 Good morning, everyone. Thank you for being part of Entrepreneur India's Resilience series. Today's topic of discussion will be the EdTech Revolution. I'm Saurav Kumar, editor of special projects for Entrepreneur India, the moderator for the session. Let me start by laying the ground rules for our attendees. The discussion will go on for around 30-35 minutes and it will be followed by a 15-minute Q&A session. If you have any questions during the course of the discussion, you can post them through the comments section if you're on Facebook. If you're on a Zoom platform, you can put it through the Q&A option at the bottom of your screen. Mention in your question if it is directed at any specific panelist. We'll take up the questions post the final discussion. Let me now introduce our panelists for the day. We have with us today Mr. Abhimanyu Sakhena, co-founder, interview bit and Scalar Academy, Mr. Arun Prasad Durairaj, CEO and co-founder of Flinto Learning Solutions, Mr. Ashish Kapadia, partner of Bloom Venture and Mr. Rishan Hyatt, co-founder and CEO of Topper. Welcome everyone. Just to put into perspective, the edtech space is expected to grow to around Rs. 26,000 crore by the next financial year, according to our Red Seaer and Omidia Network Report. And we've already seen exponential growth in enrolment during our edtech phase during this COVID pandemic. So do you think what demonetization was for the fintech space? COVID, of course, it is for the healthcare space definitely. So COVID is that moment for edtech space as well? Rishan, if I can start with you. I think so, except that during demonetization, after demonetization, we came back to similar cash levels. And although there was penetration in digital, the digital levels that we saw during demonetization did not sustain. I'm hoping that with this change, because this is over a longer duration and this is a slightly habit-forming change, we won't literally go back to the same levels as pre-COVID, the new normal will be significantly higher than the pre-COVID normal. Okay. Arun, your views? No, I think I tend to agree with Rishan on this because obviously it was a big shock on the industry, on the economy, on the habits and everything. And the longer it's stretched, some habits become sticky and some habits, people lose their habits. I think the longer this pandemic stretches and the current situation stretches, some of the habits will continue to stay even beyond. And I'm hoping that a large part of the technology adoption, because people will start seeing conveniences or people may have the fear. One example is, let's say post 9-11, there was a fear of flying for three months, but then people welcomed that fear after some time. But the airline insurances went up and that stayed there. Those things, people continued buying no matter how long after the incident was. So similarly, I think some of the technology adoption, I mean the people might have felt convenience, people might have felt cheaper options, people might have felt broader options and they may just continue adopting these for a while after this. Okay. So Arun Manu, I'll come with you with a little extension of the same question. So obviously right now, this is the need of the other students are staying at home and at least till December, we know that they're staying at home. So obviously the only medium is to go online and study. But does it really take away what a student learns or gains when he's on campus? So once the campuses are on, we are talking about that we went back to the same cash level post demonetization. So obviously this may not be the case. But then there will be people who will be going to the schools again and they'll have teachers in front of them. What happens then? So I think as Jishan mentioned that given this pandemic is not something which is going to be around just for a few months and then go and then things will be back to normal. So we clearly see that it's going to be there for longer, right? And then this when something like, you know, when we have a particular lifestyle, a way of doing things for a year or two, that becomes the new normal. Even when we talk about, let's say colleges or schools, the changes that we see that let's say all the classes are happening online, right? But of course the college or a school is much more than just the classes, the interaction between people, the playground, the sports. My hunch there would be that even when things resume, it's not going to be the school as it was before. The things there are actually a lot of things which could be delivered better online. So for example, when I say that a class for mathematics could be done online, what that means is that someone from MIT or the best mathematician in the world can take that mathematics class online. And if that could be delivered online, that will continue to be delivered online. There are, there might be aspects which cannot be delivered online. Let's say that might be a sports session in the school and maybe particularly a team sport session, right? People might go back to school for that. Even once let's say after a year or two, we don't know how long it will take. But whenever this pandemic gets over, the schools will change. I wouldn't say that schools or colleges will cease to exist. But how they operate that will change substantially. For example, if there is a particular day where I just have to attend four lectures and do certain assignments, I don't see any reason why someone would have to go to school. So earlier at Tech, like online learning, online education, it was only seen as a supplementary part. However, I think post pandemic, it is going to be the central part. Rather, the on-premise activities that will become the supplementary or supportive things to that. That is what I can predict. But of course, we