Every great contrarian deck follows the same narrative architecture, whether consciously or not. It's a Barbara Minto / McKinsey / consultant staple adapted to the investor-advocacy use case.
The four beats
Situation → Complication → Question → Answer
"Here's how "Here's what's "Which means "Here's what
the world gone wrong." we must ask." must happen."
looks now."
Every slide in the first half of a top-tier deck serves one of these four beats. If a slide doesn't, it's decoration — cut it.
1 · Situation — establish the frame
- What is the target? What market does it serve? What is its current position?
- Critically: frame the situation using facts the target itself would accept. You're not yet contradicting them.
- Length: 10–15% of the deck. Cover, two-three setup slides.
Example opener (Ackman, Canadian Pacific 2012):
"Canadian Pacific Railway is one of seven Class I North American railroads, operating 14,700 miles of track across Canada and the northern US. It has been public since 2001 and is the second-largest rail network in Canada."
Neutral, accurate, undisputed. This is the foundation you'll build the accusation on.
2 · Complication — introduce the dissonance
Now you break the frame. Something is wrong with the current situation — something the reader hadn't recognised or had been discounting.
Effective complications:
- A peer-gap becomes visible (see
patterns/peer-gap.md) - A promise was broken (see
patterns/ceo-quote-contradiction.md) - A hidden asset is mispriced (see
patterns/sum-of-parts.md) - A structural decline has been hidden by one-offs
- An accounting anomaly doesn't fit the narrative (fraud case)
Length: 40–50% of the deck — this is the bulk of the argument. Every claim is sourced, quantified, and reinforced by a visual.
Example (Starboard, Darden 2014):
"Since 2010, Darden has underperformed direct peers by approximately 300 percentage points. Over the same period, G&A as a share of sales has risen from 6.5% to 10.6% — a figure two-thirds higher than the average of publicly traded casual-dining chains. Olive Garden same-store sales fell 3.4% in FY2014, versus the KnappTrack casual-dining benchmark of -1.7%."
Numbers, sources, peers, specifics. No adjectives.
3 · Question — force the reader to ask it
The complication implies a question the reader is now forced to consider. Good decks put this question on a slide explicitly, usually in serif type, as a full-page beat.
The question is almost always one of four:
- "Why is this permitted to continue?" (governance/management thesis)
- "What is the path to closing the gap?" (operational/turnaround thesis)
- "What is the business actually worth?" (valuation/SoP thesis)
- "Is the reported reality true?" (fraud/short thesis)
Length: a single slide. Sometimes two. This is the pivot.
Example (Pershing Square, McDonald's 2005):
"If McDonald's real estate portfolio is worth $46bn — nearly 94% of current enterprise value — why is McDonald's valued as a restaurant operator?"
One sentence, full page, 48pt serif. The reader is trapped.
4 · Answer — your specific prescription
Now you deliver. What must happen, by whom, by when, and what does that deliver to shareholders?
An effective Answer includes:
- Primary demands (3–6 bullets). Each must be specific enough that a board meeting could approve or reject it directly.
- The valuation payoff — "Here is what shareholders receive if this is executed": upside, timeline, probability.
- The precedent transactions or comparable situations where this has
worked before (see
patterns/precedent-transaction.md). - The closing ask — one sentence that tells the reader what to do
now. (See
storytelling/closing-ask.md.)
Length: 30–40% of the deck.
Example (Pershing Square, McDonald's 2005 Answer):
- IPO 65% of McOpCo (company-operated restaurants) at ~7× EBITDA
- Issue $14.7bn CMBS-style financing secured against real estate
- Use proceeds to repurchase ~316mm shares at $40
- Leave parent as pure PropCo + FranCo: $45–50/share (+37–52%)
Putting it together
The full arc for a 60-slide deck typically breaks:
| Block | Slides | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Cover + TOC + disclaimer | 1–3 | Brand, thesis headline |
| Situation | 4–10 | Neutral frame |
| Complication | 11–35 | The diagnosis + evidence |
| Question | 36–38 | The pivot |
| Answer | 39–55 | Prescription + valuation |
| Closing ask | 56–60 | Call to action + appendix |
Common SCQA failures
- No clear Question slide. The deck reads as a rant — diagnosis without pivot. The reader doesn't know what they're being asked to consider.
- Answer before Complication. Decks that open with "we propose X, Y, Z" have nothing to propose yet, because the problem hasn't been established. Bad order.
- Missing Situation. Jumping straight to "Here's what's wrong" loses the neutral reader who hasn't accepted your frame.
- Answer without specific demands. "Unlock value" is not an Answer. "Spin the real estate into a REIT within 24 months" is.
Exemplars of clean SCQA
- Pershing Square · Canadian Pacific (Feb 2012) — textbook. You can literally label each slide with its SCQA letter.
- Starboard · Darden (Sep 2014) — 294 pages, SCQA fractally at each level (the whole deck + each major section).
- Pershing Square · McDonald's (Nov 2005) — the "hidden real estate" frame is a masterclass in Situation → Complication.
- Trian · "Restore the Magic" Disney (Mar 2024) — 133-page white paper following classical SCQA.
- Hindenburg · Nikola (Sep 2020) — aggressive short-seller version where Complication is "the videos were staged".
See also
storytelling/three-reasons.md— the headline-version of the Answerstorytelling/closing-ask.md— how to endpatterns/— the devices that carry the Complication and Answer