Ferguson plc (FERG)

Brian Baldwin · 2019-11
arc beats above · slides in the middle · loops below · scroll → 2 LOOPS
SETUP TENSION ANALYSIS EVIDENCE RESOLUTION APPENDIX
HOVER FOR DETAILS · CLICK A SLIDE FOR FULLSCREEN · STEP 1
No image bound to this slide. Wire up imgproxy to display the rendered slide JPEG.

Deck intelligence map

3
coverage by narrative range · generated from this deck JSON

Slide inventory

23
every slide · same image gating as the playbook
01
Slide 1
front_matter
04
The slide provides a snapshot of Ferguson's business profile, valuation, and strategic changes as of late 2019.summarize
05
The slide uses a numbered list structure to present three core pillars of the investment thesis.summarize
Open slide detailBeat · Problem (Identify pain)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
06
analyze_data
Open slide detailBeat · Problem (Identify pain)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
07
The slide uses a bar chart to visually demonstrate that Ferguson is trading at a lower multiple than its peers, specifically highlighting the higher multiples oshow_valuation_bridge
Open slide detailBeat · Problem (Identify pain)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
08
The slide uses a stacked bar chart to show the transformation of the business portfolio over time.analyze_data
Open slide detailBeat · Problem (Identify pain)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
09
The slide uses a comparison framework to argue for a valuation discrepancy based on geographic business quality.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate (Make it worse)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
10
The chart uses a broken axis to accommodate the significantly higher sales of Home Depot and Lowe's.expose_gap
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate (Make it worse)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
11
The slide uses a checkmark/cross system to indicate if a top shareholder in the sector is also a top Ferguson holder.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate (Make it worse)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
12
The chart highlights Ferguson in red to contrast with the blue peer bars.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate (Make it worse)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
13
The slide uses a checkmark/cross matrix to illustrate the analytical gap in peer selection.expose_gap
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate (Make it worse)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
14
Uses checkmarks and X-marks to visually contrast business models.compare_peers
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
15
The slide uses a checkmark/cross comparison to highlight Ferguson's superior market positioning.compare_peers
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
16
RMI likely stands for Repair, Maintenance, and Improvement.compare_peers
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
17
The chart highlights Ferguson's performance relative to competitors in Specialty, Broadline Industrial MRO, and Home Improvement Retail sectors.compare_peers
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
18
The chart uses a waterfall-style layout to show positive vs negative margin changes, with company logos as x-axis labels.compare_peers
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
19
The chart highlights Ferguson in red to contrast its performance against peers, suggesting an opportunity for improvement.compare_peers
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
20
present_solution
Open slide detailBeat · Solution (Provide relief)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
21
The slide uses specific case studies (Invesco, Signet, Barrick/Randgold) to build credibility for a proposed US re-listing strategy.cite_precedent
Open slide detailBeat · Solution (Provide relief)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
22
The slide uses a bubble chart representation to visually compare market caps.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Solution (Provide relief)Loop · Cost Of Inaction
23
summarize
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction