' expectations, for whom every period of delay is a period of position lost; a party whose own commitments, obligations, or promises to third parties are exposed until the company performs. Management should describe this concretely enough that one can see WHAT the counterparty is losing and WHY it keeps losing it — not merely that the company's offering delivers value, saves money, improves efficiency, or has a strong return on investment. (2) THE OTHER SIDE IS ALREADY ACTING LIKE THE METER IS RUNNING. Management points to real, current behavior by those counterparties that reflects the accumulating cost — described as things actually happening in recent dealings, not as an argument about why the market should be attractive. Any genuine expression counts: counterparties pressing for earlier delivery, accepting worse terms, paying more, prepaying, committing sooner or longer, escalating internally, bypassing their normal process, absorbing inconvenience, taking partial supply, funding or resourcing part of the work themselves, or returning repeatedly because each period without the company costs them more than the price of having it. The essence is ONE phenomenon: the economics of delay sit on the counterparty's side of the table rather than the company's, so the company is not persuading anyone — it is being chased by people whose own losses grow while they wait. Management should also convey, directly or plainly in substance, that this dynamic is generating business that is meaningful relative to the company's current size and whose contribution is still largely ahead of the results just reported. Answer NO if the offering is described mainly in terms of benefits, savings, productivity, better performance, attractive payback, or good returns for the customer, however compelling — discretionary value is not a running meter. NO if the loss or cost being described belongs to the company itself rather than to its counterparties. NO if the counterparty's problem is generic or abstract ("customers face cost pressure," "the industry needs to modernize," "our customers want to grow"). NO if the urgency rests only on a future rule, deadline, cycle, or condition not yet in force, or is only anticipated rather than already being felt. NO if management merely asserts that its product is essential, mission-critical, or non-discretionary without describing what the counterparty is actually losing by going without it. NO if the pressure is attributed to a brief disruption or shortage that management expects to pass and does not treat as characteristic of its market. NO if the only evidence is one isolated customer anecdote with no sense of a broader pattern. NO if the company is chiefly working to win, stimulate, or defend demand, or if the binding constraint described is the company's own inability to find business. 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.