 Thank you. So great to be here. A lot of familiar places, faces, amazing to be amongst people. Thank you, Gazzal, for being part of and agreeing to be a part of this discussion. Thank you. I'll quickly set the context for everyone, right? So many advertisers, clients, agencies have been relying a lot on third party data for the campaigns, right? But as we have been hearing, we've been seeing the third party cookies are at its fag end, right? A couple of browsers have already disabled them. One of the major browsers will duplicate them, maybe in a year or so. And then the option remains with the first party data, right? Now, that also comes with its own challenges. First party data perhaps can be expensive, requires a skill set to be built in within the teams and the organization. So how do we tackle this problem, right? How do we solve for the skill, effectiveness, and efficiency, keeping that there are no cookies, right? And for that we have expert with us. And Gazzal would love to hear your views on how your organization is kind of looking into this space and trying to solve for the problem, right? So the first obvious question, right? With that wind of that of cookies, how your organization is strategizing the future for majoring the effectiveness of the campaigns? I think, Nachik, if you made a few relevant points on, you know, once cookies goes away, what next? For starters, I think once cookies goes away, there will be something or the other that enables your advertising. However, with what that really tells you is there is going to be this consistent transition that happens in the environment. And hence it's important for advertisers like us to be in direct contact with the consumer. And that's where, you know, one-on-one contact or CRMs or things like PII come into the picture. And while we set up, get up with the different data skill sets in each organization, it's important to know what is the impact that you're getting out of the so-called CRMs, the one-on-one contact programs, the PII exchanges that you're wanting to pick up at scale and imagine for CPG organizations where pretty much every living person in the country is a TG. Can I collect all of that data? Can I have a one-on-one interaction with all of them? Definitely not. So you're going to live on panels, and with those panels becomes relevant is the existence of measurement. So while you think about CRMs, while you think about exchanges, it's important also to think about measurement, but not after you've done it, before you've done it. Even before you think about how will I get my PII, you need to know what are you going to do with it, and how will you measure success or failure for that. And hence the shift that we need to see is today measurement is always post-factor, and especially for media, we talk about pre-vales and we talk about post-evales. We've got to remember that the pre-val now is more important. The pre-setup of measurement is more important because it gives you three things. It gives you clarity of what you want. What KPIs are you wanting to deliver, and hence what are you measuring, and not like right now where you say 100 spots done, post-evales done. Here you want to measure pure business impact. You want to know when you spent your time setting up the tech stack, you spent the money and energy setting up that tech stack. This is the measurement I want in place and that's now the first stepping stone and not something that you do post-factor to say yeah, you had a good campaign. So that's a big shift that we've taken in our, I would say so to say briefing process as well. So we don't just start out with objectives and backgrounds which are typical things to think about when we think of an activity, but also at the same time talk about what does success look like and how am I going to measure it, and hence what is also the tech stack and setup required to have that measurement in place. So yeah. That's great. So yeah, totally. I think and that's what we're just discussing backstage, right? There is a campaign and there are certain objectives to it, but the way we measure those objectives perhaps are not matching how we should measure it, right? And that's where I just want to take your view, right? We're discussing about the vanity matrices, right? And really loved your view on how they can be stepping stone, right? And how you have evolved as an organization in terms of measurement. Do you want to just talk about two minutes on that? So we've been discussing on, you know, how media measurement matrices at one point were hyped as, you know, the only thing that will help you figure out what went right or not. And then suddenly there is this perception change and all of us believe, oh, these are those vanity matrices. You don't need to look at them. But I think there needs to be a balanced view there. You need to know what's happening. And the right way to do it is measure your input against your output. The vanity matrices are somewhere in between. They help you check was your input right or not. So hypothetically, you ran a video objective campaign. The vanity matrices will tell you did the campaign even run correctly or not. So while it is vanity, what it, to me, what it really means is you can't chase them. But what it doesn't mean is you don't have to look at them. You have to look at them because you need to know your campaigns ran correctly. Only if there is a valid input is how you can compare it with the output to say whether it worked or not in the entirety. And if the vanity is so-called vanity matrices, if they tell you that your input itself was not correct, there you go. You have your action points. And there's no point comparing it with sales outcomes because you know you didn't give the right input. So in some way, I think the point when we say it's vanity is to say don't make them your targets. Your targets are still reality of all of our lives. Our targets are still sales from different aspects. But the vanity matrices help you check that the input that you gave to get that final output either in the form of a sales trend or in the form of a mind measure that you wanted to reach out or an impact that you wanted to have on your BHT per se, the brand health tracks per se. These matrices are stepping stones to make sure your inputs are right. And that's how we approach it. And with the same spirit, what we've done is, like most organizations, we've gotten into live dashboards for tracing these matrices. With not the objective that you will optimize campaigns every other hour or every other day. But to make sure that you're at least available, the data is available at a hygiene level. And now you don't have to chase what my campaign was doing. But you can now chase how is it impacting the sales, how is it impacting mind functions, how is it impacting my brand funnel? Amazing. Just for everyone's clarity, vanity matrices means impressions, click-through rates or VTRs, which traditionally I've been a major of success for digital campaigns. But not necessarily they define the success or failure of the campaign. There are more matrices beyond that, which can be looked at to define whether your campaign has delivered the desired results or not. Moving forward, all of you would have seen the video that has been played earlier. It's a game of attention now. Users are seeing thousands of ads every day. Big digital, big print, big radio, but TV. It's the same mind space. And everybody wants to occupy that mind space. So attention is becoming an extremely important yet very difficult to get currency, right? So how you as an organization are addressing that issue and trying to stand out of the crowd. So on this, we're trying to move beyond what media can deliver to also look at what content can deliver. When it comes to attention, yes, formats play a role, placements