QuoteAI — Leadership Deck Outline#

Status: 🟡 Draft v0.1 — to refine with Andy, then hand off to Claude Design for build Authors: Dan Hannah & Clay Created: 2026-05-01 Parent: QuoteAI Project Design Doc | Related: Business Model, Andy Meeting Brief

Purpose#

Purpose#

Doc state: v0.2 (locked from v0.1 annotation review, 2026-05-04). Next: Andy review, then v0.3 hand-off to Claude Design.

Working outline for the leadership pitch deck Dan will deliver in Indianapolis (week of May 11-15). Companion to but distinct from andy-meeting.md — that doc was for the 1:1 champion-enablement meeting (already happened, succeeded). This is the multi-stakeholder leadership pitch.

Audience: Brehob's president and VP, plus likely Andy in the room as champion-co-presenter.

Outcome we want: leadership signals "yes, let's start" — concrete next step (90-day pilot, MOU, or "send terms next week"). NOT walking out with a signed deal; walking out with a clear forward path.

Format: PowerPoint deck with a full live demo of the app — no embedded GIFs in this deck. Andy's reaction in the champion meeting confirmed the live demo IS the killer moment; talk-track during the ~200s generation phase does the "how it works" explaining. Localhost on demo laptop for in-room (bulletproof under unknown wifi); hosted Vercel preview for post-meeting sharing. This refines PITCH-D3 (which assumed GIFs for the Andy meeting) for the leadership context specifically.

Argument Structure — Ethos / Pathos / Logos#

Classical rhetoric, in this order:

1. Ethos first — establish credibility before diving into Brehob's problems. Leadership needs to know "why am I listening to this person?" before they hear "here's what's broken at your company."
2. Logos in the middle — the bulk of the deck. Problem → demo → value → why now. This is where the deck has to hold up under CFO scrutiny.
3. Pathos last — the family story closes. Leaves them with the emotional hook. Walks out remembering "this is personal to him," not bullet points.

Pricing is intentionally NOT in the deck. This is a vision + value pitch. Pricing comes in the follow-up. If asked: "I'd love to walk through commercial terms separately — today's about whether the value proposition lands for you."

Slide-by-Slide Outline (v0.3)#

v0.3 polish — locked 2026-05-09 from transcript-aligned consolidation. 18 slides → 7. Demo-led, talking-points-off-slides architecture. Hand-off to Claude Design after Tuesday May 11 Andy virtual review.

Architecture principle: every slide carries a HEADLINE and at most 1-2 anchor visuals/bullets. Everything else is delivered verbally. This lets Dan read the room — modulate, skip, expand based on what's landing — and avoids overwhelming Brian (per Andy: "if you throw too much at him, he will just kind of crawl into his wubby").

Numbers cut from slides entirely. If asked, Dan elaborates verbally with conservative anchors. Removes argumentative artifacts.

1. Cold Open / Hook#

On slide:

Quotes in minutes, not days. Capturing 22 years of Brehob quoting expertise. Permanently.

Two-line slide. No clutter. Speed = hook; institutional knowledge = substance. The rest of the deck unpacks both.

Talking points (Dan delivers):

• Brief intro / hand-shake. Thank Andy for the tee-up.
• "Today's about whether the value lands for you — happy to dig into commercial terms separately." (Heads off the "what's the price" question early.)

Reusable beyond the slide: the tagline doubles as the brand-level one-liner — use it in the airport pitch, follow-up emails, anywhere.

2. Why I'm Here (Ethos — Short)#

On slide (1-2 anchor bullets max):

• F1 background — specific team / role / system built
• Engineering at scale — specific data volume, specific impact
• AI/ML expertise — concrete examples (not "I work with AI")

Keep to 1 slide. Specific = trust; long credentials = ego.

Talking points (Dan delivers):

• Lead with humility + curiosity, not credentials.
• Frame "team backing this" generically — "I have a team that believes in what this product can provide." Per Andy's coaching, do NOT name the brother-at-AWS specifically. Avoids the "is this just Dan?" anxiety without overclaiming.
• One personal-bridge sentence to John ("dad has been here 22 years"), but don't dwell — Pathos slide does that work later.

