Veeva Systems Inc. (VEEV) 2027 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Hello, everyone. Thank you for joining us, and welcome to the Veeva Systems fiscal 2027 second-quarter results conference call. (Operator Instructions)

各位好。感謝各位加入，歡迎參加 Veeva Systems 2027 會計年度第二季財報電話會議。(接線員指示)

I will now hand the conference over to Gunnar Hansen, Senior Director, Investor Relations. Gunnar, please go ahead.

現在我將把會議交給投資人關係資深總監 Gunnar Hansen。Gunnar，請開始。

Good afternoon, and welcome to Veeva's fiscal 2027 second-quarter earnings conference call for the quarter ended July 31, 2026. As a reminder, we posted prepared remarks on Veeva's Investor Relations website just after 1:00 PM Pacific today. We hope you've had a chance to read them before the call. Today's call will be used primarily for Q&A. With me today for Q&A are Peter Gassner, our Chief Executive Officer; Paul Shawah, EVP, Strategy; and Brian Van Wagener, our Chief Financial Officer.

各位下午好，歡迎參加 Veeva 2027 會計年度第二季（截至 2026 年 7 月 31 日止季度）的財報電話會議。提醒各位，我們已於今日太平洋時間下午 1:00 過後不久，在 Veeva 投資人關係網站上發布了事先準備的講稿。希望各位在通話前已經有機會閱讀。今天的電話會議將主要用於問答。今天與我一同參與問答的有：執行長 Peter Gassner；策略執行副總裁 Paul Shawah；以及財務長 Brian Van Wagener。

During this call, we may make forward-looking statements regarding trends, our strategies and the anticipated performance of the business, including guidance regarding future financial results. These forward-looking statements will be used based on our current views and expectations and are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially. Please refer to the risks listed in our earnings release and the risk factors included in our most recent filing on Form 10-Q.

在本次電話會議中，我們可能會就趨勢、我們的策略以及業務的預期表現（包括對未來財務結果的指引）發表前瞻性陳述。這些前瞻性陳述係基於我們目前的觀點與預期，並受各種風險與不確定性影響。我們的實際結果可能會有重大差異。請參閱我們的財報新聞稿所列風險，以及我們最近一次提交之 Form 10-Q 文件中所載的風險因素。

Forward-looking statements made during the call are being made as of today, August 26, 2026, based on the facts available to us today. If this call is replayed or reviewed after today, the information presented during the call may not contain current or accurate information. Veeva disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements. We may discuss guidance on today's call, but we will not provide any further guidance or updates on our performance during the quarter unless we do so in a public forum.

本次電話會議中的前瞻性陳述係於今日（2026 年 8 月 26 日）作出，並以我們今日可得之事實為基礎。若本通話於今日之後被重播或回顧，通話中所提供的資訊可能不再是最新或準確。Veeva 不承擔更新或修訂任何前瞻性陳述之義務。我們可能會在今日通話中討論指引，但除非在公開場合進行，否則我們不會在季度期間就業績提供任何進一步指引或更新。

On the call, we may also discuss certain non-GAAP metrics that we believe aid in the understanding of our financial results. A reconciliation to comparable GAAP metrics can be found in today's earnings release and in the supplemental investor presentation, both of which are available on our website. With that, thank you for joining us, and I'll turn the call over to Peter.

在本次通話中，我們也可能會討論某些我們認為有助於理解財務結果的非 GAAP 指標。與可比 GAAP 指標的調節表可在今日的財報新聞稿以及補充投資人簡報中找到，兩者皆可於我們網站取得。那麼，感謝各位加入，接下來我把電話交給 Peter。

Thank you, Gunnar, and welcome, everyone, to the call. Q2 was another strong quarter, delivering results ahead of our guidance. Total revenue in the quarter was $928 million with non-GAAP operating income of $416 million. Execution was exceptional this quarter as we made strong progress in many key areas.

謝謝你，Gunnar，也歡迎各位參加本次電話會議。第二季再度表現強勁，成果優於我們的指引。本季總營收為 9.28 億美元，非 GAAP 營業利益為 4.16 億美元。本季執行表現非常出色，我們在多個關鍵領域都取得了重大進展。

It was our best CRM quarter ever. We also are accelerating rapidly in AI overall and especially with Veeva Falcon. And our focused acquisition strategy is working, bringing great people and capabilities to Veeva. It's an exciting time. AI is enabling the next big chapter for Veeva and the industry. We'll now open up the call to your questions.

這是我們有史以來最好的 CRM 季度。我們在整體 AI，尤其是 Veeva Falcon 方面，也正在快速加速。而我們聚焦的併購策略正在奏效，為 Veeva 帶來優秀的人才與能力。這是一個令人振奮的時刻。AI 正在為 Veeva 與整個產業開啟下一個重大篇章。現在我們開放各位提問。

(Operator Instructions) Joe Vruwink, Baird.

(接線員指示) Joe Vruwink，Baird。

I think it's evident over the past few months that biopharma R&D spending is headed in a positive direction, and that also is showing up at Veeva. As pipelines move forward, what are you finding the mentality to be at customers around assessing and adopting something that's brand new with thinking about the Vault application agents or even Veeva Falcon. I'm interested in levels of early interest taking place amidst what seems like a busier environment and whether that's a reflection of the value customers are seeing pretty quickly when they start looking at the new Veeva offerings.

我想過去幾個月很明顯可以看出，生物製藥的研發支出正朝正向方向發展，而這也反映在 Veeva 的表現上。隨著研發管線推進，客戶在評估與採用全新事物時的心態是什麼？例如 Vault 應用代理（application agents）或甚至 Veeva Falcon。我想了解在看起來更忙碌的環境下，早期興趣的程度如何，以及這是否反映出客戶在開始評估 Veeva 新產品時，很快就看到了價值。

I'll take that one. Yes, there are a lot of things going on, right? The funding environment is relatively good. There's a lot of changes with AI and science is moving ahead. So there's a lot of priorities for the customers. And so when that happens, they can't do all things at once, and they generally try to pick some things that they can do and that are high priority.

我來回答這題。是的，現在確實有很多事情同時在發生，對吧？資金環境相對不錯。AI 帶來很多變化，科學也在持續向前推進。因此客戶有很多優先事項。而在這種情況下，他們不可能同時做所有事情，通常會挑選一些他們能做、且優先度高的事項。

Your question was related to Falcon. I think Falcon, there is a lot of interest right now because it's very clear that that's high priority. Quick cost savings and compliance and efficiency, that's high on everybody's priority. So I think there's a lot of interest in Falcon. We are the rate limiter right now. We have to get that product ready, start working with the early adopters, but interest in Falcon is very high.

你的問題與 Falcon 有關。我認為 Falcon 目前確實引起很大興趣，因為很清楚這是高優先事項。快速的成本節省、合規與效率，這些在每個人的優先順序都很高。所以我認為大家對 Falcon 的興趣很高。目前的限制因素在我們自己。我們必須把產品準備好，開始與早期採用者合作，但對 Falcon 的興趣非常高。

That's great. And then maybe as you think about how customers can now engage with Veeva in an AI framework, you have the application agents, you have Falcon, you have a custom development framework that you've introduced. Are any of those modes of engagement maybe becoming larger or a bigger piece of the conversation? And do any of those modes matter more or less as you think about how your financial model evolves and what the impact might end up being to Veeva?

很好。接著，當你思考客戶現在如何在 AI 架構下與 Veeva 互動時，你們有應用代理、有 Falcon，也有你們推出的客製化開發框架。這些互動模式中，是否有任何一種正在變得更大、或在對話中占比更高？而當你思考財務模型如何演進，以及對 Veeva 最終可能造成的影響時，這些互動模式的重要性是否有所不同？

Yes, it is a major change for Veeva. So Falcon is agentic labor. That's something different than we've done before, right? We've done cloud software, data consulting. Now we have this fourth thing, agentic labor. So it is transforming the discussion. There are two different things you could do with Veeva. You can do some agentic labor; you can do core applications. That was never the case before.

是的，這對 Veeva 來說是一次重大改變。Falcon 是代理式勞動（agentic labor）。這與我們過去做的事情不同，對吧？我們做過雲端軟體、資料顧問服務。現在我們有第四種：代理式勞動。因此它正在改變討論的方式。你可以用 Veeva 做兩種不同的事情。你可以做一些代理式勞動；你也可以做核心應用。以前從來不是這樣。

The important point is Veeva, it fits very well. It's a structural advantage for Veeva to both have the agentic labor across multiple areas in life sciences and have the core applications across multiple of those areas in life sciences. So that's why I feel like we're very well positioned and the conversations are very rich. Gosh, I just hope we got to get that product going as soon as we can.

重點是，這非常契合 Veeva。Veeva 同時在生命科學多個領域提供跨領域的代理式勞動，並在這些領域提供核心應用，這對 Veeva 來說是一種結構性優勢。所以我覺得我們的定位非常好，對話也非常豐富。天啊，我只希望我們能盡快把產品推動起來。

If we had our early adopters live and successful right now, I don't want to be hyperbole, but Falcon would be flying off the shelf if that was the case because one thing to know is there's not an extensive Falcon implementation. There's not a data mapping from one system to the other.

如果我們的早期採用者現在就已上線並且成功，我不想誇大其詞，但若真是那樣，Falcon 會被搶購一空；因為有一點要知道，Falcon 並不需要繁複的導入。不需要把資料從一個系統映射到另一個系統。

There's not a cutover process. There's not ETL to do. So this implementation of full value is faster with Falcon, but the tech underneath it is newer, and we have to get our motion down there. If you can tell -- I hope you can tell, I'm pretty excited about Falcon. I really think we're on to something.

不需要切換（cutover）流程。也不需要做 ETL。因此，使用 Falcon 實現完整價值的導入速度更快，但其底層技術較新，我們必須把那套推進方式（motion）磨合到位。如果你聽得出來——我希望你聽得出來——我對 Falcon 非常興奮。我真的覺得我們抓到了一個重要的方向。

Brian Peterson, Raymond James.

Brian Peterson，Raymond James。

Congrats on a strong quarter. So the Commercial segment was really strong this quarter. I know you called out record results. Could you maybe unpack what drove that acceleration in the subscription line item? Would love to get some more color there.

恭喜本季表現強勁。所以商業（Commercial）部門本季真的很強。我知道你們提到創紀錄的成果。能否請你拆解一下，是什麼驅動了訂閱（subscription）這個項目的加速成長？希望能多給一些細節。

Yes. This is Brian. I'll take that one. Commercial subs, yes, very strong quarter. I think the culmination of many quarters of execution, but you see them showing up in the results here, up about 13% year-over-year. Even when we back out Crossix, it's double digits in the rest of commercial. So it's quite a broad-based strength in the commercial offering across CRM, content, data, Crossix, Ostro most recently.

好的。我是Brian。我來回答這題。商業訂閱，是的，本季非常強勁。我認為這是多個季度執行累積的成果，而你現在在結果中看到它反映出來，同比成長約13%。即使把Crossix排除在外，其餘商業業務也仍是雙位數成長。因此，商業產品在CRM、內容、資料、Crossix，以及最近的Ostro等方面，都呈現相當廣泛的強勢表現。

So we feel very good about the execution. Crossix continues to be a strong performer with a lot of headroom for growth. We're continuing to see growth in CRM, which I think a lot of the conversation has been, is that going to go down? It's actually going up. And we're continuing to see a lot of room to continue growing in a healthy market in Crossix as well as the other areas.

所以我們對執行力感到非常有信心。Crossix持續表現強勁，且仍有很大的成長空間。我們也持續看到CRM的成長；我想外界很多討論是，CRM會不會下滑？其實它是在上升。同時我們也持續看到Crossix所在的健康市場，以及其他領域，都還有很大的成長空間。

Great. I appreciate the color. I just want to follow up on Aspen. I know you guys are excited about that as well. How should we be thinking about that market opportunity and some of the investments that you're taking to kind of enable that revenue stream?

很好。謝謝你補充這些細節。我想追問一下Aspen。我知道你們對那個也很興奮。我們應該如何看待那個市場機會，以及你們為了啟動/支撐那條營收來源所做的一些投資？

Aspen, I think it's very early, right? That's the thing to know. This is a start-up inside of Veeva. It's moving very rapidly. It's on 90-day plans. So we have a core market that we're going after, the horizontal CRM in a new way, in a new way that really enables AI and is built on modern technology. So the thing to know that it is very agile now. So we're -- what we're focused on is getting the product right, working with our early adopter customers.

Aspen，我認為現在還非常早期，對吧？這是需要先知道的重點。這是在Veeva內部的一個新創（start-up）。進展非常快。它是以90天計畫在推進。所以我們鎖定一個核心市場：以新的方式做水平式（horizontal）的CRM，用一種真正能支援AI、並建立在現代技術之上的新方式。因此要知道的是，它現在非常敏捷。所以我們——我們目前專注的是把產品做對，並與早期採用者客戶合作。

I'm 100% convinced that there's a market for what we're making in Aspen. Can we execute well enough? That's always the hard thing in a start-up. Can you do it? Can you do it better than your competition? And what kind of luck do you have along the way? That plays into it. I've done the start-up thing before starting Veeva. I've done the start-up thing when we started Vault inside of Veeva.

我百分之百相信Aspen正在打造的東西是有市場的。我們能不能把執行做到位？那永遠是新創最難的部分。你能不能做到？你能不能做得比競爭對手更好？以及一路上你有多少運氣？這些都會影響結果。在創立Veeva之前，我做過新創。在Veeva內部啟動Vault時，我也做過類似的新創。

We're doing it again, and I have lots of friends that have done it. And it's just like that. Can you execute well, really, really well? And what kind of luck do you have on the way? But sometimes you're wondering whether the market is there or not. You could say maybe we were wondering that when we were getting new markets going 18 months ago, et cetera.

我們現在又再做一次，而且我有很多朋友也做過。情況就是那樣。你能不能執行得好，真的、真的非常好？以及一路上你的運氣如何？但有時候你會懷疑市場到底在不在。你可以說，大概在18個月前我們開拓新市場時，等等，我們也曾經有過這樣的疑問。

Right now, we have enough product, and we're working with some early customers. We're 100% clear that the market is there, 100% clear. It's just whether we can execute and we'll see. So your question was about how to size the investment as well. That's very small on the Veeva scale. It's not something that Brian, our CFO, notices really on the Veeva scale because you have to keep that very small when you're working with early customers and you're iterating an early product.

現在，我們已經有足夠的產品，並且正在與一些早期客戶合作。我們百分之百確定市場存在，百分之百確定。剩下就是我們能否執行到位，之後再看。所以你也問到投資規模該怎麼看。以Veeva的尺度來看，那非常小。這不是Brian（我們的CFO）在Veeva的尺度上會特別注意到的事情，因為當你在與早期客戶合作、迭代早期產品時，你必須把規模控制得很小。

And actually, these days, you keep it smaller than normal because the pace of the development is faster with AI. You actually need a smaller amount of developers, very, very, very skilled as well. So it's not a financial drain on the company. It's not a focused drain, and it's certainly not any kind of revenue that's figured into our plans at this time.

而且其實在現在這個時代，你會把規模維持得比以往更小，因為AI讓開發節奏更快。你實際上需要的開發人員更少，但要非常、非常、非常熟練。所以這不是公司的財務負擔。這也不是一個需要特別集中承擔的負擔，而且目前也完全沒有把任何相關營收納入我們的計畫之中。

Ken Wong, Oppenheimer.

Ken Wong，Oppenheimer。

I wanted to circle back on Falcon, Peter. It was great to hear the customer interest. Also great to hear it's not an extensive implementation process. But what I didn't get a sense for was as you're trying to introduce virtual labor to your customers, is that a different counterparty that you're selling to versus maybe the CMO or the CIO?

Peter，我想回到Falcon這個話題。很高興聽到客戶的興趣。也很高興聽到它不是一個很繁重的導入流程。但我不太清楚的是，當你們嘗試把虛擬勞動力（virtual labor）導入客戶時，你們面對的銷售對象，是否會不同於例如CMO或CIO？

And then secondarily, how difficult do you expect it to be to maybe work through the inner politics of shifting kind of the budgets from an IT wallet to maybe an HR labor wallet? Any help in helping us think through that?

其次，你預期要處理把預算從IT的錢包轉到例如HR的人力預算錢包，內部政治會有多難？能否幫我們一起思考一下？

Ken, great question. Now I'll be able to tell you this definitively now in a couple of years when we're selling lots of Falcon and I'll be able to give you the readout. So I'm going to gauge into the future and tell you what we know so far. First off, it's actually going to be an easier selling cycle because IT is really not involved in the agentic labor. That's not something they're involved in because it's not like that.

Ken，問得很好。再過幾年，當我們賣出大量Falcon時，我就能很明確地告訴你，並給你完整回饋。所以我先往前推估，分享我們目前所知道的。首先，這其實會是更容易的銷售週期，因為IT基本上不會參與這種代理式（agentic）勞動力。他們不會參與，因為它不是那種性質的事情。

If you're selling a solution to safety, this is about the budget of the safety team. So it's really the head of the unit, the business unit and the head of the sort of the operations of that business unit. So that's super clear. And the other question is, yes, it is a very related buyer. This is actually -- we have not hit the case for Falcon where we're selling into a buyer that we are not selling into because we're always selling into the business side with our business applications, now sometimes more or less.

如果你是在賣一個安全（safety）解決方案，這就關乎安全團隊的預算。所以真正的買方會是該單位的主管、事業單位（business unit）的負責人，以及該事業單位營運端的負責人。這點非常清楚。至於另一個問題，是的，它是一個高度相關的買方。事實上——我們在Falcon上還沒有遇到那種情況：我們要賣給一個我們原本不會接觸的買方，因為我們的商業應用一直都是賣給業務端，只是有時候程度多或少。

For example, in the areas of Falcon where Falcon is playing, for example, safety, clinical regulatory, that's always been somewhat more of a business sell, IT involved, but somewhat more of a business sell. CRM is the most IT heavy sale that we have in general. So the areas where we're doing Falcon, they were ready, I would say, on the average, 60% of business sell. And those are people that we've been selling into for 10 years.

例如，在Falcon發揮作用的領域，比如安全、臨床法規（clinical regulatory），一直以來都比較偏向業務端銷售；IT會參與，但相對更偏業務端。而CRM一般是我們所有產品中IT參與度最高的銷售。所以我們在做Falcon的那些領域，我會說平均而言，大約是60%偏業務端的銷售。而這些人我們已經賣了10年。

Understood. And then, Brian, just a follow-up on some of the investments. It sounds like with Aspen, it might be sort of small upfront. But as we think about you guys ramping on Falcon, ramping on Aspen, ramping on some Vault agents, Vault AI, I mean, should we expect maybe an uptick in terms of sales investments, R&D investments? Anything we should be thinking about relative to how you guys are spending today.

了解。然後Brian，我再追問一下關於一些投資。聽起來Aspen前期可能規模不大。但當我們考慮你們在Falcon加速擴張、Aspen加速擴張，以及一些Vault agents、Vault AI的推進時，我是說，我們是否應該預期銷售投資、研發投資會有所上升？相對於你們目前的支出方式，有沒有什麼我們應該特別留意的？

As Peter talked about, Ken, we're very excited about Falcon and the path that it can be on. But you've also seen us over time consistently think about both growth and profitability. And so it's not different entering a new market like Falcon. Maybe the dynamics of the market are very slightly different.

如 Peter 所提到的，Ken，我們對 Falcon 以及它可能走上的發展路徑感到非常興奮。但你也看到我們長期以來一直同時思考成長與獲利能力。因此，進入像 Falcon 這樣的新市場並沒有不同。也許市場的動態會有些微不同。

But it's the same overall approach that we're taking there. And so we scale investment as we scale revenue, there's certainly nothing material that I would call out for this fiscal year. It's all factored into the guidance that we've updated for FY '27. And as we get another couple of quarters ahead and gain in the future of next year, we'll factor that into our guidance for next year.

但我們在那裡採取的整體方法是一樣的。因此，我們會隨著營收擴大而擴大投資；就本會計年度而言，確實沒有任何我會特別點出的重大事項。這些都已納入我們更新後的 FY '27 指引之中。而當我們再往前看一兩個季度、並進入明年更後段時，我們也會把那部分納入明年的指引。

Saket Kalia, Barclays.

Saket Kalia，Barclays。

This is Ryan Powderly on for Saket tonight. Peter, maybe my first for you. From the customers that are planning to transition to Salesforce away from Veeva CRM, what do you hear from those customers? What are they saying right now about the decision? And do you think longer term; it could be possible for Veeva to win some of those back?

今晚由 Ryan Powderly 代 Saket 發言。Peter，我第一個問題想請教你。對於那些計畫從 Veeva CRM 轉移、改用 Salesforce 的客戶，你從他們那裡聽到什麼回饋？他們現在對這個決策怎麼說？以及你是否認為從長期來看，Veeva 有可能把其中一些客戶贏回來？

Yes, Ryan, I do -- there's a handful of customers, large customers that did select Salesforce, many of them even two years ago. Those projects are -- they're having troubles, right? They're not going smooth, and we have some project delays because it turns out you -- the product is very deep, and you need that.

