{
  "docId": "019dd923-622b-71dc-a6da-0cc6d3df051f",
  "docSlug": "9bd661444d43",
  "documentTitle": "GCP Applied Technologies (GCP)",
  "authorId": "03_Starboard_Value",
  "authorName": "Starboard Value",
  "documentKindSlug": "activist-deck",
  "documentKindLabel": "Activist deck",
  "sourceTypeSlug": "activist_investor",
  "sourceTypeLabel": "Activist investor",
  "presentationDate": "2020-05-11 00:00:00",
  "orientation": "landscape",
  "aspectRatio": 1.3333334,
  "pageNumber": 26,
  "pageCount": 29,
  "prevPage": 25,
  "nextPage": 27,
  "slideType": "expose_contradiction",
  "function": "expose_contradiction",
  "density": "dense",
  "nDataPoints": 2,
  "notes": "Uses a contrast-pairs framework to juxtapose peer success against GCP failure.",
  "elementsJson": [
    "headline_text",
    "subtitle_text",
    "paragraph",
    "comparison_table",
    "footnote",
    "logo_grid"
  ],
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-622b-71dc-a6da-0cc6d3df051f/26",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-622b-71dc-a6da-0cc6d3df051f",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-622b-71dc-a6da-0cc6d3df051f.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-622b-71dc-a6da-0cc6d3df051f#slide-26",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.05,
        "w": 0.92,
        "x": 0.04,
        "y": 0.87
      },
      "kind": "callout",
      "text": "The divergence in experiences between GCP and its closest peers is difficult to understand.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "primary",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "6bbc39ee-741e-459b-8379-54d6a7d17be2",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.63,
        "w": 0.92,
        "x": 0.04,
        "y": 0.23
      },
      "kind": "framework",
      "text": "Comparison of peer quotes vs GCP quotes",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "instance",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "0cd7178b-79c1-4e41-9386-8df8c4c4280a",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.06,
        "w": 0.92,
        "x": 0.04,
        "y": 0.16
      },
      "kind": "paragraph",
      "text": "As an example, over the last two years, GCP’s closest peers for the SBM segment have enthusiastically discussed the growth they’ve been able to achieve – indicating both a healthy macro environment and share capture – while GCP has struggled.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "paragraph",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "3c7c88c8-86d1-493c-8497-6b360f280e04",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "quote",
      "text": "\"We’re in the very lucky situation that in our seven target market we have everywhere opportunity to grow…from concrete to roofing to waterproofing, great opportunities.\" — Sika (May 2018); \"So we have a market growth rate that is a little – still growing but a little softer than this year. So if we see a stronger construction market, that clearly would be a positive.\" — GCP (November 2018); \"SBM's revenue was down 11% year-over-year. Our project-based Building Envelope business was down 12% as growth in EMEA was more than offset by declines in North America and Asia Pacific.\" — GCP (November 2019)",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": "Authority citation",
      "toolSlug": "authority-citation",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd953-203e-77ad-a6a3-afb28604f098",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.06,
        "w": 0.85,
        "x": 0.04,
        "y": 0.93
      },
      "kind": "source-note",
      "text": "Source: GCP, CSL, RPM and Sika public filings and transcripts. (1) The selection of Sika, CSL, and RPM reflect Starboard’s assessment of what firms can reasonably be considered peers to GCP’s SBM segment. However, this analysis contains elements of subjectivity and the comparisons made herein may differ materially if different firms had been included. (2) Emphasis in quotations have been added by Starboard.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "3c027380-4b46-430c-8f05-989e3512de6b",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.63,
        "w": 0.92,
        "x": 0.04,
        "y": 0.23
      },
      "kind": "table",
      "text": "SBM Peer Commentary vs GCP Commentary",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "data",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "b055c416-5eb6-4e96-a3e9-8bb034909a92",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.12,
        "w": 0.92,
        "x": 0.04,
        "y": 0.03
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "GCP’s Closest Peers’ Very Positive Performance Reflects a Robust Macro Environment",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "cc2efeb3-8334-46b6-8472-7b42b0866b3f",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [],
  "tools": [],
  "frameworks": [
    {
      "name": "contrast-pairs",
      "slug": null,
      "matchId": "d6fe9c7e-6af1-4ce7-b2ee-3e91da0879e2",
      "evidence": "Side-by-side presentation of opposing performance narratives",
      "confidence": 0.95
    }
  ],
  "arcBeats": [],
  "loops": [],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}