Sophie Li
Analyst · Goldman Sachs
[Interpreted] Thank you very much for your question. Well, the first question is about the CapEx. In the past, we have been consistently investing in CapEx, mainly to build sortation centers and established transit capabilities. So today, most of our super sorting centers were self-owned and above 90% to be specific, if I may supplement. So going forward, we won't be in need of expanding our CapEx spending. Based on the economic development, some areas or weaker areas, we have also reserved base 200 to 300-hectare acres, for example. If our volume demand increases onefold or even twofold, we have sufficient reserves already there. So we don't need to spend capital to acquire further more significant land use rights. We just need to either develop them or upgrade them. The consideration, however, do need to be given to our initiatives in the longer term, they have a lot being comprehensive logistic capabilities, for example, warehousing or in-warehouse processing, LTL businesses or those ecosystem businesses do rent spaces from us so that they are able to form a comprehensive and higher-efficient -- efficiently co-located product and services by utilizing our capacity. Going forward, it is very clear that acquisition for land use rights, building supercenters are going to be very minimal. The growth of our -- or putting in line of services, putting services, the capacity is very much directed or matched with our anticipated demand of capacity in this sortation, transportation and all the segments of our operations. We are able to foresee with a very clear visibility, and going forward, we will be able to generate increasing free cash flow, where we talked about giving back return to our shareholders. It's based on the fact that the cash generation will continue to be healthy, and the CapEx spending will be stable or reducing going into 2024, 2025, so that our overall return to the shareholders will increase. The second part relates to the question on how we are able to continue to reduce the operating cost. Indeed, as you look into the past, even though ZTO has been leading this effort, but for the whole industry, it has been continuously achieving high cost efficiencies. In the past, what we've been doing and what we've been able to achieve greater results or ahead of everybody, is that our connection between the outlets and the sortation center has been more advanced or more ahead of everybody. Now going forward, as we continue to rely on lean operations, looking into greater visibilities of each of the segment of our operations, we are still able to, as volume increases, as our productivity gain continue to release, we still believe there are plenty of opportunities for us to achieve scale leverage as well as, on a unit level, continued cost efficiency. And then the second consideration, which is more of a long-term but steady visibility to us is that because of the route planning, we talked about in the past, the tri-layer throughput concept, as again, we said earlier, we were able to improve the connectivity between the outlets and sortation center. Going forward, as volume increases, we are able to establish greater connectivity between the origination outlets to a destination sorting center, or the third player being the origination center to the destination outlets, or the origination outlets to destination outlets. All these are -- simply put, an effort to reduce the number of sortation. In the past, we were at the level of 2.5 per parcel. We are reducing it now to 2.09 and continue to decrease because of better our planning and volume increases. We estimated for each onetime reduction of the sortation, we are able to reduce about $0.25 being $0.10 in sortation and $0.15 for transportation. With that, we have clear room for the future to further reduce our unit level cost because of this tri-layer throughput concept. Market share, as we looked at the first half of the year, declined 2 points. This is still matched relatively well with our capacity or capacity in services. Anywhere outside of that range will not generate as effective economy of scale and will cause us to have increased marginal cost with diminished marginal benefit. So we are, as you asked the question, how we plan our capital investment and deployment. It's very much a science related to what we are able to serve, what are the capacity build up, what we anticipate to come with the most optimal volume and optimal cost.