Storytelling: primary demands

The bullet-list section in the Answer block where you state — in specific, board-actionable language — what you want the target to do. Sits between the diagnosis (Complication) and the closing ask (the single one-line CTA on the final slide).

Why they matter

• They convert thesis into resolution-ready proposals. A board meeting can vote on "spin Midstream within 24 months". It cannot vote on "unlock value".
• They prevent the campaign from being negotiated away. Specific demands force specific responses; vague demands invite vague settlements.
• They define what "yes" looks like. A campaign without a clearly stated success condition cannot declare victory or accept settlement.
• They are the spine of the deck. Every slide of evidence in the Complication block should support at least one demand.

How many

3–6 demands. Fewer than 3 and you look incomplete; more than 6 and the campaign loses focus and becomes a wishlist.

The consensus:

• 3 demands: clean, focused, often single-thesis (peer-gap operational turnaround, fraud exposé)
• 4–5 demands: most multi-axis activist campaigns (governance + ops + capital return)
• 6 demands: large-cap conglomerate engagements (DuPont, Disney, Phillips 66) — the upper bound

How to phrase a demand

Each demand must contain:

1. Specific verb ("replace", "spin", "approve", "commit", "discontinue") — never "consider", "evaluate", "explore"
2. Direct object (what the action operates on)
3. Quantification where possible ($X buyback, N% target, by date)
4. Implementation window ("within 24 months", "by Q3 2025")

Bad

• "Improve operational performance" — no verb, no object, no metric
• "Consider strategic alternatives" — soft verb, no commitment
• "Address governance concerns" — vague on all dimensions

Good

• "Replace CEO Fred Green with Hunter Harrison."
• "Separate the real-estate portfolio into a REIT within 24 months."
• "Authorise a $4bn accelerated share repurchase within 90 days."
• "Reduce the operating ratio from 81% to 65% by FY2015."
• "Refresh the Board with our 7 nominees."

The demand grammar (template)

[Verb] [direct object] [quantifier] [timeline]
  ↓        ↓               ↓             ↓
Replace   the CEO       (Hunter        immediately
                         Harrison)
Spin      Midstream      ($25bn)       within 24 months
Approve   share buyback  ($4bn)        within 90 days
Reduce    SG&A as %      from 10.6%    by FY2025
                         to 6.5%

How demands map to the rest of the deck

Each demand should:

• Be supported by 3–10 slides of evidence in the Complication
• Be quantified by valuation work in the Answer
• Be enabled by the closing ask (the closing ask is the mechanism that makes the demands actionable — usually electing your slate)

If a demand has no supporting evidence, cut it. If you have evidence without a corresponding demand, sharpen it into one or move to appendix.

Worked examples

Pershing Square · McDonald's (Nov 2005) — 5 demands

1. IPO 65% of McOpCo (the ~9,000 company-operated restaurants) at ~7x EBITDA
2. Issue $14.7bn of CMBS-style financing secured against McDonald's real estate
3. Use debt and IPO proceeds to repurchase ~316mm shares at $40/share
4. Leave Pro Forma McDonald's as a pure real estate/franchise royalty
5. Have McOpCo pay market rent and a market franchise fee

Note: every demand has a number, a mechanism, and a transformation described — the deck reads as an executable plan, not a pitch.

Pershing Square · Canadian Pacific (Feb 2012) — 3 demands

1. Replace CEO Fred Green with Hunter Harrison
2. Elect Pershing Square's Nominees for Management Change slate to the Board
3. Drive operating ratio to industry-leading levels in line with CN

Note: only 3 demands, all interlocking. (1) requires (2); (2) enables (1); (3) is the outcome metric (1) and (2) deliver.

Starboard · Darden (Sep 2014) — 8 demands

1. Elect Starboard's full slate of 12 director nominees to replace the entire Darden Board
2. Appoint a new transformational CEO (Clarence Otis is retiring)
3. Implement a company-wide margin improvement plan targeting $215–$326M of annual EBITDA uplift
4. Execute a turnaround of Olive Garden focused on authenticity, quality, and value
5. Separate Darden's real estate (PropCo/OpCo) to unlock ~$1B of shareholder value
6. Spin off the Specialty Restaurant Group (SRG)
7. Launch an international and domestic franchising program
8. Align executive compensation with shareholder returns and protect the investment-grade rating and dividend

8 demands is the upper edge — Darden's deck has the page count (294) to support each one with detailed evidence. Don't try this at home unless you have the same depth.

Common mistakes

1. Soft verbs. "Consider", "evaluate", "explore" — easy to ignore, easy to settle into a no-op review.
2. Demands without quantification. "Buy back stock" → "Buy back $4bn at a max price of $50".
3. Demands without timelines. "Spin the segment" → "Spin within 24 months of announcement".
4. Too many demands. Anything past 6 dilutes focus and creates negotiation room — management agrees to 1, settles, claims victory.
5. Demands that contradict the slate's incentives. If your slate would be removed if Demand X executes, the slate won't act on it. Align demands with the slate's continuing role.
6. Mixing demands with asks. "Vote our slate" is the closing ask, not a demand. Demands are what the resulting board does.

See also

• storytelling/three-reasons.md — the headline version sits in reason 3 (typically); demands are the operationalised expansion
• storytelling/closing-ask.md — the singular CTA on the closing slide
• slides/slide-architecture.md — primary demands live in Block 7 (Answer)
• patterns/management-change.md — when "replace the CEO" is one of the demands
• patterns/breakup-spinoff.md — when "spin / separate / sell" is one