play a role, but what also plays a role is is your consumer insight in place and hence is your asset in place? Is your asset sitting at that intersection of where the consumer need is and what can the brand do for that need state? So while it's a reality and when we look at our media landscapes also, the time spent on TV continues to be three, three and a half hours plus. And the time on digital is shooting through the roof. It's touching four hours already. So what that does mean in reality is it's not TV eating into digital or digital eating into TV. The total time spent on casual viewing or entertainment is really going up. And with that, the clutter obviously is going up. And media alone can't solve that problem. This is where media and content need to join hands. This is where consumer insight is the game changer. If you know the sweet spot between the need state the consumer has and what your brand can solve for or not is where it lies because from there you know you want to run an influencer marketing campaign and hence your asset as well as your placement changes. Or you want to run a simple TVC that talks about the USP and hence the choice of medium and the way you place it changes. So I would say this is where truly the blend of consumer insights, media and content has to come at play. Media alone can't solve for it. Of course, you know, there are partners like you who help us again check for if you're doing things correctly. But it's also got to include a combination of these three. Is the approach that we take on this front. Yeah, amazing. Because I think nothing can play in silos, right? All the stakeholders in the ecosystem needs to come together to achieve that one single objective. That's awesome. I mean, any, as we move towards again, one is attention, but from contextual front, right? How is it, you know, the contextual environment plays role for you, right? And how do you kind of capitalize on contextually targeting communication to the audiences? I would say it goes back to what we were just discussing because attention is limited. Contextual placements become important and contextual placements. You can leverage them only if these three things from understanding the consumer and the media and the content deliveries are talking to it is falling in place. But I think we also see a shift now. There was a time when contextual advertising simply meant if you're on the music genre, you will see an ad which is having a tangent on music. And if you're on photography, you will see an ad which has a tangent on photography. I think with the capabilities that platforms offer today, the contextual advertising has a whole new meaning. So for example, for some of our brands, the solution through winters versus the solution through rainy season versus the solution through hot summers is very different. So you will see a lot of beverages ads where suddenly when it is sunny in the afternoon, we're talking about a cold coffee. But late night, we're possibly talking about that warm cup of coffee that will keep you going. And at the same time, purchase signals are increasingly becoming relevant. So it's, of course, interest and affinity. But it's also the brand life stage and also the brand objective that you're trying to achieve. And which is where signals like affinity to a category, signals like consumption of a particular product are hence available. And the evolution of contextual is towards that, away from simple, you know, genre related pieces to moving closer to what the brand wants to talk about and the spaces that brand can own. For example, when we talk about Maggie Noodles as well, Maggie Noodles means different things to different people. For somebody, it's that late night snack. For other people, it's that 4 p.m. snack that they want to pick up. For other people, it's breakfast. And for some, it is main meals. And hence, that's the level where contextualizing can go. And we work with D.C.O. partners, dynamic creative optimization partners, sometimes inbuilt with platforms and sometimes ad hoc to move contextual advertising closer to what the brand wants to deliver. Affinity, interest continue to remain relevant. But I would say those are maybe for youth impulse brands more relevant. But then there is an opportunity to move towards these brand signals as well. Great. Also, I think one last point from, as a tech partner perspective, right, we get a lot of questions from customers and agencies in terms of how do we contextualize a particular piece of content, right? For example, if it's an apple, how do you decide that whether it's an apple as an iPhone or it's an apple as a fruit or it's apple as a chemist next to you, right? And we as a technology have evolved and deployed linguistic experts to kind of create a meaning out of that content, right? Because if you're targeting a tech content, you can't be present on a food and nutrition related content. Have you faced these kind of challenges or? Absolutely, yes. I would say the start points are even lower. Sometimes the start points are we want to do something contextually, but we don't know what. So what we begin with is first almost like a search graph of what's happening in the category. And we try and map it to the consumer typology. And I would say those are still simpler start points. The challenge is exactly what you mentioned. So for example, for a sources campaign, we wanted to be present wherever there is a snack. And there are times when snacks are being mentioned in negative light. They're being spoken about as junk foods. And you don't know who plays your advertising there. So do we have an unlock for it? Unfortunately not. There are black lifts and white lifts that are available. There are exclusion lifts that are available. But those really depend upon the person who's working on it. And that's where the struggle for maybe an automated solution is the gap we see a lot of times. I would say it's still a question for us. And we'd love to have an answer. Certainly, I think clubbing contextual and majoring attention, perhaps as we move forward, can slightly plug in the gap. So when we measure the attention, we literally measure the exposure that the creative has gotten and the engagement that it has gotten. It has 50-plus parameters that you can measure your creative on. And there are certain case studies where it has seen brand lift increase. Now things like these, maybe the last words from you. Do you see this coming in play as the future of measurement? No, using the technology and then clubbing that with the traditional way of measurement. Absolutely. Like I said, measurement is now one of the first things that you want to think about. And typically in the easier days, I would say you would have the luxury of doing a link test even before you took live TVC. But that's when we were not thinking about taking campaigns overnight. And today we actually think about now that I've mailed you the creative in the next five hours, it should be live. So with that, a consistent, automated measurement system is crucial because there's no other way. The timelines have crunched the process of implementation so little that you can't think about measurement later. And with our spirit of having an ongoing measurement, it's important to invest in tech that enables you to do that in an ongoing basis. Great. Thank you so much, gazel. I think this has been a great discussion. Just my takeaways from this. One is set up KPIs and major the KPIs in a right way. Don't wait for post-campaign analytics. Do it on the go or do it before that. That's even better. And be consistent in measurement. It can't be one-off activity. You have to measure, you have to learn, and you have to keep on adopting the learnings for the betterment, right? Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you so much, gazel.