This is an edited version of the English translation of the Q4 FY2024 sell-side follow-up meeting which  
was conducted in Japanese. The Q&A session was translated from Japanese using an AI tool and  
subsequently edited for clarity.  
Recruit Holdings Q4 FY2024 Sell-side Follow-up Meeting  
May 9, 2025  
Please refer to the presentation slides for the earnings results call.  
Arai: Thank you very much. Actually, I initially wrote down what I was going to talk about today.  
However, if I did that, I would end up talking almost entirely by myself. So, I prepared a summarized version,  
which is what I presented as a summary today.  
This is the actual material I created, and it includes various points I wanted to convey. However, it also  
contained a lot of mathematical elements, which I significantly cut down during the earnings call.  
Therefore, while looking at this chart, I would like to talk about what I am focusing on and what I consider  
important. Of course, I will also answer any questions you may have. I will try my best to explain things clearly  
while referring to the numbers.  
Slide 24  
Regarding our results, as you can see, and as detailed in our financial statements, our revenue components  
are approximately 1 trillion yen in the US, 1.7 trillion yen in Japan, and slightly less than 900 billion yen in  
Europe and Australia.  
However, when it comes to profit, the contribution of our US HR Technology business is significant. Although  
we don't disclose specific figures, we are already at a stage where we are earning more in dollars than in yen.  
On the right side of this chart, we are showing gross profit. The gross profit margin on this revenue is  
approximately 60%. The cost of sales, which accounts for the difference, is almost entirely from our Staffing  
business.  
In Staffing, for accounting purposes, when we bill our customers, the amount includes the salaries and wages  
paid to the temporary staff. So, salaries and wages paid to temporary staff are recorded both as revenue and  
cost of sales. This is unavoidable from an accounting perspective.  
The cost of sales is calculated by directly deducting those salaries and wages. So, money that we don't  
actually touch is included in our revenue, which is somewhat distorted.  
On the other hand, businesses like our HR Technology segment and MMT have gross margins in the mid-90%  
range, with almost no cost of sales. In that sense, over 90% of our consolidated cost of sales comes from the  
Staffing business.  
Actually, this way of looking at gross profit aligns with how we view our Total Addressable Market (TAM), so I  
consider this gross profit figure quite important. At the same time, the percentage of margin against this gross  
profit, which is shown on the next page, I believe accurately reflects the reality.  
Slide 25  
The chart on the left side of this slide shows what we generally refer to as adjusted EBITDA.  
In parentheses, it says EBITDA+S, which, as you know, means we have added back stock-based  
compensation. In other words, it represents EBITDA before stock-based compensation.  
This transcript is provided for the convenience of investors only and this is a translated version of the Japanese call.  
1
We originally changed to this concept in 2021. When the stock-based compensation plan was created at the  
beginning of the 2021 calendar year, we decided to add it back because it's a non-cash item. This is the  
current basis for our adjusted EBITDA.  
As some people find it confusing, we are using EBITDA+S this time. If you look at the very bottom for fiscal  
year 2024, you can see a figure in the 30% range.  
This is the gross profit margin restated, and if you look at it, I think you'll see figures that suggest we're quite a  
technology company. I personally believe that mathematically, this probably represents the actual situation.  
While we will continue to discuss consolidated margins, such as the ordinary margin on revenue being around  
19.1% or 19.8%, I think looking at these figures is probably more appropriate.  
At the same time, we have received numerous comments regarding the pros and cons of adding back  
stock-based compensation and the difficulty in understanding it. Therefore, on the right side, we have also  
presented the ordinary adjusted EBITDA figures that we used until fiscal year 2020. We will probably be  
looking at both of these going forward.  
We will continue to present the adjusted EBITDA on the left side. However, considering the confusion it might  
cause and whether to think in terms of cash flow or profit margin (in this case, looking at the personnel  
expenses of the HR Technology business on the right-hand chart, as it takes that into account), if you believe  
that whether we pay in cash or stock, cost is cost, then the right-hand chart makes more logical sense.  
We would like to gradually converge on which basis we will use for our discussions, taking into account your  
feedback in the future. That's what we are thinking. In any case, cost improvements are progressing across  
various areas, so the graph should show an upward trend.  