will see with time how things evolve. Ashish, you agree with that? That the core part will be the online education and supplementary part would be the activities that we used to do in school and colleges. So to the first part that we were talking about, I definitely agree that it will coexist. Whatever momentum we have seen of people coming online and adopting the video calls as a methodology for imparting education, there will be a significant change in which schools will realize the fact that we can carry out a few of these sessions online. So why not make most of the opportunity? To continue to exist hand in hand is something that I feel very, very strongly. Schools, the physical structure is not going away in a hurry, at least for the visible future. In the future, in the long-term future, things may come to an area where everything is very specialized. So school formats may be no longer 10-acre requirements for colleges. Like we were referring, one of the panelists was mentioning about the archaic requirements. They will not go down that path. They will have education centers which are more formal, a lot of it may be done online. And then people, students will be actually going for the other activities 10 years from now. Till then it is going to definitely coexist for the foreseeable future. And let's also not forget that when it comes to the India to India 3, we still are at a stage where the infrastructure bottlenecks and all that have been far from what they should be. So for a time being what it allows people at that level is to catapult them into the mainstream and allow them to get access to quality education. Some of the initiatives, the best of initiatives came about in the last 4 months. Whether it was the government creating their own channel to talk to rural kids or it was imparting video lessons. I think we will see a very hybrid coexistence between physical infrastructure and virtual infrastructure with some changing where people are leveraging best of both worlds and gradually will start gravitating where massive large format institutions may start being more specialized. And you will have opportunities where people are approaching school for one thing, private education for other things, sports agencies for other stuff. Likewise for skills as well. I see that architecture changing gradually over 10 years, not immediately. Obviously it will take transition and come to you with similar questions. So we talked about moving to digital education. There was a news, I don't know if you guys saw it a lot, but there was a poor farmer who sold his cow to get a laptop for his daughter and then obviously he came in news. There's a huge digital divide between where I sit here in Delhi or wherever you are, and the rural India. So when we talk about putting things mostly partly on digital and rest on private institutions on other institutions, that's a long way. So is there anything specific that needs to be done? Obviously government has a broadband plan that they have to reach the villages and all, but still the gadget is required. The gadget is required. So what do we do about that? It's not an easy answer. It's not an easy answer and when you think about, if you're thinking about the last man that needs to be reached, it's always going to be a failure. We have to look at it from how far in the funnel can you go? Can you reach the 60th percentile? Can you reach the 40th percentile? Can you reach the 20th percentile? Can you reach the 0th percentile? No, I don't think so. But how deep can you go? Also, in the other world, in your supposedly current perfect world, how far are you going? Are you able to implement an all saints high school level quality to a very deeply remote village school? No, you're not. Anyway, there also you're failing. So the stark contrast will always be there. Is this better off than the previous version? Slightly yes, because at least the teacher is standardized or at least the best teacher is leveraged a lot more, leveraged 100 times more than what you would leverage. Currently, your best teacher is teaching 50 students. That's criminal, right? The best teacher teaching a class of 50 elite students in a super expensive school versus a teacher being able to broadcast to let's say 20,000 kids in one lecture. That itself is huge leverage. So yeah, half glass full, half glass empty kind of situation for us. I don't know, I'll come to you with the same question, especially regarding the early stage education and all. Is there a way effective players can come in and address this issue of this life? Obviously, as Vishal said that if you look at the last person will not be able to start even. So we need to start, we need somewhere. Obviously, when we talk about this inclusive sort of way of doing it, so which means that we'll have to think through that how do we reach them as well. So what would be your thoughts about this? While in addition to what Jishan said that definitely it's better, much, much better than even without the last minute is much better than what it is today. Second thing I will probably share an anecdote here. That often in terms of technology penetration, be it for the devices or be it through the internet, we generally like history has shown that we always hugely underestimate how quickly it penetrates. I'll share an anecdote here back in 2010 when Ola India has had not even launched and coincidentally people from Ola, they are good friends. So we were chatting when they were about to, they were sharing this idea that you know, something like this would be great. And I told them that do you really expect all these auto rickshaw drivers and taxi drivers to be owning these smartphones like iPhone and be able to operate them and have good internet connection, right? This was 2010. And I was totally convinced that all