← 返回

2026.09.22 | TB | Data | NIQ AI-Native Growth Runway

原标题：NIQ Global Intelligence – How Long is the Growth Runway for AI-native Solutions After a Strong Quarter?

#software

Third Bridge · 2026-09-22

Analyst-led • 11 Sep 2026

Companies: NIQ US, AMZN US, WMT US, KR US

David Maxwell (DM) Director, Insights & Operations at Designalytics Inc

John Conca (JC) — Third Bridge Sector Analyst

Agenda

Key Insights

Introduction

JC [00:00:01]: Welcome to Third Bridge's Interview entitled NIQ Global Intelligence – How Long is the Growth Runway for AI-native Solutions After a Strong Quarter? My name is John Conca, and I'll be facilitating today's Interview with Mr David Maxwell, former VP, Product Development, Strategic Analytics and Insights at NielsenIQ or NIQ Global Intelligence, as they are now known.

David, before we start today's Interview, please state either I agree or I disagree to the following statement: You understand the definition of material non-public information and agree not to disclose any such information, or any other information which is confidential, during this Interview.

DM [00:00:36]: I agree.

JC [00:00:37]: Could you give us a brief introduction to your background?

DM [00:00:43]: Yes, absolutely. As you said, my name is David Maxwell. I worked at NIQ for around 13 years, which, again, spans the former Nielsen and then split into NIQ, NIQ Global Intelligence, holding a variety of roles through that time, a lot focused on the innovation side of the business or what has historically been known as Bases and then more recently into some of the product development solutions, as you mentioned.

Questions

[00:01:18] What's your state of the union on NIQ Global Intelligence as a whole, where it's at and where it's going? Over five years or so, many changes have happened, such as the spin-off from the bigger Nielsen organisation into PE ownership and the IPO.

DM [00:01:49]: Yes, absolutely. I think some of the recent performance highlighted in quarterly earnings, I think, feels to be a positive step. There has been, and this is obviously going back to potentially decades of past quarterly earnings, some challenges for NIQ and some headwinds and certainly can get into some of the specifics of that. I think that in general, the private equity phase of that was fairly tumultuous, it seems from just purely a profit and revenue standpoint. While I haven't been inside of the company since the move public, my outsider's point of view would say that that's been seemingly a fairly positive shift.

[00:02:42] NIQ had a really strong 5.8% organic growth in Q2 2026. What is driving the company's recent success? The leadership is still the same. Is it better market dynamics or something on the execution piece?

DM [00:03:18]: I think it could be a few things. There's always this debate in terms of how companies like NIQ benefit or are harmed by broader economic conditions. I think I've seen that go both ways that when their primary clients, major manufacturers face hard times, obviously, that would make sense that their budget cuts would have a downstream impact on NIQ's revenue. I think there's also a counterpoint to that that in some of those trying times and uncertainty for manufacturers, that is when they truly need that type of perspective and data the most. I don't think it's unrealistic to say that some of the broader economic conditions like the tariffs of the past couple of years and even some of the broader trends like GLP-1s and things like that that there is just a thirst for data from some of their primary clients. I think some of that could be driven by the atmosphere as a whole. Also, that there has been quite a bit of very loud publicity from NIQ's side on their development of different AI solutions, which I think is another important piece of the puzzle likely, and that, I think, fits very well with the services that NIQ is providing. At a high level, this is massive amounts of sometimes raw, sometimes complex data, and it feels like AI could play a very interesting role in increasing the usability of that.

[00:05:04] How might AI play out for NIQ? It was a big overhang for a while. Management has done a good job of leading with AI-led growth in a lot of the calls and highlighting it. People are worried about disintermediation, but you also have these products.

DM [00:05:54]: I think to a certain extent, I would say, if I put myself in a client's shoes, I would think the jury is still out a little bit on how effective, useful and impactful those tools are going to be, what can they actually do, what are their limitations. Personally, I'm always a little bit sceptical around just the buzzwords that surround some of these solutions and the reaction of needing to have something, but is that something actually impactful and actually useful. I think there's a little bit of maybe a wait and see in terms of how effective some of these solutions are. That being said, and I hinted at this earlier, I have personally gone through the struggle. NIQ's clients and NIQ's associates go through the struggle of what to do with this data sometimes. Sometimes answering very simple or what seemed like should be very simple business questions can be difficult just because of the granularity and just the massive amounts of this data. That is where I feel like that if you truly have an effective AI solution that can seamlessly pull insights and summarise some of these complex business questions for people that that is where that could be a highly, highly effective addition to the portfolio.

[00:07:27] What problem would AI be potentially solving for? If I were a client using this, what would I be hoping to accomplish? What might be the next product iteration?

DM [00:07:53]: I think there's probably two key camps. One is just maybe the simpler aspect of things of navigating the platform. I'm thinking more of the chatbot functionality here of, like, "Hey, I'm trying to do this, what's the best way to do it," or "I'm trying to drill down to this level of detail, how do I specifically pull that data out of the platform." More of, like, almost a customer service type approach. I think the other aspect is pulling out macro-level insights from that data. For example, anyone who's ever looked at a scanning data file, I think, would understand that you probably have tens of thousands of line items of very specific individual UPC products. It can be very difficult to understand which of these UPCs fit together as a subline, how do these sublines fit together at a brand level, how do those brands factor up into a category and how are those categories segmented or not. It feels simple on the surface. When you drill down into the data, it gets extremely complex and highly manual. That is where I think the more impactful AI tools could come into play to identify and say, "These seven UPCs belong to X sub-brand, and I can easily summarise that data for you and analyse the performance of this new launch or analyse the trend of this product in market."

[00:09:28] What does NIQ's core business look like today? How does the product get monetised? A lot of the business's core is scanning data.

DM [00:09:59]: Yes. No, for sure. I think probably the bigger ticket items are obviously going to be large manufacturers subscribing to that data, purchasing that data so that they have access to it at any time and buying licences so that their employees can access that data. I think that's a big piece of it. There's a whole other component then in terms of what can NIQ actually do with that data to proactively provide analysis and insight to those clients. Essentially, trying to make answering some of the clients' business questions easier because they don't have to do it themselves. Those are out-of-the-box ongoing analyses of the data tracking exercises, those things that NIQ can provide. Maybe the third piece of that is that, obviously, any other aspect of NIQ's business, whether that is concept product testing or marketing mix measurement, those types of solutions have access to that data, too. That data, when used internally, increases the accuracy and just makes those deliverables more compelling for clients as well.

[00:11:29] How monetisable is the analytics portion? Wouldn't big manufacturers buying this data be analysing it themselves? Do they want more from an analytics piece, like a one-stop-shop approach and NIQ being able to pull the insights vs hiring somebody and bringing that in-house, which has a high cost? Is that a client demand?

DM [00:12:38]: No. Yes, for sure. I would say, yes, it inevitably is able to be monetised, and I do think there's a demand for it. I think as opposed to the total universe of clients that are interested in purchasing scanning data, it's obviously a subsegment of that. To your point, some clients, I think, are more sophisticated in their own analytics departments and their own insights departments that I'm oversimplifying probably, but all they need is the raw data, and they can run from there and perform their own analysis. They have a very regimented system in place internally that they don't necessarily need that analytics. That is certainly not true of all manufacturers. I think manufacturer size probably has a strong correlation there is that maybe some of the more medium or smaller manufacturers would maybe find that, "Hey, it's cheaper or more efficient for us to partner with NIQ to get some of that analysis without having to hire however many employees that may require for them to do all of that internally."

[00:13:57] The end goal with the AI piece would be monetising that meaningfully. Could this be a solution for everybody or for the general subset? Would it be able to command the dollar value that this investment makes it worthwhile? I'm sure there are many angles here.

DM [00:15:07]: I think it could definitely be a compelling addition for some of those manufacturers who maybe underutilise the analytics piece that NIQ can provide, again, assuming that what I'm assuming that it can do comes to fruition. I could certainly see that being an incentivising piece for people to either engage more with the platform or drive a point of differentiation vs competition in the market. I think my only caveat to that could potentially be that there may be a risk of that going the other direction where all of a sudden, because most manufacturers have access to not the same tool, but an AI tool that maybe could do similar things that does it have the opposite effect and that more manufacturers actually only need the raw data because they have their own AI tools, or LLMs in general are advanced enough to be able to put together some of these analyses. I think the proposition as a whole, yes, could have that intended effect of increasing people leveraging the capabilities of the NIQ system and platform. I would also just caveat that LLMs in general and AI tools in general that clients could have their hands on could swing that in the opposite direction.

[00:16:48] Do you view it as a race? This isn't specifically a dedicated software business, but a traditional SaaS model. There was the SaaS-pocalypse discussion on the disintermediation risk. Wouldn't NIQ acting as a data provider potentially make the data more valuable in its own right? What might be the disintermediation risk?

DM [00:17:31]: Yes. No, I think it's a great point that if anything, it makes the data more valuable because obviously, that's going to be the training basis for any tool that is developed by anyone. You use the term race. I think that's a pretty apt way to think about it. If a client is able to implement AI internally in a way that they feel they are satisfying all of their analysis and insights needs that they would get from scanning data, then there's probably no need to employ or upgrade whatever solutions that NIQ may leverage. If NIQ is ahead of the majority of these manufacturers in developing a tool, then I think that's a very promising unique opportunity to get that tool established internally at manufacturers before they even evaluate or go too far down the road of developing something themselves.

[00:18:41] It's a two-horse race in this space between Circana and NIQ. How should we be thinking about the dynamics between the two? There's Numerator too.

DM [00:19:08]: Yes, for sure. I think just that dynamic inherently historically and going forwards presents a challenge for both businesses as a whole, NIQ and Circana because the main differentiator here is going to be two things. One is what coverage do you have, what type of retailers do you have agreements with and that you've partnered with and essentially, who is providing their data to you so that you can sell that to manufacturers. That's a key differentiator. My understanding is that NIQ and Circana are very close in terms of the coverage. The battle is fought on the margins for some of the more speciality retailers and things like that. There's not a ton of differentiation in just the quantity of data that can be provided. I think far less important than that, what both of these companies end up doing with that data is a point of differentiation. Obviously, we've talked about the analysis and insights component of that, but also how they coverage adjust it.

How they say, "Look, we know this is an imperfect picture of the world, but based on all of our triangulation and other research and other data sources, we think that we can adjust up these numbers to get to a full picture of the entire market." Those are going to be proprietary methods and calculations that each business likely will approach a little bit differently. Like I said, I think that is probably a far less important component for most clients. Those are the two main differentiators. At the end of the day, I would imagine, and I think what I've just generally heard and seen in the market is that the primary factor here is going to end up being price and who can negotiate the best contract for those manufacturers. If you're getting the same data from both, who's going to give it to me the cheapest.

[00:21:27] Circana was quite aggressive with some deals with big retailers. You have to pay a lot for those as well. Could that be a potential differentiator if Circana is willing to sign an exclusive deal with Kroger or Whole Foods? Is that a little less realistic? Is that a new dynamic? If so, how is that manifesting?

DM [00:22:15]: I think so or at least to your point, it feels like something that has been talked about a lot more in the past decade or so, which certainly, yes, could be a component of differentiating and again, improving coverage. I think part of the interesting dynamic here is that no one's been exclusive with either of these companies for long or for a massive amount of time. I think what ends up happening is that both of these companies know how much volume a particular retailer, even massive retailers like Kroger contribute to each individual category, each individual brand. They do have fairly sophisticated ways to adjust this data. Even if one of them has an exclusive agreement with a certain retailer, the other probably has a pretty good sense of what that data would be.

I think especially when you're looking at this from a higher-level approach, that's where I think the differentiation gets a little bit more muddy. When you start getting into some of the very specific products and UPCs, certainly, that could have an impact. There's still some white whales out there of, like, Costco, and I think there's partnerships with Amazon out there, but I don't know that that's truly a full scope picture of the e-comm environment. Private label data has never been available necessarily in any granularity. There's still opportunities, I think, but it does seem some of the battle is being fought in exclusivity. How impactful that actually is in terms of what clients are getting, I'm a little bit sceptical of.

[00:24:12] NIQ acquired GfK in July 2023, and management mentioned on the Q2 2026 call that a lot of the integration is behind them. I've heard about helping in specific verticals such as tech and durables. Why would there be a difference in the tracking and data from a verticals perspective? How does that happen?

DM [00:25:07]: Yes, for sure. It comes down to at the highest level where these products are sold. If you think about large durables, if you're buying a refrigerator, you're typically not purchasing that through Target, Walmart, grocery, the typical FMCG or refer to it as, like, MULO or MULO X, channels that are typically thought of when you think of this data. I think what that's probably resulted in is, a, a lag in some agreements to acquire that data from NIQ and from Circana, like, if you think about Lowe's or Home Depot, Best Buy, the channels where a lot of these products typically move through. That's where GfK carved out their niche is securing data for these products that have the majority of their volume moving outside of standard channels. They really had a unique positioning in that market. I think the acquisition obviously opened up that data to NIQ. I think even more so than the data, it's all the knowledge and history that comes along with that. As I mentioned, what NIQ can do with that data, not just within the scanning data business, but within their innovation business and media mix business and all of these other pockets of NIQ would get infused with that knowledge that GfK had and the capabilities that GfK had to essentially do a lot of what NIQ is doing, but in this very specific vertical that had been siloed off prior to that.

[00:26:56] Are there any particular strengths or weaknesses in NIQ or Circana's coverage in any end markets? The GfK acquisition helped NIQ in the tech and durables space. Was that historically Circana's strength? Is that where the differentiation may come into play?

DM [00:27:33]: Yes, I think so. I don't know that I can give you an accurate assessment of exactly where the coverage strengths and weaknesses lie. I do believe there was some announcement around, again, NIQ's partnership with Amazon, which obviously would be a massive win. Whole Foods years ago was another piece of the puzzle that was incorporated there. GfK is obviously probably the most recent and relevant example of expanding into something that feels quite incremental that it's talking to and servicing clients that NIQ may not have had much business, if at all, any business with them. I think speaking about point of differentiation, what I have heard anecdotally from connections in the industry who have worked with both providers and companies that I have worked at that have used both solutions, I think there are opinions that get formed in terms of ease of use for the platform itself. I almost think that that sometimes can have a disproportionate impact maybe that, like, sure, one company may get a major win in terms of securing a partnership with this retailer or unlocking this vertical, and that certainly has an impact. I think that the end-user experience and just the ability to pull data out of these platforms and have it in a format that is easy to use and manipulate is also another driving force that probably doesn't get talked about much at all.

[00:29:34] How should we think about long-term growth in this space? Full-year guidance for organic constant-currency growth was in the 5.2-5.6% range. Management raised that for organic growth in Q2 2026. Would there be more demand for this data in the broader market? What would be driving it?

DM [00:30:28]: Yes, it's a good point. I think the way that I've always looked at this, and again, this is probably a little bit on the sceptical side of things is that I don't necessarily see this explosion in market opportunity. Maybe there is something there with AI that, as we said, increases the usability of the data, but does that expand it to other sectors or other end users that we maybe weren't thinking about before. Every manufacturer knows that they need some scanning data, and they know that they're going to get it from one source or another. I do think that a lot of the growth potential is from winning contracts from competition and making sure that when your contracts are up for renewal, that they are secured and not lost. The growth equation to me always seemed a little bit challenging from that perspective that it's just this constant battle of trying to win back a contract and trying to defend your current contracts. I think what that can mean is, yes, you might have a great year. You might have a great couple of years in terms of winning some major contracts, but it feels like that tide is always going to ebb and flow a little bit.

One thing that I think NIQ, and I assume this is probably true for Circana as well, but NIQ has looked at other pieces of this CPG world in terms of innovation, renovation, product testing, concept testing, those types of things to provide growth engines, where that marketplace is a whole lot more competitive in terms of hundreds of different suppliers that do that. There's plenty of market share to be gained in those types of things. Now the pool is much smaller. Those are much smaller, much more transactional elements as opposed to some of the big scanning data contracts. I think if you're looking at growth, I think it probably has to come from elsewhere beyond just this constant back-and-forth battle of scanning data contracts.

JC [00:33:02]: Should 5% be considered the general baseline here, and maybe have a good year where you're a little bit higher or lower? Management specifically touted multiple straight quarters of mid-single-digit organic revenue growth, none of it explosive.

DM [00:33:40]: Yes. It feels strong to me. It feels on the high end of what might be sustainable. If I had to insert my opinion there, I think that the 5%-plus growth rate is not something that I would expect to see sustained quarter after quarter, year after year.

[00:34:08] NIQ Bases, Optiq suite, Connect AI and NIQ Cadence were highlighted in NIQ's Q2 2026 earnings call. The company brought out its new generative AI. Do you think there's anything incrementally value-additive?