Slide 26  
The next page presents another concept: Non-GAAP operating income. It has been quite some time since we  
acquired Indeed and then Glassdoor. Since we are based on IFRS, the amortization of goodwill is reflected in  
the Non-GAAP operating income, and its margin is another important figure to consider when evaluating  
profitability, in my opinion.  
Using operating income under IFRS includes all temporary items, so I will primarily focus on Non-GAAP  
operating income, along with the previously mentioned EBITDA and EBITDA+S, as the three key figures for  
evaluating profitability.  
Slide 28  
That's all for the consolidated discussion. Next, let's move on to the HR Technology business.  
This shows the quarterly dollar-based revenue.  
Revenue on a US dollar basis for HR Technology was 1.85 billion US dollars, an increase of 8.7%, which was  
roughly in line with our February outlook of 8.4% year over year increase. Compared to the third quarter,  
revenue increased by 2.6%.  
As Deko mentioned earlier, data confirms that in the US, the number of paid job postings from small and  
medium-sized businesses has been trending weaker since the beginning of March compared to the overall job  
market trends in the US. Unfortunately, we were unable to detect this in February, so the actual result fell  
below the forecast we presented in February, reaching 1.18 billion US dollars with an increase of 2.2%.  
Compared to the third quarter, this represents an increase of only 0.3%.  
Regarding margins, we continue to strictly manage costs, resulting in a figure of 34.6%. However, looking at  
the +S part of EBITDA+S on the right, we received quite a few questions from institutional investors asking  
why the margin had decreased compared to Q2 and Q3.  
This transcript is provided for the convenience of investors only and this is a translated version of the Japanese call.  
2
My answer is that the accounting recognition of stock-based compensation actually fluctuates quite a bit each  
quarter for various reasons.  
For example, if the number of employees decreases, then the amount of stock-based compensation will also  
decrease.  
There are factors that cause it to increase and decrease. However, as you can see, if you look at the dark blue  
line, it remains relatively constant at around 29% on a quarterly basis  
Therefore, if it weren't for the impact of stock-based compensation, I think we would have seen stable  
operations throughout the year.  
Because of this, I've recently been thinking that looking at the figures without the +S (stock-based  
compensation) in EBITDA might be a better way to understand the underlying reality.  
Shall we move on to the next page?  
Slide 29 and 30  
This page looks back at the history of our HR Technology business. Those who have been following us for a  
while may vividly recall the remarkable revenue growth and margin expansion in fiscal year 2021.  
As I mentioned earlier, the highest quarterly margin within that period was 43.1%. I believe that in future  
phases of revenue growth, surpassing that level shouldn't be too difficult.  
The reason for this is that in that year, 2021, our headcount was probably just over 13,000. However, the  
following year saw a rapid increase in personnel, peaking around December 2022 at over 16,000. While  
revenue increased, the margin declined, as you can see, due to a sharp rise in personnel costs.  
We implemented the first cost reduction in March, followed by another one a year later. As of the end of March  
most recently, our headcount has fallen to around 11,500.  
So, when we hit our peak margin, the headcount wasn't that low; it was around 13,000. After that, it exceeded  
16,000, and now it's around 11,000 something. Considering costs, I don't think it's a pipe dream to surpass the  
previous 43% margin.  
Nagao: Are you saying that the 43% can be surpassed on an annual basis?  
Arai: I don't know. I don't know how long the revenue growth will continue. However, if our cost structure is  
solid, I don't think it's an outlandish statement even if revenue fluctuates to some extent.  
As our revenue has grown this large, we can't really spend a very high percentage on advertising and  
promotion, even if we wanted to. There aren't that many places to spend it effectively, so I think the  
percentage will be limited.  
Looking at the margin on the next page, as I mentioned earlier, we created the stock-based compensation  
plan starting in the 2020 calendar year, and that has accumulated to around ¥70 billion plus.  
The amount will decrease as the number of employees decreases and increases as it increases. But if you  
think about it calmly, an increase in headcount leads to a larger add-back, which improves the percentage.  
However, is that truly a good thing? I think looking at the figures without the +S is probably better for everyone  
to track the progress of efficiency.  
By the way, almost 95% of the stock-based compensation comes from the HR Technology. Management in  
other operations also receive stock.  
This transcript is provided for the convenience of investors only and this is a translated version of the Japanese call.  
3
In terms of who receives it, it's almost entirely limited to the HR Technology business. You can assume that  
almost all of it is tied to HR Technology.  
The headcount at the end of fiscal year 2024 is actually around 11,800.  