Locked from prior outline: Brother-at-AWS bullet cut (per Andy's transcript: "I would just say, look, I have a support staff that is, that believes in what this product could provide… we are working on this together.")

3. The Problem (Cliff + Bottleneck Combined)#

On slide (3 bullets max):

• John retiring after 22 years — no replacement plan
• "18 guys quoting 18 different ways" — Andy's own words
• 3-person Customer Success Team is the structural bottleneck

Talking points (Dan delivers):

• The retirement cliff: senior salesperson retirement → 30-50% account attrition over 2-3 years. "And there's no replacement plan."
• Quote completeness: per John, most reps don't include installation or PM — 33-50% of project value left on the table.
• Structural insight: the bottleneck is the 3-person CST, NOT the salespeople. Adding more reps doesn't help when the funnel narrows there. (Per Andy: hard to work with, inconsistent output, absenteeism.)
• Speed framing: "Speed is the universal lever — every lost-deal reason cascades from speed. Lost on price? Couldn't counter fast enough. Lost to a competitor? They got there first. Customer went cold? Couldn't re-quote fast enough."
• Industry typical 48hr → <4hr with QuoteAI. Don't compare to specific competitors (we have no data on what they actually do).
• Motors specifically (per Andy): speed is critical — same-day quotes; air is 48hr-typical; crane is more flexible. Motors is where this lands hardest.

4. Demo (The Solution) ⭐#

The star of the deck. ~30-45 minutes of meeting time. Live demo on Dan's laptop. No GIFs.

On slide: a single screen-mockup or a clean "Live Demo" title card. The screen IS the slide.

Demo spine (the flow Andy already saw + endorsed):

1. Upload — drop a Brehob QUOTE FORM .xls into the form; pre-population happens.
2. Generate — kick off; ~200s of streaming output (search → think → write).
3. Review — three colored gates (amber caveat, red review, blue price) for human approval.
4. KPI Dashboard — the Brian/Caleb moment. Quote volume, win rate, region drill-downs.
5. Knowledge-base chat — type a real Brehob question ("What did we sell to Slate Trucks before?" / "Show me all heated/blower-purge dryer quotes from the last 5 years."). Returns real results from the corpus, live. Underscores the platform thesis.

Featured demo beats (Andy-validated, transcript-confirmed):

• ⭐ Quoting flow — the spine
• ⭐ KPI Dashboard live — "Dude, they would love that. Oh my god." (Andy). Per John (Brehob leadership meeting takeaway 2026-05-08): they're acutely frustrated about quote-book and KPI tracking. Dashboard is a perfect-solution-for-impossible-problem moment. Caleb (KPI-fluent) will eat this up.
• ⭐ Knowledge-base chat — "Dude, that's awesome." (Andy). Most concrete platform-thesis demo possible.

Cut/downgraded from prior outline:

• ❌ Pricing card live demo — Andy didn't react to it in the transcript; pricing/margin conversations belong in the follow-up commercial talk, not in the value pitch
• 🟡 Real-Brehob-customer-quote regenerated — keep as optional accent if the data state allows; don't make it the spine

Demo infrastructure:

• In-room: localhost on Dan's laptop. Bulletproof under unknown wifi.
• Follow-up: Vercel preview URL (~10 min from a branch push). Lets leadership poke at it after Dan leaves; gives Andy something to share internally during deliberation.

Pre-trip risk: rehearse three times on the actual laptop being brought, with the same data state, before flying. Demo Murphy's Law is real.

200s Generation Phase — Talking Point Anchors#

The 200s of streaming output is the highest-leverage rehearsed verbal moment in the entire pitch. Don't script word-for-word — have ~6 anchor points to pull from based on room energy. Hit the 3-4 that land hardest.

Pull from these:

1. The data underneath — "22 years of John's quote history. Plus the 3 boxes Andy mentioned that are still waiting to be loaded. The more we feed it, the better it gets."

2. Institutional knowledge moment — "John's exact phrasing — that's what's being captured in real-time. When he retires, this is what stays. The expertise becomes the company's, not just one person's."

3. Privacy / data control — "Your data stays in your environment. Nothing leaves Brehob. No model training on your quotes." (Disarms a Brian-style "what about our data?" question before it's asked.)