the auto guys, all the taxi drivers, they cannot have smartphones. Within two years, every single one of them had a smartphone, had internet connectivity and Ola was everywhere, even in tier three cities, right? We would be surprised to see particularly with the tailwinds that we see with Geo, etc. My very strong conviction is that within few years, 90 percentile would have a device, a very affordable device on which they can consume high quality educational content and 90 percent will have a decent enough internet connection. Most probably it will be Geo who will be bringing it over. But we always always, if we look back at last 10 years, we always hugely underestimate how quickly technology penetrates all this, you know, like the entire pyramid. It goes down very, very quickly. Like particularly with the speed at which the devices go cheap, the internet in India particularly go cheap. We will be surprised to see how quickly it penetrates. I do not believe that people within two years of time, there would be a lot of people. And fine, there might be someone below poverty line who cannot afford it, but the reality is they cannot afford even the physical education today. That's great. I don't know, I'll come to you. So, now even the government has, you know, earlier ethics was something which was operating on its own, but now the government has also, you know, I'm not talking about the education policy. And just before that also, they kind of kept the number of our schools can have the students, you know, in front of screen and everything. So, is this government intervention, what does it change for ethics? Like basically the government is starting to, you know, seriously look at this space. And what would, what would it mean for, you know, the students at lunch? So sort of I have a slightly different take on government. I don't know, I mean, in fact, during the entire course, I was slightly more confused about government stand on a lot of issues when it comes to education from school reopening to food, norms and fees and, you know, how they deliver. I think, I think I personally was actually confused about it. And, and still there's not, not a lot of clarity on, you know, how these issues are getting addressed. It looked more populist statements than actually solutions for the current problem. Okay. My personal opinion here is, see, end of the day. Someone mentioned initially these things. I mean, government can give a broader framework within which things can operate and which are within their, I would say, purview and leave the schools and entrepreneurs to really drive solutions because end of the day, the people who are closest to the problem can come up with better solutions than people who are far away from the problem. Right. So in terms of, you know, in terms of, you know, driving solutions, yes, government intervention happening, but I don't know if the solutions are in, you know, anywhere in the, in the picture. In fact, I would, I would take an example of, you know, for lack of better analogy, government innovation are actually opposite end of the spectrum. Right. The minute regulation comes in innovation goes for a toss. There is a lot of innovation when there is open and free thinking. Right. Let's take the same example of submenu was saying, right. Hola cat, right. I mean, the whole taxi industry was not very well regulated before Hola came in, which is why they were not able to disrupt that segment. But after disruption, now they are regulating the segment, right. Had the regulation been there in first place, I don't know if you and I would be hauling a taxi the way we would be hauling today. Right. So I believe that the government should probably step back a little bit, leave certain things to entrepreneurs and innovators to solve and only give a broader framework to operate rather than giving very specific instructions on what can be done and what cannot be done. Okay. Ashish, I think you have a think on this issue as well. Yeah, it's hard to argue to what Arun said. And fundamentally, there is one fact that none of us are going to, you know, turn away from education in India is not about the kid alone. Education in India is the only opportunity for that family to significantly alter their overall, not lifestyle. More people in India are not privileged for on what we refer to as lifestyle broadly. It's the only way to upgrade and have a reasonable or a better quality of life. So if we have an overwhelming population, which is striving to get education quality access to healthcare and better access to financial products, it all begins at education. So the ability and the intent of parents to spend is actually at its highest level when it comes to education. So whatever developments and that infrastructure, we have lagged significantly behind when it comes to physical infrastructure, but we have been very decently poised when it comes to digital infrastructure. Is it at an acceptable level? Well, no, there are still parts of India which get internet connection only when the person walks out two kilometers away from their houses and pockets in the village where you can get access. We are getting better. We were definitely nowhere as close three years ago. We're getting better for sure. So I feel that education will have to be looked on as a very significant contribution with private frameworks and partnerships through the digital route as against to just an initiative at the policy and the government level. We both have to coexist and that's the only way it will reach far and wide with the policy actually behaving what we have had RBI behaving when it comes to fintech. You lay down the frameworks and lay down the networks and then let everybody else come and build on top of that. And that is what is going to really change and make sure that we have a very significant penetration. So before I move to the next question, I'll request the attendees again. If you have questions, keep them coming. We'll take them after maybe 20, 25 minutes. Rishan, I'll come to you. So now that we're speaking about the policy, so the new education policy that we have. So there are many changes in that. So does it really open up a lot of opportunities for fintech players to come in and participate or bring in new offerings? What's your reading of the policy? Well, I think the new policy is a change and in India any change is actually good because the rate of change in India is very, very slow. And therefore anytime you make a change, yeah, two steps forward, one step backward, but still like it's net net positive. So I welcome change. I think so far why education is where it is in India is because of the very rigid framework that we put around schools. You can't run a school for profit. That automatically takes schools out of the market. Nobody can offer schooling as a market solution. If the rules of market don't apply to schooling, it's always going to be a very, very inefficient product. You're going to attract all the wrong entrepreneurs. If I can't build for profit, then I'm, I don't want to build. And then it attracts all the set of wrong entrepreneurs who say, Hey, you know what, I'm okay building because you know, I'm going to build a trust behind this and that trust is going to take away the profit and there's a building P and there's a bus fee. So I think we need lesser, we need to open up that framework that we built. I don't know when, but several decades ago we need to open up that framework and make schools for profit that will attract the right kind of talent. I will probably operate my school at the lowest profit possible and offer the best product instead of being living in a very inefficient structure. So I think unlocking schooling from that one thing itself will change our human capital significantly, right? Like I feel bad that you're stuck in a system where only very few people are allowed to operate a school and that too for nonprofit and have circumvented many, many ways to look at the end of the day. Families are still paying. It's not like schooling is cheap. Families are still paying. It's the second highest or third highest spend for every single household. Why not let the rules of market apply? I don't know your thoughts on that. I don't know your thoughts on that. No, I think I completely agree. I think, in fact, I can talk at the same length, especially for the preschool segment. In fact, if you look at, that's the last one that's going to recover among the whole ed tech or rather the early learning system or the education system. And I think a lot of these rules of market also applies to the same market that we're dealing with. So moving on to something else. So we have seen that right now there are, like we started with a couple of ed tech players, but right now we have a lot of ed tech players that are there operating specializing in preschool or coding or maybe engineering or school boards and everything. So do you think there is going to be a consolidation which will happen in terms of, or maybe collaborations that you will see will start happening so that if not A to Z maybe, but midway through, more, you know, a bunch of solutions will be provided to students and learners. And what do you think? I think it's probably too early to say about collaboration or consolidation, primarily because, you know, I mean, instead of looking at whole education system as one monolithic structure, it's a very heterogeneous structure which has a lot of different layers, right? And every layer has a very unique need. In fact, you know, what I'm seeing right now is more unbundling of educational services, right? I mean, we lived in an era where there was a complete bundling of everything into a school. I mean, a school became your one-stop means for everything, right? Whether it's a max class or English class or science class or coding class or your sports class. Everything was a very monolithic structure to what's happening now is partly driven by COVID, but this, I think this movement started happening earlier also, right? I mean, you have a coding specialization, you have a logical thinking specialization, you have a math specialization, you have a sports specialization. So it's getting the whole system is getting unbundled into more specialty services. And I think in every specialty service, there is a room for players to grow and excel and build, I would say, very valuable companies in that space. And only when companies are able to really deliver value in that space, then there comes a room for consolidation. And because every player is probably more focused on, I mean, there are only handful of players that are capable of acquiring and running very large companies in this space today. And I think the rest of the companies will have to start and excelling in that specific layer which they want to operate. So, I mean, I'll come to you. So I didn't expect that, you know, there are obviously various layers of education that needs to be at best. Yes, from an entrepreneurship point of view, people making specialized solutions for X, Y, Z, 5. What about the students? Can they take so many different layers separately here? Like when we were in school, we go to school, you know, morning till evening, we have separate, you know, things to be done. Yes, they were also layers. There were different teachers and everything to do with that. Yes, it was a one-stop thing. But now one has to go to X for math, one has to go for Y, go to Y for something else or something. What about the student? Will they be able to, you know, able to take so much of cream time for education? Right. No, so here actually I would, from my experience, I'm so sorry, from my experience of interacting with the students, while if we look at the layers as let's say K5, K12, you know, university learning and let's say industry-oriented learning or higher education, et cetera, they are definitely there would be like these are fairly mutually exclusive sets. But when I look at one student, what my observation and learning have been, that's like more than just the content or more than just, you know, telling someone what students also need is like someone gives them structure, right? So for example, if there is a kid who is in K12, let's say he has finished his 10th class and is in 11-12, more than just a specific class or topic, what he's looking for is that give me the path, which leads me to the outcome that I'm looking for. So unbundling in my experience, I would slightly have a divergent from what Aaron suggested. What I have seen is particularly from the student's point of view, what they need is a clear path that there is someone, some service provider who will give me everything which is needed for my outcome. It might be that I finished my school successfully. It might be that I learned all the industry-related skills and then get a job. But if I tell someone that, you know, if you want a job, then like, you know, here are 100,000 courses you can pick and do whatever you want to do. It generally doesn't lead to outcomes, and it's very, very confusing actually for the student. My opinion is that particularly for a higher education where I am more involved, K12, maybe Jishan and others might be able to add more. But at least for the higher education, people want that here is my goal. Can you be my mentor? Who can tell me what all should I learn to get to that goal? And also, of course, help me learn those. So unbundling there is pretty hard. If I unbundle, for example, Coursera, Udacity, they all make us like pretty much all the knowledge in the world is available. Even Wikipedia has all the knowledge of the world. But I cannot become a very strong software engineer just reading Wikipedia while everything related to software engineering is on Wikipedia. So unbundling might like, of course, technology might solve in very interesting ways where then there can be a machine mentor who can tell you what you should do next. But like it might take time right now. I do not see that happening very quickly. My take on this sort of is some products by nature are a single dimension product. Like example, a cab product is a one dimensional product. What do you do with Ola? You take it out, you book a cab, get in the cab, get out. It's one dimensional. Some products are slightly multi-dimensional. For example, e-commerce is more or less a one dimensional product. I order, I discover a product, add to cart and get out. But can begin to get multi-dimensional because as soon as there is higher discovery, there is an ad revenue. If there is music, there is content revenue, et cetera. So it can become a two three dimensional product. So they start off with one but want to keep expanding to multi-dimensional product. Google is a classic example of building super search and using search in hundreds of products and building a multi-dimensional product. Learning by default has to start at a multi-dimensional product. There is no option for a learning app to start off at one dimension. There's no one thing that you want to learn, right? So you start off with a multi-dimensional product. You start off with video classes, life classes, practice, asking questions, answering questions, search for discovering questions, learning to code. So you have to address all these multiple dimensions in one go. Like we are still not addressing physical exercise. We're still not addressing hobbies that can get interested in the school. So you have to start off with a multi-dimensional product and there is no way you can remain, you can come back to one dimensional product because you're starting point itself versus. So my set, my take is there will be a good learning app or a good tech company has to be multiple, has to address on multiple dimensions and will stay like that. Because it's a multi-dimensional product, companies will look dissimilar. They can't look very similar because whenever you have a multiple dimension thing, you will have chances of building it in so many different ways and therefore you will have multiple dissimilar companies trying to do the same things and won't be Apple to Apple comparison between companies. And that's good because more choice for the customer. Ashish will come to talk to so many investors and others also. So M&A is something that still our startup ecosystem is not very ready to accept. So collaboration in others we have seen like in spaces where people have tried to collaborate and give better facilities, especially during the COVID. Do you think that that can happen in tech? Like for instance, can gaming companies become a part of tech to make it more interesting for students or something? So it sort of honestly depends on whether they are together. Are they going to widen the access or deepen the offering? To the extent it is going to be one of the two, anything is possible. And I may be trying to trivialize it or maybe oversimplify the whole point. But if there is a very wide access that a certain gaming company has in terms of acceptance to the TG, and they can really collaborate and widen the access for the tech business, could be some skills or some other education programs or could be extending the child's ability to get more exposed to activities which are not part of the course in today's curriculum. Of course they can work together. But if it is neither of the two, just for the fact that both have scaled and for them to just widen the offering, I don't think it may really work. So why an M&A takes place is very important and how it gets operationally executed determines the success of it. Startups are built very fast. They are built over the journey of maybe anywhere between three years to maybe 10 years. And it's not that the two organizations have a very long history and a gestation. So there is going to be enough opportunities for people to come together and be nimble and work together. But at the same time, what also happens is as these enterprises mature, it is going to be very critical to understand that we have the required depth as a nation. We have the required market size as a country where the specialized enterprises can exist. We really don't need to dilute the offering just for a better valuation or better market access. And at the end of the day, might not be music to people's ears. But M&A of one highly valued company with another highly valued company has been helping anybody. What matters is a company that can have consistent pre-cash flows after the first few years of infrastructure and access being created and eventually go to the market for getting a validation on the price. There could be niche offerings which may get integrated into a larger place. But eventually the goal should be a large scale business that gets listed. And trust me when I say this is that we are large enough a market in many areas and we will get there in other areas where we feel today we are niche and small. Three years or five years ago, I'm talking about 2016 when people would ask this question and say, okay, what's an edtech? What's the kind of exposure people have on edtech? You could count the names of these companies on your fingers. And today it is the flavor of the season. Both the extremes are not reflective of the reality. One has to acknowledge as Zeeshan was mentioning earlier that this is a moment for edtech. And like it was said on Twitter maybe a few months ago, India's DecaCon actually could mega company could actually come from this vertical. India's Amazon could be from edtech. So I think it's a combination of factors. It's not very unit dimensional. Like we have been discussing throughout the last half an hour. Okay, so let's just say with you, we have seen a lot of big, large checks being given to edtech during this pandemic. So you think it's sustainable or it's just that investors are looking at not to miss the opportunity right now. You said that the biggest unit or mega con could come from the edtech space. So how sustainable is it or how do you see it? So having been part of an academy over the last four or five years, I can tell you that the penetration and the thought process is deep. And when you look to take a look at what you're referring to as FOMO are the large scale investors suffering from FOMO and just attributing big checks. I don't think so. If we all agree that our big India movement is going to be in edtech. Then I think you also need to acknowledge that it is not going to be a winner. Take it all. It's not going to be a space where just one great company can be built. I very strongly feel that you are going to have three or four large format businesses that will scale up succeed. And I would definitely be disappointed if we don't have a couple of them listed on exchanges. Where they could list where it's India or overseas that's a debate. I'm not getting into that. But yes, there is enough debt. There is enough ability and intent to pay in those vertical in edtech. And we look at edtech as a broader space of human development. It's a massive landscape. The investments are coming on that bet and it is not just coming on, okay, can I just do more of the same. What more can we just do with the network? What more can an academy do with the existing network that they have built? Is the question that investors are asking to themselves? And do they have the ability to be the best in the space? So far as they can get the answers for this question, I think they have more money is warranted. It was a wave like a secular wave. Like it happened in 2016, 17. I would definitely have agreed and said, yeah, it's more of a formal but it's not a secular way. The investments are going in a very targeted fashion and while valuations are on the higher side, the check sizes are resonating with what plans of businesses are making. I can say this because we are closely working with a few companies in the space. So yeah, I do feel that yeah, there is enough depth in the space. We should not be losing sleep over it. We should acknowledge that our markets are big and make sure that we are right ambassadors for the ecosystem and the country. Yeah, obviously I think that she had a number of students that we have and we have a very young population and especially after this pandemic, there is a need for upskilling even for people who are into jobs and also I think that opens up a lot of space. What would you say? I think I certainly agree, especially with the funding. You asked me this, right? Yeah, yeah. Okay. I mean, just following up on the funding questions, I think the opportunity is deep and as I told, there were multiple dimensions of consumers. I would say direct to consumer and direct to school opportunities like B2B and B2B. A lot of consumer markets is where a lot of innovations were actually taking place pre-COVID and I would say within the B2B2C or a B2B space within education, there were I would say limited innovations that were taking place primarily because the layer was very, I would say resistant to innovation, right? Resistant for changes. Now with COVID, it has become unstoppable that everything boils down to the consumers now and everyone is now focusing on, I would say the consumer because the learning has shifted from a school to a home, which means the consumers plays now. And this is why you are seeing, I would say a lot of the new innovation or new products being opened up and I think they're getting more traction, more from a B2C perspective and this is, which means that what you're seeing is tip of the iceberg and if this continues, a lot of the innovation will actually follow through back to the schools again and you can see a lot more depth in every layer of the education segment that we are seeing today. Okay, all right. So we have another 10, 15 minutes left so we need to take up some questions that are there in the Facebook and also so we have a question coming in from Ram Ravi. Can we have, can we give the audio to Ram Ravi please? Ram, you'll have to unmute and... Yeah, can you hear me now? Yes, please go ahead. Yeah, it's a great talk. So I was just wondering with regard to the tech space, a lot of the online learning tends to be very individualistic or promotes individual learning. So aren't we, is there any way in which we can make this more collaborative like how our traditional learning is which is offline learning and that tends to be quite collaborative, right? So are we going more towards exams, especially in India where the focus has always been on exams? I think we have discussed it partly but still Risha would want to answer that question. Sure, so Ram in learning binaries are tough. It's not like online learning is individualistic and school learning is collaborative. No way can I access that school learning is collaborative. School learning is batch. Sure, but collaborative. I don't think so. And can you have collaborative learning online? Definitely yes. We are all learning collaboratively on multiple things on a daily basis in our own lives. So binaries are tough. What I would say is do you need individualistic learning? Definitely yes, because even for a same set of parents, their two kids are extremely different. No, like after having 99% overlap, the two kids are different for the parents and therefore they will need individualistic learning. If online can offer that, that's a great opportunity. Is there enough collaboration possible online? I feel that there is enough collaboration possible online. So I think it sort of wins on both fronts. Individual learning is definitely not possible on a batch group format, right? No matter how much I try, I cannot have a different test for each student in a class in a school. I have to still give the same test to all kids and collaboration is also still pretty limited in a school format. So yeah, not a clear answer, but that's my take on this one. Anyone else wants to think that way? I will just add one thing there that actually in the online world, collaboration happens like often it gets exponential and supercharged in online world. If you take example of the open source community, for example, like people collaborate all across the globe. I have contributed to open source projects where two of the contributors might be from Japan and two from Australia and from India. So actually often what happens is that it might be very hard for me to find the collaborators within my school or within my college who might have similar interests as mine. But when it goes online, then suddenly my collaboration group becomes global. So often it gets very supercharged in the online world as well. Like for example, to create a group of math Olympiad aspirants is super easy on online, but finding 30 math Olympiad aspirants in a class of 60 is impossible, right? But finding them across 50 different schools, one kid per school is super easy online. Just an example of collaboration online. Okay, all right. There's a question we've got on Facebook from Kunj Thakkar. Kunj says, currently child are more game savvy and addicted while learning online. It's an opportunity to make games that evolve around education as well as fun. So is edtech game going to be the next question? I think we have already discussed about it, but you know, still, if there is anything else that you would want to add, or I'll take the next question maybe then. I think we discussed it, right? To the extent there is a proper comprehensive model around the whole thing. There is a scope. If it is going to be just extending and you may find some other idea, well, it may or may not do as well as one would like. But to the extent there's a sound offering that is built around it, definitely there is enough scope for these cusps to form. They could be over a bit of time over the last few months. I have seen somebody who was pitching education specializing only in financial products and monetary matters. Now there will be these niche areas that also will come up and they will all have their own place in the ecosystem. One can debate on how scalable these are going to be and adding one more filter. The scalability can take a beating, but definitely there will be more opportunities coming over the next few years in each of these combinations. We can take the next question which is from Meghna. Can you give the audio to Meghna please? Meghna, you'll have to unmute and ask the question. And till the time Meghna comes, we have another question on Facebook which we can take. So it's a very big question. I'll try to sum it down to a little. Basically it says that the pandemic is not overcome till then we will have schools locked and alternative with online classes. That's going to be good. But Dr. Neu's skills of learning, this will evolve in the brain, but the main problem is teachers because they are new to that. Okay, so the basic question is of course I've also seen some of the teachers struggling to adapt the new, this form of teaching because it's very difficult for them to teach in this way. So obviously for Arun or for Avima Neu, you have the same teachers who are doing it for you now possibly or helping you do that. But what about the majority of teachers who are not used to this kind of education? What happens to them? What do we do about that Arun? Well, I can have a go at this one. Yes. You know what we fail to realize is teachers no matter what age are the most keen students. They are exceptional students. They learn very fast. We might have this image that, oh, this teacher is already 55 years old and will not be able to adapt to online learning and online learning demands a certain type of teacher and you have a certain image of that teacher. You will be surprised to see some of the learning classes that happen online. So over the last three months, we've got 40 schools running end to end on our platform. So they start with prayers in the morning and with national anthem in the evening, full five periods a day, full sessions, like for our sessions a day. And you will see all teachers participate and they have adapted within, I want to say like within six to eight lectures, they've adapted to their own styles. They do pop quizzes. They bring PowerPoints. They do a bunch of things and, you know, they have a way to engage the class. So I think it's not that difficult. It's the tools are super easy and teachers have a knack of picking it up and presenting to the class. They are not crippled by, oh, I teach in a class format. Therefore I can't teach online. Definitely not true. And I keep jumping from class to class and see what happens. And I was in the Hindi class and the Hindi class is like a really old. He was teaching in the Moabras. Like I usually spend five minutes in the class just to see I spent 30 minutes in the class just going through a Hindi Moabra class. It was meant for a seventh, eighth grader. It was so damn interesting even for me. So, yeah. Let's not assume they are not students. No, no, obviously coming from a family which has so many teachers. So I would agree with you. Arun, your opinion on that? No, I think I probably agree a lot with Zeeshan on that because see, I think I would say a lot of times even when I was growing up if I recollect my own school environment, right? Despite what the school wants to do, the teachers always used to create a micro culture of what they wanted to bring inside the classroom, right? I mean, forget the curriculum, forget the exams. They always bring their own flavor, okay? And really impact the classes. I mean, what I'm talking about really good teachers impact the classes. I mean, and they bring their energy, you know, to disrupt learning, right? And I've seen this as I grew up in a lot of classes. And I would say, you know, let's think of, if I think of, you know, teachers as innovators, as schools of the government, right? I mean, obviously there are restrictions within each of the operate. And now the whole, you know, layer of medium is now changing. I think I have personally seen a lot of teachers transforming and adopting the new, I would say, medium of learning and teaching very efficiently. And again, they're only limited by what they can do and what they cannot do in terms of what the school wants them to. But let alone to their own choices, they're actually doing wonders. And this is exactly why a lot of independent teacher-led platforms are now taking off, right? For example, if you think of platforms like Class Class, right? And I think in the US there's a company called, I think it's called OutSchool, right? OutSchool has like over 10,000 teachers who are doing very creative things in the way that they want to impact a child's learning. And teacher, I mean, further than school-led platforms, teacher-led platforms are now actually starting to take off primarily because of these reasons. Thank you so much. We have just about time to maybe take one more question. If Meghna is there, we'll take the question and Meghna, please, Meghna, can you hear us? I think I'll take the question. So I will give more or less answer what aspect we'll invest into before investing in an tech-based pandemic. So I think actually you have, definitely you have spoken about while the pandemic is on and everything. Do you think it's going, and I think it's going to remain the same for start as well because as you said, the depth of the market and, you know, there is always space to coexist. Absolutely. I'm very convinced about it. And it may not be relevant for me to repeat it. I have the opportunity to just put out another angle. So post the pandemic, they would be, so whatever traffic we have gained, whatever momentum we have gained, there will be some amount of backing that I'm expecting to happen as things become more stable. But we don't have visibility into what that stability is going to be, both in terms of timeline and what that world will look like. So till such time, this is a reality. When that stability comes back, very strong habit-forming changes would have happened in patterns and societies for education and many other verticals. So what I like to believe and what I definitely feel very strongly about is that two thirds to maybe even three fourths of the incremental momentum will be there and will continue to be there. The base has suddenly gone up. So we will have a higher base to now work on post the pandemic. So I don't think it only gets better from here so far as tech is concerned. Thank you so much gentlemen. We have run out of time. We'll have to close this. So I'm sure with entrepreneurs and the investors in the tech space and now government also, for the first time, thinking of increasing the spend on education to 6% of GDP, that's a very good sign. If we can achieve that, I'm sure that the tech and the education space will see new rise. Thank you gentlemen, everyone, for being here today and hope to see you again. Thank you. Excellent. Thank you very much for having us. Yes, thank you Vishal. Thank you Arun. Thank you Avnanu. Thank you sir. Thank you everyone.