是的，Ryan，我認為會——有少數客戶、一些大型客戶選擇了 Salesforce，其中很多甚至是兩年前就做了選擇。那些專案——他們遇到困難，對吧？進展並不順利，而且我們也看到一些專案延宕，因為事實證明——產品非常深，你需要那種深度。

So yes, I think we can win back some of those customers, maybe some of them completely. Others have been in some certain regions and not others. I think the bulk of that win back would probably be in 2027 and 2028 because Veeva CRM, they have that backstop until the end of 2029. So this is the time when it starts really to get real, right?

所以是的，我認為我們可以贏回其中一些客戶，也許有些可以完全贏回。其他則可能只是在某些地區採用、在其他地區沒有。我認為大部分的贏回可能會發生在 2027 與 2028 年，因為 Veeva CRM 有那個「後備支撐」一直到 2029 年底。所以現在正是事情開始真正變得現實的時候，對吧？

Because during 2029, there's no more backstop of, oh, we can keep using Veeva CRM because they know they have to go to Vault CRM. Yes, we're very optimistic about that. And the best thing we can do there to help that is really focus on our existing customers that did decide to go with us for CRM and make them very successful and improve the product.

因為到了 2029 年，就不再有那種「喔，我們還可以繼續用 Veeva CRM」的後備支撐了，因為他們知道自己必須轉到 Vault CRM。是的，我們對此非常樂觀。而我們能做的、對此最有幫助的事情，就是真正聚焦在那些已決定與我們一起做 CRM 的既有客戶，讓他們非常成功，並持續改進產品。

And for the customers that didn't choose Veeva, we have a good relationship with them, and they've told us that, hey -- we said, hey, we want to be your plan B, and they really embrace that, and that's the way they view that because these customers have businesses to run, right? They got to get their medicines to patients. It's great. They love having a backup option if their plan A doesn't work out.

至於那些沒有選擇 Veeva 的客戶，我們與他們關係良好，他們也告訴我們——我們說，嘿，我們想成為你們的 B 計畫，而他們確實很接受這點，這也是他們看待我們的方式，因為這些客戶有業務要營運，對吧？他們必須把藥送到病患手上。這很好。如果他們的 A 計畫行不通，他們很喜歡有一個備援選項。

Really interesting. I appreciate that. Brian, maybe my follow-up for you. Could you just talk a little bit about what you're seeing on the R&D subscription line? And maybe specifically, where you see Veeva in the journey between some of the, let's call them, old guard products versus some of the newer growth areas that you're investing in, just as we think about that revenue mix shift and how it's evolving?

真的很有意思。謝謝你的分享。Brian，我接著想問你。你能否談談你在 R&D 訂閱這條線上看到的情況？也許更具體地說，當我們思考營收組合的轉移以及其演變時，你如何看待 Veeva 在所謂「舊勢力」產品與你們正在投資的一些較新成長領域之間的旅程位置？

Yes. It's a great question, Ryan, because we're right in the middle of that transition that you pointed to. And I think very pleased with the progress and the execution that we're making. But the old guard that you're referring to would be things like, I guess, eTMF, and CTMS, and QDOC, and QMS and our regulatory suite that has fueled a lot of the growth in R&D to date. And a lot of the growth as you look out over the next few years to 2030 and beyond is being driven by a different set of products, EDC, eCOA, RTSM, Safety, and LIMS.

是的。這是個很好的問題，Ryan，因為我們正處於你所指出的那個轉型的正中間。我對我們取得的進展與執行力感到非常滿意。你所說的舊勢力，可能指的是像 eTMF、CTMS、QDOC、QMS，以及我們的法規（regulatory）產品套件，這些迄今為止推動了 R&D 的大量成長。而當你展望未來幾年到 2030 年及更遠，很多成長將由另一組產品所驅動：EDC、eCOA、RTSM、Safety，以及 LIMS。

And these are big, very strategic products with a ton of headroom, but they're very early. So we're excited about that. We're executing really well against that. But there's a little bit of a changing of the guards that's happening there. And the S curves don't stack up exactly. So you see some of that factored into the guidance for the balance of the year. But we're very confident and excited about the long-term trajectory of the R&D business and obviously pleased to be raising the guide again here in Q2.

這些都是大型、非常具策略性的產品，成長空間非常大，但仍處於非常早期。所以我們對此感到興奮。我們在這方面的執行做得非常好。但那裡確實正在發生一點「世代交替」。而 S 曲線並不會完全無縫疊加。因此，你會看到其中一些已反映在今年剩餘期間的指引之中。但我們對 R&D 業務的長期走勢非常有信心、也很興奮，當然也很高興在這裡於 Q2 再次上調指引。

Alexei Gogolev, JPMorgan.

Alexei Gogolev，JPMorgan。

I wanted to go back to the Falcon discussion. So with 5 Falcon early adopters and first go-lives expected this year, what are the key readiness gates you must clear? And how do you expect the human in the loop requirement to evolve by workflow type?

我想回到 Falcon 的討論。目前有 5 家 Falcon 早期採用者，且預期今年會有首次上線（go-live），你們必須通過哪些關鍵的就緒（readiness）關卡？以及你預期「human in the loop」的需求會如何依工作流程類型而演進？

I'm sorry, Alexei, there was a breakup and it said, what are the key you have to clear, and I didn't hear the word in the middle.

抱歉，Alexei，剛剛訊號斷斷續續，你說到「關鍵的……你必須通過」，但中間那個詞我沒聽清楚。

Peter, I was talking about the key readiness gates you must clear and how do you expect the human in the loop requirement to evolve by workflow type?

Peter，我是在問你們必須通過哪些關鍵的就緒（readiness）關卡，以及你預期「human in the loop」的需求會如何依工作流程類型而演進？

The key sort of regulatory hurdles, if I heard correctly. Yes. Agentic labor is like human labor in a way. It's nondeterministic. So you have to prove that you have the right training and guardrails around humans, and that's the same thing we have to do around our agents and the human -- we provide for that human in the loop with Falcon as well because you can see the outcome of what the agent did and does inside of the Vault application. So from what we can see, it's working very well.

如果我聽得沒錯，是關於關鍵的法規（regulatory）門檻。是的。代理式勞動（agentic labor）在某種程度上就像人類勞動。它是非決定性的（nondeterministic）。所以你必須證明你對人類有正確的訓練與護欄（guardrails），而我們對代理（agents）也必須做同樣的事；同時，Falcon 也提供「human in the loop」，因為你可以在 Vault 應用程式內看到代理做了什麼、以及其結果。就我們目前所見，它運作得非常好。

It's not. This approach is completely similar to what customers are doing today on certain internal projects. The difference is they would like to be able to do it at scale in a very repeatable motion. So I would guess 3 years ago, we would probably have to be teaching the customers a lot about what is AI, what is the agentic labor, how do you do this? How do you do that? That's -- we really don't have to do that so much anymore. The customers know how to deal with it. They just want a partner that can scale it across multiple areas.

它並不是——這種方法與客戶今天在某些內部專案上所做的完全類似。差別在於，他們希望能以可擴展、且非常可重複的方式來做。所以我猜三年前，我們可能還得教客戶很多：什麼是 AI？什麼是代理式勞動？要怎麼做這個？要怎麼做那個？但現在——我們其實不太需要再做那麼多了。客戶知道如何應對。他們只是想要一個能把它擴展到多個領域的合作夥伴。

And also on the data cloud topic, so you added 14 Data Cloud customers. Where is Data Cloud proving most differentiated? And how are you positioning connected data as a prerequisite for AI outcomes in commercial workflows?

另外在 Data Cloud 的議題上，你們新增了 14 家 Data Cloud 客戶。Data Cloud 在哪些方面最能展現差異化？以及在商業工作流程中，你們如何將「連結式資料」（connected data）定位為達成 AI 成果的先決條件？

So we don't position Data Cloud as a prerequisite for AI. It's more of an accelerator. The cleaner your data is, the better your AI processes are going to work, especially in certain areas. What's working well for us in Data Cloud is OpenData, so clean reference data. Now that's a hard project to do because it involves changing a lot of things in downstream systems. But we have some momentum there, and I think that's going to continue.

因此，我們不把 Data Cloud 定位為 AI 的先決條件。它更像是一個加速器。你的資料越乾淨，你的 AI 流程就會運作得越好，尤其是在某些領域。我們在 Data Cloud 這邊運作得很好的，是 OpenData，也就是乾淨的參考資料。現在那是一個很難做的專案，因為它牽涉到要改變許多下游系統的東西。但我們在那裡已經有一些動能，我認為這會持續下去。

We have strong momentum in Compass for certain therapeutic areas of complex therapies, where our Compass products can see different things in the flow of complex products in the US that other people -- other offerings can't see. And then we're -- we have real market leadership with our Link product and Link Key People, and we're expanding there with the add-on products of Link. So Link Medical Insights, Link Key Accounts for the US, Link Workflow for Congresses.

我們在 Compass 上，在某些複雜療法的治療領域有很強的動能；我們的 Compass 產品能在美國複雜產品的流轉流程中看到不同的東西，是其他人——其他方案看不到的。然後我們——我們的 Link 產品以及 Link Key People 具有真正的市場領導地位，而且我們正透過 Link 的附加產品在那裡擴張。所以有 Link Medical Insights、面向美國的 Link Key Accounts、以及用於大會的 Link Workflow。

So overall, data is not a thing that can accelerate very, very fast. It's not like selling fast fashion on Instagram, right? That can accelerate fast and then disappear. Data is not like that. It's a long, slow grind, but we're certainly happy with our progress, and it's very synergistic with Veeva. If you look at what Veeva -- why is Veeva being successful? We have a very synergistic product plan.

所以整體而言，資料不是那種可以非常、非常快加速的東西。它不像在 Instagram 上賣快時尚，對吧？那種可以很快加速，然後又消失。資料不是那樣。這是一段漫長、緩慢的磨功，但我們當然對進展感到滿意，而且它與 Veeva 的協同效應非常強。如果你看 Veeva——為什麼 Veeva 會成功？我們有一個高度協同的產品規劃。

We have software applications that work with our data and consulting that knows about our software and data. And we have agents that work with our applications that are known by our consulting and that leverage our data. So it's not a random set of products. It's -- we're building the industry cloud and the more our customers realize it, the more benefits they get because things fit together.

我們有能與我們的資料一起運作的軟體應用，以及了解我們軟體與資料的顧問服務。而且我們有能與我們的應用一起運作的代理（agents），這些代理為我們的顧問所熟悉，並且能運用我們的資料。所以這不是一組隨機的產品。而是——我們正在打造產業雲；客戶越能意識到這點，他們得到的好處就越多，因為各個部分能彼此契合。

David Windley, Jefferies.

David Windley，Jefferies。

I wanted to ask, Peter, on Falcon quickly, are your early adopters exclusively sponsors or OEMs? Or are you also seeing some service providers approach you to adopt Falcon capabilities?

Peter，我想快速問一下 Falcon：你們的早期採用者是否完全是贊助方（sponsors）或 OEM？還是你們也看到一些服務供應商來接洽，想採用 Falcon 的能力？

Our early adopters are with sponsors. Now we have had some interest with service providers. And I say that carefully, interest, they're interested. But we really haven't engaged heavily there yet because you have to be focused when you start working with your first customers. Service providers will have similar needs to sponsors, but not the same. So we're focusing on the sponsors first, and I fully expect over time that this will be useful for outsourced service providers, but we have to work on the sponsors first.

我們的早期採用者是在贊助方那邊。現在我們確實也收到一些服務供應商的興趣。我會謹慎地說是「興趣」，他們有興趣。但我們還沒有在那裡投入很多，因為你在開始與第一批客戶合作時必須保持聚焦。服務供應商的需求會與贊助方相似，但不完全相同。所以我們先聚焦在贊助方；我完全預期隨著時間推進，這對外包服務供應商也會有用，但我們必須先把贊助方做好。

Great. And pivoting for my follow-up, a lot of moving parts in China over the course of this year, maybe over the course of the last several years, regulatorily, drug development-wise, et cetera. How do you see the China market as an opportunity for Veeva right now?

很好。那我追問一下：今年在中國有很多變動，可能過去幾年也是如此，包含監管、藥物研發等等。你現在如何看待中國市場對 Veeva 的機會？

Yes, China is certainly moving fast. I mean when we look at my tech career standing, it's over 30 years here, it's just astounding the transformation in China and what it means for the global economy and what can be accomplished and the whole notion of a parallel tech stack in China. So yes, it's moved so fast and it continues. And it's great to see that from my perspective. It brings variety. So our opportunities there, we have quite a few products that are made by our Veeva China team in China for China.

是的，中國確實在快速前進。我的科技職涯超過 30 年，回頭看中國的轉型之驚人，以及它對全球經濟的意義、能完成的事情，還有「在中國有一套平行技術堆疊」這個概念，都令人震撼。所以是的，它走得非常快，而且仍在持續。從我的角度看，看到這點很棒。它帶來多樣性。因此我們在那裡的機會是：我們有相當多產品是由我們的 Veeva 中國團隊在中國、為中國打造的。

So we have our China CRM suite, and that's gaining market share that's written on the China tech stack, et cetera. We have our data products made in China specific for the China market. And there's other things that we can do in China, there in China for China. But one of the big benefits is those products fit with our global products. For example, China CRM fits with our global PromoMats products.

所以我們有中國 CRM 套件，而且它正在提升市占；它是建立在中國的技術堆疊之上，等等。我們也有在中國製作、專為中國市場設計的資料產品。此外，在中國，我們還能做其他「在中國、為中國」的事情。但其中一個重大好處是，這些產品能與我們的全球產品相互契合。例如，中國 CRM 能與我們全球的 PromoMats 產品相互配合。

So there's a synergy there. China is good business for us, and we're proud to do that in China, and it's profitable for us there and it's growing, but it's also synergistic with our global business because our global customers when they have their headquarters in the US or Japan or Europe, they want a team, a global Veeva team that can help them with China also. So it's very synergistic. We really love our China business.

所以這裡有協同效應。中國對我們而言是很好的生意；我們也以能在中國做這件事為榮，在那裡對我們是有利潤的、也在成長；同時它也與我們的全球業務高度協同，因為我們的全球客戶——當他們的總部在美國、日本或歐洲時——也希望有一個全球的 Veeva 團隊能同時協助他們在中國的需求。所以協同效應非常強。我們真的很喜歡我們在中國的業務。

Rishi Jaluria, RBC.

Rishi Jaluria，RBC。

Nice to see continued strength in the business. I want to start with a question on Aspen and the pricing model. I think the publicly posted pricing model is really interesting and compelling as application software companies are, kind of, figure out, kind of, the pivot to more consumption, et cetera, and you're talking about charging per human or per agent.

很高興看到業務持續展現強勁動能。我想先問 Aspen 與定價模式的問題。我覺得你們公開發布的定價模式非常有趣且很有吸引力，因為應用軟體公司正在某種程度上摸索如何轉向更多以用量計費等等，而你們談到按「每位人員」或「每個代理（agent）」來收費。

Can you maybe walk us through how you see that pricing model starting, how the puts and takes of that? And what lessons or learnings can, kind of, be picked up from that as you see more Falcon adoption, more AI adoption within the broader Veeva suite and trying to, kind of, price accordingly for this new AI world? And then I've got a quick follow-up.

你能否帶我們走一遍：你如何看這個定價模式的起步方式，以及其中的取捨？另外，當你看到 Falcon 採用增加、Veeva 更廣泛產品套件中的 AI 採用增加，並嘗試在這個新的 AI 世界中相應定價時，從中可以汲取哪些經驗或學習？然後我還有一個簡短的追問。

Yes. So cloud software, we've got to remember, it hasn't been around for 50 years, right? I was working on it in the early days of Salesforce.com, and that was not even 25 years ago, right? It was -- for me, it was 23 years ago. So very early. And the pricing model sort of arrived and the technology model arrived and the way we do things arrived. And you see that all in the first-generation big cloud companies, big cloud application companies. There's a way you do things, right?

是的。所以雲端軟體——我們得記得，它並不是已經存在 50 年的東西，對吧？我在 Salesforce.com 的早期就做過這個，而那甚至還不到 25 年前，對吧？對我來說，是 23 年前。所以非常早期。然後定價模式某種程度上逐步成形，技術模式也逐步成形，我們做事的方式也逐步成形。你在第一代大型雲端公司、大型雲端應用公司身上都看得到這些。有一套你做事的方式，對吧？

So Aspen is taking a different approach that may or may not prove effective. It's to say, well, it's a different approach, a different technical stack, a different approach there and a different pricing approach. It's just much more simple. You get your productivity, $50, $50 a user a month. So it's not this crazy price and you can't -- you don't know what it is and you have to haggle with your sales rep for discounts.

所以 Aspen 採取了一種不同的方法，這種方法未必一定有效。它的意思是：好吧，這是一種不同的方法——不同的技術堆疊、不同的做法，以及不同的定價方式。它就是簡單得多。你得到你的生產力：每位使用者每月 50 美元，50 美元。所以不是那種瘋狂的價格，你也——你不知道到底是多少，還得跟你的業務代表討價還價要折扣。

And if you're big companies this and that and 14 different editions, no. It's more like modeled off of Amazon Web Services. There's a price, okay? And it's a good product. You can buy it. You don't have to buy it. It's a good product. So we will lean into that. And then there's, of course, usage overage, okay. Let's say you buy 5 users is $50 a month and you put a terabyte of data in there for some reason.

如果你是大型公司又怎樣、還有 14 種不同版本——不，沒有。它更像是參考 Amazon Web Services 的模式。有一個價格，好嗎？而且它是個好產品。你可以買。你也可以不買。它是個好產品。所以我們會朝這個方向加大投入。然後當然也會有用量超額（usage overage），好。比方說你買 5 個使用者，每月 50 美元，然後你因為某些原因在裡面放了一 TB 的資料。

Well, okay. Well, that's not anything that anybody thought about. So there are the overage charges that you will pay monthly on the overage. So you kind of -- it's a mix -- you get -- I would say we're shooting for mostly predictable because that's -- at the end of the day, large businesses would really want mostly predictable, but you have to have this escape hatch to say, yes, I can't use unlimited compute because that's kind of -- that doesn't make sense.

嗯，好吧。嗯，那不是任何人會去想到的事情。所以會有超額費用，你將按月為超額部分付費。所以你有點——這是一種混合——你會——我會說我們的目標是大多可預測，因為——歸根結底，大型企業確實會希望大多可預測，但你必須要有這個逃生閥來說，是的，我不能使用無限運算，因為那有點——那不合理。

So now we're also going to listen to our early customers, and we're a very customer-friendly company and if there's a better way to do it, we'll certainly do that. We're after authentically customer success. You got to remember; we're a public benefit corporation. We're after success for our customers, the industries we serve and Veeva, and our investors. So the thing is make it simple, get rid of all this noise that has built up in the systems over time.

所以現在我們也會聽取早期客戶的意見，我們是一家非常以客戶為友善的公司，如果有更好的做法，我們當然會那樣做。我們追求真正的客戶成功。你要記得；我們是一家公益公司（public benefit corporation）。我們追求的是我們的客戶、我們服務的產業以及Veeva本身的成功，還有我們投資人的成功。所以重點是把事情簡化，把這些隨著時間在系統中累積起來的雜音都去掉。

All right. No, that's really helpful. And then maybe just thinking through as Falcon and kind of your AI products grow, can you talk a little bit about under the hood, what, sort of, the AI stack looks like?

好。不，這真的很有幫助。然後也許再想一下，隨著Falcon以及你們的AI產品成長，你能不能談談在底層，AI技術堆疊大概長什麼樣子？

And maybe more importantly, as these become a bigger portion of the business, drive greater usage and, obviously, as you pointed out, Peter, greater customer success, how should we be thinking about the impact on margins, both gross margins as well as free cash flow margins? And is there an opportunity over time to leverage more multimodality and even some of the open weight models as they improve to control some of that potential gross margin headwind?

也許更重要的是，當這些在業務中占比變大、帶動更高使用量，並且如你所指出的，Peter，帶來更高的客戶成功時，我們應該如何看待對利潤率的影響，包括毛利率以及自由現金流利潤率？而且，隨著時間推移，是否有機會利用更多多模態能力，甚至在開放權重模型持續改善時，來控制一些潛在的毛利率逆風？

Yes. Again, I don't really want to make predictions on Falcon because it's early. But in general, I don't think we're going to have a gross margin problem. I think the gross margins will be roughly similar to our software. And here's why when we really go deep into Falcon and we have what we call Falcon copies where we have the real customer data that we're testing the agents with and developing the agents with; we know what's going on.

是。再說一次，我不太想對Falcon做預測，因為還很早。但一般而言，我不認為我們會有毛利率問題。我認為毛利率大致會與我們的軟體相近。原因是，當我們真正深入Falcon，我們有所謂的Falcon副本（Falcon copies），也就是我們用真實客戶資料來測試代理並開發代理；我們知道發生了什麼。

So more and more and more of that work goes into the deterministic software, and we use the nondeterministic models, the Anthropic models, et cetera, when we need to. So it's not -- a lot of this value is going into the agent. And then I believe everybody knows that the cost of these models are going to go down versus whether they're with better hardware or open weight models or et cetera, et cetera.

所以越來越多的工作會進入確定性軟體（deterministic software），而我們只在需要時才使用非確定性模型、Anthropic模型等等。所以並不是——很多價值其實是在代理（agent）裡。而且我相信大家都知道，這些模型的成本會下降，不管是因為更好的硬體、開放權重模型等等等等。

The current cost of the models is not sustainable, not based on what we're doing, but based on this notion of what software development is doing, eating up 50% of the tokens in the world and hundreds of billions of dollars. Somebody is going to build a better mousetrap for that over time, and that will compress the prices. That's our belief. But even if that wouldn't happen, I think Falcon would be a great business because we're pushing a lot of things into the deterministic layer.

目前模型的成本是不可持續的，這不是基於我們在做的事情，而是基於這種觀念：軟體開發正在消耗全球50%的token，以及數千億美元。隨著時間推移，一定會有人為此打造更好的解決方案，並且會壓縮價格。這是我們的看法。但即便那不會發生，我也認為Falcon會是一門很棒的生意，因為我們把很多事情推進了確定性層（deterministic layer）。

Tyler Radke, Citi.

Tyler Radke，花旗（Citi）。

Brian, just going back to your comments on the R&D side of the business and talking about kind of the stacking of those S curves. I was wondering if you could just be a bit more precise in terms of the timing and when you see the kind of the growth inflection happening from those S curves. And if you were to just sort of stack rank those products you mentioned, what sort of have the biggest opportunity to be the next $500 million or $1 billion products within R&D?

Brian，回到你對研發（R&D）業務的評論，談到那些S曲線的疊加。我想知道你能否在時間點上更精確一些：你何時看到那些S曲線帶來的成長拐點出現？另外，如果要把你提到的那些產品做個排序，哪些最有機會成為研發領域下一個5億美元或10億美元級別的產品？

Yes. Thanks for the question, Tyler. I think we are excited really about all of those products, all the 5 that I mentioned, EDC, eCOA, RTSM, Safety, LIMS, every one of those is very large and very strategic in their area. A few of them are around clinical, Safety is its own big space, LIMS is in quality. So each of these is very significant opportunities and at slightly different stages as you look across them, but all of them pretty early.

是。謝謝你的問題，Tyler。我想我們對我提到的那5個產品都很興奮：EDC、eCOA、RTSM、Safety、LIMS，每一個在各自領域都非常大、也非常具策略性。其中幾個是臨床相關，Safety本身就是一個很大的領域，LIMS則在品質（quality）領域。所以這些每一個都是非常重要的機會，而且你橫向看它們時，所處階段略有不同，但都還算相當早期。

And so I think that's what gives us the confidence as we look out to 2030, for example, that we're on track for those goals is we're making great progress in the product, great progress in the execution, great progress getting customers live and happy and successful and reference selling. We don't put exact timing on that, right? We don't generally talk year-by-year, so I'm not going to give guidance out beyond this year. But I think we feel very confident in the trajectory that we're on with those products in R&D.

因此，我想這也是為什麼當我們展望例如2030年時，會對我們正朝那些目標前進充滿信心：我們在產品上進展很大、在執行上進展很大、在讓客戶上線並且滿意與成功、以及透過客戶推薦來銷售（reference selling）方面也進展很大。我們不會對此給出精確時間點，對吧？我們通常不會逐年談，所以我不會提供超出今年的指引。但我想我們對研發這些產品所走的軌跡感到非常有信心。

Got it. And then in terms of Aspen and sort of your broader ambitions across industries, outside of your traditional segments. Like, just can you just remind us of, sort of, the ICP there? Is it smaller organizations? Or how do you -- I mean, clearly, such a broad opportunity. So how do you start and prioritize that and staff it?

了解。那再談到Aspen，以及你們在傳統細分市場之外、跨產業的更廣泛企圖。你能不能提醒我們那裡的ICP大概是什麼？是較小型的組織嗎？或者你們怎麼——我的意思是，顯然這是非常廣泛的機會。那你們如何開始、如何排定優先順序並配置人力？

For clarity, ICP, what is ICP?

為了釐清，ICP，ICP是什麼？

Like the ideal customer profile.

像是理想客戶輪廓（ideal customer profile）。

Okay. I'll take that one. Yes, the ideal customer profile when you're just starting out is really a nimble type of company that really wants to work with you. And I think in this area, we're going to probably get a lot of young tech start-ups, right? Because they're doing some really innovative in what they're doing, and they don't really want to do the same old thing in CRM for core account contact opportunity management. So I think we have early indications that there'll be great companies to work with. But we'll see. Again, I'll let you know a lot more in the year.

好。我來回答這題。是的，當你剛起步時，理想客戶輪廓其實是那種很靈活、真的願意跟你一起合作的公司。我想在這個領域，我們可能會獲得很多年輕的科技新創，對吧？因為他們在做的事情非常創新，而且他們不太想在CRM的核心帳戶、聯絡人、商機管理上繼續做老一套。所以我想我們已有一些早期跡象顯示，會有很棒的公司願意一起合作。但我們再看看。同樣地，今年內我會再告訴你更多。

Jailendra Singh, Truist.

Jailendra Singh，Truist。

I want to go back to Falcon discussion and the 5 early adopters there. It seems one of them is a top 20 pharma company. Based on your conversations with these top pharma companies around Falcon, do you believe that the work will be shifting to Falcon is something they were outsourcing to other partners with the CROs? Or should we think about something they were doing in-house and now they are leveraging Falcon for that? And related to that, any incremental color on the pricing of the Falcon product?

我想回到Falcon的討論以及那5位早期採用者。看起來其中一家是前20大的製藥公司。根據你與這些大型藥廠就Falcon的對話，你是否認為，將轉移到Falcon上的工作，是他們原本外包給CRO等其他合作夥伴的？還是我們應該把它視為他們原本在內部做、現在改用Falcon來承接？另外，Falcon產品的定價方面，能否再多提供一些資訊？

In terms of where the labor is done or where it will be displaced, I think there'll be a combination of internal and outsourced, although generally not the CROs. That's not what I see. It's a different type of outsourcing, some of it from the CROs, but not most of it. And then in terms of the pricing, it's very early for that. I know we've been in discussions with customers, and their desire is for predictability. That's for sure, right?

就勞務在哪裡完成、或將被哪裡取代而言，我認為會是內部與外包的組合，雖然一般而言不是CRO。那不是我看到的情況。那是一種不同類型的外包，其中一部分來自CRO，但不是大多數。至於定價，現在談還很早。我知道我們一直在與客戶討論，而他們的訴求是可預測性。這是肯定的，對吧？

They want predictability for that because for one thing, they get that predictability when they either hire or outsource labor. It's quite predictable, and it's better for them. It's actually better for us, too. So -- but what gets in the way of that a little bit is, well, Falcon is quite early now. So it can do certain things, but it can't do the things that it will do 3 years from now. So how do you have a fixed price when your capabilities are rapidly improving?

他們希望在這方面具有可預測性，因為其中一個原因是，當他們雇用或外包勞動力時，就能獲得那種可預測性。這相當可預測，對他們更好。其實對我們也更好。所以——但稍微妨礙這件事的是，嗯，Falcon 現在還很早期。所以它能做某些事情，但它還做不到三年後它將能做的事情。那麼當你的能力正在快速提升時，你要如何訂出固定價格呢？

So I think with some of our customers, we'll end up having enterprise license agreements, enterprise subscription agreement for the labor based on the size of their company or their function, but it will probably escalate over time. It will be lower in the beginning when Falcon is less mature. So if you want a teenage Falcon, it costs you x. And if you want a Falcon and it's 25-year-old, it costs you a bit more.

所以我認為，對於我們的一些客戶，我們最後會採用企業授權協議、企業訂閱協議，針對這種勞動力依其公司規模或其職能來定價，但它很可能會隨時間而上調。在一開始 Falcon 還不夠成熟時，價格會較低。所以如果你要一個青少年期的 Falcon，費用是 x。如果你要一個 25 歲的 Falcon，那就要多付一些。

I think it's going to be like that. But again, this is the type of thing you work out with the early adopters. The nice thing here and the structural advantage that we have is this is the same buyer facing the same business problems as our applications. These are people we know deeply. The trust is there. You will hear people say business moves at the speed of trust, and there's a lot to that. And we have the trust with these customers.

我想大概會是這樣。但再說一次，這類事情你會和早期採用者一起把它談妥。這裡的好處，以及我們具備的結構性優勢在於：面對的買方與我們應用程式所面對的是同一批人、同樣的業務問題。這些人我們非常了解。信任已經存在。你會聽到有人說，商業運作的速度取決於信任，而這句話很有道理。而我們與這些客戶之間是有信任的。

So we'll get to the right story pretty quickly. All this hinges on having a product that works well and that's really where our focus is. I would say our early signs are good. When I talk to the engineering and the product management people on Falcon, there's an optimism. You'll see even the pessimistic ones saying like, oh, my goodness, this could really work. And in some early test runs, it's like, wow, we tested this against the humans, what the humans did, and Falcon is already better than what the humans did.

所以我們會很快找到正確的敘事方式。這一切都取決於產品是否好用，而那正是我們的重點所在。我會說我們的早期跡象不錯。當我和 Falcon 的工程與產品管理人員交流時，能感受到一種樂觀。你甚至會看到那些悲觀的人也在說：天啊，這真的可能行得通。而在一些早期測試中，感覺像是：哇，我們拿它去跟人類做的結果對比，Falcon 已經比人類做得更好了。

So there's a sense of optimism, but it's too early to declare success. We have to be very paranoid and pessimistic because we're going into something we haven't done before. Veeva has never done agentic labor and the whole motion is new. That's why the leader of Falcon reports right to me. This is a complete new market and a new motion for Veeva. So we don't have all the answers yet.

所以有一種樂觀的氛圍，但現在還太早，不能宣告成功。我們必須非常多疑、非常悲觀，因為我們正在進入一個以前沒做過的領域。Veeva 從未做過代理式勞動力（agentic labor），整個推進方式都是新的。這也是為什麼 Falcon 的負責人直接向我匯報。這對 Veeva 來說是一個全新的市場與全新的推進模式。所以我們現在還沒有所有答案。

That makes sense. My quick follow-up on other point you raised in your prepared remarks, and somebody asked it earlier about the focus on CRM win backs among top 20 companies that did not select Vault CRM. I understand your point that you want to share success stories with them.

這很合理。我想就你在事先準備的發言中提到的另一點快速追問一下，也有人先前問過：你們把重點放在 CRM 的「贏回」上，特別是那些前 20 大、但當初沒有選擇 Vault CRM 的公司。我理解你的意思是，你想和他們分享成功案例。

But just curious, have there been any developments or conversations with customers who have picked Salesforce that is driving that confidence that these opportunities are more actionable? Or is it more around delays in rollout by Salesforce that's giving you confidence of opening up window? Just curious, like, it seems like you're a lot more exclusive this time around than in the past.

但我只是好奇：對於那些選了 Salesforce 的客戶，是否有任何進展或對話，正在推動你們相信這些機會更可落地、更可行動？還是說，更多是因為 Salesforce 的上線推廣（rollout）延遲，讓你們有信心窗口正在打開？只是好奇，感覺你們這次比過去更聚焦、更「挑選」一些。

Yes. It's based on our execution and what we're seeing with Salesforce as well. I think Peter alluded to earlier how Salesforce has been struggling with some of the larger projects that they have, and they don't really have any customers live. And when you look at what Veeva is doing, it contrasts pretty significantly. We have over 180 customers live. We have customers that are turning AI on.

是的。這是基於我們的執行表現，以及我們同時也在觀察 Salesforce 的情況。我想 Peter 先前提到，Salesforce 在一些大型專案上一直很吃力，而且他們其實沒有任何客戶真正上線。而當你看 Veeva 正在做的事情時，對比就非常明顯。我們已有超過 180 家客戶上線。我們也有客戶正在啟用 AI。

We had a big milestone in CRM this quarter where one of our top 20 turned AI on in CRM for their entire field force. So really significant milestone. So the contrast between how Veeva is executing and what we're seeing on the other side is very significant. As Peter mentioned, we're very close with these customers. They buy a lot of products from Veeva. We have deep relationships. We stay very close with them.

本季我們在 CRM 有一個重大里程碑：我們的一家前 20 大客戶，已在 CRM 中為其整個外勤團隊全面啟用 AI。所以這是非常重要的里程碑。因此，Veeva 的執行狀況與我們在另一邊看到的情況之間的對比非常顯著。如 Peter 所說，我們與這些客戶非常緊密。他們向 Veeva 購買很多產品。我們有很深的關係。我們一直與他們保持非常密切的互動。

And that's what gives us the confidence, our execution, our innovation, getting customers live, that trust. And that's why you hear the bullishness and the confidence in those win backs. Just more broadly in the overall market, we're executing very, very well in CRM. It's really clear that we are the market leader.

而這些——我們的執行、我們的創新、讓客戶上線、以及那份信任——就是讓我們有信心的原因。這也是為什麼你會聽到我們對那些贏回機會的看多與信心。更廣泛地看整體市場，我們在 CRM 的執行非常、非常好。很清楚我們是市場領導者。

We're going to maintain the market leadership position. And just to kind of paint the kind of what we view as the end state, we see Veeva maintaining over 70% share in the CRM space, which means we'll continue to execute. We'll continue to drive innovation for our customers. We feel really good about how CRM is playing out.

我們會維持市場領導地位。再稍微描繪一下我們所認為的最終狀態：我們看到 Veeva 在 CRM 領域維持超過 70% 的市占率，這意味著我們會持續執行。我們會持續為客戶推動創新。我們對 CRM 的發展態勢感覺非常好。

You asked about our customer interactions there. Yes, we have customer interactions, lots of people at Veeva deal with these customers, and I personally do at times, too. And the common thing you might hear is from a customer is we're not ready to make that decision yet, right? So they're open to it, they're looking to it, they're not ready yet. So that's -- those types of things give us confidence.

你問到我們與客戶的互動。是的，我們有很多客戶互動，Veeva 有很多人都在與這些客戶合作，而我有時也會親自參與。你可能會從客戶那裡聽到的共同點是：我們還沒準備好做那個決定，對吧？所以他們是開放的、在考慮的，但還沒準備好。所以——這類回饋讓我們有信心。

Craig Hettenbach, Morgan Stanley.

Craig Hettenbach，摩根士丹利。

Great discussion around all the AI developments. Peter, from a macro perspective, after a couple of volatile years, whether it was IRA, MFN, pricing, tariffs, the backdrop has steadied. So I'm curious, outside of agentic in your customer discussions, what are they most focused on? What areas in terms of they leaning into investments that you're seeing in the business?

關於所有 AI 發展的討論很精彩。Peter，從宏觀角度來看，在經歷了幾年波動之後——不論是 IRA、MFN、定價、關稅——大環境已經趨於穩定。所以我很好奇，除了代理式（agentic）之外，在你們與客戶的討論中，他們最關注的是什麼？就你們看到的業務而言，他們正在哪些領域加大投資？

Yes, Craig, it is interesting. We think things have steadied. It is an interesting comment on the world, right? We have 2 kinds of major wars going on. We've got a complete tech disruption in AI that's going on. And I think what happened is the life sciences industry has gotten used to, hey, the world is going to have a lot of moving parts. And they're just moving forward. So I think it's -- you're good to point this out.

是的，Craig，這很有意思。我們也認為情勢已經穩定下來。這其實也是對這個世界的一個有趣評論，對吧？我們同時有兩場主要戰爭在進行。我們也正經歷 AI 帶來的全面科技顛覆。而我認為發生的事情是，生命科學產業已經習慣了：嘿，世界會有很多變動因素。而他們就只是繼續往前走。所以我覺得你指出這點很到位。

They're not being disrupted by the disruptions. If we would have something really catastrophic in the future, that can always disrupt things. So for example, if we had a major, major shift in interest rates, well, life sciences is a capital-intensive industry that can do things. If major escalations in war, that can do things. But so far, the industry seems to be executing pretty well and focusing on the jobs to get done.

他們並沒有被這些顛覆所打亂。如果未來出現真正災難性的事件，當然仍可能擾亂一切。例如，如果利率出現非常、非常重大的變動——生命科學是一個資本密集型產業——那就可能產生影響。如果戰爭大幅升級，也可能產生影響。但到目前為止，這個產業似乎仍執行得相當不錯，並專注於要完成的工作。

Got it. And then just on my follow-up for the EDC segment. Compared to one or two years ago, as that was ramping, that got a lot of attention. Can you just maybe give us an update on just how those ramping deals are progressing and then just the opportunity to capture additional top 20 over time?

了解。接著我想就 EDC 部門再追問一下。相較於一、兩年前，當時還在爬坡期，受到很多關注。你能否更新一下這些爬坡中的案子目前進展如何，以及隨時間推進爭取更多前 20 大客戶的機會？

Yes. EDC is one of the larger areas, and it's certainly a long implementation cycle. So some of our wins are still ramping. And we're working with the other ones. We have -- I believe it's 9 out of the top 20. Most of the other ones are with Medidata, not all. And we're working on those over time, but it's not the right time for all customers to change out all systems at one time, getting back to -- they have many other things to do. I would go back to the structural advantage we have.

是的。EDC 是較大的領域之一，而且確實有很長的導入週期。因此我們的一些得標案仍在爬坡中。我們也在與其他客戶推進。我們目前——我相信是前 20 大中的 9 家。其他多數是與 Medidata 合作，但不是全部。我們會隨時間逐步推進，但並非所有客戶都適合在同一時間更換所有系統；回到——他們還有很多其他事情要做。我會回到我們所具備的結構性優勢。

In the Development Cloud, applications all on a common platform and then with Falcon as well, the structural advantage with Falcon is more things to bring to the same buyer. And especially in clinical, having the Clinical Operations, Clinical Data Management and our Site Solutions. The Site Solutions is very strategic to us, and we're introducing eSource there. So I think confident on EDC over time. It just takes a while, and that's something that I think you'll see progress in the couple of year -- in the next couple of years there.

在 Development Cloud 中，應用程式都在同一個平台上，Falcon 也是如此；而 Falcon 的結構性優勢在於能把更多東西帶給同一位採購決策者。尤其在臨床領域，涵蓋臨床營運（Clinical Operations）、臨床資料管理（Clinical Data Management）以及我們的 Site Solutions。Site Solutions 對我們非常具策略性，我們也正在那裡導入 eSource。所以我對 EDC 長期發展有信心。只是需要一些時間，我想你會在未來幾年——在接下來幾年看到那方面的進展。

Andrew DeGasperi, BNP Paribas.

Andrew DeGasperi，法國巴黎銀行（BNP Paribas）。

I just wanted to ask, one, first, I think you're coming up to the one year anniversary of your partnership with IQVIA and the settlement with them. So I just wanted to understand how is that going. Have you seen any momentum because we haven't heard much from that deal? And I wanted to know if you -- is it going ahead of expectations or in line or below?

我想先問一個問題：我想你們與 IQVIA 的合作夥伴關係以及與他們的和解，快要滿一週年了。所以我想了解目前進展如何。你們是否看到任何動能？因為我們從這筆合作聽到的消息不多。另外我也想知道——它是超出預期、符合預期，還是低於預期？

We're really happy with that IQVIA partnership, gosh, that's -- and I discussed with the management team of IQVIA, and I can represent that they represent to me that they're very happy with the partnership as well. So yes, and customers are especially appreciative of it, right, much less hassle working with Veeva and IQVIA. I think great things are going to come out of that partnership.

我們對與 IQVIA 的合作非常滿意，天啊，那——我也和 IQVIA 的管理團隊討論過，我可以轉述他們也向我表示，他們同樣對這段合作關係非常滿意。所以是的，而且客戶也特別感謝這點，對吧，與 Veeva 和 IQVIA 合作時麻煩少很多。我認為這個合作關係會帶來很棒的成果。

They're already starting to come, and I think there's more to come. When you look at it, IQVIA and Veeva, we are both major players to the life sciences industry. We are the two major players. I think it's fair to say, by far. And AI is transforming the industry. And for AI, you need services, you need data, you need software.

這些成果已經開始出現，而且我認為後面還會有更多。從整體來看，IQVIA 與 Veeva 都是生命科學產業的主要參與者。我們是兩大主要玩家。我想可以說，遠遠領先其他人。而 AI 正在改變這個產業。要做 AI，你需要服務、需要資料、也需要軟體。

So the more Veeva and IQVIA can collaborate, the better it is for the industry, helps the industry grow, helps Veeva grow, helps IQVIA grow. So I couldn't be more happy with that. If you ask me, I feel 500% better about our IQVIA relationship now than I did two years ago. It's probably the best thing that happened to our company 12 months ago, and that was just outstanding. So super happy with that.

因此 Veeva 與 IQVIA 合作得越多，對產業就越好：幫助產業成長、幫助 Veeva 成長、也幫助 IQVIA 成長。所以我對此再滿意不過。如果你問我，我現在對我們與 IQVIA 的關係，比兩年前好 500%。這可能是 12 個月前發生在我們公司最棒的一件事，真的非常出色。所以非常、非常滿意。

And then I'm curious about the double-digit growth you mentioned in the Commercial Cloud business, even excluding Crossix. And I just want to unpack that, like, in terms of the -- did it come from PromoMats and some of the other marketing tools? Or was there something unique about the CRM side that gave you -- was giving you that acceleration?

另外我也好奇你提到 Commercial Cloud 業務有雙位數成長，即使排除 Crossix 也是如此。我想把這點拆解一下：這成長是來自 PromoMats 和其他一些行銷工具嗎？還是 CRM 端有什麼特別因素，帶來——帶動了這樣的加速？

Not really any one factor that I'd point to, Andrew. And I think that's part of what actually makes us feel so much excitement and the results is that it was CRM. It was add-ons and new customers and content. It was new customers and brands in Data Cloud. It was continued growth in Crossix on both the measurement and the audiences side.

其實沒有任何單一因素是我會特別指出來的，Andrew。我想這也正是讓我們如此興奮、以及成果如此亮眼的一部分原因：它來自 CRM。也來自附加模組、新客戶與內容。也來自 Data Cloud 的新客戶與新品牌。Crossix 在衡量（measurement）與受眾（audiences）兩端也都持續成長。

It really was broad-based growth around commercial. And I think -- I guess what I'd point to is some of what Peter and Paul have mentioned is that full commercial story and full capability of all those products on one platform from one provider really resonating in the market and driving growth. So very strong quarter from commercial.

這確實是商業端全面性的成長。而我想——我會指出的是 Peter 和 Paul 提到的一些內容：完整的 commercial 故事，以及由單一供應商在同一平台上提供所有這些產品的完整能力，正在市場上引起強烈共鳴並推動成長。所以 commercial 這季表現非常強勁。

(Operator Instructions) Dylan Becker, William Blair.

（接線員指示）Dylan Becker，William Blair。

Maybe, Peter, if we touch on the strength in consulting and services, I know that there's kind of several components to that. But how would you classify, kind of, the value of efficiency of, kind of, being able to do more with the same, kind of, amount of your existing resources versus the efficiency gains you're seeing there, enabling your customers to go faster and capitalize on, kind of, more of the AI opportunities, meet their, kind of, increasing willingness, if that makes sense?

Peter，也許我們談一下顧問與服務的強勁表現。我知道這裡面有好幾個組成部分。但你會如何看待——大致上——在既有資源規模不變的情況下做到更多的效率價值，與你們看到的效率提升之間的關係？這些提升讓客戶能更快推進、把握更多 AI 機會，並滿足他們——如果這樣說得通——日益提高的意願？

Because it does seem like that's another area. I know it's not perfectly correlated to the subscription side but continues to see healthy momentum in driving that change management for a lot of these enterprises.

因為看起來那也是另一個領域。我知道它和訂閱端不一定完全相關，但在為許多企業推動變革管理方面，仍持續展現健康的動能。

I think that the big benefit for Veeva that we will hopefully see over time here is that by more tech enabling our consulting and our specialized services, our software will become more valuable. So for example, if somebody wanted to buy our EDC and if it took $1 billion to implement, nobody would buy it. But if it took $10 in a week, everybody would buy it. So the faster you can have your implementations go and the more accurate, the less cost, the more valuable your applications become.

我認為對 Veeva 來說，隨時間推進我們希望看到的最大好處是：透過更多技術來賦能我們的顧問與專業服務，我們的軟體會變得更有價值。例如，如果有人想買我們的 EDC，但導入要花 10 億美元，那就沒人會買。但如果只要 10 美元、一週就能完成，那大家都會買。所以導入越快、越準確、成本越低，我們的應用程式就越有價值。

So that's the big driver. Yes, it probably means growth for us in services because people will buy more services. But it's about customer success and the industry success and driving our application business. I overall think it will be a renaissance for services and consulting companies as we go forward because I think this notion of tech-enabled services, specialized tech-enabled services is really going to drive growth rather than going to generalists that say, hey, I have people that can do a lot of things.

這就是最大的驅動因素。是的，這可能也意味著我們的服務會成長，因為人們會購買更多服務。但核心在於客戶成功、產業成功，以及推動我們的應用程式業務。我整體認為，未來服務與顧問公司將迎來一波復興，因為我覺得「技術賦能的服務」、專業的技術賦能服務，將真正推動成長，而不是去找那些泛用型的公司說：嘿，我有人可以做很多事情。

No, you have a job to get done. You'll probably go to the specialist that has a tech-enabled service that can get that done. And I think that will actually lead many companies to do more with partners rather than doing it internally because they can get the outcome quicker and better with a tech-enabled service.

不，你有一個工作要完成。你很可能會去找具備技術賦能服務、能把事情做成的專家。而我認為這其實會讓許多公司更傾向與合作夥伴一起做，而不是內部自行處理，因為透過技術賦能服務，他們能更快、也更好地達成結果。

Tamjid Chowdhury, Guggenheim Securities.

Tamjid Chowdhury，Guggenheim Securities。

I guess, Peter, I wanted to ask you a question on a recent management change. It was announced that Tom Schwenger will be leaving the company to go to a long-standing partner of yours. And we understand that he played a pivotal role in many of the company's top 20 biopharma wins. So how should we be thinking about the current transition of his responsibilities and maybe the impact of his exit on the relationship he has helped curate over the years, if any?

我想，Peter，我想就近期的一項管理層變動問你一個問題。公司宣布 Tom Schwenger 將離開公司，前往你們一位長期合作夥伴那裡任職。我們也了解到，他在公司拿下許多前 20 大生物製藥客戶的勝利中扮演了關鍵角色。那麼，我們應該如何看待他目前職責的交接，以及他離職是否會對他多年來協助建立的關係造成任何影響（如果有的話）？

Yes. Tom, of course, sad to see Tom go. Tom was at Accenture before he came to Veeva many years ago and was a great Veeva partner at Accenture. And Tom is going to go on to be a CEO of a services type partner, and we think that he will be a great partner for us there now. So all good there. Those relationships don't go away that Tom has. So he will keep those. And in terms of Veeva, when a customer -- especially when you mention CRM, gosh, that's a business-critical decision that lasts for 10 years, that's involved.

是的。Tom，當然，很遺憾看到 Tom 離開。Tom 在多年前加入 Veeva 之前曾在 Accenture 任職，並且在 Accenture 時就是一位很棒的 Veeva 合作夥伴。而 Tom 接下來將去擔任一家服務型合作夥伴的 CEO，我們認為他在那裡也會成為我們很棒的合作夥伴。所以那方面一切都很好。Tom 所擁有的那些關係不會因此消失。所以他會繼續維持那些關係。至於 Veeva，當客戶——尤其你提到 CRM，天啊，那是一個攸關業務的決策，會持續 10 年，牽涉很多層面。

There's many, many people involved in that, and there's a product involved with that. So I don't -- that won't -- Tom's departure won't have effect on our CRM business because that's more of a -- it's an enduring long-standing thing. It's different than maybe consulting type work or something like that. This is a product attachment. So that's not going to affect our business.

有非常非常多的人參與其中，也有產品本身在其中。所以我不——那不會——Tom 的離開不會影響我們的 CRM 業務，因為那更像是一個——長期且持久的事情。這和可能是顧問型工作或類似的事情不同。這是產品的綁定。所以這不會影響我們的業務。

Billy Fitzsimmons, Piper Sandler.

Billy Fitzsimmons，Piper Sandler。

Congrats on the two big top 20 biopharma wins for Vault CRM in the quarter. Could you give a little more color on how those deals played out? What ultimately drove them to Veeva over Salesforce? And for the top 20 vendors that have not decided yet, has your level of confidence changed in potentially winning those versus, say, 90 days ago?

恭喜本季 Vault CRM 拿下兩個前 20 大生物製藥客戶的大型勝利。你能否再多分享一些這些交易是如何推進並最終成交的？是什麼因素最終促使他們選擇 Veeva 而不是 Salesforce？另外，對於尚未做出決定的前 20 大廠商，你們對於可能贏下這些客戶的信心，相較於例如 90 天前，有所改變嗎？

Yes. So first, we're excited about the exceptional quarter that we had, and that was one of the headlines. You heard us talk about three large companies, two in the top 20, really selecting Vault CRM, Biogen selecting Vault CRM. And then, of course, we have Regeneron as well. The why is pretty simple, and I think we touched on it on this call, right? It goes back to trust, so they trust Veeva to be able to deliver.

是的。首先，我們對本季表現非常出色感到興奮，而這也是其中一個重點標題。你們聽到我們談到三家大型公司，其中兩家是前 20 大，確實選擇了 Vault CRM，Biogen 選擇了 Vault CRM。當然，我們也有 Regeneron。原因其實很簡單，我想我們在這通電話裡也提到過，對吧？回到「信任」：他們信任 Veeva 有能力交付。

And then product, product excellence. The product is working. We are delivering on the promise of all the innovations that we've told the market we would execute on, and that's playing out in the marketplace. So it's trust and it's great product. I mean it's really -- it simply comes down to those 2 things.

然後是產品，產品卓越。產品正在運作。我們正在兌現我們告訴市場會執行的所有創新承諾，而這正在市場上得到驗證。所以是信任，以及很棒的產品。我的意思是——真的——歸根結底就是這兩件事。

In terms of the remaining top 20 commitments that are out there, there's only 2 left. So we have 12 of top 20, and there are two remaining, and they'll play out by the end of this year, but we feel good about both of them. They still need to be finalized, but we like our chances in both, and we'll update you as things play out.

至於剩下仍在進行中的前 20 大承諾，只剩下 2 個。所以我們已經拿下前 20 大中的 12 家，還有兩家尚未定案，會在今年年底前見分曉，但我們對這兩家都感覺不錯。它們仍需要最終敲定，但我們看好兩案的勝算，後續進展我們也會再向各位更新。

Ryan MacDonald, Needham & Company.

Ryan MacDonald，Needham & Company。

Congrats on a nice quarter. Peter, an emerging trend that we've been seeing across large health care and life sciences organizations within the industry this year is one in which customers want to embrace AI, but they don't want to take the risk on a new and unproven entrant that offers AI for only a specific point solution or a niche use case as they don't have the time to evaluate hundreds of new vendors.

恭喜有個不錯的季度。Peter，我們今年在產業內大型醫療保健與生命科學組織看到一個新興趨勢：客戶想要擁抱 AI，但他們不想把風險押在一個新的、尚未被驗證的參與者身上——這些參與者只針對某個特定點狀解決方案或利基使用情境提供 AI——因為客戶沒有時間去評估數百家新供應商。

It sounds like they'd rather consume AI from the incumbent platform vendors that they're already deeply embedded with. So one, are you getting this sort of same feedback from your customers? And two, does this dynamic create an opportunity for you to perhaps ramp up the M&A activity, acquire similar types of AI point solutions like Copli and sell it into your existing base faster than what one of these smaller AI solutions could do on their own?

聽起來他們更願意從他們已經深度導入的既有平台供應商那裡採用 AI。所以第一，你們是否也從客戶那裡收到同樣的回饋？第二，這樣的動態是否為你們帶來機會，讓你們可能加快併購（M&A）活動，收購類似 Copli 這種 AI 點狀解決方案，並更快地銷售給你們既有客戶群，相較於這些較小的 AI 解決方案公司單打獨鬥所能做到的速度？

Sorry, I was giving a great answer on mute. The customers want to be out of the experimentation phase. They definitely want to be out of that. So some months ago, when we first introduced Falcon that had customers come up to me personally, we were at an event and they said, oh, thank goodness, you're announcing that because that's -- thank goodness you're announcing that because that's -- I didn't want to evaluate all these small vendors.

抱歉，我剛剛在靜音狀態下給了一個很棒的回答。客戶希望走出實驗階段。他們確實想要離開那個階段。所以幾個月前，當我們首次推出 Falcon 時，有客戶親自走到我面前——我們在一個活動上——他們說，喔，謝天謝地你們宣布了這個，因為——謝天謝地你們宣布了這個，因為——我不想去評估所有這些小供應商。

So now that you have an offering that helps me not have to go and look at all these small vendors. So yes, it's absolutely what customers want. In terms of acquisitions, we may find others that are a cultural fit, but we'll be very discerning. Copli was an excellent acquisition for us. And by the way, the Falcon M, which is now Falcon MLR, that is maybe -- our sales cycles there are probably more advanced than in any other part.

所以現在你們有一個產品，能幫助我不必去看所有這些小供應商。所以是的，這絕對是客戶想要的。至於收購，我們可能會找到其他在文化上契合的標的，但我們會非常審慎。Copli 對我們來說是一筆非常出色的收購。順帶一提，Falcon M（現在是 Falcon MLR），那裡也許——我們在那部分的銷售週期可能比任何其他領域都更為成熟。

That market is very ripe for things. But in these other areas, we're getting started, and we're making a lot of progress with Falcon. So if we're going to do an acquisition there, it would be more for talent acquisition and not for product because we've put a real good base in the Falcon product and Falcon platform. I don't think we'll need acquisitions for products anymore. We did look at some when we were just starting Falcon.

那個市場非常成熟，時機也很到位。但在其他領域，我們才剛起步，而我們在 Falcon 上也取得了很大進展。所以如果我們要在那裡做收購，會更偏向人才併購，而不是為了產品，因為我們已經在 Falcon 產品與 Falcon 平台上建立了非常好的基礎。我認為我們不再需要為了產品而進行收購。我們在剛開始做 Falcon 的時候確實看過一些標的。

We looked at a number, I would say, in at least 20 companies to look at. We found one that was the right fit of culture, product and that of willingness to be acquired. And we found that in Copli. So it's sometimes like that. For Falcon, I don't actually expect us to find another acquisition that fits, and we're not dependent on any acquisition, but we'll see what happens.

我們看了不少，我會說至少看過 20 家公司。我們找到了一家在文化、產品以及願意被收購等方面都合適的標的。而我們在 Copli 找到了這個標的。所以有時候就是這樣。對於 Falcon，我其實不預期我們還會找到另一個合適的收購案，而且我們也不依賴任何收購，但我們就看看後續會怎麼發展。

Gabriela Borges, Goldman Sachs.

Gabriela Borges，Goldman Sachs。

This is Grayson on for Gabriela. Just one on Aspen. What are the specific customer problems that Aspen is aiming to solve that maybe the existing horizontal CRM platforms struggle with? And what are the milestones that you would point investors to watch for over the next year?

我是代替 Gabriela 的 Grayson。我想問一個關於 Aspen 的問題。Aspen 具體想解決哪些客戶痛點，而這些痛點可能是現有的橫向 CRM 平台比較難處理的？另外，在接下來一年，你會建議投資人關注哪些里程碑？

In terms of milestones, I think it's probably just the things that we say on our earnings calls and things like that, that would be -- there's not going to really be visible milestones, I would say. We'll probably give you updates when the time is there. And your other question was basically how will things be better? Is that what the question? If you could rephrase that again?

就里程碑而言，我認為大概就是我們在財報電話會議上所說的那些事情之類的——我會說，不會真的有什麼可見的里程碑。我們可能會在時機到了的時候再向各位更新。而你另一個問題基本上是：事情會如何變得更好？是這個問題嗎？你可以再把那個問題重新表述一次嗎？

Yes. Just what are the specific customer problems that you're aiming to solve with Aspen versus what some of the existing horizontal CRM platforms struggle with today?

是的。你們希望用 Aspen 來解決哪些具體的客戶痛點？相較之下，現有一些通用型（水平式）CRM 平台目前在哪些方面做得不理想？

Yes. A couple. One is price, price being unpredictable, getting out of control, that would be one. The other one would be just sort of dependability of the vendors, right, that you can really count on the vendor to be on your side. Scalability of the vendor, right? Sometimes they want something that really works for a small company but can scale up to a very large. Now in the market, you have to pick like, do I want something that works for a small company?

是的。有幾個。其中一個是價格，價格不可預測、容易失控，這是一個。另一個就是供應商的可靠性，對吧，你能真正指望供應商站在你這邊。供應商的可擴展性，對吧？有時候他們想要一個對小公司非常好用、但也能擴展到非常大型企業的方案。但在市場上，你必須做選擇：我是要一個適合小公司的？

Or do I get something that's too big for me now, but I can scale up. Other things are just like data entry. The existing CRM systems really, if you get into them like, okay, they require a heck of a lot of data entry. Most of that with AI doesn't need to be done anymore. And then I just think there's just this other fundamental thing of better CRM system.

還是要一個現在對我來說太大、但未來可以擴展的？其他還有像資料輸入。現有的 CRM 系統，如果你深入使用，會發現它們需要大量的資料輸入。其中大部分在 AI 的幫助下其實不再需要這麼做了。然後我認為還有另一個根本性的點：更好的 CRM 系統。

And that's just the details of a fundamentally better data model, better business logic, better just details, like how do you handle multicurrency? How do you handle forecasting? How do you handle implementation so that you can get the CRM you want for your company in 3 months rather than getting half of what you want in three years.

也就是在細節上具備根本更好的資料模型、更好的業務邏輯，以及更好的各種細節，例如：如何處理多幣別？如何做預測？如何進行導入，讓你在 3 個月內就能得到你公司想要的 CRM，而不是 3 年後只得到一半你想要的東西。

So I was on the Board of Zoom for many, many years, and Zoom was a very small company when I joined and very few investors wanted to invest in Zoom because they thought, well, there's already Webex, there's all these other things. But Eric had an idea, but mine will be fundamentally better, better, better. And that's the same idea here. Now that's unusual that, that could be disruptive. But I think in this case, it will be better, nicer, less expensive, more predictable, faster. I think all those things add up.

我在 Zoom 的董事會任職很多很多年；我加入時 Zoom 還是一家非常小的公司，而且當時很少投資人願意投資 Zoom，因為他們覺得，嗯，已經有 Webex，還有其他各種產品了。但 Eric 有個想法：我的會在根本上更好、更好、更好。這裡也是同樣的想法。這種情況不常見，這可能具有顛覆性。但我認為在這個案例中，它會更好、更友善、成本更低、可預測性更高、速度更快。我覺得這些加總起來就是關鍵。

Scott Schoenhaus, KeyBanc.

Scott Schoenhaus，KeyBanc。

I wanted to drill more into Crossix. From 90 days ago, are you seeing from your purview, from Crossix, are you seeing pharma marketing advertising budgets become better than they were 90 days ago? And do you think that AI is helping to act as a catalyst for pharma budgets, not only across Crossix, but the overall pharma digital advertising space?

我想更深入談談 Crossix。相較於 90 天前，從你的觀察、從 Crossix 的角度來看，你是否看到製藥行銷廣告預算比 90 天前更好？你是否認為 AI 正在成為推動製藥預算的催化劑，不僅在 Crossix，也包括整體製藥數位廣告市場？

Yes. We continue to see strength in the pharma marketing budgets and spend on digital, and that's playing out in Crossix. We had good -- another strong quarter of performance in Crossix. AI, what role is that playing? I think that's a nice long-term benefit and driver of what we're doing in Crossix as companies. You probably heard us talk a little bit about helping companies become an agentic commercial, engage with doctors via AI.

是的。我們持續看到製藥行銷預算與數位投放支出維持強勁，而這也反映在 Crossix 上。Crossix 又交出了一個表現強勁的季度。AI 在其中扮演什麼角色？我認為這是我們在 Crossix 所做事情的一個很好的長期效益與驅動因素。你們可能聽過我們稍微提到，協助企業打造具代理能力（agentic）的商業模式，透過 AI 與醫師互動。

They're turning more and more to AI. And as that becomes a more important channel, Crossix becomes more important in terms of measuring and understanding and optimizing against that spend. So yes, absolutely, AI is a nice -- will be a nice tailwind for the foreseeable future for Crossix.

他們越來越依賴 AI。而當這成為更重要的渠道時，Crossix 在衡量、理解並針對這些支出進行最佳化方面就變得更重要。所以是的，毫無疑問，AI 將在可預見的未來成為 Crossix 的一股有利順風。

We have reached the end of the Q&A session. I will now turn the call back to Peter Gassner for closing remarks.

我們已到達問答環節的尾聲。接下來我將把電話會議交回給 Peter Gassner 作結語。

Thank you, everyone, for joining the call today, and thank you to our customers for your continued partnership and to the Veeva team for your outstanding work in the quarter. I'm looking forward to speaking with you again on our upcoming Investor Day on November 5. Thank you.

感謝各位今天參加電話會議，也感謝我們的客戶持續的合作夥伴關係，並感謝 Veeva 團隊在本季度的傑出表現。我期待在 11 月 5 日即將舉行的投資人日再次與各位交流。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。感謝各位出席。您現在可以掛線。