Nuno Fonseca 0:00:04.5: 

Hi, everyone. Welcome to the Home Trust adopts a forecasting process to enable more impactful decisions. It's a very long title for a presentation. Basically, we're going to talk about the implementation that Home Trust did for their forecasting and budgeting process in Anaplan. First of all, my name is Nuno Fonseca. I lead our finance transformation services for banking at Deloitte here in Canada. With us today, we have Jashar Grewal, which is the VP, head of FP&A and strategic initiatives at Home Trust; as well as Jason, which is senior manager in FP&A and capital for the same institution. We're going to talk about a little bit of their experience - later on about their experience in terms of their implementation, why they selected Anaplan in Deloitte, and what they have seen after the few months that they've been using, already, the platform, how they have felt - felt is the right term - in their lives, and the impact that Anaplan had in their lives and their daily jobs. Hopefully, it will give us some insight on that. Before we get to that, I would like to share with you, for those of you that don't know, give you a little bit of insight to what the banking sector is facing for the last - I want to say ten years. I won't go through and bore you a lot of your time to talk about all these points, but I would highlight three of them that are going to be really key for what we're going to talk about later. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:01:41.3: 

I would talk about, basically, the lack or limited ability to scenario modeling. I don't think that's an issue only for banking, in all honesty! We have actually seen a couple of other sessions this morning where they were raising that as an issue, the time it takes, the complexities of doing that specially when you have industries, so banking sheet focus as banking and other financial services companies. The other one is that I'll call out the lack of integration with balance sheet management. So, understanding those assets liabilities, those capital management, risk, integration, credit loss provisions, etc. are a main constraint in terms of the ability for the banks to actually improve their process. There's a lot of dependency with other subfunctions or functions like treasury, the businesses themselves. So, mortgages, product owners, or lending product owners, as well as the risk and the capital teams. Finally, because you could say, 'Well, from a regulatory standpoint, banks already have to do scenario modeling; that's what stress testing is about.' Yes, but it's very siloed. There's not a lot of connections across with financial planning, with business planning. So, what we are seeing in industry is a bit of - not a bit, a lot of the connection between balance sheet forecasting planning and really looking forward to integrate capital management optimization, or capital management funds transfer pricing integration. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:03:17.7: 

If there is a large cost, we've all seen before - including this morning - a lot of conversations around workforce planning, around general and services expenses. The largest component of costs in a bank is actually capital and funds. So, actually, the impact we can have in terms of improving their P&L, their profitability by product by customer, is by connecting those components. All of the other things you will see here, it's something that Anaplan excels at. You've probably seen that. As customers of Anaplan, you probably bought it because of that, so I won't delve too much on that, but I would call out a couple of things. The fact that we are seeing business ownership and business-led implementations in Anaplan. We'll talk with Jashar and Jason later being in the finance and the business groups. It's a big differentiator factor to our minds, and we will talk about a bit of the success factors that that implies. Before we get to detail and give Jashar and Jason the opportunity to share with us their experiences, we wanted to share with you what the vision is, the vision that Home Trust and other banks have bought with us, or are in the process of designing that journey, are looking at. What's their end goal? How do they become more integrated in the way they manage and they plan their balance sheet and their P&L, and how they actually integrate better with their businesses and other controlled functions like risk and capital management. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:04:49.9: 

It's about not only understanding how finance functions in banking can be much more business impactful, guide their businesses and their decisions, and also understanding why sometimes they have restrictions from a growth perspective, or from a profitability perspective. Also connecting the treasury and the funding teams, the funding centers with your risk and your capital management teams. So, being able to do that. Underpinning all that, there's a couple of things that are important. One is a quality of living on the finance teams, is going to be in the industry in some years a case study of how much they are overworked. Also, in terms of their ability to be efficient in terms of finance operations, being able to not necessarily grow their finance teams by a lot to be able to deliver all of this value. I wanted to go through the questions with - we've a few questions for you, Jashar, Jason. If you don't mind, can we start with you, Jashar? My first question is, what drove Home Trust's interest in doing this kind of planning and this kind of implementation, first of all? 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:05:59.2: 

