Pegasystems Inc. (PEGA) 2026 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Hello, everyone. Thank you for joining us and welcome to the Pegasystems second-quarter 2026 earnings call and webcast. (Operator Instructions)

各位好。感謝各位加入，歡迎收聽 Pegasystems 2026 年第二季財報電話會議與網路直播。(接線員指示)

I will now hand the conference over to Peter Welburn, Vice President of Corporate Development and Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

現在我將把會議交給企業發展與投資人關係副總裁 Peter Welburn。請開始。

Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Pegasystems Q2 '26 earnings call. Before we begin, I'd like to read our Safe Harbor statement. Certain statements contained in this presentation may be construed as forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as expects, anticipates, intends, plans, believes, will, could, should, estimates, may, forecasts, and similar expressions are intended to identify these forward-looking statements. These statements speak only as of the date the statement was made and are based on current expectations and assumptions.

各位早安，歡迎參加 Pegasystems 2026 年第二季（Q2 '26）財報電話會議。在開始之前，我想宣讀我們的「安全港」聲明。本簡報中所包含的某些陳述，可能被視為《1995 年私人證券訴訟改革法》所定義的前瞻性陳述。諸如 expects、anticipates、intends、plans、believes、will、could、should、estimates、may、forecasts 及類似用語，旨在識別此等前瞻性陳述。這些陳述僅截至其作出之日有效，並以目前的預期與假設為基礎。

Because these statements relate to future events, they are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from our current expectations for fiscal year 2026 and beyond. Factors that could cause such differences are described in the company's press release announcing our Q2 2026 results and in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission including our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025, as well as other recent SEC filings.

由於這些陳述涉及未來事件，因此存在若干風險與不確定性，可能導致 2026 會計年度及其後的實際結果與我們目前的預期出現重大差異。可能造成此等差異的因素，已載於公司發布之新聞稿（宣布我們 2026 年第二季業績）以及我們向美國證券交易委員會（SEC）提交的文件中，包括截至 2025 年 12 月 31 日止年度的 Form 10-K 年度報告，以及其他近期 SEC 申報文件。

Investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements as there can be no assurances that the results contemplated will be realized. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect subsequent events or circumstances.

提醒投資人勿過度依賴此等前瞻性陳述，因為無法保證所預期的結果一定能實現。除法律另有規定外，我們不承擔更新或修訂任何前瞻性陳述以反映後續事件或情況的義務。

In addition, non-GAAP financial measures discussed on this call should be considered in conjunction with and not as substitute for our consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP. Constant currency measures are calculated by applying the June 30, 2025, foreign exchange rates to all periods presented. Reconciliations of GAAP to non-GAAP measures can be found in our earnings press release.

此外，本次電話會議中討論的非 GAAP 財務衡量指標，應與依 GAAP 編製之合併財務報表一併考量，而不應作為其替代。固定匯率（constant currency）衡量係以 2025 年 6 月 30 日的外匯匯率套用至所呈列的所有期間計算。GAAP 與非 GAAP 指標之調節表可見於我們的財報新聞稿。

With that, I'll turn the call over to Alan Trefler, Founder and CEO of Pegasystems.

接下來，我將把電話會議交給 Pegasystems 創辦人暨執行長 Alan Trefler。

Thank you, Peter, and thank you, everyone, for joining today's call. Ken will walk you through the first-half financial results shortly. But before he does, I'd like to spend a few minutes discussing some major market shifts that we've seen, and a lot of the tension and confusion in the market and why we believe it creates significant opportunity for Pega.

謝謝你，Peter，也謝謝各位參加今天的電話會議。Ken 稍後將帶各位回顧上半年財務結果。但在他開始之前，我想先花幾分鐘談談我們所看到的一些重大市場轉變，以及市場中的緊張與困惑，並說明為何我們相信這為 Pega 帶來顯著機會。

The market evolution shows a structural shift in software. We're still in the early stages of the fundamental transformation driven by AI. Across the industry organizations are rethinking how software is designed, built, operated, and evolved.

市場的演進顯示軟體產業正在發生結構性轉變。由 AI 驅動的根本性轉型仍處於早期階段。在整個產業中，各組織正在重新思考軟體如何被設計、建置、運作與演進。

And for the time, AI providers acted a little bit like drug dealers, offering their products for free or charging $20 a month for what felt like unlimited usage. To many users, the experience was magical. But at the same time, the frontier model providers have been investing literally billions or trillions of dollars building the data centers required to power AI.

而在一段時間內，AI 供應商的行為有點像毒販，免費提供產品，或以每月 20 美元的價格提供看似無上限的使用量。對許多使用者而言，這種體驗宛如魔法。但同時，前沿模型（frontier model）供應商正投入以十億甚至兆美元計的資金，建置支撐 AI 所需的資料中心。

And now they're going to need to seek a return on that investment, making a significant share in the economics of the market. These companies are under pressure to generate meaningful revenue. And what was once available for free or for all you-can eat licensing is priced now by token use with the attendant anxiety and ambiguity.

而現在他們將需要尋求投資回報，並在市場經濟中取得相當可觀的分潤。這些公司正承受產生具實質意義營收的壓力。過去免費或採「吃到飽」授權的服務，如今改以 token 用量計價，並伴隨相應的焦慮與不確定性。

And it's not done, more of this is coming. The challenge for enterprises is token consumption is opaque until the bill arise. Many of the tokens these models consume are reasoning tokens. They don't show up in input or output, but are used by the model itself as it loops through increasingly cloud logic. These reasoning costs become surprisingly and prohibitively expensive.

而且這還沒結束，後續還會有更多類似情況。企業面臨的挑戰在於：token 的消耗在帳單出現之前往往不透明。這些模型消耗的許多 token 是推理 token（reasoning tokens）。它們不會出現在輸入或輸出中，而是模型在自身反覆迴圈、執行愈來愈複雜的雲端邏輯時所使用。這些推理成本會變得出乎意料且高到難以負擔。

Now, this cost uncertainty is leading many, many organizations to sort of freeze and trying to figure out what's going on and take a more deliberate approach to technology investments as they assess the economic environment. Decision cycles have lengthened as clients seek greater clarity around technology strategies, AI priorities and the reality of highly variable token costs. At PegaWorld, we unveiled the solution offering our clients access to AI agents with no token costs.

如今，這種成本不確定性正導致非常多組織某種程度上按下暫停鍵，試圖弄清楚發生了什麼，並在評估經濟環境時，對科技投資採取更審慎的做法。由於客戶希望更清楚了解技術策略、AI 優先事項，以及高度可變的 token 成本現實，決策週期已拉長。在 PegaWorld 上，我們發布了一項解決方案，讓客戶可使用 AI 代理（AI agents）且不產生 token 成本。

Our clients' demand for predictable outcomes and predictable costs plays directly and uniquely to Pega strength. Our clients see the opportunity to use AI to deploy software faster and more effectively. And to see the power of AI agents to automate work that could not have been automated before. But the value from this technology will not be measured in the lines of code generated or the number of agents deployed. The value comes from better business outcomes with greater speed, control and efficiency.

客戶對可預測成果與可預測成本的需求，直接且獨特地契合 Pega 的優勢。客戶看見運用 AI 以更快、更有效率地部署軟體的機會。也看見 AI 代理能自動化過去無法自動化的工作之威力。但這項技術的價值，不會以產生的程式碼行數或部署的代理數量來衡量。價值來自更佳的業務成果，以及更高的速度、控制力與效率。

For decades, we have delivered software that optimizes and executes the workflows and decisions that run our clients' businesses. AI is making that software much, much easier to design and build and continues to evolve. As our tag line puts it, build for change. AI dramatically expands what is possible. But the requirements of enterprise systems remain the same.

數十年來，我們提供的軟體能最佳化並執行驅動客戶業務運作的工作流程與決策。AI 正讓這些軟體的設計與建置變得容易得多，並持續演進。正如我們的標語所說：為變革而建（build for change）。AI 大幅擴展了可能性。但企業系統的要求仍然相同。

They need to be predictable, governable, secure and cost-effective at scale. So our goal is simple: help our clients avoid AI chaos and the mess that comes from it by delivering predictable outcomes at predictable costs. Our approach is different from the two misguided approaches that others in the market are offering. The first of this guides approach is that enterprises should just use AI agents to code up anything they want generating millions of lines of code.

它們需要在大規模下仍具可預測性、可治理性、安全性，並且具成本效益。因此我們的目標很簡單：透過以可預測成本交付可預測成果，協助客戶避免 AI 混亂以及隨之而來的爛攤子。我們的方法不同於市場上其他人所提供的兩種誤導性做法。第一種被誤導的做法是：企業應該只用 AI 代理去寫出任何他們想要的東西，產生數百萬行程式碼。

Now look, Pega has competed against coding yourself for decades. And the reality is it went through an open-source cycle where everything was going to be open source and people would code themselves of those technologies and tools. It went through an inexpensive fingers in India cycle. But the problems with code and our moat against it remains the same. In fact, with AI, the problems with this alternative get worse. Code is hard to change.

各位請看，Pega 與「自己寫程式」這條路競爭了數十年。現實是，它曾經歷過一個開源循環：一切都將開源，大家會用那些技術與工具自行撰寫程式。也曾經歷過一個「印度便宜人力」的循環。但程式碼的問題，以及我們對抗它的護城河，始終如一。事實上，有了 AI，這種替代方案的問題更嚴重。程式碼很難變更。

It's hard to understand. And AI generates more code with less visibility making those limitations even more pronounced. Clients report to me that simple things like changing the label on a field become really, really hard when that field is buried in millions of lines of code that no human has ever reviewed and wasn't structured for people to really understand. The code is only readable by coders and it doesn't fit into a model that business and IT can jointly see. Pega provides that model.