Slide 31  
Next, this slide probably contains the most interesting content for everyone today.  
From the left, we have revenue in US dollars, then revenue in Japanese yen in the middle. And then the  
EBITDA margin, which is presented in Japanese yen as well, and the margin itself doesn't change regardless  
of the currency, so that's why it's presented this way.  
On the far left, in US dollars, I'd like you to focus on the US and Europe & Others.  
And for our Japan business, since it operates in yen, we'd like you to look at the figures in yen. That's why  
we've provided both yen and dollar figures.  
Since we're using an exchange rate of 145 yen to the dollar this time, we've already incurred a 5% loss due to  
the yen-dollar conversion. To make things clearer, we've prepared both yen and dollar figures this time.  
The green figures in the middle are pro forma numbers, and this is our launchpad. The figures up to last year  
don't include the Japan business, so the actual results are solid and accurate. However, for analysis, future  
forecasts, and understanding trends, we believe it's best to use these green pro forma figures as your starting  
point.  
Another point here, looking at the margin on the far right, the real, or actual, margin before the pro forma  
adjustment is 35.9%, but it becomes 33% in the pro forma. I think many of you might assume that the Japan  
business dragged down the overall margin.  
Since we don't distribute stock-based compensation to our employees in Japan, the profitability of our Japan  
operations appears lower when looking at the EBITDA+S basis.  
Therefore, we want you to look at the margin before adding back stock-based compensation, which is the blue  
section. If you do that, you'll see that we're not really losing that much ground – only about one point-  
something percent – so the Japan business isn't significantly pulling down the overall performance.  
The decrease in revenue from gross to net actually has a positive effect on the margin. This is a prime  
example of why you can't just take the numbers at face value.  
Even with the revenue decrease, the increase in margin meant that the integration didn't result in a significant  
loss overall.  
For FY2025, we will see improvement, reaching 34.5%. The increase from 33% to 34.5% is due to the  
efficiency improvements that Deko discussed. This means that despite the gross revenue in yen not being  
particularly strong, it's actually decreasing, we anticipate both the actual amount and the percentage of the  
margin to increase. This is probably the most significant point.  
Yoneshima: Is the pro forma revenue for FY2024 net revenue?  
Arai: Yes, it is.  
Nagao: May I ask a question as well?  
Regarding the yen-based revenue for FY2025, since it's Japan, I assume it's an apple-to-apple comparison.  
Could you explain the background for the slightly weak figure of -2.7% here?  
Arai: Yes. We have advertising and placement. Placement is positive.  
This transcript is provided for the convenience of investors only and this is a translated version of the Japanese call.  
4
However, as a result, the negative impact of advertising can’t be offset, leading to the -2.7% figure. Since  
placement is positive, it naturally means that the decline in advertising is larger. About 70% of the decline in  
advertising is due to the difference between gross and net revenue.  
The majority of the remaining 30% is a more detailed matter, but the fact is that by April 1st, everything except  
one specific business was converted to PPC (Pay-Per-Click). The only business that hasn't been converted is  
our new graduate recruitment business. This business operates on a one-year cycle, so the current  
preparations are still based on the old system, and we will continue with the current approach for the rest of  
this year. That's the basic situation.  
So, by this time next year, our new graduate recruitment business will also be converted to the PPC model. To  
be more precise, we plan to make that model change sometime within this current fiscal year. Therefore, the  
difference between gross and net revenue from that change should account for almost all of the remaining  
30%.  
Operationally, the business is progressing smoothly, and you can consider it to be roughly flat.  
Nagao: I understand completely. Thank you.  
Arai: Since this is the first year of integration, our primary goal for this year is to stabilize operations rather  
than aggressively pursue revenue growth. We anticipate further improving operational efficiency from next  
year onwards, and I believe revenue growth will likely follow.  
However, this year Japan will be relatively low-key, with the negative growth largely attributable to the  
significant difference between gross and net revenue.  
Oum: Regarding the US revenue plan, the explanation was that you would monetize to offset an  
approximately 10% volume decrease to achieve a flat result.  
However, looking back, there was also a negative figure in the previous period, perhaps around the same  
10%, and you were able to achieve 5% growth. Considering this, the hurdle for monetization seems to have  
increased. Are you making preparations for this period? Why is it -10% resulting in 0% this period? Or, from  
another perspective, you mentioned that there's a range for each business. Could the maximum range be  
+5%, or could it also be 0%?  
Arai: It depends on the timing, but the fact that this March and April have seen a significant weakening in the  
situation is a very large factor behind the current figures. Whether this is a temporary phenomenon or will  
continue is one parameter that would create the range in our forecast.  
If we consider how long this decline will continue, a band emerges. On the other hand, as I've mentioned  
before, the effect of monetization involves not only increasing the numerator but also decreasing the  
denominator, which has a positive impact. However, that effort gradually diminishes in its effectiveness.  
So, we will strive to ensure that the effect doesn't diminish. For example, for job postings lower than average  
price, we can set a threshold as minimum budgets to reduce them. We talked about such strategies before.  
As we set the minimum budget for monetization, the number of posted jobs will decrease, and the impact of  
those measures will naturally diminish. But despite that, our current scenario is that we should be able to  
offset this negative volume at a minimum.  
The reason Japan is a bit weak and can't immediately return to growth is partly due to a pause in various  
investments and hiring before the reorganization, a typical reaction of not undertaking major changes before  
an integration. This might cause a slight lag. However, if we can effectively recover from that, we anticipate a  
good season from next fiscal year onwards for that business.  
Slide 32  
This transcript is provided for the convenience of investors only and this is a translated version of the Japanese call.  
5
In Staffing, Japan's growth had sufficiently offset the negative performance overseas until last year. However,  
it seems unlikely that this will be the case this year, so we're hitting a ceiling. Regarding margin, I don't think  
we'll reach 6%, but I believe we can manage with a slight decrease compared to last year.  
Nagao: What kind of image should we have for the margin in fiscal year 2025 when comparing Japan and  
overseas?  
Arai: Margin, right. The margin in Japan itself is not decreasing. If we were to invest in systems, it might  
decrease, but considering only the operational soundness, it's not deteriorating.  
Slide 33  
Let's move on. This is also a business where pro forma figures are necessary. The HR Solutions segment is  
gone, and M&S has changed its name to MMT.  
So, the launchpad is the green figure of 540 billion yen. We previously showed a pie chart once every  
half-year, but as I mentioned earlier, the right half, which accounts for about 50% of revenue, will drive  
revenue growth. That is, this area will achieve revenue growth higher than 5%, pulling up the overall figure to  
achieve a 5% increase in total revenue.  
Regarding margin, before allocating corporate overhead costs, we achieved the 30% we had been discussing,  
actually 30.2%. However, when we redraw that onto the green bar, it reaches 25.4%. This is the pro forma  
figure.  
We are saying that if we achieve this 5% revenue growth, we should be able to see an improvement of around  
2.2 percentage points even this year. In the medium term, we expect this to reach around 35%.  
Also, as Deko mentioned earlier, we can now discuss this Marketing Solutions business much more clearly, so  
I think we can gradually increase the level of detail. That concludes the business discussion.  
Slide 34 and 35  
As a result, at the consolidated level, while revenue will slightly decrease and gross profit will also slightly  
decrease, we anticipate an improvement in margin.  
Yamamura: Regarding cost management, I had thought that the HR Technology business had already  
undergone significant personnel reductions and reached a near-limit. Where do you see room for these cost  
improvements? Should we understand it as coming from AI-driven automation or other areas?  
Arai: There's a general understanding that there are quite a few areas where we can trim costs. As Deko also  
mentioned, about one-third of new coding is already being automated, so at least in that area, there's no need  
to increase headcount.  
We are considering things like not needing to replace staff lost through natural attrition. When we consider  
various other small areas where we can make cuts, as I mentioned in the segment-specific discussion, we still  
anticipate margin improvement in the HR Technology.  
We are told that this isn't being implemented in Japan yet, so the main impact will be in the US and Europe.  
While we don't provide separate figures, the fact that the overall margin is up by 1.5% means that the  
improvement in those regions other than Japan must be even higher, or they have to improve significantly to  
reach that 1.5% overall increase if Japan remains flat. So, there's a strong push for improvement there.  
Since we can't increase revenue significantly in the short term, we are moving towards focusing on how to  
increase profit. We are implementing various cost-cutting measures in different areas, and the figures we've  
presented this time represent the minimum we expect to achieve.  
Slide 36, 37 and 38  
This transcript is provided for the convenience of investors only and this is a translated version of the Japanese call.  