Yes. Basically, we started off. We had gone through - we called it the Ignite Program at Home. We had done this huge IT transformation inside the entire organization, and we implemented SAP, and we were leading edge in all of that fashion in terms of our GL and some of our business cases. Our FP&A system was lagging. It was essentially Excel. There wasn't a system in place. What predicated the transformation on the system side is, we wanted a transformation on the finance side. So, really, instead of becoming or being a provider of reports and data and historical information, we wanted to be a partner to the key decision makers in the company; treasury, the C-suite, and the business units to really provide insights and analytics and help them make decisions. So, we didn't go to them with, 'This is what's been happening.' We were going to them with, 'Maybe we should be raising the rates here, or maybe we should be cutting back on the funding in this area, or let's plan how we're going to invest in these projects using proper scenario analysis.' All of that, to do that, it was necessary to have a system that could support all of those things. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:07:17.5: 

What were the components you were looking to implement in this transformation? 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:07:22.5: 

Our key modules, I call them - I don't think that's the correct technical term, but we're obviously forecasting and budgeting. Those are the big pieces, and capital planning, which is what we were using in there as well. We have consolidation that's already done in a different system, but we were really using it to have actuals, and so we could do variance analysis and analytics on each product by the product type and their life cycle in our portfolio. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:07:58.7: 

Also, you wanted to implement balance sheet, and P&L, it goes without saying, a capital planning side, I guess! What components in addition you implemented beyond the P&L? What depth did you brought into your P&L from an expenses standpoint, from any additional initiatives standpoint, or if any that you brought into the program? 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:08:22.5: 

Yes, so we didn't implement the [?Nix 0:08:24.5] module as thoroughly as we could have gone. We haven't linked it to our HR IS or anything like that, but we definitely have implemented an FTE planning so that it's detailed and it's by role and headcount by cost center. We have driver-based and non-driver based on the income and on the expense side. So, those are some of the other areas that were linked into that planning. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:08:50.4: 

I think it's clear, in terms of what you are looking for from an outline of the program. I know that Home Trust did a fairly thorough vendor selection across a few vendors. What were you looking for in terms of a partner, both from an implementation standpoint as well as from a technology standpoint? 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:09:12.2: 

For us, it was very key to have a partner that didn't just understand the software that we were looking to implement, but really understood the business. As much as our team had this bench strength, we knew our business, we knew our products, we knew kind of what we wanted the model to do, I would say, but we didn't know Anaplan. It couldn't be that we were working with an implementation partner that didn't understand our business, because when you're building these complex models, especially when they're forward looking and have rules as complicated things like the [?BCAR 0:09:43.2] rules or the [?Car Guidelines 0:09:43.9], you really need to work with a partner that understood Fis. What are our processes? How do we make money? How does interest expense work? How does funding work? How does securitization work? We wanted a partner so that, when we told them we - vernacular. So, yes, we have loans that run off in X years. They need to understand what run off means. They need to understand what PMI means. Otherwise, we would be doing twice the work, because we'd also have to check their understanding of the business, and then also check the model. Having Deloitte as the partner, and the team that actually really understood Fis and how we operate was probably instrumental in the success of the implementation. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:10:30.3: 

Well, we like to think so! Thank you. In terms of the technology you selected… 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:10:33.8: 

They didn't pay me for that! 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:10:35.8: 

In terms of the selection of Anaplan, what were the key factors for that selection? What have you seen in Anaplan that is a differentiator in terms of what you were looking for to implement? 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:10:49.0: 

In the early stages, one of the big things for us was that we wanted a solution that would allow us to look at our products… I mean, we weren't implementing an FTP software at the time - or, sorry, building FTP in Anaplan at the time, but we still wanted a software that understood each of our products, and we could map out each of the asset side of the balance sheet with quite a significant degree of detail. So, back book portfolio origination. I know some of these terms, people are just like, 'What the hell are you talking about?' I hope most of you understand what I'm saying. So, that kind of granularity was very important because it's very important to how we manage our business and make decisions. The other key part of it for me, and maybe if anyone in the room has experience with SAP is… One of the nightmares, personally, for SAP is, any small change is a whole, giant, massive project. You can implement a piece of SAP, and then a year down the line, two years down the line, say, 'We'd also like to implement this other piece.' Lo and behold, it's a nightmare to do. You have to have a whole project team. It's millions of dollars. You would think the add on should be relatively easy. 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:11:58.6: 

What we liked about Anaplan was the agility. We knew what we wanted today, we knew what was really, really important for us to get better today, and then we wanted the agility to be able to say, 'Well, in a year from now, when we've gotten really good at the basic of budgeting and basic Nix, maybe we want to build our cost allocation model right here.' I know, based on what we've learned, and what we've done so far, it's not going to be a multi-year, multi-million-dollar project. It's going to be a nice, easy add-on that already works with everything we've built. So, those are the two main big drivers of the decision for me. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:12:33.6: 

Thank you, Jashar. The other question I have following on the back of that is, I understand you are implementing and planning a multi-phase approach. So, the first phase: deliver a few of those capabilities you were looking for, hopefully. What were the biggest impacts you would say the application had in the FP&A processes, if you want? Jason, I'll come back to you also to share some of your personal experiences as we talked about earlier! 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:13:06.9: 

Well, we spoke about, earlier, was FP&A team work burnout and overwork. The team was probably suffering from quite a bit of that pre-Anaplan. It was just a function of Excel, it's quite slow. It's clunky, and it takes a long time. So, any sort of scenario analysis, we're not a large multinational corporation; we're quite small; we mostly function in Canada. Any small changes to assumptions, any top-down challenge resulted in quite a significant number of - and Jason's smiling, which he didn't do before! Resulted in quite a number of changes in hours. It just made us not agile, and also made the whole process quite significantly less value-add. Now, we can talk with the C-suite, we can talk with the business leads and say… I'll just give one example, and I'm sure Jason will add more. We can go to the team and say, 'You guys are kind of aggressive on the volumes you're giving us for origination next year, especially at the NIM, you're projecting.' NIM is net interest margin. So, I'll say price you're projecting, so that it's universal. You probably want to consider if this is the right mix. Probably need a lower price to get this volume, or vice versa. Those active and front-of-the-line suggestions wouldn't have been possible in the old model. There was just no time to do that kind of analysis. I don't know if you want to add anything, Jason.  

 

Jason Lee 0:14:43.4: 

Yes, I want to echo what Jashar said. In a nutshell, it's been a delightful experience using Anaplan, compared to our old Excel-based model! Basically, it just gave us more runway to be more agile, especially now. If you're in the banking industry, you probably realize how funding rates is changing daily, weekly in a significant way. Companies like Bank of Canada started cutting the interest rates. So, it has been helping us a lot in the current budget cycle we're going through right now. If we use the old Excel model, sometimes, if we change some inputs, what will happen is we'll have to… Let's say the business gives us the update input during the meeting. We won't be able to input the new assumption into our model and give them instant feedback. We don't have to go through multiple follow-up meetings to make a decision. So, that really helped us to be able to be agile and be able to give up to date information, so that we help the partner with business so that they can make a decision in a timely manner. That's been the key milestone we have in the new system. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:15:54.1: 

Thank you, Jason. Just one point. We haven't paid not even a dinner, so thank you for your point there, in terms of the awesome experience. [?Luke], you've got to take note of this! So, I would say, just as a follow-up question, Jason - and I know you and I have talked a couple of times on this is, how does this change your approach? Your approach as an FP&A analyst, and someone that runs the capital process at the bank, how does this change your way of approaching things? 

 

Jason Lee 0:16:26.1: 

In the past, when we used the Excel model, significant time was spent gathering the data, validating the data, and then inputting the data into systems. Just to give you an example, when you used to have XML, there used to be 25-plus spreadsheets that we had to run at the same time because they were interlinked to each other. So, it took, sometimes, half an hour just to save the model when you make one change. So, if you make one change and save the model, you wait there, and then… Maybe in case I forgot something to change, then I have to wait 30 minutes and then you input it again and then wait 30 minutes. What used to happen is, basically, you go to a meeting and, as I've talked about, you won't be able to give the feedback. So, the C-suites and then business leaders, they don't have a clear idea how long it will take for us to turn around the new version of the forecast, or even what-if scenarios. So, they give us more clear idea of when we'll be able to deliver the results. So, now, the focus shifts from just model user. Instead, we are being more business partners, so we can give more timely information, and also contribute more. 

 

Jason Lee 0:17:43.4: 

Before, our model was more suited for very simple enterprise-level budgeting, but now our system is more sophisticated to be able to give enough granularity in data so that we can discuss also line of business budget in a more timely manner. Before, sometimes, we had to go away after the budget. [Unclear words 0:18:05.3] budget's done, sometimes, we have to go through very tedious process to create a line of business budget. Sometimes, there were surprises that it doesn't… It wasn't what the business lead was expecting if you dice the number into business segments. So, then our company has been growing past couple years, and we started launching different types of funding vehicles, and then we launch into new products. So, this instant ability to provide data was needed to be able to make decision making in new business cases. So, that's been very transformative for Home Trust. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:18:43.4: 

Awesome. Thank you, Jason. All of that, I assume, had a lot of time invested on your part and the team, some of the elements around here. How did you climb that learning curve? How did you get ready? How did you learn Anaplan? To your feeling, what were the key factors that made you proficient in Anaplan and understand how you can work with that? Not only that, learning how to ask better questions from the consultants, and improve what you needed from them, as well as then transition to a more BAU or more support function. 

 

Jason Lee 0:19:22.5: 

I'm not going to lie. It wasn't an easy journey to get to where we were. Luckily, we had Deloitte support, so we were able to map out what we need to build into our system. At the same time, we're coming from simple Excel-based modeling into more granular-level modeling. So, it took some time, but as you know, Rome wasn't built in a day, so it took some time for us to map out all the requirements that we need to have. The key thing was, for us, we took our time to implement in a couple forecasting cycle to perfect the model before last year's budget. The learning the curve was there, but it took our team to several forecasting cycle to learn the basics in Anaplan. Once you learn the basics, Anaplan is very intuitive to use. Now, we are more self-sufficient instead of working primarily with the Deloitte model builder. So, it takes time, but it's a very good investment. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:20:31.1: 

Yes, I'm just going to pick on that, in terms of Rome wasn't built in a day. I just [sic] want to give the wrong impression to folks because, Rome, yes, it wasn't built in a day, but it took a few decades. What would be the statistics that you would call out, in terms of… How long did it take, how many people were involved on your end? I won't disclose how many there were in our end! The idea is just to give folks an idea in terms of the size of it, and the effort. Obviously, we talk about a lot of things that seem daunting from a banking standpoint. Capital planning, risk integration, funding, etc. are complex. Just to give folks an idea, how many of those, whereas what was the time that it took for you to get there? 

 

Jason Lee 0:21:19.1: 

We embarked the journey starting April, May last year, and then we basically took two or three months to talk with the Deloitte model builders to map out what our requirements are for the modeling perspective. We had a [?Q 0:21:35.8]. So, we did a pilot test run for two forecasts. We tried to replicate the Q1 forecast using Anaplan compared to Excel model to do the validation testing overall. Then Q2 was like a test run before model was used for budget. Ultimately, our goal was using the Anaplan for last year's budget. Then we did a parallel run with the original model. Then if there's a discrepancy between them, we spend time to understand why there are differences in bottom line and balance forecasting, and make improvements in a way. Then, obviously, we made mistakes along the way, and then last year's budget wasn't perfect. There is always something that you discover after you design the modeling. It's still a complicated model, but you just need to take time and take a couple quarter forecasting to make it perfect. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:22:39.7: 

Thank you, Jason. Jashar or Jason, whoever feels more comfortable with that - or both, actually, because you probably have different experiences - what would you say were the key lessons learned from the project, from the usage of Anaplan that, if you had to give some advice to whoever is interested, or thinking about implementing, or going in this journey, you would have to tell them? 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:23:03.6: 

For us, like I said, we were going through this - not finances - organization-wide transformation in IT. So, we had some lessons that we had already seen, and things that had fallen apart in the other areas of the IT transformation that we applied. So, one of the big things for me as the leader of the team was, I didn't want just the consultants. No offence, Deloitte, but just coming in, building it, and handing us this finished model. So, what we did was, we did hire contractors to backfill some of the BAU work that could be backfilled, because I wanted the team who did and was going to do the work to be the one that was building it. What I would have done even more is, in the earlier stages, had even more, maybe, building, or at least sitting virtually with. We were going through, still, COVID cycles. With the Deloitte team, and just really learning the ins and outs of the model. This is a very simplistic way of putting it, but Anaplan is almost a complicated Excel, but that works much better. Once you understand the rules, how things link, how modules and pages link, you start to build this natural intuitiveness about how to use it. If that had been built earlier, some of our later issues, we would have been able to resolve without involving as much of the Deloitte team's time, as much as it was appreciated.  

 

Jashar Grewal 0:24:29.8: 

Then what Jason said was spot on. We didn't do it and flip over one day. We did multiple cycles. With something like this, the devil's always in the details. Especially when you're building new products, you're building new funding sources; you build it, you think it works, and then when you start putting in actuals, or you start putting in numbers, something doesn't make sense. Here, liabilities are going up by millions of dollars. Your expenses are going down. Something's not connecting. So, those would probably be the biggest two takeaways. 

 

Jason Lee 0:25:01.7: 

Yes, I echo what Jashar said. Taking time for implementation. The most important phase is the designing phase. That's where I thought we could have done better. We had some hiccups with the designing phase. At first, we didn't know what we wanted, to be honest. That was the issue. Going back, thinking about it, if we spent more time on designing phase, and laid out clear details to deploy model building, they will reduce the time that we took for us to make… Maybe limit one phase of the project. That still helped us to get to where we are. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:25:44.5: 

Thank you. I do have another - I hope it's not a ha-ha question, 'Gotcha!' What about data, in terms of getting the data in, automation of data, data quality? Do you need to have perfect data to get there? Does Home Trust have perfect data at subledger level? It's a rhetorical question; you don't need to answer! Do we need to get that, and what were the challenges you faced in terms of getting the data in, and that level of detail? 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:26:10.9: 

Our data is perfect, of course, every dollar and cent. We made a decision, so there's always - and to Jason's point, each design phase, and each component of the model, we made decisions of how accurate does it need to be? At the end of the day, this is an FP&A model. It's not a reporting module, it's not a regulatory module; it's very much to drive decisions that are projecting. Quite frankly, if I could project two years out, I probably wouldn't be in this room. I'd be on a yacht in Italy or somewhere. We really wanted to make some of those materiality assessments. So, some pieces, we wanted to be more perfect, and we designed either the uploads or the builds to be quite perfect. Then other areas, we were like, 'This doesn't need to be as perfect.' I'll give an example. You know our back book, which is our existing loan portfolio, we do load all of that into Anaplan, because you want the calculations on what the back book is doing, which is always a big part of your portfolio, to be quite accurate. We have that data, we have the actuals, so it should match. Things like capital are a little bit different because how do you know what the component of your RWA - and I'm really sorry if I'm talking absolute gibberish right now for the people who don't know BCAR. You don't know what the components are going to be of your capital on the asset side, or what your [?SAT1 0:27:32.9] is going to look like, except for net income, and shareholders equity, and all that. 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:27:39.4: 

So, those, we built in models that are proportional, or look at historics and then look at actuals, and build that out forward, with the ability to override or do sensitivity. So, it really was on a component by component basis that allows us to drive intelligent decisions, and a cost benefit on, is the accuracy here really going to help us make a better decision? If it's not, then we didn't want to waste that time. 

 

Nuno Fonseca 0:28:08.4: 

Thank you. One last question. So, without any sort of compromise, and to the extent you can share anything with us, we know that you've just finished your first phase. What are the use cases you think, or you're thinking about expanding to in using Anaplan for as you look at the next steps of your journey? 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:28:33.9: 

We're a midsized organization. We're probably not as large as the D-SIBs and some of the other customers in the room, and we're not very, very small. So, again, we were very specific on the components that we wanted to implement for what we'll call phase one. Like we said, our future plans are to integrate… We have so much of this model built to the granularity of the product. So, we would like to potentially build out more of line of business reporting directly in Anaplan. For us, that would mean two big pieces of implementation. One would be to somehow link to our funds transfer pricing methodology for the interest expense piece, which right now, we load in after the fact. Then the other piece would be Nix allocation, or cost allocation, so building that in Anaplan as well, considering we have a lot of the planned data in there by cost center, so NGL. So, just building those two in the future state to help automate those pieces that currently sit - I wouldn't say entirely outside of Anaplan, but that link to Anaplan but are done in Excel models. Now, that said, the build in Anaplan has made those outside processes much, much easier and cleaner and more explainable, because the backup is coming from a source that has all that. It would even help us improve the analytics and data even more. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:30:04.5: 

Thank you. Let us know when you want to start! I think we are done in terms of the questions we had and some of the things we wanted to share with you. So, we're going to open up for all of you. If there are any questions, I can bring the microphone, or someone else in the room can bring the microphone. Happy to have questions. So, we can start. If you don't mind introducing yourself, and then asking the question. Thank you. 

 

Audience 0:30:32.3: 

Thank you for presenting your case today. My name is [?Sameer]. I'm from Manulife Financial services company. You touched a bit on the what-if analysis, and I wanted to ask you, what's your strategy about the what-if analysis? How frequent do you do them, and how you employ Anaplan doing that for you? 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:30:51.9: 

At home, we're actually interesting because, in a lot of organizations, the enterprise-wide stress testing ownership usually rests in the risk world at home. It actually sits in finance. I think we're pretty unique in that way. So, for us in our world, what we like to do is, we're the consolidator of other stress tests. That's one of the ways we do it. So, if treasury runs a stress test, or risk runs a stress test, or even our credit team is running a stress test on the macroeconomic scenarios and they think there are certain results to our loan loss rates, our interest rates, our liquidity, our net income; we will take that and aggregate that, and run it through our model to show what the impact is downstream on the KPIs. That's one of the, I would say, almost regulatory ways. The other ways we do it, it's ongoing. Right now, as Jason mentioned, we're actually going through our budget process, our cycle for 2025. As we were sitting down with our business units, or our res-le team, residential-lending team, we run those constantly. We'll say, 'Considering what you know about the market, what we think is going to happen in the market next year, do we want to be competitive on volume? Are we really trying to catch more market share, or do we think we can be a little bit more competitive on price?'  

 

Jashar Grewal 0:32:12.3: 

They might say, 'Well, what happens if we do X on rates, and that gives us this much pickup on volume?' You really have to balance it. You can get a lot of volume at a pretty crappy NIM, and you end up hurting yourself. The opposite is true as well. You can make a great return, but not do as much in volume. So, that's an iterative process right now. Before we lock in the budget, we've been reaching out to them all the time, and we say, 'We ran this. This is what I think.' We also provide the insights, as Jason mentioned earlier. We might say, 'We don't think this is possible. I know you asked us to run this scenario, but that's quite aggressive for you to put in your budget because of X, Y, Z. We've seen this historically. This is the trend we're seeing.' Our team might say, 'This is what we're seeing the rates doing for the next six months. This is what we're seeing our competitors doing. This is a no-go scenario.' So, we run it for you, but… So, we've embedded that within our almost forecasting and budgeting process, which is unique since we've implemented Anaplan. Then, of course, the regulatory stuff happens as… 

 

Audience 0:33:25.5: 

Hi, the name's [?Dave] and I'm a business writer. There's a lot of implementation partners out there; three or four initials and their acronym. What made you choose Deloitte, the partner of choice? 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:33:39.1: 

Nuno paid me. No, I'm kidding! 

 

Audience 0:33:41.4: 

How much?! 

 

[Laughter] 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:33:45.3: 

What actually made us go with Deloitte; once we had decided on Anaplan - so that was the first part of the decision tree. The second choice was, how are we going to do this? Personally, my really big decision, or my goal was that this wasn't going to be a consultant or IT-run implementation. I want it to be an FP&A-run implementation. We owned it. I was the project sponsor. I ran the project. So, that was first and foremost in my mind. Meeting with Deloitte, and with the team that we ended up working with, and the team they introduced us to, it really was for us the poor understanding of our business. When we sat in a room with them, we were doing the initial design, we were talking about the initial pieces. Just immediately recognizing that they knew what I mean when I said something. When I said, 'When securitization happens at the renewal, this loan will have to come back to book,' I didn't have to explain what that meant. As you can tell, there are components of the banking world that are so complicated. If I had to spend all that time first explaining to our partners what all of those things were, it would be exhausting, but also, it would be more prone to errors. So, all that stuff, all those little glitches we found in the details, I imagine those would be tenfold because they wouldn't have an innate understanding of how to model something without me telling them every single piece of the… Those are probably the biggest piece for us.  

 

Nuno Fonseca 0:35:19.8: 

Any more questions? Awesome. I would just speak on that because, if you don't mind, I'll share an experience from you on that scenario modeling. It's a real-time experience, Jason, apologies for that, but I'll share. The fact that you are in a Friday and someone asks, 'What if we have a different plan for dividends that used to take four hours and a bit of work on Saturday; now it takes three minutes?' They don't have to reconcile the balance sheet. They don't have to reconcile the cash flows in the P&L. So, that's when - of the things that they have now for them. It doesn't mean that's easier. It doesn't make it any easier, but it makes it faster and makes their life a little bit easier. The number of scenarios they can run is, obviously, larger. 

 

Jashar Grewal 0:36:01.3: 

Actually, to add to that, Nuno, some of you might be aware, Home Trust went private last year. We were actually bought out by Smith Financial Corporation. So, we were a public company that was bought out. I don't know if any of you have had the pleasure of working with investment bankers! They ask a lot of questions, and a lot of scenario analysis is required for those questions. I don't know if, without Anaplan, we would have closed the deal, quite frankly! I would say the tool was quite instrumental in that respect as well. 

 

Nuno Fonesca 0:36:30.7: 

Thank you. Thank you, Jashar. Thank you, Jason. I appreciate you taking the time to share your experience. Thank you everyone to join us this afternoon. I would just say one thing. If you want to know more about some of these assets, some other assets we have for financial services for banking specifically, our team is on the booth up there. It's left corner when you get in the room. They will be happy to share some of that, show you some of the capabilities we've got, and talk a little bit about our experience helping other banks. Thank you, everyone. Have a nice afternoon. 

 

[Applause]