DM [00:34:46]: The one acquisition that I was certainly aware of as it impacted my day-to-day when I was there, but since I've read additionally about how that acquisition came to be for NIQ and where it's operating within the portfolio. I believe they refer to it as the product sensory AI or product development AI, which is a unique use case of AI, essentially fusing real-world product testing, people actually trying products and as normal, surveying and answering questions about flavours and textures and all of that kind of stuff. AI models being able to extrapolate that to other markets and predict the performance of certain products in other markets, other global markets or even help develop new prototypes for clients. I think there's… Yes, some very expected AI tools, I would say, that, again, are present on the Connect platform and help manipulate and summarise this wealth of data, but I think there are also pockets of highly creative and unique elements where that's being employed that I think could drive a significant point of differentiation as well.

[00:36:26] What are the major cost drivers of NIQ's business today? How do you see that changing in an AI world going forwards?

DM [00:37:06]: Yes. Certainly, with a company of NIQ's size, like workforce is going to be your cost. I think likely close behind that is their own data processing capabilities and obviously, the contracts that NIQ needs to pay to secure the data that they will then package and sell to manufacturers. I don't know that AI has much of an impact on that third option. I think you still have to obviously transact that data and purchase it so that you can facilitate that sale then to your end clients, but maybe not unique to NIQ, I think that some of the efficiencies that AI can provide theoretically could result in reduced dependency on that many people. I'm sure there are roles within NIQ that could be replaced by AI tools and things like that.

One element that throughout my career and in my current role is prevalent is programming surveys. NIQ and others in the industry do a ton of survey-based research. Up until now, maybe still now, someone has to do that. It's a very technical, very manual process typically, but it feels like something that is very close to being able to be done reliably by AI. I think there's a lot of data cleaning that could be done by AI. I do think there are likely a number of roles that will either be reduced or transformed to be more efficient by the use of AI. Now the counterpoint to that, of course, is what sort of costs come along with all of that AI usage and what is that equation?

[00:39:11] NIQ highlighted a 270bps improvement YoY, and approximately attributed half of that to AI-led productivity gains. Do you think the company is tapping out? That's 3% to the adjusted EBITDA margin, almost. That's pretty good.

DM [00:40:06]: For sure. Obviously, that's extremely strong. I think my initial reaction is like, "I'm surprised that they would attribute already that much margin improvement to AI efficiency." It also leads me to believe that, "No, it's not tapped out." I think, again, this is not necessarily a knock on NIQ. I think it's probably the reality of any company of its size, but I would be highly, highly sceptical that the surface has even been scratched on the level of efficiency that could be achieved with AI internally and externally. I think we're talking mainly internally here with margins, but I would expect that there is a massive amount of room to grow in terms of improving margins from that standpoint. I just can't imagine a situation where that AI has truly proliferated all of the manual tasks that are required to operate a business like NIQ.

[00:41:22] Across pure data providers, in the pure comps, it's just Circana. It's not publicly traded, but for Gartner, FactSet or data providers that serve different end markets, the average is roughly 33%. There's a 10pp gulf. That's used to justify the stock trading at a lower multiple. Do you think that gap is bridgeable? Would the scanning data business, the data processing they need, with probably more manual workflow than some other providers, always structurally be in the 23-25% range? Could 30%-plus be a realistic target?

DM [00:42:57]: Yes, absolutely. Again, what I struggle with a little bit to come up with a firm answer is what sort of costs are incurred as those capabilities expand. I think certainly looks great at this point on paper. As I said, I think that there has to be significant opportunities still internally, but I don't know what the cost of scaling the use of AI and things like that internally does to a bottom line necessarily. I think that would be my primary hesitation in saying that, yes, you could close that 10% gap.

JC [00:43:46]: Articles from early 2026 mentioned how much people are spending on AI. I assume that will only scale upwards going forward.

DM [00:43:57]: Sure. How do those pricing models change over time if they do get a little bit more favourable to companies that have the ambition to adopt them like NIQ does, then maybe it's less of a concern, but I think, yes, some of the same that you're referencing, I think is my hesitation as well.

[00:44:16] Is there anything else you'd like to mention? Would you like to address any misconceptions or misunderstandings?

DM [00:44:42]: I mentioned this very briefly at the very beginning of our conversation, but just the headwinds that NIQ has faced over time, in some cases, have very closely mirrored the headwinds that manufacturers face because their struggles result in reduced budgets, which obviously results in less research and less appetite to purchase whatever it is from NIQ. If some of those concerns are less economic or revenue-based for manufacturers and just more uncertainty in general, then I think that has historically benefited companies like NIQ. I think there's some competing headwinds and tailwinds out there currently. Obviously, there's broader economic concerns at the moment. I think the impact of various tariffs is still either filtering through to them or a little bit unknown or certainly the future of some of those is completely unknown. I think that's a real risk for CPG manufacturers and therefore, NIQ.

There's also some broader trends depending on which part of the business you're talking about just in terms of reduced consumption and GLP-1s is a nice buzzword for that. We have seen that have a quantitative impact already, but it's not just consumers using GLP-1s eating less. There is that attitude that then permeates and drives down categories like snacking and soft drinks and sweets and candy and things like that, which has a downstream impact on NIQ. The counter to that is that these CPG manufacturers are wondering, what do I do about this? Do I create new products that are GLP-1 friendly? Do I change my package design with a GLP-1 friendly badge on it? I think the jury is still out a little bit in terms of is that a net positive or a net negative for a company like NIQ, where they're in a unique position to answer some of those questions. They're also in a unique position to be hurt by any damage that's done to a CPG manufacturer's bottom line as a result of that trend.

[00:47:15] Inflation data today was a little hotter than people thought. It's not that people weren't cost-conscious before. I think that's even becoming more front and centre here. What might be ultimately the path to mitigating some of these headwinds? Is there one?

DM [00:47:49]: I think NIQ has always been very good at providing a point of view on some of these things. I'm sure they have numerous thought leadership pieces out there already on the impact of GLP-1s and things like that, but I think reminding clients and being at the forefront of that conversation and confidently being able to say that, "Yes, we can answer this question, we know how these trends are impacting your business and your categories and we know what you should do to either counter or capitalise on it." I think maintaining a voice and in that conversation is important. That's probably the easiest thing that can be done. When you talk about broader economic impacts like inflation and things like that, I think that's really tough to counter. I'm not sure that anything necessarily can fully counter that. Obviously, Nielsen does have the ability to inform pricing structures and things like that and to lead the way with some of that research with their clients, but that's a drop in the bucket if you're comparing that to nationwide people buying less and therefore, manufacturers having their own internal budgets cut.

[00:49:19] Could there be a genuine switching cost between NielsenIQ and Circana? Is it relatively easy to ingest whichever data? Could you go from one contract to another relatively simply? Is there value in sticking with one or the other that could help insulate some of these shifts and not create this race to the bottom?

DM [00:50:08]: Overall, I would say there's definitely value in sticking. Obviously, that depends greatly in terms of how integrated that data and the platform and obviously, anything that NIQ is proactively analysing for those clients, how integrated that is into the organisation. The example I might use is if a manufacturer is taking that raw data, feeding it into their own systems, they understand they have an experienced team of insights and marketing professionals and people who understand what to do with that data and how to analyse it. There's almost no barrier to switching. It's learning a new platform, which I think can be done in a matter of days and sure, training your workforce and how to do it shouldn't necessarily be understated, but I think at its core, a very sophisticated manufacturer who is doing most of the, quote, unquote, work on their end could do that with any data source with very limited hassle.

I don't know that that is actually the majority of the cases, though. I do think a lot of these manufacturers have very close relationships with a team at NIQ. They're constantly talking about the state of their business. Like I said, there's a lot of these analyses that are longer-term tracking efforts just with the pulse on the business. Some of those things that are a little bit more ingrained, I think, do represent a much larger hurdle to switch and obviously, is a big point of leverage for whoever holds that contract today, but ultimately, the end users of those platforms and that data are not the ones making that decision. These contracts are being negotiated at the very high C-level.

[00:52:03] Throughout 2026, there were tariffs and persistent GLP-1s. There's inflation now. The Middle East Conflict is creating pressure and headwinds. 5.8% was a good number. Is the pendulum about to aggressively swing back? Should we be tempering expectations for 2027, given all the headwinds and the fact that we've been able to hold on and perform pretty well?

DM [00:52:54]: Without obviously knowing the ins and outs of the finances of the business, my personal opinion on it would be that the recent quarterly performance is a bright spot in what otherwise has been a pretty tumultuous decade. My opinion would be that it's not evidence of a pendulum swinging that it is things that were done well and costs that were cut or alleviated at this moment in time, but I wouldn't assume that that is a sign of things to come necessarily. I think that the prior performance of NIQ is likely more predictive of the future performance, not necessarily this most recent quarter.

JC [00:53:44]: Thank you so much for your time and your commentary today. It is greatly appreciated.

DM [00:53:49]: Of course.

Transcription ends at 00:53:50 of the recorded material