它很難理解。而 AI 以更低的可視性產生更多程式碼，使這些限制更加明顯。客戶向我反映，像是把某個欄位的標籤改一下這種簡單的事，當該欄位被埋在數百萬行、從未被任何人審閱、且並非為了讓人真正理解而結構化的程式碼中時，就會變得非常、非常困難。這些程式碼只有寫程式的人看得懂，而且不符合一個能讓業務與 IT 共同看見的模型。Pega 提供的正是那個模型。

Our system is built on a structured and visual foundation of workflows business logic, personas and integrations. These remain transparent, understandable governable and adaptable over time. We represent the logic in business metaphors by stages, steps and decision rules that clients can easily understand and change. With the release of Pega Infinity last week, we took a significant step forward with the introduction of Infinity Studio. Together, Pega Blueprint and Infinity Studio now create a more complete AI-powered life cycle that helps clients design, build, operate and then continuously evolve enterprise systems, all in a model that both business and IT can work in.

我們的系統建立在結構化且視覺化的基礎之上，涵蓋工作流程、業務邏輯、人物誌（personas）與整合。這些要素能長期保持透明、可理解、可治理，並可隨時間調整。我們以業務隱喻來呈現邏輯，透過階段、步驟與決策規則，讓客戶能輕鬆理解並加以變更。隨著上週 Pega Infinity 的發布，我們透過推出 Infinity Studio 向前邁出重要一步。Pega Blueprint 與 Infinity Studio 結合後，現在打造出更完整的 AI 驅動生命週期，協助客戶設計、建置、運作，並持續演進企業系統，而且是在一個業務與 IT 都能共同運作的模型中完成。

That capability reinforces what has always differentiated Pega, our ability to help enterprises build for change. And in an AI-driven world, that advantage becomes even more valuable. While with Blueprint, we applied powerful AI reasoning at design time before an application goes into production enabling our clients to reimagine how they get worked on, create better processes and see them working in an application, they can design in minutes. Blueprint takes in information about our clients' business and create a system built around the scalable structures of workflows, personas, integrations and decisions and structure is critical. In contrast, if clients generate code directly with tools like Claude or Kodex, where is the architecture, how is the business launch captured and understood.

那項能力強化了長久以來使 Pega 脫穎而出的特質：我們協助企業為變革而建的能力。而在一個由 AI 驅動的世界裡，這項優勢變得更加珍貴。透過 Blueprint，我們在應用程式上線投產之前的設計階段就運用強大的 AI 推理能力，使客戶得以重新想像工作如何被完成、打造更好的流程，並在應用程式中看到它們實際運作——而且可在幾分鐘內完成設計。Blueprint 會吸收客戶業務相關資訊，並建立一個以可擴展結構為核心的系統，涵蓋工作流程、角色（personas）、整合與決策，而「結構」至關重要。相較之下，若客戶直接用 Claude 或 Kodex 之類的工具產生程式碼，那麼架構在哪裡？業務邏輯如何被捕捉並被理解？

And code-first approaches become opaque, complex difficult to govern and extremely expensive to change, especially at scale. When we developed and released Blueprint, it really opened up people's eyes to how they could reimagine their businesses. It brings in our decades of experience and our Blueprint agents are able to really come up with things better than either the inputs they're giving. It's enormously exciting. And I'm constantly having clients tell me, this is one of the most novel uses of AI they have seen.

而以程式碼優先（code-first）的方式會變得不透明、複雜、難以治理，且在變更時成本極高，尤其是在大規模情境下。當我們開發並發布 Blueprint 時，確實讓人們大開眼界，看到他們可以如何重新想像自己的業務。它帶入了我們數十年的經驗，而我們的 Blueprint 代理（agents）確實能提出比客戶所提供輸入更好的成果。這令人無比振奮。而我也不斷聽到客戶告訴我，這是他們見過最具新意的 AI 應用之一。

There's really nothing else like it out there. Blueprint enable clients to reimagine their business processes to be better to see how those processes translate into working systems and engage with a working system early in the sales cycle. Blueprint is transforming how we engage clients and prospects at the front end of the sales cycle, moving Pega from a conceptual sales process to nisperiential and product led one. In retrospect, when we started with Blueprint, we really focused on new clients and new applications. We have not yet brought the full power of Blueprint to help existing clients reimagine and rethink their existing big applications for two reasons.

市面上真的沒有其他東西能與之相比。Blueprint 讓客戶得以重新想像並優化其業務流程，看到這些流程如何轉化為可運作的系統，並在銷售週期早期就能與一個可運作的系統互動。Blueprint 正在改變我們在銷售週期前端與客戶及潛在客戶互動的方式，讓 Pega 從概念式的銷售流程，轉向更具體驗性（experiential）且以產品為導向（product-led）的流程。回頭看，當我們開始做 Blueprint 時，確實把重點放在新客戶與新應用上。我們尚未把 Blueprint 的完整威力帶給既有客戶，去協助他們重新想像並重新思考既有的大型應用，原因有二。

First, we were learning how to use it. And secondly, in helping clients reimagine existing systems is, in many ways, a more tricky and complex problem. But now with Pega 26, Infinity 26, which we released last week, we've made the power of Blueprint AI available for clients to reimagine and improve their new and existing Pega applications.

第一，我們當時仍在學習如何使用它。第二，協助客戶重新想像既有系統，在許多方面是一個更棘手、更複雜的問題。但現在，隨著我們上週發布的 Pega 26、Infinity 26，我們已讓 Blueprint AI 的能力可供客戶用來重新想像並改善其新的與既有的 Pega 應用。

This release brings Blueprint AI from the design time use and to build the deployment and to evolve using this Infinity Studio capability. Our completely reimagined builder environment enables our Pega Cloud and Client Cloud clients to leverage Blueprint AI to deploy new applications and to improve existing ones. Blueprint AI helps businesses and helps IT leaders reimagine how organizations get work done. Infinity Studio extends the power of Blueprint AI into the application development and deployment, creating a continuous path from idea to execution. This is especially compelling for our existing clients who can use Blueprint to modernize and evolve existing Pega applications, helping them reimagine what's possible.

這次發布把 Blueprint AI 從僅在設計階段使用，延伸到建置、部署，以及透過 Infinity Studio 的能力來持續演進。我們徹底重新想像的建置環境，讓 Pega Cloud 與 Client Cloud 客戶能運用 Blueprint AI 來部署新應用並改善既有應用。Blueprint AI 協助企業與 IT 領導者重新想像組織如何完成工作。Infinity Studio 將 Blueprint AI 的力量延伸到應用開發與部署，打造從構想到落地執行的連續路徑。這對既有客戶尤其具吸引力，他們可用 Blueprint 來現代化並演進既有的 Pega 應用，協助他們重新想像可能性。

But it also is terrific for new clients who can answer the question, how are they going to continue to evolve after their initial build. Furthermore, we've made the whole Pega development environment available via MCP. So people who are very technically oriented could use Claude Code or open AI codecs or any coating agent to be able to initiate their Pega applications. These improvements dramatically lower the barriers to entry reducing training time and accelerating productivity and will enable more workflow creation across the enterprise. Infinity Studio will make it easier for our clients to build and extend their workflows.

但這對新客戶也同樣出色，因為它能回答一個問題：在初始建置完成後，他們要如何持續演進。此外，我們也透過 MCP 提供完整的 Pega 開發環境。因此，技術導向很強的人可以使用 Claude Code、OpenAI codecs 或任何 coding agent 來啟動他們的 Pega 應用。這些改進大幅降低進入門檻、縮短訓練時間並加速生產力，並將促成企業內更多工作流程的建立。Infinity Studio 會讓客戶更容易建置並擴展其工作流程。

We launched it last week, and we'll be rolling it out aggressively through the rest of the year. But Infinity Studio is a really big deal for our clients and prospects. I said there were two misguided approaches to AI, and let's talk about the second for a moment. The second approach says, hey, just use AI agents to reason through every process at run time.

我們上週已經推出，並將在今年剩餘時間積極推廣與擴大導入。但 Infinity Studio 對我們的客戶與潛在客戶而言，確實是一件大事。我說過有兩種對 AI 的誤導性做法，現在先談第二種。第二種做法是說：嘿，就用 AI 代理在執行階段（run time）對每個流程逐一推理。

Now, people know this approach brought risks. I mean, agents built on LLM don't execute with the consistency that enterprises need for most of their workflows. It also turns out, however, that it can be hugely expensive. We've got a calculator of pega.com that shows you the difference between this and our approach and it's pretty staggering. Our approach is fundamentally different, use AI extensively at design time to Blueprint AI and design the workflows and get them right and really make them excellent, but once you get them right, run them repeatedly at scale, thousands or millions of times, only using the AI selectively in the runtime steps where it makes sense. Highlight the metaphor of chef.

現在，人們知道這種做法帶來風險。也就是說，建立在 LLM 之上的代理，無法以企業多數工作流程所需的一致性來執行。然而事實也證明，它可能非常昂貴。我們在 pega.com 上有一個計算器，展示這種做法與我們做法之間的差異，結果相當驚人。我們的方法在本質上不同：在設計階段大量使用 AI（透過 Blueprint AI）來設計工作流程，把它們做對、做到卓越；但一旦做對之後，就在規模化情境下反覆執行——成千上萬次或數百萬次——只在執行階段那些確實合理的步驟中選擇性使用 AI。強調「主廚」的比喻。

Great restaurant doesn't reinvent each dish each and every each and every paper. They take the time to design a recipe or set of recipes that work really well at scale. And that's what we do with Blueprint. And then when it comes time to execute the dinner service, the whole kitchen follows the recipe predictably and consistently tuning it only when needed. That's our workflow running in production.

一家很棒的餐廳不會在每一道菜、每一次、每一張單都重新發明一次。他們會花時間設計一份或一組能在規模化情境下運作良好的食譜。而這正是我們用 Blueprint 所做的事。接著當晚餐服務要開始執行時，整個廚房會可預期且一致地遵循食譜，只在需要時才微調。那就是我們在生產環境中運行的工作流程。

Clients know how to execute effectively at scale, providing the perfect balance between AI inspiration at design time and AI used consistently at and run time. And this also means we're not using up massive amounts of costly reasoning tokens and run time. And it's how we are able to offer our Agentic AI as an uplift to our case base price with no variable per token costs. We use AI selectively for specific and well-defined tasks, where it adds value in run time, like a summarization or reading documents. But core workflows remain deterministic, predictable in the outcomes they deliver and efficient in the cost it takes to run them.

客戶知道如何在規模化情境下有效執行，在設計階段的 AI 靈感與執行階段一致使用 AI 之間取得完美平衡。這也意味著我們不會在執行階段耗用大量昂貴的推理 tokens。也因此，我們能以「在案件基礎（case base）價格之上的升級（uplift）」方式提供 Agentic AI，而不會有按 token 計價的可變成本。我們只在執行階段針對特定且定義清楚、能帶來價值的任務選擇性使用 AI，例如摘要或閱讀文件。但核心工作流程仍保持確定性（deterministic），在交付結果上可預期，且執行成本效率高。

This is a key and structural differentiator for us. It's hugely important to allow our clients both ensure they deliver the outcomes they want predictably and to ensure their AI costs or tied to value. We've taken this power even further. With Infinity 26, every single workflow in Pega, both new and existing is automatically available through MCP. That means any agent built on any agent platform can find and invoke a Pega workflow.

這是我們關鍵且結構性的差異化因素。它極其重要，能讓客戶一方面確保以可預期方式交付他們想要的成果，另一方面也確保其 AI 成本與價值連動。我們把這股力量推得更遠。在 Infinity 26 中，Pega 的每一個工作流程——無論新舊——都會自動透過 MCP 提供。這表示，建立在任何代理平台上的任何代理，都能找到並呼叫一個 Pega 工作流程。

And the workflow instructs the agent to operate predictably and consistently. And because the workflow does the reasoning for the agent, Pega helps our clients make even agents build outside of Pega more cost effective. So in conclusion, our clients tell us they want to see increased efficiency and better results from AI. They also, however, want better outcomes of installation of runaway token costs and measurable results in increased efficiency and better processes for much of the work they do, they don't want to re-reason a business process every time it runs. And instead, our approach really resonates.

而該工作流程會指示代理以可預期且一致的方式運作。並且因為工作流程替代理完成推理，Pega 也能協助客戶讓即使是在 Pega 之外建置的代理更具成本效益。因此總結來說，客戶告訴我們，他們希望從 AI 中看到更高效率與更好的結果。但同時，他們也希望有更好的成果，而不是面臨失控的 token 成本；他們要的是可衡量的效率提升與更好的流程——對於他們所做的大部分工作而言，他們不希望每次流程執行都要重新推理一次業務流程。相反地，我們的方法確實引起強烈共鳴。

We imagine with AI, execute predictably continuously evolve and improve it. And this is what Pega delivers, giving clients the ability to design an effective recipe for executing worker design cut. And then what uses requested business outcome, the menu at the restaurant contains the proven recipes that organization has been how to do extremely well at scale and that are consistent with regulators' needs and the efficiency the organization wants. Clients, I believe are continuously -- are increasingly recognizing the value of our approach, and we have a strong and differentiated story today. The clients who saw the PegaWorld who I met with extensively, we're extremely excited.

我們用 AI 來想像（reimagine），以可預期方式執行，並持續演進與改善。這正是 Pega 所交付的：讓客戶能設計出一套有效的「食譜」，用以執行工作——以設計為核心、降低成本。而當要達成所要求的業務成果時，餐廳的菜單包含了那些經過驗證的食譜：組織已經學會如何在規模化情境下把它做得非常好，並且符合監管機構的需求與組織所追求的效率。我相信客戶正持續——也日益——認知到我們方法的價值，而我們今天有一個強而有力且差異化的故事。我與在 PegaWorld 上見到、並深入交流的客戶都非常興奮。

And you can see Infinity 26 to sell in Kerim's keynote, which is available on pega.com. It's also becoming increasingly clear that while the market is still early in its AI journey, many of the key trends, I think, are moving in our direction. Increasingly, clients are coming to us to ask how they can manage business costs while achieving business value. As organizations move beyond AI experimentation, and try to bring ROI to production deployments, they will avoid approaches that generate massive amounts of brittle code or highly unpredictable economics. We think that these companies will succeed with AI by becoming those that combine innovation with structure, control and economic discipline.

而且你可以在 Kerim 的主題演講中看到 Infinity 26 的展示，該演講可在 pega.com 上觀看。也愈來愈清楚的是，雖然市場在其 AI 旅程中仍處於早期階段，但我認為許多關鍵趨勢正朝著對我們有利的方向發展。客戶愈來愈常來詢問我們，他們如何在實現業務價值的同時管理營運成本。隨著組織走出 AI 實驗階段，並嘗試將 ROI 帶入正式上線的部署，他們將會避免那些會產生大量脆弱程式碼或帶來高度不可預測經濟性的做法。

Some of the things we hear just seem like madness. People talking about trying to control thousands and thousands of independently operating agents. We just don't see how that works. And candidly, I've talked to a lot of customers who don't see how that works either. Our approach instead really builds on our traditional workflows, inspired by AII for way more aggressive design and the use of AI to do the pieces that it needs to do have run time.

我們聽到的一些說法簡直像是瘋狂。有人在談要試圖控制成千上萬個各自獨立運作的代理（agents）。我們實在看不出那要怎麼行得通。坦白說，我也和很多客戶談過，他們同樣看不出那要怎麼行得通。相較之下，我們的方法是建立在我們傳統的工作流程之上，並受到 AII 的啟發，採用更積極的設計，以及運用 AI 去完成它在執行階段需要完成的那些部分。

And we remain committed to how we help our clients get through the confusion that has been candidly obligated. But so much noise in the market about SaaSpocalypses and software being debt, et cetera. I think some software is definitely under threat, unquestionably. But the types of systems we are to build them in code would be extremely complicated, hard to update, hard to accept, and that build for change is important for our clients. So these principles relate to how we are going to work with our customers to work with them.

我們仍然致力於協助客戶度過這段坦白說已被迫面對的混亂。但市場上充斥著大量雜音，像是所謂的 SaaSpocalypse（SaaS 末日論）以及「軟體就是負債」等等。我認為某些軟體確實面臨威脅，毫無疑問。但我們所打造的這類系統，如果用程式碼來建置，將會極其複雜、難以更新、難以採用；而「為變更而建」（build for change）對我們的客戶而言很重要。因此，這些原則也關係到我們將如何與客戶合作、並與他們一同推進。

But we don't just want to help our customers bring efficiency to their businesses and help our customers run well-managed businesses. We need to also operate our business that way. We remain committed to getting through the current period of wild confusion and generating strong cash -- free cash flow along the way regardless of market conditions or how long it takes for the sort of understanding here to stabilize. We will be using and leveraging our AI technology and capabilities to improve our efficiency and create additional operating leverage. And we will temper our spend accordingly vis-a-vis our free cash flow needs.

但我們不只是想幫助客戶為其業務帶來效率、協助客戶經營管理良好的企業。我們也必須以同樣的方式來經營我們自己的業務。我們仍然致力於度過當前這段高度混亂的時期，並在此過程中不論市場狀況如何、或需要多久才能讓這種理解趨於穩定，都要持續產生強勁的現金——自由現金流。我們將使用並善用我們的 AI 技術與能力來提升效率，並創造額外的營運槓桿。同時，我們也會依照自由現金流需求來相應調整支出。

With that, let me turn it over to Ken to provide more color on our first half. Jim?

接下來，我把時間交給 Ken，請他就我們上半年表現提供更多說明。Jim？

Thanks, Alan. The first half of '26 had challenges for 3 primary reasons. First, as we explained in February, our renewal portfolio significantly weighted toward the back half of the year, resulting in a more typical seasonal pipeline pattern. Because of a meaningful portion of our net new ACV comes from cross-selling and upselling into our existing client base, fewer renewal opportunities naturally result in fewer expansion opportunities given our typical contract length renewal timing is inherently a long-term dynamic in our business.

謝謝，Alan。26 年上半年面臨挑戰，主要有三個原因。第一，如同我們在二月所說，我們的續約組合明顯偏向下半年，因此管線呈現較典型的季節性模式。由於我們淨新增 ACV 的相當一部分來自對既有客戶的交叉銷售與加購，續約機會較少自然就會導致擴張機會較少；而以我們典型的合約期限而言，續約時點本質上就是我們業務中的長期動態。

Second, as Alan explained, unprecedented change in software market created significant buyer uncertainty organizations wrestle with fundamental questions about how AI would reshape software development and whether they should build more capabilities themselves. The market entered a token maxing mindset where organizations encouraged even celebrated token consumption and then whiplash to the opposite extreme, where companies sought to tightly monitoring control token usage. The resulting uncertainty made customers more cautious and contributed to a more confused and longer buying cycle.

第二，如 Alan 所說，軟體市場出現前所未有的變化，造成買方高度不確定性；各組織正苦於一些根本問題，例如 AI 將如何重塑軟體開發，以及他們是否應該自行建置更多能力。市場進入一種「把 token 用到極致」的心態，組織鼓勵、甚至讚揚 token 的消耗，隨後又急轉到相反的極端——企業開始尋求嚴格監控並控制 token 使用量。這種不確定性使客戶更為謹慎，並導致更混亂且更長的採購週期。

Third, we didn't execute well enough on our go-to-market change to drive deeper and broader engagement with our clients and prospects. As part of that effort, we are increasing prospecting activity, expanding executive level engagement, identifying new workflow and legacy transformation opportunities with not only existing clients but also strengthening our focus on new logo acquisition.

第三，我們在推動市場進入（go-to-market）變革方面的執行不夠到位，未能促成與客戶及潛在客戶更深、更廣的互動。作為該項努力的一部分，我們正在增加開發潛在客戶（prospecting）的活動、擴大高階主管層級的互動、辨識新的工作流程與舊系統轉型機會；不僅針對既有客戶，也同時強化我們對新客戶（new logo）獲取的聚焦。

We are also using Blueprint to help shorten sales cycles powered by the combination of Blueprint and the newly released Infinity Studio in Pega 26. These are the right changes to improve pipeline quality, conversion and sales productivity over time. Our progress in the first half was slower than we anticipated, but we remain very confident this is the right approach.

我們也在使用 Blueprint，藉由 Blueprint 與 Pega 26 中新發布的 Infinity Studio 的組合來縮短銷售週期。這些都是正確的改變，將隨時間推進提升管線品質、轉換率與銷售生產力。我們在上半年的進展比預期慢，但我們仍非常有信心這是正確的方法。

With that context in mind, let me turn to our financial results. Annual contract value growth or ACV growth, is one of the most important metrics in our view the best indicator of underlying execution. That's because ACV growth provides a clear view of the business momentum than revenue growth in a subscription model.

在這樣的背景下，讓我來談談我們的財務結果。年度合約價值成長（Annual Contract Value growth，或 ACV 成長）是我們認為最重要的指標之一，也是衡量底層執行力的最佳指標。這是因為在訂閱模式下，ACV 成長比營收成長更能清楚反映業務動能。

Pega Cloud ACV increased by [$165 billion] as reported year over year, growing 22% as reported and in constant currency. This growth reflects the continued expansion of our cloud business and reinforce the success of the subscription transition we began in 2017. As a result, Pega Cloud remains the fastest growing and most important component of our subscription model. The growth moderated to 27% at the end of last quarter in constant currency. We're watching that trend closely and remain focused on improving our broader ACV growth trajectory.

Pega Cloud ACV 依報告口徑年增 [1650 億美元]，依報告口徑與固定匯率口徑皆成長 22%。這項成長反映我們雲端業務的持續擴張，並強化我們自 2017 年開始推動訂閱轉型的成功。因此，Pega Cloud 仍是我們訂閱模式中成長最快且最重要的組成部分。以固定匯率計算，成長率在上季末放緩至 27%。我們正密切關注這一趨勢，並持續專注於改善我們整體 ACV 成長軌跡。

Our overall ACV growth rate was offset by decreases in maintenance ACV and subscription license ACV. As a result, total ACV grew 7% as reported and 8% in constant currency year over year. We expect Pega Cloud ACV to continue increasing as a percentage of total ACV over time and still believe it can ultimately reach approximately 75% of the total. And that mix shift toward Pega Cloud will continue to put pressure on maintenance and subscription license ACV growth in future periods. Over the longer term, however, a greater concentration of Pega Cloud ACV will create a more predictable, higher quality revenue stream, improved cash flow visibility and strengthen our ability to compound shareholder value.

我們整體 ACV 成長率受到維護（maintenance）ACV 與訂閱授權（subscription license）ACV 下滑的抵銷。因此，總 ACV 依報告口徑年增 7%，以固定匯率計年增 8%。我們預期 Pega Cloud ACV 隨時間推進將持續提高其在總 ACV 中的占比，並仍相信最終可達到約 75% 的總占比。而這種朝向 Pega Cloud 的組合轉移，將在未來期間持續對維護與訂閱授權 ACV 成長造成壓力。然而，從更長期來看，更高比例的 Pega Cloud ACV 將帶來更可預測、更高品質的營收來源，提升現金流可視性，並強化我們複利式提升股東價值的能力。

While our total ACV growth was below expectations, we continue to operate a period of significant market disruption. Several software companies have recently noted delays in purchasing patterns where the business is not going away, clients are frozen in the confusion. It remains difficult for us to assess the magnitude or duration of potential IT spending reallocations and an impact on software growth. But more broadly, clients are still focused on legacy transformation and using and refining their AI strategies but also governing usage, managing token costs. So this -- although this is a great long-term trend for us and our value proposition, it still may continue some delay in investment decisions.

雖然我們的總 ACV 成長低於預期，但我們仍處於市場顯著動盪的時期。近期有多家軟體公司提到採購模式出現延遲——業務並沒有消失，而是客戶在混亂中按下暫停鍵。我們仍難以評估潛在 IT 支出重新分配的幅度或持續時間，以及其對軟體成長的影響。但更廣泛而言，客戶仍聚焦於舊系統轉型，並在使用與精煉其 AI 策略的同時，也在治理使用方式、管理 token 成本。因此——雖然這對我們及我們的價值主張而言是極佳的長期趨勢——它仍可能持續造成投資決策的延後。

Moving to cash flow, even with slower ACV growth, the durability of our model is evident in our cash generation. We generated $288 million of free cash flow in the first half 2026. The a record that reflects the strength of our subscription model and our disciplined approach to managing the business increasing free cash flow over time is one of the most important measures of value creation and business health. It also provides strategic flexibility for capital allocation, which then brings me to my next topic, as we discussed during our investor session in June, we intend to deploy a substantial amount of our free cash flow toward opportunistic share repurchases.

談到現金流，即使 ACV 成長較慢，我們的現金創造能力仍顯示出我們模式的韌性。我們在 2026 年上半年產生了 2.88 億美元的自由現金流。這是一項紀錄，反映我們訂閱模式的強勁，以及我們以紀律方式管理業務；隨時間推進提升自由現金流，是衡量價值創造與企業健康度最重要的指標之一。它也為資本配置提供策略彈性；這也帶到我的下一個主題——如同我們在六月投資人會議中所討論的，我們打算將相當大一部分自由現金流用於機會型的股票回購。

In the first half of 2026, we repurchased 9 million shares for over $360 million in the open market under the prior authorizations. That cash expenditure represented well over 100% of the free cash flow generated during the same period, and total common shares were reduced by 6 million shares in first half of 2026. Share repurchases remain very attractive use of capital and represent a meaningful opportunity to create long-term shareholder value, especially in a disruptive market that we see around SaaS. We remain confident the long-term prospects of the company and our strong cash generation provides us considerable flexibility.

在 2026 年上半年，我們依先前授權在公開市場回購了 900 萬股，金額超過 3.6 億美元。該現金支出遠超過同期間所產生自由現金流的 100%，而 2026 年上半年普通股總股數淨減少 600 萬股。股票回購仍是非常具吸引力的資本運用方式，並代表創造長期股東價值的重要機會，特別是在我們所看到圍繞 SaaS 的動盪市場中。我們對公司長期前景仍充滿信心，而我們強勁的現金創造能力也為我們提供相當大的彈性。

While we're pleased with our capital allocation results, one of the most common questions investors have been asking is what are we seeing in the demand environment? As we exited the second quarter, we began to see a more balanced discussion emerging around AI economics and deployment costs. Clients and prospects are increasingly focused on measurable business outcomes, governance and total cost of ownership rather than just experimentation alone. This shifts favors Pega's differentiated approach and creates an opportunity for us to more effectively communicate our unique value proposition and our approach to AI cost containment.

雖然我們對資本配置的成果感到滿意，但投資人最常問的問題之一是：我們在需求環境方面看到了什麼？在我們走出第二季之際，我們開始看到市場對 AI 經濟性與部署成本的討論變得更為均衡。客戶與潛在客戶愈來愈聚焦於可衡量的商業成果、治理以及總持有成本（TCO），而不再只是單純的實驗。這樣的轉變有利於 Pega 的差異化方法，並為我們創造機會，更有效地傳達我們獨特的價值主張，以及我們在 AI 成本控管上的作法。

Let me be clear: Pega does not charge or token, rather than monetizing for token, our AI monetization strategy is based on the business value that clients create on our platform. Clients should be rewarded for driving outcome, not penalized for AI usage. Our monetization approach features two key elements. First, Blueprint makes it easier and faster for clients to create and deploy applications on the Pega platform.

我講清楚：Pega 不會按 token 收費；我們的 AI 變現策略不是把 token 貨幣化，而是以客戶在我們平台上創造的商業價值為基礎。客戶應該因為推動成果而獲得回饋，而不是因為使用 AI 而受到懲罰。我們的變現方式包含兩個關鍵要素。第一，Blueprint 讓客戶能更容易、更快速地在 Pega 平台上建立並部署應用程式。

Given our case-based pricing model, the more workflows clients run on the platform, the more value that they create and then the more ACV that we generate. Second, we apply case price uplift for advanced AI-powered run time capabilities, including innovations such as Agentic Process Fabric. This approach aligns our economic interest with our clients value creation and success as clients drive more value for Pega and expand adoption across the enterprise, both parties benefit.

在我們以案件（case）為基礎的定價模型下，客戶在平台上執行的工作流程越多，他們創造的價值就越大，而我們產生的 ACV 也就越多。第二，針對進階的 AI 驅動執行期（runtime）能力，我們會採用案件價格上調（uplift），其中包括如 Agentic Process Fabric 等創新。這種作法讓我們的經濟利益與客戶的價值創造與成功保持一致；當客戶為 Pega 創造更多價值並在企業內擴大採用時，雙方都能受益。

Before I conclude, I'd like to provide a few forward-looking thoughts on our business. As a reminder, we provide annual guidance at the beginning of the year. We do not issue quarterly guidance or typically update our outlook during the year.

在我結束之前，我想就我們的業務提供幾點前瞻性的看法。提醒一下，我們會在年初提供年度指引。我們不提供季度指引，也通常不會在年中更新我們的展望。

Given our back-end loaded renewal portfolio and our slower-than-expected start to the first half of 2026, we definitely have our work cut out for us in the second half. That said, we expect the market disruption of buyer confusion to remain factors in the near term. I'm optimistic though that our ACV growth over the long term will be stronger than our Q2 results would indicate.

考量到我們的續約組合偏向下半年認列，以及 2026 年上半年開局比預期更慢，我們在下半年確實有很多工作要做。話雖如此，我們預期買方困惑所造成的市場擾動在短期內仍會是影響因素。不過我仍然樂觀，長期來看，我們的 ACV 成長會比第二季的結果所顯示的更強勁。

I also thought it would be helpful to share that when we model our full-year net new ACV add for 2026, we assumed one-third of that add would be in the first half of the year and two-thirds of that add would be in the second half of the year. We will work hard to recover as much of that first-half shortfall as possible, but it will be very difficult.

我也認為分享一點會有幫助：當我們建模 2026 年全年淨新增 ACV 時，我們假設其中三分之一會發生在上半年，三分之二會發生在下半年。我們會努力盡可能彌補上半年的缺口，但這將非常困難。

The second half requires stronger execution that we delivered in the first half, particularly in expansion activity, new logo contribution, and conversion of our healthy qualified pipeline. From a mix perspective, now that Pega Cloud ACV is 57% of total ACV and continues to be the fastest-growing element of the business, we expect continued pressure on maintenance and subscription license growth rates as clients migrate to Pega Cloud, as I mentioned a moment ago. In addition, as more and more buyers move from the experimental phase of AI into the ROI stage, that shift plays to our strengths.

下半年需要比上半年更強的執行力，特別是在擴張活動、新客戶（new logo）貢獻，以及將我們健康的合格管線轉化為成交方面。從組合角度來看，既然 Pega Cloud ACV 已占總 ACV 的 57%，且仍是業務中成長最快的部分，隨著客戶遷移至 Pega Cloud，我們預期維護與訂閱授權的成長率將持續承壓，正如我剛才提到的。此外，隨著越來越多買方從 AI 的實驗階段進入 ROI 階段，這種轉變也更符合我們的優勢。

As AI costs come under greater scrutiny, our outcome-based pricing model provides a clear and more efficient path for clients to generate and measure return on their AI investors. As we iterate on our annual -- as we reiterated at our annual investor session last month, we expect to generate $700 million plus of free cash flow than 2028. Slower ACV growth in the first half of '26 does not change that objective, but it will require us to reevaluate certain investment priorities.

當 AI 成本受到更嚴格的檢視時，我們以成果為基礎的定價模型，為客戶提供一條更清晰且更有效率的路徑，以產生並衡量其 AI 投資的回報。正如我們在上個月的年度投資人會議上重申的，我們預期到 2028 年將產生超過 7 億美元的自由現金流。2026 年上半年 ACV 成長較慢並不改變這個目標，但將要求我們重新評估某些投資優先順序。

Our 2028 free cash flow objective is supported by multiple levers, including cloud scale, continued mix shift, sales productivity, gross margin improvement and disciplined investment prioritization. We will make appropriate adjustments to ensure that we remain on track to achieve or exceed this target. Strong free cash flow enables long-term shareholder value creation and our commitment to the Rule 40 performance reflects our belief that the world's most valuable companies combine durable subscription growth with disciplined cash generation.

我們 2028 年自由現金流目標由多項槓桿支撐，包括雲端規模效益、持續的組合轉移、銷售生產力、毛利率改善，以及有紀律的投資優先排序。我們將做出適當調整，以確保我們仍在達成或超越此目標的軌道上。強勁的自由現金流能帶來長期股東價值創造，而我們對 Rule of 40 表現的承諾，反映了我們相信：世界上最有價值的公司，會把持久的訂閱成長與有紀律的現金創造結合起來。

In conclusion, we remain optimistic our latest technology enables clients to achieve predictable outcomes at predictable costs at a time organizations are struggling to justify the economics of Token masking and broad-based AI experimentation that failed to deliver ROI. Our investments in Blueprint, Infinity Studio, Agentic Process Fabric, and the broader Pega platform are designed to help clients deploy AI at scale within a governed framework that accelerates productivity and business transformation. We made some critical architectural choices that even if you take -- even if it takes a few quarters to recognize are going to be game changing. The idea of design time and runtime being respected in their own ways is massively different in the approach of our competitors.

總結來說，我們仍然樂觀：在許多組織難以證明 token 計費與大規模 AI 實驗（卻未能帶來 ROI）的經濟性之際，我們最新的技術能讓客戶以可預測的成本達成可預測的成果。我們在 Blueprint、Infinity Studio、Agentic Process Fabric 以及更廣泛的 Pega 平台上的投資，旨在協助客戶在受治理的框架內大規模部署 AI，加速生產力與業務轉型。我們做出了一些關鍵的架構選擇，即使需要幾個季度才會被充分認知，也將帶來顛覆性的改變。將設計期（design time）與執行期（runtime）以各自方式加以尊重的理念，與競爭對手的作法有著極大的不同。

Looking at it yourself to appreciate the differentiation and how hard it would be for someone to emulate. We continue to see strong engagement from both new logos and existing clients, growing Blueprint adoption and increasing interest in solutions that help organizations move from AI experimentation to AI-powered business outcomes. And the market is increasingly rewarding companies that can combine AI, workflow automation and enterprise transformation within a governed production-ready platform.

你需要親自看看，才能體會這種差異化，以及他人要仿效會有多困難。我們持續看到新客戶與既有客戶的強勁互動、Blueprint 採用率提升，以及市場對協助組織從 AI 實驗走向 AI 驅動商業成果的解決方案之興趣日增。而市場也愈來愈獎勵那些能在受治理、可投入生產的平台中，結合 AI、工作流程自動化與企業轉型的公司。

Pega is uniquely positioned at the intersection of all of those trends. While execution remains our top priority for the balance of 2026, our long-term conviction has only strengthened. We remain confident in our market opportunity, confident in our ability to deliver substantially growing free cash flow and confident in our disciplined approach to balancing growth and profitability and will sustain strong Rule 40 performance and create significant long-term value for our shareholders.

Pega 在所有這些趨勢的交會點上具備獨特定位。雖然在 2026 年剩餘期間，執行仍是我們的首要任務，但我們的長期信念只會更加堅定。我們對市場機會充滿信心，對我們能交付大幅成長的自由現金流充滿信心，也對我們在平衡成長與獲利能力方面的紀律作法充滿信心；我們將維持強勁的 Rule of 40 表現，並為股東創造可觀的長期價值。

With that, operator, can you please open the line for questions.

接下來，接線員，請開放提問線路。

(Operator Instructions) Steve Enders, Citi.

(接線員指示) Steve Enders，花旗（Citi）。

I guess I wanted to dig in a little bit more on just what it is you are seeing on the demand side. It sounded like exiting 2Q, but maybe some of these deals were beginning to unlock and things were getting over the finish line. But can you just maybe give a little bit more clarity on have you seen deals get over the finish line now? Are the deals that pushed from 2Q? Like are they starting to close? And just, I guess, how does that make you feel about I guess, the broader kind of opportunity for these delays to undo into the back half of the year?

我想再更深入了解一下你們在需求端究竟看到了什麼。聽起來在走出第二季時，也許有些交易開始解鎖，事情也逐步跨過終點線。但你能否再更清楚說明一下：你們現在是否已看到交易跨過終點線？那些從第二季延後的交易呢？它們是否開始成交？另外，我想問的是，這讓你對於今年下半年這些延遲是否有機會回補、以及更廣泛的機會面，有什麼感受？

So we are seeing movement. We went through a period I would say, early to mid-second quarter, in which the level of confusion -- look, I've been doing this a long time. So I've seen other enormous moments of confusion. But this would rival anything that I'd see. People just weren't sure what they should be doing.

我們確實看到一些進展。我們經歷了一段時期，我會說是在第二季初到中段，那段時間的困惑程度——你看，我做這行很久了。所以我也見過其他非常巨大的困惑時刻。但這次可說是不輸我見過的任何一次。人們就是不確定自己應該做什麼。

And I would say even today, there is enormous confusion that is percolating in lots of these organizations. And trying to figure out what to do, they're trying to figure out how this all fits into our future. And the reality is though these companies have serious things they need to get done. So we've had excellent engagement from customers. The things we announced in Pega, which obviously was just in June, have generated a lot of enthusiasm.

而我會說即使到今天，許多組織內仍有大量的困惑在醞釀。他們在試著弄清楚該怎麼做，也在試著弄清楚這一切如何融入我們的未來。但現實是，這些公司有一些非常重要的事情必須完成。因此我們從客戶那邊獲得了非常好的互動與參與。我們在 Pega 所宣布的事項（顯然是在 6 月才剛發布）已經激起了很大的熱情。

The idea that we have an architecture that is understandable. You can actually understand, hey, big difference between agents that do a lot of their thinking and design time and use it, that's something people can internalize and understand. And the fact that we translate that into a new token cost model, has gotten a lot of candidly excitement and provides real reassurance of these clients that we have a thing to do. So I'm seeing see things starting to move. But I'll be honest, in the summer, the third quarters are lousy time for return around, it's just in general.

我們的想法是，我們擁有一個可被理解的架構。你其實可以理解：嘿，那些在設計階段就做了大量思考、並在執行時加以運用的代理（agents）之間有很大的差異；這是人們可以內化並理解的。而且我們把這轉化為新的 token 成本模型，坦白說引發了很多興奮，也讓這些客戶真正安心，覺得我們有一件事情可以去做。所以我看到事情開始在推進。但我得坦白說，夏季、第三季通常都是回升的糟糕時點，整體而言就是如此。

And we are working it, and I have a lot of confidence that what we're doing is the right thing. And candidly, what we did a couple of years ago were choosing this architecture. I think it's been enormously indicated and customers do see the difference. But in terms of unlocking, yes, they will be unlocking in the second half. how quickly it will happen, that's candidly part of this great uncertainty, I think a lot of companies are dealing with.

我們正在努力推進，而且我非常有信心我們正在做的是正確的事。坦白說，我們幾年前所做的，就是選擇這個架構。我認為這已被非常充分地證明是正確的，客戶也確實看得出差異。但就解鎖（unlocking）而言，是的，他們會在下半年解鎖；會多快發生，坦白說這就是這種高度不確定性的一部分，我想很多公司都在面對。

Okay. Okay. That's context around that. And then on, I guess, just the investments that you feel like it may be a little bit more kind of discretionary or at least to make the $700 million in free cash flow work in a few years. Just -- I guess is this, I guess, making you change how you feel about the own investments that need to be made in your business? Or I guess if rubber meets the road, just what does that look like? Or how does that maybe take shape or change strategically, how you think about the business and the investments that need to be made to grow here?

好的。好的。這就是相關背景。接著我想問，關於你們覺得可能比較偏「可選擇性」（discretionary）的投資，或至少是為了讓幾年後 7 億美元自由現金流能夠實現的那些投資。就是——我想問，這是否讓你改變了對於必須在你們業務中進行的自有投資的看法？或者如果真的到了關鍵時刻，實際上會是什麼樣子？又或者在策略上，這會如何成形或改變你對業務以及為了在這裡成長所需投資的思考？

Some of -- we really enjoyed after years of capable not operating that way, we've really enjoyed the benefits of being a Rule of 40 cash flow generated company, and we are committed to doing that. We have enormous opportunities to change the way we operate and become more efficient. And we're seeing that happen, and we're doing that. We will temper our investments to make sure that we don't go back to the spend culture that I think we probably had more of if you go back a decade.

其中一些——在多年沒有以那種方式運作之後，我們非常享受成為一家能產生現金流、符合「Rule of 40」的公司的好處，而我們也承諾會持續這麼做。我們有非常巨大的機會去改變我們的營運方式並提升效率。我們正在看到這些發生，也正在這麼做。我們會適度調整投資，確保不會回到我認為大概在十年前更常見的那種「花錢文化」。

So I'll turn it over to Ken, who's going to be the enforcer of this.

所以我把問題交給 Ken，他會是這件事的執行者（enforcer）。

Well, I think, Steve, I think what really the simplest way to think about this is that we work very hard to build the muscle of the discipline in the organization to run as a Rule of 40 company. And based on where our growth trajectory is we need to always be looking at opportunities to rightsize the amount of investment spend that we have based on where we are and our future growth trajectory. So that's just -- to me, that's just running a good business.

嗯，我想，Steve，我認為最簡單的理解方式是：我們非常努力在組織內建立「紀律」這塊肌肉，讓公司能以 Rule of 40 的方式運作。而基於我們的成長軌跡，我們必須一直尋找機會，依據我們目前的位置以及未來的成長軌跡，去把投資支出規模調整到合適（rightsize）。所以對我來說，這就是在經營一家好公司。

The specific opportunity we have ties to a lot of the opportunity around AI in our own operation, which is areas where we can optimize where we can not only optimize by leveraging technology but also optimized by looking at places where we might be able to organize more effectively and be able to get better outcomes by thinking about themes of work that we do that could be better coordinated and also just quite frankly, looking at ways that we could drive efficiency and how we deliver value in all the different parts of the business. I would not put us -- I would not say that any part of our financials are best-in-class and cannot be improved.

我們的具體機會，與我們自身營運中許多 AI 相關的機會相連結；也就是在一些領域，我們可以最佳化——不僅是透過運用科技來最佳化，也可以透過檢視哪些地方能更有效地組織運作，並藉由思考我們所做工作的主題（themes of work）是否能更好地協調，來取得更好的成果；同時也坦白說，就是找出我們能如何提升效率、以及在業務各個部分交付價值的方式。我不會把我們——我不會說我們財務的任何部分已是同業最佳、無法再改善。

Going from gross margin, the whole way through to spend in each of our functional areas. That's really what you should hear from us is that we're going to continue to run a good business, investing in the right areas and make sure that we're delivering value for shareholders that we believe rule and certainly free cash flows lever in that value creation.

從毛利率一路到我們各個職能領域的支出。你們真正應該從我們這裡聽到的是：我們會持續把公司經營好，在正確的領域投資，並確保我們為股東交付價值；我們相信 Rule of 40，當然自由現金流是推動這種價值創造的槓桿。

Raimo Lenschow, Barclays.

Barclays 的 Raimo Lenschow。

Can you kind of mention the three areas that kind of impacted the numbers? And I was just trying to -- the cohort we knew about the go-to-market changes as well, and I heard your comments there. How do I have to think about like how much of what we're seeing here now is kind of stuff that the go-to-market changes and the cohort, which is kind of in your control, so you can control the controllable versus the talking maxing that we see in the market. So how much is in your control really to change what's going on here? And I have 1 follow-up.

你能否提一下影響數字的三個領域？我只是想——我們知道那個 cohort，以及 go-to-market 的變更，我也聽到你們對此的評論。我該如何思考：我們現在看到的狀況，有多少是 go-to-market 變更與 cohort 這些比較在你們掌控之內的事情——也就是你們可以控制可控因素——相對於我們在市場上看到的那些（talking maxing）？所以到底有多少是在你們掌控之內、可以去改變目前正在發生的事？我還有一個追問。

Yes, that's a great question. And there is a connection between those 2 themes that I think will make sense to you, which is with the whole AI kind of disruption, what that really -- that happens kind of right in the middle of us really pushing harder to grow into new logos, grow into new work flows into new use cases. So there's a tremendous opportunity with Blueprint to be able to unlock in a much faster and more efficient way opportunity with both our existing clients and new logos. So that is a motion that is different than the way that we've operated at Pega over the last quite frankly, 40 years. So that was a change for us.

是的，這是個很好的問題。而我認為這兩個主題之間確實有關聯，你應該會覺得合理：也就是在整個 AI 類型的顛覆之下，實際發生的是——這件事剛好發生在我們更用力推動成長的中間：拓展新客戶（new logos）、拓展新的工作流程（work flows）、拓展新的使用案例（use cases）。因此，Blueprint 帶來非常巨大的機會，能以更快、更有效率的方式，為我們既有客戶與新客戶解鎖（unlock）機會。所以這是一種不同的推進方式（motion），坦白說，這與我們過去 40 年在 Pega 的運作方式不同。所以這對我們而言是一個改變。

I think maybe we underestimated some of the ways that we needed to really manage that change internally. So that is a big part of what happened in the first half of the year is we just didn't move as fast as we would have liked to in terms of making that change. And we believe that is a tremendous value unlock even in a confused market because there is lots of opportunity where people are looking at solving this problem with a deterministic workflow approach and certainly with the best platform to do that in Pega. So I think those things are -- there is a relation there, but a lot of this is in our control.

我想也許我們低估了在內部真正管理這個變革所需要的一些作法。所以今年上半年發生的一大部分情況是：就推動這個改變而言，我們沒有像希望的那樣快。而我們相信，即使在一個混亂的市場中，這仍然是非常巨大的價值解鎖，因為有很多機會是人們正在尋求用「確定性」（deterministic）的工作流程方法來解決這個問題，而 Pega 當然擁有做到這件事的最佳平台。所以我認為這些事情——兩者之間是有關聯的，但其中很大一部分是在我們的掌控之內。

Yes. Okay. Perfect. That's good to hear. And then the other things on the guidance, I mean, a common pattern would be like, look, you had a tougher first half to kind of derisk guidance somewhat. Just kind of -- can you kind of -- and you talk to that a little bit, Ken, but like I'm still slightly confused why not use this opportunity.

是的。好的。完美。很高興聽到。然後關於指引（guidance）的其他部分，我的意思是，一個常見的模式會是：看，你們上半年比較艱難，所以把指引稍微去風險化（derisk）一些。只是——你能否——你也稍微談到這點了，Ken，但我還是有點困惑，為什麼不利用這個機會。

Well, so we're -- we've stayed away from the pattern, whether you agree with it or not or whether others agree with it or not, we saw the pattern of being in this constant kind of chasing, trying to reguide guide and reguide quarters. Our business is a business cycle that doesn't happen in a 90-day period typically. So we've kind of tried to stay away from that. I think what we're trying to give some color to is that we had a lot of work to do in the back half of the year in the existing model, right? 2/3 of our business was going to be in the back half of the year.

嗯，所以我們——我們一直避免那種模式，不管你是否同意、或其他人是否同意；我們看到那種模式是一直在追逐、試圖不斷重新給指引（reguide）、每季再重新給指引。我們的業務週期通常不是在 90 天內就會發生的。所以我們有點刻意避開那樣做。我想我們試著提供一些脈絡的是：在既有模型下，我們在下半年有很多工作要做，對吧？我們有 2/3 的業務原本就會落在下半年。

That's a good working set for us to go after. It's just going to be very challenging to make up the gap that we already experienced in the first half. So hopefully, that gives some color around how we're thinking about the potential range of outcomes. But to be honest with you, I think reguiding to a number in an uncertain environment, I don't think is super helpful for anybody, including us. We're going to try to -- we want the number to be as big as possible, obviously.

對我們來說，這是一個很好的工作目標集合（working set）去努力爭取。只是要彌補我們在上半年已經出現的缺口，將會非常具有挑戰。所以希望這能讓你更理解我們如何看待可能結果的區間。但坦白跟你說，在一個不確定的環境中把指引重新調到某個數字，我不覺得對任何人（包括我們自己）特別有幫助。我們會努力——當然我們希望數字越大越好。

But I think that helpful guide of like we originally said one-third, two-third, certainly, we have significantly underachieved on the one-third in the first half. And if you just assume we can't make that up, but we will still work hard to achieve what we originally thought in the back half. That's hopefully some color to help you get a view of that, Raimo.

但我認為那個有幫助的指引——就像我們一開始說的三分之一、三分之二——很明顯地，我們在上半年於「三分之一」這部分的達成度顯著不足。如果你就假設我們無法把這部分補回來，但我們仍會在下半年努力達成我們原先的預期。希望這些補充能讓你更有感覺，Raimo。

Devin Au, KeyBanc Capital Markets.

Devin Au，KeyBanc Capital Markets。

Would love to just get a little more context on some of the deal elongation commentary. I know you gave kind of that commentary of expecting to add one-third and two-thirds of the new you for the year. in the first half and second half. But would love to just get maybe more context, maybe you could kind of quantify the magnitude of deals that might have slipped from 2Q into the second half or beyond that? And are these deals that were kind of pushed out, are they concentrated in any specific vertical or geos. Just any context there would be helpful.

我想再多了解一些關於交易週期拉長（deal elongation）的評論背景。我知道你提到過，原本預期今年新增的部分會在上半年貢獻三分之一、下半年貢獻三分之二。但我希望能再多一些脈絡，例如你是否可以量化一下，有多大規模的交易從第二季延後到下半年或更之後？另外，這些被往後推的交易，是否集中在特定產業垂直領域或特定地理區域？任何相關背景都會很有幫助。

So let me start just by saying one thing. So the thing that we're not seeing which I think we view as a positive is what we're not seeing is clients not wanting to engage. Second thing we're not seeing is we're not seeing clients our opportunities go away because the client says, oh, we're not doing that. We're only going to use AI. We're not doing that.

我先從一點開始說。我們沒有看到、而且我們認為是正面的，是客戶不願意互動。第二個我們沒有看到的是，我們沒有看到客戶的機會消失，因為客戶說：喔，我們不做那個了。我們只會用 AI。我們不做那個。

We're going to -- we chose not to do any transformation, for example. So we don't think that the market is actually deciding the transformation is not important. But a lot of those pipeline deals that just did close, right? They elongated. So we -- when that will unlock and when that will correct, Devin, I think it's a very hard thing to predict.

例如，我們要——我們選擇不做任何轉型。所以我們不認為市場真的在判定「轉型不重要」。但很多管線裡的交易就是沒有成交，對吧？它們的週期拉長了。所以——何時會解鎖、何時會修正回來，Devin，我認為這非常難預測。

But I think the thing that I would be most worried about that I'm personally not seeing it's just -- if deals just go away, right, pipeline deals just go away. We're not seeing that. We just are seeing a little bit of a fine buyer dynamics in the market.

但我個人最擔心、而我目前沒有看到的情況是——如果交易就這樣消失了，對吧，管線裡的交易就這樣不見了。我們沒有看到那樣的情況。我們只是看到市場上買方動態變得更精細、更謹慎了一些。

Alan, anything to add there?

Alan，你要補充嗎？

No, no, I think that's accurate. People are just confused. It's really almost a max confusion moment. It's starting to make more sense. Candidly, it was wonderful that earlier this year, suddenly take started costing something. People realize that they have an economic decision to make here. Because before that, it was all magic and no expense.

沒有，沒有，我覺得這說得很準。大家就是很困惑。這幾乎是一個「最大困惑」的時刻。現在開始變得比較有頭緒了。坦白說，今年稍早突然之間，token 開始變得有成本，這很棒。大家意識到這裡有一個需要做的經濟性決策。因為在那之前，一切都像魔法一樣，卻沒有費用。

Candidly, I think we have a compelling story even in a free token competitor environment because we offer the predictability. You need a level of determinism. I don't see anyone else out there who's able to use AI aggressively to be able to redesign and reimagine the business and then use AI selectively to make you deliver outcomes at scale at a reasonable cost.

坦白說，即使在競爭對手提供免費 token 的環境下，我們仍然有一個很有說服力的故事，因為我們提供可預測性。你需要一定程度的確定性（determinism）。我看不到還有誰能夠積極運用 AI 來重新設計、重新想像業務，然後再選擇性地使用 AI，以合理成本在規模化的情況下交付成果。

And we're going to work really hard to push 26.1 out to a lot of new customers and have them get hands on with that, probably faster than we've done historically. And I think that will actually help us online customers as we enter the third and fourth quarter.

而且我們會非常努力把 26.1 推向更多新客戶，讓他們實際上手體驗，可能會比我們過去的做法更快。我認為，當我們進入第三季與第四季時，這其實會幫助我們的線上客戶。

Got it. I appreciate the additional context there. And then maybe just a quick follow-up on the free cash flow side. I mean just given the potential of a kind of more muted ACV outlook for the year. Can you just kind of speak to the confidence in the lowering the $575 million outlook for the free cash flow side? Was that kind of guidance to hinge on the ACV growth to accelerate for the year? Just any color there?

了解。謝謝你補充這些背景。接著我想就自由現金流再追問一下。我的意思是，考量到今年 ACV 展望可能比較偏溫和。你能否談談把自由現金流展望下調到 5.75 億美元的信心？這個指引是否原本是建立在今年 ACV 成長會加速的前提上？任何補充說明都可以。

We certainly -- we would -- I mean, we certainly would expect ACV growth to accelerate from where it is now through the back half of the year. But certainly, any ACV shortfall puts pressure on our ability to hit that $575 million for this year. So I definitely wouldn't suggest that the ACV landing spot and the free cash flow for the current year are completely unrelated or disconnected. There's certainly a relation there. There are decisions that we make around spending that are in-year decisions that we certainly will be much more thoughtful about given the first half performance.

我們當然——我們會——我的意思是，我們當然預期 ACV 成長會從目前的水準在下半年加速。但確實，任何 ACV 的不足都會對我們今年達成 5.75 億美元造成壓力。所以我絕不會暗示今年 ACV 的落點與今年的自由現金流是完全無關或脫鉤的。兩者之間當然有關聯。我們在支出方面會做一些「當年度」的決策，鑑於上半年表現，我們肯定會更審慎地思考。

But we still feel like the cash flow durability is strong, but I would be that would be remiss to suggest that the ACV shortfall would have some cash flow impact associated with it.

但我們仍然覺得現金流的韌性很強；不過如果我說 ACV 的不足不會帶來任何現金流影響，那就不恰當了。

Patrick Walravens, Citizens.

Patrick Walravens，Citizens。

Alan, so as I think back to your June 8 remarks, I think you had a pretty good sense this was coming, right? Because you made a comment back then it's very similar to what you're saying now. You said there's still enormous amount of confusion. It's going to take months and quarters for the confusion to abate. So what are you seeing at the beginning of June because you still have three weeks to go in the quarter. Like was there a really big deal that poster what was -- what makes you suspect this is going to be a problem so early?

Alan，當我回想你 6 月 8 日的談話時，我覺得你當時就很清楚這件事要發生了，對吧？因為你那時的評論跟你現在說的非常相似。你說仍然存在大量困惑。困惑需要好幾個月、好幾季才會消退。所以你在 6 月初看到了什麼？因為那時距離季度結束還有三週。例如，是不是有一筆很大的交易出了狀況——到底是什麼讓你這麼早就懷疑這會成為問題？

Well, I'm not sure so early. The reality is, when you were talking to customers after the whole SaaS populous narrate, people were wondering what do we do right? Should we be writing this ourselves. One of the interesting challenges for us is that, particularly since we sell to a lot of very large organizations and to, for example, banks. Those have been primary targets of the people trying to get customers to become agent, right?

嗯，我不確定算不算這麼早。現實是，在整個 SaaS 普及的敘事之後，當你跟客戶談時，大家都在想：我們該怎麼做，對吧？我們是不是應該自己寫？對我們來說一個有趣的挑戰是，特別是因為我們賣給很多非常大型的組織，例如銀行。這些一直都是那些想讓客戶變成 agent（代理/智能體）的人主要鎖定的目標，對吧？

I mean everybody is talking about that. They hear it over time. And you can just tell they're massively confused with what they hear originally from companies like Microsoft and Salesforce. And then recently, just the overwhelming drumbeat of Anthropic and open AI and others coming with their coating solutions. What I'm encompassed by is as recently as last week with the heads of technology of very large financial institution.

我的意思是，每個人都在談這件事。他們長期不斷聽到這些說法。你可以看得出來，他們對於一開始從 Microsoft 和 Salesforce 這類公司聽到的內容感到極度困惑。而最近，Anthropic、OpenAI 以及其他公司帶著他們的 coding 解決方案而來，形成鋪天蓋地的鼓聲般宣傳。我最近一次的感受是，就在上週，我和一家非常大型金融機構的技術主管們在一起。

Going into saying, we really don't want to be in a position to maintain all this code, the amount of code that this stuff generates and the lack of sort of sensible structure around it, it's -- somebody just needs to look at a package system and say, hey, I can understand this. So when I go and I want to change something, it makes a difference. That's what we need to build on. But it's not unreasonable that everybody is trying to reevaluate things. When you think of just all the noise that hit. And I think, Patrick, I think a lot of that hit really in Q2.

他們談到：我們真的不想處在必須維護所有這些程式碼的位置——這些東西產生的程式碼量，以及其周邊缺乏某種合理結構——這……總之需要有人看著一個套件系統並說：嘿，我看得懂這個。這樣當我想去改某些東西時，才會真的產生影響。這就是我們需要用來作為基礎去建構的東西。但每個人都在嘗試重新評估，這並不不合理。當你想到所有襲來的雜訊。而我認為，Patrick，其中很多其實是在第二季發生的。

All right. Great. That's really helpful. And can I ask is -- I mean, you mentioned like OpenAI and Anthropic is Salesforce and Microsoft. Are the companies -- is it like is Sierra starting to pop up? Is Decagon starting to pop up? Are those types of vendors contributing to the confusion for your customers?

好。很好。這真的很有幫助。我想問的是——我的意思是，你提到像 OpenAI、Anthropic，以及 Salesforce、Microsoft。那像 Sierra 這些公司是否也開始浮現？Decagon 是否也開始浮現？這類型的供應商是否也在加劇你們客戶的困惑？

Well, Sierra has been out there for a while, and the customers have been experimenting with them. I've yet to see the sort of ground swell that I think was promised in some setting for some of those. I think it does present some confusion, opportunities to the customers. because I think organizations are unsure. So I do a Sierra, should I do a Workflow should I do direct open AI or Claude sort of interface, everybody is in this party shouting at the customers.

嗯，Sierra 已經在市場上推出一段時間了，客戶也一直在嘗試使用它們。但我至今仍未看到我認為在某些場合對其中一些所承諾的那種自下而上的強勁動能。我認為這確實會帶來一些困惑，也為客戶帶來一些機會，因為我覺得各組織並不確定。所以我該用 Sierra 嗎？我該用 Workflow 嗎？我該直接用 OpenAI 或 Claude 這類介面嗎？大家都在這場派對裡對著客戶大喊。

And in that environment, it's just incredibly noisy. And what I'm going to say is that we have a distinctive story I've never been happier that we made some of the decisions we made three years ago.

而在那樣的環境裡，噪音真的非常大。我想說的是，我們有一個獨特的敘事；我從未像現在這樣慶幸三年前我們做出了一些決策。

Mark Schappel, Loop Capital.

Mark Schappel，Loop Capital。

Ken, given that this year, is more weighted toward the back half of the year? And given that some of the deals in the pipeline didn't close in 2Q, what is giving you confidence that the current delay in purchase decisions is just temporary rather than kind of a more durable shift in spending priorities.

Ken，鑑於今年的表現更偏向下半年？再加上管線中的一些交易在第二季沒有成交，是什麼讓你有信心認為目前採購決策的延遲只是暫時的，而不是支出優先順序出現較為持久的轉變？

I think that's a very fair question that I would -- I don't know that I would say I have complete clarity to refute the suggestion that this may go on longer. What does give me confidence is our pipeline is growing nicely. And our late-stage pipeline is up -- is very strong over last year. And we're not seeing clients not want to engage.

我覺得這是個非常合理的問題——我不確定我是否能說我有完全清楚的把握去反駁「這可能會持續更久」的看法。讓我有信心的是，我們的銷售管線正在良好成長。而且我們的後期（late-stage）管線相較去年大幅提升——非常強勁。我們也沒有看到客戶不願意與我們互動。

And the last point I would make is that the pipeline and the discussions that we have are companies that are use they're thinking about AI priorities as well. They're still kind of engaging with us in very healthy conversations around how we can help their transformation needs. So it looks like the activity that we're seeing is, I would say, real than it will, that it sees real pipe.

我最後想補充的一點是，我們的管線與正在進行的討論，很多公司也在思考 AI 的優先事項。他們仍然以非常健康的方式與我們交流，討論我們如何協助他們的轉型需求。所以看起來我們看到的活動，我會說是真實的——它確實反映在真實的管線中。

But the question you're asking about, like, how do I know for sure that the confusion won't continue for a prolonged period of time, I would say, I don't think anybody in the market can guarantee that. But I would say we feel confident that the activity is rising. The pipeline is strong.

但你問的問題是：我怎麼能確定這種困惑不會長時間持續？我會說，我不認為市場上任何人能保證這一點。但我會說，我們有信心活動正在回升。管線很強。

The clients are real. We know these clients in many cases. And our engagement around Blueprint has been a real big difference maker for us in -- in building that. It's -- right now, it's just down to us continuing to execute I mean I think somewhat of this is you just as a software company for all this confusion, you just need to grind through it. You just need to work through and just stay focused on your objectives I think we're in that kind of market right now.

客戶是真實存在的。很多情況下我們也認識這些客戶。而我們圍繞 Blueprint 的互動，在建立這些成果上對我們而言是非常重要的差異化因素。現在——就只是回到我們持續執行；我的意思是，我覺得在這麼多混亂之下，作為一家軟體公司，你就是得把它磨過去。你必須持續推進並專注在你的目標上；我認為我們現在就是處在這樣的市場。

And we have the benefit of having real structural differentiation I think it can be hard for people who don't want to spend the time ticking in and looking. But if you actually go look at the alternative approaches that we have and company who's writing massive amounts of code or generating dozens or thousands of agents, there's a big difference when you guys workflows at the heart of it. And to be blunt, we are the best workflow company out there by far.

而我們的優勢在於具備真正結構性的差異化；對於不想花時間深入研究與比較的人來說，這可能不容易看出來。但如果你真的去看我們的替代方案，以及那些需要撰寫大量程式碼或生成數十、數百甚至數千個代理（agents）的公司做法，當你把工作流程（workflows）放在核心時，差異就非常大。坦白說，我們是目前市場上最好的工作流程公司，遠遠領先。

That's fair. And then, Ken, would you say that renewals are holding up better than net new business? Or are you seeing pressure on both?

了解。那麼，Ken，你會說續約的表現比新增業務更穩健嗎？還是你看到兩者都承受壓力？

I would say the net new business and the expansion with existing clients is where some of the some of the kind of -- the freezing happened, I think, in the first half of the year.

我會說，新增業務以及既有客戶的擴張，是今年上半年出現某種——某種「凍結」的地方。

Patrick McIlwee, William Blair.

Patrick McIlwee，William Blair。

So we heard that Blueprint helps cut your average sales cycle roughly in half, which seemingly supported a material acceleration in your revenue over the last year or two. Can you talk about the significance of Infinity Studio 26, if you think that has a potential to have a similar effect on your implementation time lines and do you feel -- as we think about that, do you feel that, that dynamic alongside some of the frozen but not lost deals you've talked about provide any kind of spring loading of demand do you feel like you have heading into late '26 or into '27?

我們聽到 Blueprint 能把你們的平均銷售週期大約縮短一半，這似乎支撐了你們過去一兩年營收的顯著加速。你能談談 Infinity Studio 26 的重要性嗎？你認為它是否可能對你們的導入時程產生類似的效果？另外，當我們思考這點時，你是否覺得這個動態，加上你提到那些「凍結但未流失」的交易，會帶來某種需求的蓄勢（spring loading）效應，讓你們在 2026 年下半年或 2027 年迎來更強的需求？

Yes, I think that's a good question. So bringing the Blueprint ANA capabilities, into Infinity Studio is a really, really big deal. What we have done originally was focused very much on how do you completely reimagine the design process. And it can be that was a sufficiently hard problem that deserved our focus. But what it meant is that after somebody wants to begin using the system, the whole concept of building for change required you to return to a more adequated environment.

是的，我覺得這是個好問題。把 Blueprint 的 ANA 能力帶進 Infinity Studio，是一件非常、非常重要的事。我們一開始做的重點非常聚焦在：如何徹底重新想像設計流程。而那本身就是一個足夠困難的問題，值得我們投入專注。但這也意味著，當有人想開始使用系統之後，「為變更而建」的整個概念會要求你回到一個更合適的環境。

And customers told us, no, we don't want to do that. We want to be able to continue in this sort of accelerated mode of thinking and exploration. I think having a pretty study will be available with Blueprint AI technology is going to be a really, really big deal. And candidly, I think it will do more than have the build and delivery experience. I think it's going to completely change it much in the same way the blue did.

客戶告訴我們：不，我們不想那樣做。我們希望能在這種加速的思考與探索模式中持續前進。我認為讓一個相當成熟的 Studio 能搭載 Blueprint AI 技術，將會是非常、非常重大的改變。而坦白說，我認為它帶來的不只是改善建置與交付體驗。我認為它會徹底改變整個流程，就像 Blueprint 當初所帶來的改變一樣。

So we're very excited about that. But candidly, it's good in the market now for a week. So we're going to get some real experience. I'm sure we'll talk about it at the next call.

所以我們對此非常興奮。但坦白說，它在市場上才剛推出一週。所以我們會取得一些真實的使用經驗。我相信我們會在下一次電話會議中談到它。

Okay. And wanted to ask if you could quickly provide some thoughts on the proliferation of open source and open weight models, SaaS evolving space. But what implication is you believe.

好的。另外想請你快速分享一下，開源與開放權重模型的擴散、以及 SaaS 持續演進的空間。你認為這會帶來什麼影響？

I think it's actually sort of great and inevitable. The reality is that these model makers are going to find that they've become largely commoditized. And it's an interesting thing to see how quickly that is happening.

我認為這其實挺好，而且是不可避免的。現實是，這些模型製造商會發現他們在很大程度上已經商品化了。看到這件事發生得如此之快，是一件很有意思的事。

We have reached the end of today's Q&A. I will now turn the call back to Alan Trefler for closing remarks.

我們已到達今天問答環節的尾聲。接下來我將把電話會議交回給 Alan Trefler 作結語。

Thank you. Obviously, it's a challenging moment, but last week, actually, we were -- we opened the Nasdaq to celebrate our 30th anniversary. And this being my 120th earnings call frightening to say. We've seen a lot. We've seen a lot of technology change.

謝謝。顯然，這是一個充滿挑戰的時刻，但其實就在上週，我們——我們敲響納斯達克開市鐘，慶祝我們的 30 週年。而這是我第 120 次財報電話會議，說起來有點嚇人。我們見過很多。我們見證了許多科技變遷。

We've seen a lot of market changes and a lot of market ships. I just want to assure people that I think we have a really good understanding of how to react strongly, but smartly. And we are going to do that, and I appreciate your support. Thank you very much.

我們也見證了許多市場變化，以及許多市場的轉向。我只是想向大家保證，我認為我們非常了解如何強而有力、但也聰明地做出反應。我們會這麼做，也感謝各位的支持。非常謝謝。

This concludes today's call. Thank you for attending. You may now disconnect.

今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝各位參與。您現在可以掛線。