Union Pacific Corporation (UNP)

Eric Mandelblatt · 2023-02
arc beats above · slides in the middle · loops below · scroll → 3 LOOPS
SETUP TENSION ANALYSIS EVIDENCE RESOLUTION APPENDIX
HOVER FOR DETAILS · CLICK A SLIDE FOR FULLSCREEN · STEP 2
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

43
every slide · same image gating as the playbook
01
Slide 1
front_matter
03
front_matter
04
Includes a dual-axis chart showing historical investment value and percentage of AUM.establish_context
05
The slide uses a hub-and-spoke diagram to demonstrate stakeholder alignment.summarize
06
The slide uses strong, negative framing ('worst', 'failed', 'disgruntled') to build a case against the CEO.diagnose_problem
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
07
Includes a headshot of Jim Vena and a line chart comparing Total Shareholder Return.state_demand
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
08
summarize
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
09
Includes a specific valuation bridge/table showing potential stock price doubling.closing_ask
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
10
The slide uses a 'social proof' strategy by aggregating positive analyst sentiment to validate the 'crown jewel' thesis.summarize
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
11
The slide uses a 'list of quotes' to set up a future contradiction between management's claims and actual performance.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
12
The table highlights UNP's consistent 'WORST' ranking across all categories.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
13
The chart uses a smoothed line representation of annual data points.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
14
The chart uses 2014 as the base year (indexed to 100).compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
15
The chart uses 2014 as the base year (indexed to 100).expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
16
The chart uses a red dashed box to emphasize UNP's poor performance relative to peers.name_villain
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
17
The chart uses 2014 as the base year (indexed to 100). UNP is visually emphasized with a thicker, darker line.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
18
The slide uses a 'worst' framing to call out UNP's poor relative performance.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
19
The slide uses a narrative structure to contrast leadership performance, specifically isolating Jim Vena's tenure as a period of improvement.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
20
Uses a 'Promise vs Result' table structure to build a case for management incompetence.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
21
Uses a timeline-based annotation approach to highlight the gap between management promises and actual guidance revisions.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
22
The slide uses a 'before and after' structure centered around Jim Vena's tenure to show that the lack of confidence is a persistent, cyclical issue.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
23
The slide uses a 'Significantly BELOW' callout column to emphasize the gap between guidance and reality.expose_contradiction
24
The slide uses a bar chart to contrast UNP's CEO bonus payout percentages against a peer average, highlighting a persistent gap.expose_contradiction
25
The slide uses a bar chart to highlight UNP's position at the extreme end of the distribution for all three metrics.compare_peers
26
The slide uses a combination of qualitative quotes and a quantitative bar chart to build a case against management's operational competence.name_villain
27
Uses quotes from STB Chairman Martin Oberman to establish the 'villain' narrative.name_villain
28
The slide highlights a failure to meet self-imposed targets and a decline in performance compared to a previous period under specific leadership.expose_contradiction
29
The slide uses a vertical red dashed line to mark the departure of Jim Vena as a causal event for the subsequent performance degradation.diagnose_problem
30
The chart highlights a -15% performance for UNP compared to a +2% for Canadian peers, with a clear visual gap of ~17% and ~10% respectively.expose_gap
31
The chart uses a waterfall structure to bridge current EPS to potential pro-forma EPS based on specific operational improvements and capital allocation.quantify_opportunity
Open slide detailLoop · Cost Of Inaction
32
The slide uses a 'before-after' logic applied to three distinct case studies to build a precedent for the current activist campaign.cite_precedent
Open slide detailLoop · Funnel Analysis
33
Uses a before-after framing to contrast companies with and without specific operational leadership.compare_peers
34
Uses a causal chain/logical equation structure (A+B+C+D=E).frame_situation
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
35
The chart uses a bridge format to illustrate the delta between current consensus and the activist's projected upside.show_valuation_bridge
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
36
Includes a line chart showing historical NTM P/E and a table showing peer group multiples.show_valuation_bridge
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
37
summarize
38
Includes specific callouts for investor day guidance and a potential EPS upside scenario.quantify_opportunity
39
transition
40
Includes a comparative bar chart of cost structures and three trend charts for trucking headwinds.diagnose_problem
Open slide detailLoop · Mece Breakdown
41
The slide uses four charts to establish a narrative of under-investment and the necessity for a catch-up phase.summarize
42
Includes a table of specific Class I railroad emissions savings and a visual comparison of the total savings impact.quantify_opportunity
43
The chart highlights a significant gap between current consensus projections and potential upside scenarios.quantify_opportunity