{
  "docId": "019dd923-622b-71dc-a6db-42fab09bc86d",
  "docSlug": "f306ccfd77a7",
  "documentTitle": "PepsiCo (PEP)",
  "authorId": "06_Trian_Partners",
  "authorName": "Trian Partners",
  "documentKindSlug": "activist-deck",
  "documentKindLabel": "Activist deck",
  "sourceTypeSlug": "activist_investor",
  "sourceTypeLabel": "Activist investor",
  "presentationDate": "2013-07-01 00:00:00",
  "orientation": "landscape",
  "aspectRatio": 1.3333334,
  "pageNumber": 32,
  "pageCount": 59,
  "prevPage": 31,
  "nextPage": 33,
  "slideType": "cite_precedent",
  "function": "cite_precedent",
  "density": "dense",
  "nDataPoints": 25,
  "notes": "Uses a comparative table to illustrate the success of a past corporate spin-off as a precedent for the current activist proposal.",
  "elementsJson": [
    "headline_text",
    "bullet_list",
    "comparison_table",
    "footnote",
    "logo_grid"
  ],
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-622b-71dc-a6db-42fab09bc86d/32",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-622b-71dc-a6db-42fab09bc86d",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-622b-71dc-a6db-42fab09bc86d.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-622b-71dc-a6db-42fab09bc86d#slide-32",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "callout",
      "text": "Would Yum have been as successful (and would it have built a Chinese business worth >$20bn) had it been part of PepsiCo these past 15 years? We think not",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": "Visual emphasis",
      "toolSlug": "visual-emphasis",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd953-64cf-7128-a32a-5255cd5ca9ed",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.38,
        "w": 0.92,
        "x": 0.06,
        "y": 0.12
      },
      "kind": "list",
      "text": "In 1997, PepsiCo spun-off its quick service restaurant (QSR) business (Yum) to focus exclusively on snacks / beverages. At the time, Yum was clearly disadvantaged vs. McDonalds in terms of global brands and financial firepower. But 15 years later, Yum has significantly outperformed McDonalds across virtually every key metric due to savvy management and aggressive capital deployment, particularly in emerging markets. Would Yum have been as successful (and would it have built a Chinese business worth >$20bn) had it been part of PepsiCo these past 15 years? We think not. Investors today view PepsiCo Beverages as disadvantaged vs. Coke. They may be right but PepsiCo Beverages has a collection of phenomenal brands with significant untapped potential. Five years from now (or fifteen) will PepsiCo Beverages be better off still playing “second fiddle” to Frito-Lay or having operated as a standalone company under a 100% dedicated management team?",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "bullet",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "0c1a1db8-255d-491f-a79b-e2e9102a6500",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "metric",
      "text": "Enterprise Value: $35,797",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "primary",
      "toolName": "Quantification",
      "toolSlug": "quantification",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd953-64cf-7128-a32a-57c2966f283d",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.08,
        "w": 0.92,
        "x": 0.06,
        "y": 0.89
      },
      "kind": "source-note",
      "text": "Source: SEC filings. Note: The estimates, projections, pro forma information and potential impact of the ideas set forth herein are based on assumptions that Trian believes to be reasonable, but there can be no assurance that actual results or performance will not differ, and such differences may be material. This presentation does not recommend the purchase or sale of any security. The above examples are merely illustrative. Market conditions at the time of the events reflected above may differ materially from current and future market conditions. The performance of these examples should therefore not be construed as an indication of PepsiCo's performance. Past performance is not an indication of future results.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "88ed8e2b-fdc6-472c-a26e-90096bd14f6f",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.35,
        "w": 0.92,
        "x": 0.06,
        "y": 0.53
      },
      "kind": "table",
      "text": "Yum vs. McDonalds (1997 Spin-Off Through Today) Enterprise Value, EPS, International Sales, Restaurant Profit, # of China Restaurants",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "data",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "687607a7-31f4-4288-b60f-c7d0b0846522",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.07,
        "w": 0.55,
        "x": 0.06,
        "y": 0.03
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "Precedent For PepsiCo Spin-Off Success: Yum! Brands",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "58977e8d-128f-489f-a53a-7dd6b43026b8",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [],
  "tools": [
    {
      "name": "Valuation: Precedent transactions",
      "slug": "precedent-transactions",
      "agent": "architect",
      "layer": "slide",
      "matchId": "d0c63cf3-2518-4785-ad0d-d578728ce8a7",
      "evidence": "Precedent For PepsiCo Spin-Off Success: Yum! Brands",
      "confidence": 0.8
    }
  ],
  "frameworks": [
    {
      "name": "comparison_frame",
      "slug": null,
      "matchId": "dc0aef68-b151-474d-b0b2-b3217e245a42",
      "evidence": "Compares Yum! and McDonald's performance metrics to support a spin-off thesis.",
      "confidence": 0.9
    }
  ],
  "arcBeats": [
    {
      "to": 59,
      "from": 25,
      "beatId": "a7b0e30d-20b3-4240-a09b-2497aa6acb9b",
      "arcName": "Problem-Agitate-Solution",
      "arcSlug": "problem-agitate-solution",
      "beatName": "Solution",
      "beatSlug": "problem-agitate-solution-solution-provide-relief",
      "evidence": "Slides 25-59 present the proposed solution",
      "position": 2,
      "confidence": 0.9,
      "parentBeatName": "Resolution",
      "parentBeatSlug": "resolution"
    }
  ],
  "loops": [
    {
      "to": 59,
      "from": 26,
      "name": "Tale Two Worlds",
      "slug": "04-tale-two-worlds",
      "bestFor": "Competitive analysis, benchmarking, case for change",
      "matchId": "efc95e7b-f645-4275-a8e6-eca2b777e397",
      "evidence": "The document presents a clear contrast between current and proposed structures",
      "position": 0,
      "objective": "Presenting a better future through separation or merger",
      "structure": "Current State -> Desired State / Benchmark -> The Gap & Implication",
      "confidence": 0.8,
      "description": "Show the gap between two states to drive urgency or highlight opportunity"
    }
  ],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}