{
  "docId": "019de50f-0096-705c-9682-a891ae8ca099",
  "docSlug": "4ee354470b615d587f65effaca15faf0",
  "documentTitle": "Baird | Investment Banking Pitch Book | 35 slides",
  "authorId": "baird",
  "authorName": "Baird",
  "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck",
  "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck",
  "sourceTypeSlug": "investment_bank",
  "sourceTypeLabel": "Investment bank",
  "presentationDate": "2018-04-01 00:00:00",
  "orientation": "landscape",
  "aspectRatio": 1.3333334,
  "pageNumber": 28,
  "pageCount": 35,
  "prevPage": 27,
  "nextPage": 29,
  "slideType": "peer_benchmark",
  "function": "compare_peers",
  "density": "dense",
  "nDataPoints": 24,
  "notes": "The slide uses a mix of bar charts to compare Antero Midstream GP with EQT GP Holdings and Western Gas Equity Partners.",
  "elementsJson": null,
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019de50f-0096-705c-9682-a891ae8ca099/28",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019de50f-0096-705c-9682-a891ae8ca099",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019de50f-0096-705c-9682-a891ae8ca099.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019de50f-0096-705c-9682-a891ae8ca099#slide-28",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.3,
        "w": 0.45,
        "x": 0.52,
        "y": 0.23
      },
      "kind": "chart",
      "text": "MLP DISTRIBUTION CAGR",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "bar-grouped",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "1fea108c-292b-4453-8a8d-cacd6f988ca2",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.3,
        "w": 0.45,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.58
      },
      "kind": "chart",
      "text": "DISTRIBUTION GROWTH LEVERAGE",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "bar-grouped",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "55caa5ee-3f31-4cc6-9bcc-dfcc0d139cfa",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.3,
        "w": 0.45,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.23
      },
      "kind": "chart",
      "text": "IDR-ONLY CAGR",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "bar-grouped",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "a4da38c4-d5bf-4084-9ad2-904219d0a773",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.3,
        "w": 0.45,
        "x": 0.52,
        "y": 0.58
      },
      "kind": "chart",
      "text": "GP / IDR TIER",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "bar-grouped",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "a9716dc7-bbc2-445e-81b6-a37f61d4071d",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.05,
        "w": 0.9,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.95
      },
      "kind": "disclaimer",
      "text": "Source: Partnership filings, S&P Capital and Wall Street consensus estimated as of April 17, 2018. AMGP statistics based on and Antero management Base Case projections. (1) LQA presents 4Q 2017E, annualized. (2) Measures the implied percent growth in GP cash flow relative to a 10% increase in the distribution per LP unit based on the current distribution of the MLP.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "a38b03d1-a40d-4ffe-8cd3-8a3acc592d6a",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.03,
        "w": 0.6,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.13
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "AMGP's growth profile is unique among even its closest peers",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "action-title",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "cca084c0-f908-42c9-b041-6141c82015e0",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.05,
        "w": 0.5,
        "x": 0.05,
        "y": 0.06
      },
      "kind": "title",
      "text": "AMGP'S CLOSEST GP COMPARABLES",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "headline",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "9cee0d7d-1858-49fb-ab18-2f79422e8e7f",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [],
  "tools": [],
  "frameworks": [
    {
      "name": "comparison_frame",
      "slug": null,
      "matchId": "0a980575-d6e7-40a8-8b3e-3e5222bd881b",
      "evidence": "Direct comparison of financial metrics across three peer companies.",
      "confidence": 0.9
    }
  ],
  "arcBeats": [],
  "loops": [
    {
      "to": 28,
      "from": 24,
      "name": "Cost Of Inaction",
      "slug": "27-cost-of-inaction",
      "bestFor": "Urgent budget requests, compliance, risk mitigation",
      "matchId": "342d9b79-9685-4144-be45-3fcca375f476",
      "evidence": "The deck highlights the downward bias in price targets and valuation dislocations",
      "position": 1,
      "objective": "What are the consequences of not addressing valuation dislocations?",
      "structure": "The Status Quo -> The Hidden Costs Accumulating -> The Future State of Inaction -> The Tipping Point",
      "confidence": 0.6,
      "description": "Quantify what happens if the audience does nothing"
    }
  ],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}