6
Finally, regarding capital allocation, we did quite a bit last year, spending 819.6 billion yen, and we also  
conducted share cancellations, so I think significant improvement was achieved in that regard.  
The 450 billion yen buyback program that we started in March is still in progress. We originally planned to  
continue it until December, but we've already spent about 76% of that amount, so it will likely finish much  
sooner than December, probably sometime in June. This will naturally lead to the question of what we will do  
next.  
We have many M&A ideas, so we will monitor whether those materialize while also observing the economic  
environment. For example, if the economic environment were to harm our operations, buybacks would no  
longer be a viable option. However, if that doesn't happen and no M&A occurs, we would consider doing  
another buyback. That's our current thinking.  
Therefore, while our target of reaching 600 billion yen remains, we may need to be flexible depending on  
future economic conditions and circumstances. However, we don't currently anticipate a situation where that  
would be necessary.  
Regarding dividends, as we've communicated, shareholder returns will take other forms, so this year we are  
increasing the dividend by 1 yen per share.  
What I didn't mention earlier were points like how I look at gross margin and profitability on a gross profit  
basis, the concept of adding back or not adding back stock-based compensation, and the reasons for the  
negative trend in Japan's HR Technology business. These are somewhat detailed topics, so I omitted them  
earlier, but I thought it would be better to explain them to you today, hence this explanation.  
Q&A Session  
Arai: I will now take questions.  
Yoneshima: Regarding the revenue of the HR Technology business, I'd like you to elaborate. For the US,  
there's an assumption of a 10% decrease, but you also mentioned in today's briefing that the second half  
might see a bottoming out. Is the forecast based on a bottoming out, or is it really based on a sharp 10%  
decline?  
Arai: It's not a 10% decline followed by a flat trend; it's rather a gradual downward trend.  
Yoneshima: One more point. Europe & Others is at +8%. While the Staffing business is a bit weak, the HR  
Technology business in Europe & Others is showing relatively good figures. What's the reason or background  
for this?  
Arai: There's quite a high potential for monetization. Progress is, in a good way, lagging behind the US, which  
suggests there's room for growth.  
Yamamura: This isn't about the numbers, but a follow-up on the Japan discussion. I tried to roughly map out  
how the analyst model might evolve by combining the HR Solutions and HR Technology, but today Deko was  
saying something like the monetization approach might be shifting…  
Arai: Whether it's advertising or placement services, if we can help candidates find good jobs, that's what  
matters, right? If I were a candidate, that's what I would think.  
The people who need our services want to land a good job as quickly as possible, so the method doesn't  
really matter to them, especially since they're not paying us directly.  
The perspective might be a bit different for the companies. There's a difference in how they allocate funds  
depending on whether they pay upon successful hire or pay for advertising regardless of the outcome.  
When considering hiring good people, companies might be more inclined to spend money on placement  
services.  
This transcript is provided for the convenience of investors only and this is a translated version of the Japanese call.  
7
This relates to the ongoing discussion about how to allocate the recruitment budget. Ultimately, the most  
desirable outcome is for Recruit to receive payment, regardless of whether it's through advertising or  
placement fees.  
The same applies to the candidate pool. The resumes, or profiles, are the same. Matching based on the same  
information is the most efficient. Doing this together rather than separately increases that efficiency. The AI  
agent video also illustrates this. We provide an app to candidates, but we don't directly charge them for it.  
However, the data we gather is enormous. If that leads to better matching, then it pays off for us in terms of  
cost. That's the underlying philosophy, in the long run.  
Yamamura: So, whether it's advertising or placement doesn't matter? What's your vision for what happens  
when placement and automation compete?  
Arai: Ultimately, even if we look at the current situation, there are people who pay for advertising and people  
who pay for placement, and many customers use both. So, it's not necessary for them to become one single  
thing. It's just a matter of how money is spent and how hiring is done. I think those two categories, or  
methods, will remain regardless of whether or not automation happens.  
However, even in our placement business, we are advancing automation. Therefore, compared to those who  
operate solely with human staff, our efficiency will naturally be better, our running costs will be lower, and our  
profit margin will increase.  
Furthermore, because we will be conducting transactions 24 hours a day, we will naturally be able to handle a  
large volume. That's where our winning strategy lies. However, even if you create such a mechanical or  
automated system, it becomes useless if there are no actual matches.  
Because we possess matching capabilities, it makes sense for us to pursue automation. But even if someone  
just creates a mechanically valuable tool, as Deko mentioned, what makes it profitable or valuable for us is  
that we have job data and data related to our customers' hiring needs. He said that this is essential, and I  
agree.  
The remaining question is how well human-driven operations can be made more efficient, and how we can  
overcome that bottleneck.  
For example, if candidates answer questions the mechanical agents ask, then perhaps our human career  
advisors, who can currently handle 30 candidates at a time, could handle 60 if some of their tasks are  
automated. I think there’s probably a balance between the upside of one career advisor being able to take  
care of 60 people to drive revenue, and the cost-savings of focusing only on 30 people, maybe requiring only  
a 0.5 employee. So, if we’re prioritizing revenue growth for now, I think it makes sense to use machines to  
help increase the number of people each advisor can take care of. That's the kind of world we're entering.  
As that gradually saturates, the next step will be to increase efficiency. Either can come first, but I think  
interesting developments will emerge as this progresses.  
When expanding in the US, as Deko also mentioned, we will focus on areas where we can offer new and  
better solutions.  
I think there's a huge difference between having and not having a business rooted in human interaction. I  
hope that those who are successfully running such businesses will leverage them, grow them, and transform  
them into new businesses – that's where the dream lies.  
Zhai: I haven't been covering your company for very long, so I'm not sure if my understanding is correct. You  
mentioned earlier that the European business is a bit behind the US, so there's still room for monetization  
there. Does this mean that there are monetization methods already implemented in the US that haven't been  
introduced in Europe yet, and introducing them will increase the unit price?  
This transcript is provided for the convenience of investors only and this is a translated version of the Japanese call.  
8
Arai: Yes, that's part of it. Also, the penetration rate is still lower. So, what we were able to achieve in the US  
last year will likely be realized in Europe, with a slight time difference. That's what I meant.  
Zhai: Conversely, based on what I heard, is it fair to understand that the US is reaching a point where the  
possibilities for further improvement are becoming limited?  
Arai: I think the goal is to continue creating new things so that possibilities don't become limited.  
Zhai: So, this fiscal year, there will be relatively fewer of these new things compared to last year?  
Arai: I wouldn't say there will be fewer. We're talking about offsetting the negative impact of around 10%  
decrease in job openings, so I don't think we're significantly lagging behind.  
However, simply repeating the initiatives that emerged last year will only result in a flat outcome. We naturally  
face the challenge of needing to introduce new initiatives on top of that.  
Therefore, our business goal is to advance monetization efforts that surpass that.  
Munakata: Just to confirm the previous question, you've conducted various beta tests and trials in the past,  
learning through trial and error what works and what doesn't, and growing based on that. Should we expect a  
similar process this fiscal year – an extension of that, where various things are being tested internally, and we  
might hear about successes or things that didn't quite work out during briefings?  
Arai: To give you a concrete image, if we could announce something significant and new at Indeed  
FutureWorks in September, like a new product launch, that would be an example of what we're aiming for.  
Yamamura: So, based on what's currently visible, you can achieve to offset the 10% decrease?  
Arai: I believe we are also developing other things that haven't been discussed yet.  
Yamamura: So, considering that, there's still potential for future growth.  
Arai: Yes, and I think you'll need to follow us every quarter, as new things will likely emerge. We are working  
towards launching them because we believe that's necessary to offset the negative impact.  
Shen: Thank you very much.  
Forward-Looking Statements  
This document contains forward-looking statements, which reflect the Company's assumptions and outlook for  
the future and estimates based on information available to the Company and the Company's plans and  
expectations as of the date of this document or other date indicated. There can be no assurance that the  
relevant forecasts and other forward-looking statements will be achieved.  
Please note that significant differences between the forecasts and other forward-looking statements and  
actual results may arise due to various factors, including changes in economic conditions, changes in  
individual users’ preferences and business clients' needs, competition, changes in the legal and regulatory  
environment, fluctuations in foreign exchange rates, climate change or other changes in the natural  
environment, the occurrence of large-scale natural disasters, and other factors.  
Accordingly, readers are cautioned against placing undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements.  
The Company has no obligation to update or revise any information contained in this document based on any  
subsequent developments except as required by applicable law or stock exchange rules and regulations.  
This transcript is provided for the convenience of investors only and this is a translated version of the Japanese call.  
9