Elliott · activist-deck
Phillips 66 (PSX)
53 pages · 3 arc beats · 2 loops
Phillips 66 (PSX)
Elliott · 2025-02 arc beats above · slides in the middle · loops below · scroll → 2 LOOPS
124681012141618202224262830323436384042444648505253
Deck intelligence map
3 coverage by narrative range · generated from this deck JSON
Narrative range 32 total
Metadata
Components
Metrics
Tools
Frameworks
Beats
Loops
Problem 5 slides 100% 5/5 slides 100% 5/5 slides · 40 hits — 0/5 slides
60% 3/5 slides 100% 5/5 slides 100% 5/5 slides 60% 3/5 slides Agitate 15 slides 100% 15/15 slides 100% 15/15 slides · 107 hits — 0/15 slides
20% 3/15 slides · 4 hits 73.3% 11/15 slides 100% 15/15 slides 33.3% 5/15 slides Solution 12 slides 100% 12/12 slides 100% 12/12 slides · 89 hits — 0/12 slides
8.3% 1/12 slides 91.7% 11/12 slides · 12 hits 100% 12/12 slides — 0/12 slides
Slide inventory
53 every slide · same image gating as the playbook
01
The slide uses a Route 66 road imagery as a visual metaphor for the company name.front_matter
03
Includes a bar chart comparing TSR performance before and after Elliott's involvement.introduce_nominees
04
The slide lists six categories of advisors/experts used to validate the activist thesis.establish_context
05
The slide uses a three-column structure to frame the activist thesis: Assets, Problems, and Proposed Solution.summarize
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
06
The slide uses a peer benchmark to highlight the valuation gap between the company's current trading multiple and its implied SOTP value.show_valuation_bridge
Open slide detailBeat · Problem
07
The slide uses a waterfall-style bar chart to visualize cumulative negative returns over time.name_villain
08
Uses a waterfall-bridge chart to decompose Enterprise Value.show_valuation_bridge
09
The slide uses a waterfall-style valuation bridge to show how specific operational and portfolio actions contribute to share price appreciation.propose_solution
10
Uses a before-after framing to justify a similar intervention for Phillips 66.cite_precedent
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
12
The slide uses a section-divider style navigation bar at the top. The bottom footer indicates this is part of an Elliott Management activist deck.summarize
13
Includes a watermark 'EXHIBIT 1' and 'BITDA' partially visible.compare_peers
14
Includes a dual-axis chart showing EBITDA-Capex and conversion percentage.analyze_data
15
The slide uses a 'Streamline 66' branding, likely an activist campaign by Elliott Management against Phillips 66.compare_peers
16
Includes a cost curve chart showing CPChem's position relative to global competitors.quantify_opportunity
17
Includes a quote from TD Cowen as external validation of the underperformance thesis.transition
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
18
The slide uses a rhetorical question as an action title to challenge management's narrative.expose_gap
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
19
The slide uses a three-column layout to categorize the problems, with a summary paragraph at the top.diagnose_problem
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
20
The slide uses a CEO quote to contrast with the market performance data, framing the company's structure as inefficient.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
21
The slide uses a 'villain' framing for the Phillips Today column, using red text and 'x' icons to highlight negative performance metrics.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
22
The slide uses a 'conglomerate discount' argument to critique M&A strategy.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
23
Uses a visual metaphor of a hand crushing a Phillips 66 sign to represent management's grip on the company structure.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
24
The slide uses a line chart for operating expenses and a bar chart for EBITDA spread to highlight the profitability gap.expose_gap
Open slide detailBeat · Agitate
25
The slide uses a red banner theme to highlight negative performance areas, consistent with activist investor messaging.name_villain
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
26
The slide uses a 'villain' framing by attributing poor performance to management's reliance on consultants rather than internal expertise.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
27
Uses a 'Promises vs. Reality' framework to highlight management failure.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
28
Uses a quote from management to contrast with the quantitative shortfall.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
29
Uses a bar chart to compare PSX and VLO margins over time, highlighting the 2012-2019 average as a benchmark.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
30
Uses a contrast-pairs framework to highlight the difference between a 'High-Performing' and 'Underperforming' company.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
31
Uses a 'best practice' framework to contrast two companies. Includes a footer section with market sentiment quotes.compare_peers
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
32
Uses a red-highlighted 'communicated' box to expose a discrepancy in M&A valuation and red arrows to show cost overruns.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
33
Uses a waterfall chart to show net divestitures and a table to detail asset dispositions.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
34
The slide uses a red 'shortfalls' column to emphasize negative performance gaps.expose_gap
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
35
The slide uses a quote to highlight market skepticism regarding the company's current structure.expose_contradiction
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
36
Uses a before-after framing to contrast current state (inefficiencies) with future state (value unlocking).show_valuation_bridge
Open slide detailBeat · Solution
37
Includes a map of Permian assets and a donut chart showing market share in the DJ Basin.show_valuation_bridge
38
The slide uses a checkmark matrix to demonstrate strategic alignment across multiple potential acquirers.compare_peers
39
The slide uses a comparative framework to suggest a path for Phillips 66 based on Marathon's historical success.compare_peers
40
Includes a sensitivity analysis table for share repurchases at various premiums.quantify_opportunity
41
The slide uses a screenshot of a previous Elliott presentation as evidence of their original thesis, then contrasts it with a table of actual results.expose_contradiction
44
Contains detailed footnotes explaining the derivation of EBITDA and refining metrics.analyze_data
45
Includes detailed footnotes regarding adjustments for specific companies like PSX, SUN, OKE, TRGP, and DOW.compare_peers
46
The table uses a 6.6x EBITDA multiple as a baseline for valuation, with specific adjustments for asset sales and debt paydowns.show_valuation_bridge
47
Includes detailed footnotes explaining valuation assumptions, tax basis, and synergy estimates.analyze_data
48
Includes detailed footnotes explaining assumptions for leverage, share price upside, and pro-rata debt.analyze_data
49
Includes specific valuation multiples for business segments and a step-by-step derivation of Opex/bbl decline based on natural gas price changes.analyze_data
50
The slide uses a structured 'Potential Excuse' vs 'Counterpoints' format to systematically dismantle management's likely defensive arguments.preempt_rebuttal
51
The slide uses a 'Potential Defense vs. Counterpoint' structure to systematically dismantle management's likely arguments.preempt_rebuttal
52
Uses a weighted average calculation to justify the company's leverage profile.compare_peers