Slide recipe: Before / after

The visual counterfactual. Two trajectories side by side: where the target is heading vs. where it could go. The delta between them is the shareholder opportunity cost of inaction.

See patterns/before-after-framing.md for the rhetorical logic. This file covers the physical slide build.

Layout A · The two-line time-series

The canonical layout. One chart, two lines, time on the x-axis.

$200 ┤                                            ●  ●  ● Our plan
     │                                       ●
     │                                  ●
$150 ┤                              ●         ╲
     │                         ●          ╲ Implied delta
     │                    ●                ╲   $X per share by 2028
$100 ┤               ─ ─ ●─ ─ ─ ●─ ─ ●  Current trajectory
     │           ─ ●─       
     │     ─ ●─                                  
 $50 ┤ ●─                                        
     └────────────────────────────────────────────────────▶
       2024    2025    2026    2027    2028    2029
                  ↑
                  Inflection point: CEO change / spin announce / etc.

Key design decisions:

Solid line = "Our plan". Dashed line = "Current trajectory". Solid reads as concrete; dashed reads as path-of-least-resistance.
Colour the delta: light fill between the two lines, accent colour at low opacity. The gap IS the argument.
End-state values labelled: "$X" and "$Y", with the delta called out separately
Single milestone marker on the "Our plan" line — when the intervention occurs (vote, transaction, etc.)
No gridlines — the focus is the gap, not the absolute levels
No predictions beyond 5 years — anything longer feels speculative

Layout B · The 3-column state table

When the gap is too large for a single time-series chart without distortion. Snapshot of three discrete points in time.

┌──────────────────┬──────────────────┬──────────────────┐
│  CURRENT         │  MID-TRANSITION  │  TARGET END-STATE│
│  (2024 actual)   │  (2026 forecast) │  (2028 forecast) │
├──────────────────┼──────────────────┼──────────────────┤
│  Revenue   $8.2B │  Revenue   $9.1B │  Revenue  $12.4B │
│  EBITDA    $0.9B │  EBITDA    $1.5B │  EBITDA   $2.3B  │
│  Margin     11%  │  Margin     16%  │  Margin    19%   │
│  FCF      ($0.2B)│  FCF       $0.4B │  FCF      $1.1B  │
│  ND/EBITDA  4.1x │  ND/EBITDA  2.8x │  ND/EBITDA 1.4x  │
│                  │                  │                  │
│  Share price     │                  │  Share price     │
│  $48             │                  │  $86–112         │
└──────────────────┴──────────────────┴──────────────────┘

                                        +60–130% upside

Critical features:

Same KPIs in same row — the eye reads horizontally
Metric units consistent across columns (don't mix $B and $M)
End-state column highlighted in accent colour
Implied upside printed below the table, large

Layout C · The narrative columns

Used when "after" includes qualitative changes (governance, operational levers, capital structure) that don't reduce to a single chart.

┌──────────────────────────┬────────────────────────────┐
│  CURRENT TRAJECTORY      │  OUR PROPOSED PATH         │
│  Status quo board        │                            │
├──────────────────────────┼────────────────────────────┤
│  • CEO Smith continues   │  • Search for industry     │
│                          │    operator                │
│                          │                            │
│  • Conglomerate          │  • Spin Midstream within   │
│    structure preserved   │    24 months               │
│                          │                            │
│  • $0.5B annual buyback  │  • $4B accelerated         │
│                          │    buyback (~80% float)    │
│                          │                            │
│  • Margins flat          │  • Margins recover to peer │
│                          │    median by FY2028        │
│                          │                            │
│  ↓                       │  ↓                         │
│  Implied $115 by 2028    │  Implied $183 by 2028      │
│  (-12% TSR)              │  (+75% TSR)                │
└──────────────────────────┴────────────────────────────┘

Used by: Elliott / Phillips 66 (2025), Trian / DuPont (2015), Land & Buildings / various REIT campaigns.

Methodological footer (every variant)

A single footer line that pre-empts "your forecast is hand-wavy":

Source: company filings, FactSet consensus, [precedent transformation]
benchmarks. "Our plan" trajectory assumes execution of [3 specific
operational levers] with timing per [precedent X].

Without this line, the slide is interpretation. With it, the slide is a defensible claim.

Common mistakes

Hockey-stick "after" line. If your "Our plan" trajectory rises monotonically with no setbacks, the chart loses credibility. Real transformations have a year-1 dip from one-time costs. Show it.
No methodology footnote. Without sourcing, the chart is a wish list.
Too-long horizon. 5 years credible, 10 years aspirational, 15 years fantasy. Stay 3–7 years.
Symmetric Y-axis manipulated. Don't truncate the y-axis to make the gap look bigger. If the gap is real, full range shows it.
Missing the "where the inflection happens" annotation. The reader needs to see WHEN your intervention takes effect.

Exemplars

Starboard · Darden (Sep 2014) — Layout B canonical example
Pershing Square · Canadian Pacific (Feb 2012) — Layout A on operating ratio
Elliott · Phillips 66 (Apr 2025) — Layout C with quantified end-states
Greenlight · Peloton (Oct 2024) — Layout A on subscription revenue with the bull-case overlaid
Engine Capital · Parkland (2024 series) — Layout C iterations as the campaign progressed
Ancora · Norfolk Southern (Apr 2024) — Layout A on operating-ratio counterfactual

Find anything