Hong KongEnergy utilityLaunch · $50K
CLP Power

Powering the transition without powering up the call center — agentic customer service for CLP's millions of accounts

CLP serves the large majority of Hong Kong's households and businesses under a regulated-return regime where service quality is a public obligation and cost discipline a permanent one — and the energy transition keeps adding billing complexity: new tariffs, rebates, feed-in payments, EV charging and efficiency programs; an agentic frontline that explains bills in plain Cantonese, executes account changes in-conversation and scales through typhoon-outage inquiry spikes is the service model that matches both the regulatory bargain and the demographic reality.

Entry use case
Billing and account service line
Expected outcome
Resolve routine billing, tariff and account-change contacts in-conversation, cutting queues and cost per contact while improving explained-bill satisfaction.
Recommended next step
Launch-scoped proposal to customer service leadership: pilot the billing and account line ahead of the next tariff-adjustment announcement, measured on resolution rate and cost per contact.
What we understand

CLP Power's operating reality

CLP Power supplies electricity to Kowloon, the New Territories and most of Hong Kong's population under the Scheme of Control framework agreed with the government.

Public fact

The Scheme of Control ties permitted returns to assets and obligations, with tariff adjustments and customer-facing performance politically visible at every review.

Public fact

Decarbonization commitments and energy-transition programs — feed-in tariffs, efficiency subsidies, EV infrastructure — are adding product and billing complexity to a once-simple utility relationship.

Public fact

The residential base includes a large elderly, Cantonese-first segment for whom phone remains the only real service channel; bill-shock moments after tariff changes drive contact waves.

Reasoned inference

Typhoon and extreme-weather events create outage-inquiry spikes that fixed hotline capacity absorbs badly.

Reasoned inference

Move-in/move-out account churn in a dense rental market generates steady transactional volume well-suited to in-conversation completion.

Seller hypothesis — validate

Validate with the account team before outreach: Actual billing-line volumes and tariff-change contact multipliers · Outage-day inquiry spikes and current absorption capacity · Regulatory or Scheme-of-Control considerations on automated customer communication · Incumbent contact-center stack and refresh timeline

Build vs buy

Why we have a right to win here

Buy-led target

Limited internal ability or appetite to build the core platform — strong candidate for the packaged solution

Evidence: CLP is an asset-and-operations utility whose IT runs through vendors and integrators; it has digital-utility initiatives but no internal AI platform capability, and Cantonese-first conversational AI is a straightforward governed procurement.

Why they won't build the full stack: Utility engineering is committed to grid reliability and decarbonization capex; building voice AI in-house is outside every regulated mandate, while a bought platform with human gates delivers measurable service economics a Scheme-of-Control review can point to.

What management is signalling

CLP operates under the Scheme of Control with tariff adjustments and customer-facing performance publicly scrutinized, while decarbonization investment raises the political sensitivity of customer bills.

Reported factrecent annual reports and tariff announcements · 2025

GTM implication: Bill-explanation quality and service cost are both regulator-visible — sell the frontline as service improvement and efficiency in one regulated-era package.

Energy-transition programs are adding billing and product complexity that drives explanation-heavy contact volume.

Inferencerecent investor communications (validate) · 2025-2026

GTM implication: Each new program adds conversation load — position the platform as the adoption channel for the transition agenda itself.

What already exists (don't pitch this)
  • CLP mobile app with billing and consumption tracking
  • Hotline and IVR service in Cantonese and English
  • Online move-in/move-out and payment services
  • Outage notifications via app and SMS
What customers still can't do end-to-end (pitch this)
  • →In-conversation bill explanation and account changes for the phone-first elderly base
  • →Elastic capacity for tariff-change and typhoon inquiry spikes
  • →Proactive program and rebate outreach at base scale
  • →Cross-channel context between app, web and hotline
Opportunity map

Where agentic communications pays off first

WorkflowWhy it matters hereValueComplexitySpeedChannels
Billing and account service line
Bills explained in plain Cantonese and changes executed in-conversation; queues and repeat contacts drop.
Bill explanation, tariff questions, payment arrangements and move-in/move-out changes are the structural volume of millions of accounts.
Friction today: Older callers queue for bill explanations; account changes require forms and callbacks.
VoiceApp chatWeb
Outage and typhoon inquiry surge line
Live, consistent outage-status conversations at unlimited capacity; crews communicated about, not interrupted.
Extreme-weather response is the utility's most public service moment and its worst capacity mismatch.
Friction today: Outage-day call spikes melt the hotline exactly when accurate restoration answers matter most.
VoiceSMSApp chat
Energy-transition program outreach
Program eligibility explained and applications guided in-conversation; adoption measured per campaign.
Feed-in tariff, efficiency-subsidy and EV-charging programs need explanation-heavy adoption conversations at scale.
Friction today: Program awareness runs on leaflets and web pages; interested customers can't get questions answered easily.
VoiceWhatsAppWeb
Watch the change

Billing and account service line: today vs the agentic model

Scenario: After a tariff adjustment, an 71-year-old customer calls about a higher bill; the agent, in patient Cantonese, walks through the charges line by line, checks her eligibility for the concessionary scheme, enrolls her in-conversation and sets a payment arrangement — no branch visit, no callback, no confusion left over.
Today
same interaction, two worlds
Agentic layer
Languages served
2–3 staffed
10+ in one deployment
Platform capability
Cost per contact
$13.50 median assisted
$1.84 median self-service
Benchmark
QA coverage
1–2% sampled
100% scored
Platform capability
Sources & assumptions
  • · Languages served: Platform capability: Gemini + Chirp speech
  • · Cost per contact: Gartner customer service cost benchmarks, 2024
  • · QA coverage: Platform capability: every interaction logged and evaluated
  • · Gartner, customer service cost benchmarks (2024): $13.50 median assisted vs $1.84 self-service per contact
  • · McKinsey, digital-first collections research: 20–25% NPL reduction among leaders; up to 40% opex reduction with gen AI
  • · Baymard Institute: ~70% average cart abandonment (meta-analysis)
  • · IAMAI–Kantar via IBEF (2025): 900M+ Indian internet users; 98% consume Indic-language content
  • · LeadSquared and vendor funnel studies: 78% of students choose the first institution to respond (directional, vendor data)
  • · HDI / ITSM operator benchmarks: $15–25 per L1 ticket; 40–60% of L1 volume is resets/status (validate per customer)
  • · Conventional-flow wait times and volumes are typical operator patterns — assumptions to replace with the customer's own baseline
  • · Agentic-flow behaviors (context retention, 100% logging, in-line policy checks) are platform capabilities, not projections
Recommended solution

One integrated stack, opinionated for this account

Channels · Tilicho Labs
VoiceApp chatWebSMSWhatsApp

Voice & channel orchestration, telephony, conversational execution, session/state, routing, integration build. Capability coverage validated during implementation.

Intelligence · Google Cloud
Gemini reasoningEnterprise groundingWorkflow agentsMulti-agent orchestrationGoverned actionsEvaluation & analytics
Systems · CLP Power
Billing / CISPayment systemsCRMOutage managementService status feedsProgram systems

API access to these systems is the critical-path dependency.

Trust & languages
CantoneseEnglishMandarin

Identity-bound sessions, policy-bounded actions, 100% audit logging, human approvals at defined points, in-tenant intelligence.

Business case

The economics, with your numbers

Addressable monthly interactions400K
Seller assumption — replace in discovery
Current cost per interaction ($)$5.0
Industry benchmark scale — validate
Automation / assistance rate (%)55%
Seller assumption — pilot proves this
$2.0M
Current operating cost / mo
$12.3M
Modelled gross benefit / yr
0.0 mo
Payback on Launch
1303%
3-yr ROI (modelled)
Automated/assisted interactions per month220K
Modelled AI run-cost per month (usage + cloud, system estimate)$77K
New monthly operating cost$977K

All figures are modelling estimates from the labeled inputs above — nothing here is customer-provided yet. The pilot's first job is replacing these assumptions with CLP Power's measured baseline. Package price covers implementation only; recurring usage billed separately.

Recommended package

Launch — $50K implementation

Launch · $50K · A focused, fast production pilot8–10 weeks to a live, measured pilot

Why this package for CLP Power: A focused pilot on the billing and account line — the dominant volume class — proves economics fast in a conservative, regulated utility before expanding to outage communication and program outreach.

Included
  • Up to 3 channels
  • One priority workflow
  • Limited enterprise integrations (1–2 systems)
  • API credential & security setup
  • Core conversational + workflow configuration
  • Basic analytics
  • Controlled production pilot with defined success criteria
Not included
  • ✕Usage & consumption (billed separately)
  • ✕Additional workflows
  • ✕Multi-geography rollout
  • ✕Managed operations
Recurring costs (separate from the package)

Packages cover implementation and integration only. Recurring costs are billed separately: Tilicho Labs platform usage (~$0.15/call-min indicative, usage only), Google Cloud consumption, telephony/carrier charges, managed operations, and support & optimization. No package includes unlimited usage.

Customer resources required
  • · API access + credentials for: Billing / CIS, Payment systems, CRM
  • · A named business owner for billing and account service line
  • · Security review counterpart and policy sign-off (Billing / CIS scope)
  • · Baseline metrics for the pilot's success thresholds
Executive messages

What to say to whom

CEO

“The Scheme of Control bargain is reliability plus reasonable cost plus visible service; agentic Cantonese-first service is the customer-facing proof point that the transition era isn't coming at customers' expense.”

CIO / CTO

“A governed agent layer over CIS and outage systems modernizes the service surface without touching regulated core systems — bounded integration, PDPO-grade controls, full auditability.”

COO

“Tariff-change waves and typhoon spikes are your two worst staffing problems; elastic capacity absorbs both without carrying peak cost year-round.”

Head of Customer Service / Retail

“Bill-explanation calls dominate your queues and defeat your IVR; an agent that explains charges patiently in Cantonese changes satisfaction and handle economics at once.”

Chief Risk / Compliance Officer

“Approved-language enforcement on tariff and program explanations, human gates on hardship arrangements, 100% logging — regulator-ready evidence of consistent customer treatment.”

CFO / Procurement

“Under regulated returns, operating efficiency is the lever you own; a Launch pilot quantifies cost per resolved contact against baseline in one quarter with bounded spend.”

Outreach

Pre-built offer emails for CLP Power

Written from this account's own research — the strategic signal, the capability gap, the entry workflow, and the modelled economics — not a mail-merge template. Pick the moment and the persona, edit anything, then copy or open in your mail client.

Moment in the deal
Cold outreach — no prior conversation
Who it's addressed to
Cares about: The workflow itself and its daily failure modes
Register
Length
Draft — edit freely before sending
Open in mail client

Customer-safe by construction: drafts are composed only from customer-facing fields. Account tier, build-vs-buy classification, priority score, internal routing, and partner-commercial detail are not inputs to the composer, so they cannot appear in a draft. Money figures are always framed as modelled from the customer's own volumes. Read before sending — you own what goes out.

The pursuit

Tier 2 — high-potential incubation

Why this tier

Hong Kong's largest electricity utility serving Kowloon and the New Territories under the Scheme of Control — millions of accounts, an energy-transition agenda adding tariff and product complexity, and an aging, Cantonese-first customer base that calls.

Recommended next step

Launch-scoped proposal to customer service leadership: pilot the billing and account line ahead of the next tariff-adjustment announcement, measured on resolution rate and cost per contact.

Entry: Billing and account service line · Launch package · 8–10 weeks to a live, measured pilot. Human fallback throughout; success thresholds agreed before build.

Start the pursuit

Research-based priority-account universe assembled from public information, market scale, communication volume, and solution fit. This is NOT an authoritative list of top Google Cloud customers; existing Google Cloud relationships are noted only where publicly reported. Validate every account with the account team before outreach.