SEC Filings

WNS (HOLDINGS) LTD filed this Form 6-K on 08/06/2018
Entire Document

Table of Contents

For example, one of our largest auto claims clients by revenue contribution in fiscal 2012 terminated its contract with us with effect from April 18, 2012. This client accounted for 10.4% and 7.5% of our revenue and 1.3% and 1.9% of our revenue less repair payments (non-GAAP) in fiscal 2012 and 2011, respectively.

In addition, one of our top five clients by revenue contribution in fiscal 2014, an OTA, provided us with a lower volume of business in fiscal 2015 as the OTA entered into a strategic marketing agreement with another OTA in August 2013 pursuant to which it over a period of time, from the fourth quarter of fiscal 2014 to the fourth quarter of fiscal 2015, moved its customer care and sales processes that were previously managed by us to a technology platform managed by the other OTA. As a result, we lost most of our business from that OTA and since June 2015, we ceased to provide services to that OTA. That OTA accounted for 2.5% and 6.1% of our revenue and 2.6% and 6.5% of our revenue less repair payments (non-GAAP) in fiscal 2015 and 2014, respectively. The other OTA uses several BPM vendors to manage such processes on their technology platform. We are approved as one of the other OTA’s providers of BPM services. We have managed to compete with incumbent BPM vendors for the other OTA’s business and the other OTA has become one of our largest clients. For more information, see “— A few major clients account for a significant portion of our revenue and any loss of business from these clients could reduce our revenue and significantly harm our business.”

Some of our client contracts contain provisions which, if triggered, could result in lower future revenue and have an adverse effect on our business.

In many of our client contracts, we agree to include certain provisions which provide for downward revision of our prices under certain circumstances. For example, certain contracts allow a client in certain limited circumstances to request a benchmark study comparing our pricing and performance with that of an agreed list of other service providers for comparable services. Based on the results of the study and depending on the reasons for any unfavorable variance, we may be required to make improvements in the service we provide or to reduce the pricing for services to be performed under the remaining term of the contract. Some of our contracts also provide that, during the term of the contract and for a certain period thereafter ranging from six to 12 months, we may not provide similar services to certain or any of their competitors using the same personnel. These restrictions may hamper our ability to compete for and provide services to other clients in the same industry, which may result in lower future revenue and profitability.

Some of our contracts specify that if a change in control of our company occurs during the term of the contract, the client has the right to terminate the contract. These provisions may result in our contracts being terminated if there is such a change in control, resulting in a potential loss of revenue.

Fraud on account of circumvention of controls within our or our clients’ computer systems and processes could adversely impact our business.

Our business is dependent on the secure and reliable operation of controls within our and our clients’ information systems and processes, whether operated or executed by our clients themselves or by us in connection with our provision of services to them. Although we take adequate measures to safeguard against system-related and other fraud, there can be no assurance that we would be able to prevent fraud or even detect them on a timely basis, particularly where it relates to our clients’ information systems which are not managed by us. For example, we have identified incidences where our employees have allegedly exploited weaknesses in information systems as well as processes in order to record fraudulent transactions. We are generally required to indemnify our clients from third party claims arising out of such fraudulent transactions and our client contracts generally do not include any limitation on our liability to our clients’ losses arising from fraudulent activities by our employees. Our expansion into new markets may create additional challenges with respect to managing the risk of fraud due to the increased geographical dispersion and use of intermediaries. Accordingly, we may have significant liability arising from fraudulent transactions which may materially affect our business and financial results. Although we have professional indemnity insurance coverage for losses arising from fraudulent activities by our employees, that coverage may not continue to be available on reasonable terms or in sufficient amounts to cover one or more large claims against us, and our insurers may also disclaim coverage as to any future claims. We may also suffer reputational harm as a result of fraud committed by our employees, or by our perceived inability to properly manage fraud related risks, which could in turn lead to enhanced regulatory oversight and scrutiny.

Our business may not develop in ways that we currently anticipate due to negative public reaction to offshore outsourcing, proposed legislation or otherwise.

We have based our strategy of future growth on certain assumptions regarding our industry, services and future demand in the market for such services. However, the trend to outsource business processes may not continue and could reverse. Offshore outsourcing is a politically sensitive topic in the UK, the US and elsewhere. For example, many organizations and public figures in the UK and the US have publicly expressed concern about a perceived association between offshore outsourcing providers and the loss of jobs in their home countries.