Question Bank › Winning more per swing than they used to — and t

Winning more per swing than they used to — and the change is recent, real, and still playing out

Calls Tested
482
Answered YES
6
Hit Rate
1.2%
rare by design

Akamai Technologies, Inc. (AKAM) — this company's answers

NO on the Q4 2021 call 2022-02-15 B
The model's full reasoning — Q4 2021 call → NO1. The user wants me to determine if management conveys that the company has recently begun converting opportunities into actual won business at a clearly higher rate or scale than its own recent past, grounding this improvement in real events that already happened while indicating the same improved conversion is still continuing right now. 2. I need to analyze the transcript for the three parts: (1) A SELF-COMPARISON SHOWING IMPROVED CONVERSION. (2) THE EVIDENCE IS REAL AND ALREADY BANKED. (3) THE IMPROVEMENT IS PRESENTED AS STILL IN FORCE. 3. Let's scan the transcript for any mention of win rates, close rates, conversion rates, or comparisons of current success against past success in landing business. 4. Key topics discussed: - Q4 2021 results (revenue, security growth, etc.) - Acquisition of Linode (announced, not closed yet). - Guardicore acquisition (closed in Q4 2021). - Guidance for 2022. - Renewals of top customers. 5. Let's look for specific language about conversion. - Tom Leighton: "In Q4, we spent $271 million to buy back just over 2.4 million shares of stock." (Not relevant) - Tom Leighton on Guardicore: "As a part of Akamai, Guardicore has continued its strong growth momentum and closed major deals last quarter at one of the largest freight railways in the U.S. and at one of the largest telecommunication companies in South America." (This is about specific deals closed, but is it a comparison to past conversion rates? No, it's just reporting wins.) - Ed McGowan on Guardicore: "We are very pleased with the initial momentum we've seen from Guardicore as well as the continued growth of the pipeline." (Pipeline is mentioned, but the question is about conversion, not pipeline.) - Tom Leighton on Guardicore: "And you see that in the improved guidance we've given. And just we closed the deal a few months ago, and we're looking at this year then of doing $30 million to $35 million and now, as you heard from Ed, substantially more than that." (This is about revenue guidance, not conversion rate.) - Tom Leighton on Guardicore: "And I can tell you from talking to many of our customers, many of the world's major banks, they are very interested in what Guardicore can do..." (Interest, not conversion.) - Ed McGowan on renewals: "typical renewal pricing, nothing unusual in terms of anything in the market to call out there.

← Back to the full AKAM analysis

Show the exact prompt the model was given
Using ONLY the supplied earnings call transcript and no outside information: On this call, does management convey that the company has RECENTLY BEGUN CONVERTING ITS OPPORTUNITIES INTO ACTUAL WON BUSINESS AT A CLEARLY HIGHER RATE OR SCALE THAN ITS OWN RECENT PAST — that when the company goes after orders, customers, contracts, projects, approvals, placements, or engagements, it is now landing them more often, faster, or bigger than it was landing them several quarters ago — AND does management ground this improvement in real events that already happened while indicating that the same improved conversion is still continuing right now? Answer YES when management's own words convey, in whatever form fits the business, ONE coherent phenomenon with all three parts present: (1) A SELF-COMPARISON SHOWING IMPROVED CONVERSION. Management contrasts how the company is currently converting opportunities into won business against how it converted them before — for example: win rates, success rates, close rates, or hit rates described as visibly higher than the company's own recent norm; a much larger share of pursuits, bids, evaluations, trials, or discussions now ending in the company's favor; wins now arriving at a frequency, pace, or size the company was not achieving several quarters ago; business the company used to lose, miss, or fail to land now being captured; or management plainly saying that its efforts are producing more than the same efforts used to produce. The comparison must be against the company's OWN prior experience — not against competitors, the industry, or last year's market conditions. (2) THE EVIDENCE IS REAL AND ALREADY BANKED. The improved conversion must be demonstrated by things that actually happened in the recent period — actual wins, signings, orders, awards, placements, openings, or customers landed and identifiable in management's account — not by pipeline, interest, proposals outstanding, or management's confidence about future closings. (3) THE IMPROVEMENT IS PRESENTED AS STILL IN FORCE. Management conveys, directly or plainly in substance, that this improved conversion is not a finished episode: further wins of the same kind are continuing to arrive, are in late stages, or are expected from the same drivers already at work — so the recent wins read as the early stretch of a changed trajectory rather than a completed burst, with reasons for the improvement attached to the company itself (its offering, capability, reputation, positioning, or execution) rather than to a one-time external event. Answer NO if management reports strong demand, growth, or good results without contrasting current conversion against the company's own prior rate of converting. NO if the claimed improvement rests on pipeline, quotes, proposals, or hoped-for closings rather than on business actually landed. NO if the improvement is attributed mainly to a one-time event, a single unusual deal, an easy comparison, seasonality, or a temporary condition management expects to fade. NO if management describes the run of wins as concluded, slowing, or unlikely to continue. NO if winning at this rate is simply normal for this company and nothing about its conversion has recently changed. 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.

Companies that answered YES

TickerCompanyCallDateCall grade
NICE NICE Ltd. Q4 2023 2024-02-22 B+
IMAX IMAX Corporation Q2 2023 2023-07-26 B+
GVP GSE Systems, Inc. Q1 2023 2023-05-15 D
FAT FAT Brands Inc. Q4 2021 2022-03-21 F
TENB Tenable Holdings, Inc. Q2 2021 2021-07-27 A
LBTYK Liberty Global's Q1 2016 2016-05-10 C+

How the model reasoned

FAT · Q4 2021 → YESThe question is about whether management conveys that the company has recently begun converting its opportunities into actual won business at a clearly higher rate or scale than its own recent past. ...**YES** Management conveys an improved conversion rate through the statement that new construction and franchise sales are "stronger than we've seen in many years, if not ever," directly contrasting current performance against their own historical experience.
IMAX · Q2 2023 → YESThe question is about whether management conveys that the company has recently begun converting its opportunities into actual won business at a clearly higher rate or scale than its own recent past. ...YES Management explicitly contrasts current signings performance against its own recent past (84 YTD vs. 47 in all of 2022; 46 in Q2 vs. 13 in Q2 2022; 68 new systems vs.
LBTYK · Q1 2016 → YESThe question is about whether management conveys that the company has recently begun converting its opportunities into actual won business at a clearly higher rate or scale than its own recent past. ...**YES** Management conveys exactly this three-part phenomenon. (1) Self-comparison: They repeatedly contrast current conversion against their own recent past.

More from the question bank

This quarter could not have been described lBetting on a customer they cannot yet nameConversion calendar in handSecond wave already orderingGround-level proof points accumulatingInsiders still discovering the upsideAll questions →
Not investment advice. Artul.ai publishes AI-generated earnings-call quality grades and expected-volatility estimates — never buy or sell recommendations. We tested over 1,600 predictive hypotheses against 165,000 transcripts; the honest result, including what failed, is documented in our methodology.