4. Speed comparison — "What you're watching takes 3-5 minutes. The same quote takes the team 48 hours today, sometimes a week." (Pause for effect.)

5. Four value pillars (verbal, no numbers) — "Labor saved on the support team. Knowledge captured before John retires. More quotes through the funnel. Higher win rate from speed and completeness." (Let them do the math themselves if they ask. If pressed, anchor conservative: "In the range of multiple sales-support-hires worth of recovered capacity per year, plus material upside on win rate and throughput.")

6. Optional probe — "Anything specific you want to see when this lands?" (Gives Andy a window to redirect; gives Ed a chance to ask a practical question.)

What NOT to say during the 200s:

• ❌ "Agentic AI changes the math 100x" — sounds like AI hype; Brian is allergic (per Andy: "people are just bolting AI onto all their shit")
• ❌ "$2M / $4M / $6M" — no hard numbers. Verbally elaborate only when prompted.
• ❌ Anything about LLMs, prompt engineering, vector embeddings, RAG, agentic frameworks — speak in business language

5. Year 1 + What's Next (Scope + Platform Vision Combined)#

On slide:

Year 1 ships:

• Quoting (form → draft → review → done)
• Quote completeness (auto-attach install + PM)
• Pricing visibility
• Equipment datasheet auto-attach
• Sales-leadership KPI dashboard

Year 2+ extensions (separately scoped when their time comes):

• Inventory integration / ERP tie-in (Microsoft Business Central)
• CRM integration (Microsoft Dynamics)
• Crane division
• Customer-facing quote portal

Talking points (Dan delivers — Andy's 90/10 rule: ~60s on the future stuff, no more):

• "Brehob is first customer. You shape the roadmap." Inventory ahead of CRM, or vice versa — Brehob's priorities.
• "Each new capability rides the same infrastructure — not a from-scratch build. The platform compounds."
• Optional, only if asked: per Andy, scope additions = price additions. Don't proactively raise pricing.

Out-of-scope for Year 1 (mention only if directly asked):

• Lead capture / routing — depends on Brehob's existing lead process; ZoomInfo + custom Dynamics CRM is still phase 1
• Full proposal packaging (branded PDFs + installation diagrams) — Year 2 conversation
• Mobile app

6. Why This Is Personal (Pathos)#

Dan's voice. Dan's words. The emotional close.

On slide: a single photo or moment — Dan's choice (childhood photo with John, family photo at a Brehob event, etc.). Minimal text. Let Dan's words carry it.

Talking points (Dan delivers — close to verbatim, with two ending options to pick on the day based on room energy):

"22 years ago, this company took a chance on my dad. You invested your own time and money into developing him into one of your best salesmen. Indirectly, you took a chance on my family too. This company is the reason I was able to play football in high school, the reason I was able to get my electrical engineering degree, the reason I started my career at General Motors. I wouldn't be where I am today without Brehob.

Ending — Option A (humble close, mirrors the opening):

"And now I'm asking you to take a chance on me."

Ending — Option B (assumptive close, joining-the-team):

"And now I'm here. Not as a vendor — as someone joining the team in a different role. My dad on the sales floor. My little brother just starting. Me, building this. Same mission, different chair."

Pick on the day:

• A is more vulnerable — lands harder if the room is warm. Mirrors the opening "took a chance on my dad" → "take a chance on me." More humility, less presumption.
• B is more confident — lands harder if the room is analytical/distant. Positions Dan as already part of the team.
• Andy's room read suggests warm ("they're really excited about it", "frothing at the mouth") → A is the likely pick, but rehearse both.

Why this slide works (per Andy's transcript reaction to the family-invested framing: "That's a good response, Dan. That's really good."): authenticity over performance. The football → engineering → GM specifics are the anti-mushy ballast — concrete details neutralize the emotional weight. Stay with family framing, not Remember-the-Titans-energy — performative will read off-key.

Note on company vs. people: "this company took a chance" (institution), not "you took a chance" (people in the room) — Brian and Ed personally may not have been there 22 years ago.

7. The Ask#

On slide: one line, large.

"I'd like to come back next week with a structured proposal. What's the right way to make that happen?"

Talking points (Dan delivers):

• Soft + confident. Don't pre-commit a number — pricing conversation is follow-up.
• Per Andy: "They're really excited about it. They're not going to negotiate hard. They'd leave that up to me anyway." The Ask doesn't need to be hard.
• If pushed on price in the room: "I'd love to walk through commercial terms separately — today's about whether the value proposition lands for you. Andy and I have been working on a value model — I'd rather walk through it properly with a structured proposal."
• The Ask is concrete (next week, structured proposal, defined process) but doesn't demand commitment in the room.

Don't use:

• ❌ "What do you think?" (invites criticism, not commitment)
• ❌ "Are you open to making this work?" (too soft)
• ❌ Any specific price or term (premature)

v0.3 Status — Open Questions & Refinement Path#

Locked 2026-05-09. Supersedes the legacy ## Open Questions / TBDs and ## Refinement Path sections below (which still contain v0.2-era content — slated for manual cleanup in Foundry UI; can't be removed via MCP because of duplicate-heading ambiguity).

Locked in v0.3 (2026-05-09)#

• Cold open content — locked: tagline + subhead
• GIFs vs live demo — locked: full live demo, no GIFs
• KPI dashboard scope + featured-beat status — locked: in Year 1, featured demo beat
• Datasheet auto-attach scope — locked: in Year 1
• Lead system tie-in scope — locked: out of Year 1
• Total value rounding — locked: numbers cut from slides entirely; verbal-on-demand with conservative anchors
• FTE jargon — locked: plain language
• Competitor speed claim — locked: dropped numeric competitor comparison
• Slide count — locked: 7 slides, demo-led, talking-points-off-slides architecture
• Brother-at-AWS bullet (Slide 2) — locked: removed per Andy's coaching; generic team framing instead
• Slide 14 (Why This Is Possible Now / Thesis) — locked: cut entirely. AI-hype-adjacent. Demo IS the proof.
• 5 separate value-driver slides — locked: collapsed; value carried verbally during 200s demo phase
• Pricing card as featured demo beat — locked: downgraded; not a featured beat
• Pathos slide content — locked: family-invested framing with two ending options for room-read
• 3 separate problem slides — locked: collapsed into one (cliff + bottleneck combined)
• Slide 7 (How It Works) — locked: folded into demo talk-track per v0.2; placeholder removed in v0.3

Still open#

• Ethos slide content (Slide 2) — Dan to draft the F1 / engineering specifics in his own voice
• Pathos ending choice (Slide 6, A vs B) — decide on the day based on room read; rehearse both. Andy's read suggests warm → A is the likely pick.
• LinkedIn recon — should we reference specific salespeople by name during the demo? Andy's call.
• Real-Brehob-customer-quote regen — feasibility check on the demo data state; keep as optional accent if doable
• Demo infrastructure validation — confirm localhost demo works on the actual laptop Dan is bringing (not just dev machine); Vercel preview spun up at least 48hrs before flight
• Visual treatment — Claude Design hand-off for actual deck build (post Tuesday Andy review)
• Slide 6 photo selection (Pathos) — Dan to pick the visual

Refinement Path#

1. v0.1 (initial): strawman outline. ✅ Done 2026-05-01.
2. v0.2 (locked 2026-05-04): annotation review locked. Cold open chosen, GIFs → live demo, scope additions, value rounding, jargon swap, competitor claim struck.
3. v0.2.1 (2026-05-04 PM): platform-reframe applied (Slides 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 14, 16 updated; Slide 16 renamed).
4. v0.3 (locked 2026-05-09 — this version): transcript-aligned consolidation. 18 slides → 7. Demo-led, talking-points-off-slides architecture. Hard numbers cut from slides. Brother-at-AWS removed. Slide 14 (Thesis) cut. 5 value-driver slides collapsed. Pathos drafted with two ending options. You are here.
5. Tuesday May 11 — Andy virtual review. Andy reads v0.3 outline + early Claude Design pass. Pushes back on anything that won't land. Particularly: ethos specifics, LinkedIn recon, demo accents, ending option preference.
6. Claude Design hand-off: post-Andy. v0.3 + style direction (PowerPoint, Brehob-friendly visual tone, no GIFs, demo runs on laptop). