{
  "docId": "019dd923-622c-750b-8b9c-3ab27badb381",
  "docSlug": "cdaa07ebe8a9",
  "documentTitle": "Juniper Networks (JNPR)",
  "authorId": "02_Elliott_Management",
  "authorName": "Elliott Management",
  "documentKindSlug": "activist-deck",
  "documentKindLabel": "Activist deck",
  "sourceTypeSlug": "activist_investor",
  "sourceTypeLabel": "Activist investor",
  "presentationDate": "2014-01-13 00:00:00",
  "orientation": "portrait",
  "aspectRatio": 0.77272725,
  "pageNumber": 23,
  "pageCount": 28,
  "prevPage": 22,
  "nextPage": 24,
  "slideType": "comparison_table",
  "function": "expose_contradiction",
  "density": "dense",
  "nDataPoints": 18,
  "notes": "The slide uses a structured table to contrast Juniper's acquisition history with the subsequent market performance and competitor success.",
  "elementsJson": [
    "headline_text",
    "paragraph",
    "comparison_table",
    "footnote"
  ],
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-622c-750b-8b9c-3ab27badb381/23",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-622c-750b-8b9c-3ab27badb381",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-622c-750b-8b9c-3ab27badb381.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-622c-750b-8b9c-3ab27badb381#slide-23",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "callout",
      "text": "Juniper has historically tried to buy into other attractive markets but consistently mis-executes post-acquisition, resulting in significant missed opportunities and greater shareholder value implications.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": "Visual emphasis",
      "toolSlug": "visual-emphasis",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd953-3f3d-76db-b332-07f1dba71d45",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.08,
        "w": 0.85,
        "x": 0.08,
        "y": 0.16
      },
      "kind": "paragraph",
      "text": "Juniper has historically tried to buy into other attractive markets but consistently mis-executes post-acquisition, resulting in significant missed opportunities and greater shareholder value implications.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "paragraph",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "c5530219-38cd-4915-93a7-fcf233227366",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "quote",
      "text": "Why Did Juniper Really Ax the DX Line? — eweek.com",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": "Authority citation",
      "toolSlug": "authority-citation",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd953-3f3d-76db-b332-08e4c9278dcb",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.08,
        "w": 0.85,
        "x": 0.08,
        "y": 0.9
      },
      "kind": "source-note",
      "text": "Source: Company filings, Capital IQ, press releases, press articles. 1. Per IDC's Q3 2013 Security Appliance Tracker (12/12/13). 2. Includes market caps for CHKP, PANW, FTNT and FEYE as of 1/9/14 and Cisco's purchase price for Sourcefire. 3. Per Infonetics Research's Data Center Network Equipment: Quarterly Worldwide and Regional Market Share, Size and Forecasts: 3Q13 (12/10/13) 4. \"Why Did Juniper Really Ax the DX Line?\" http://www.eweek.com/c/a/IT-Infrastructure/Why-Did-Juniper-Really-Ax-the-DX-Line/. Feb. 20, 2008.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "7c36aebc-f240-4054-ac43-8e0cce055b57",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.6,
        "w": 0.85,
        "x": 0.08,
        "y": 0.28
      },
      "kind": "table",
      "text": "Table comparing Network Security, WAN Optimization, Application Delivery Controller, and Session Border Controller across acquisition, market dynamics, value destruction, and missed opportunity columns.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "data",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "34998229-5eb1-4931-a9e0-af5defd30209",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.03,
        "w": 0.6,
        "x": 0.08,
        "y": 0.11
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "M&A Track Record Has Resulted in Significant Lost Value (cont'd)",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "682db258-233c-45c1-acf9-9e1c080467ab",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [],
  "tools": [],
  "frameworks": [
    {
      "name": "comparison_frame",
      "slug": null,
      "matchId": "7b7f1f82-1ec2-4d3c-8653-3e1c74163b8a",
      "evidence": "The slide uses a structured table to compare four different business units across four specific dimensions of failure.",
      "confidence": 0.9
    }
  ],
  "arcBeats": [],
  "loops": [],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}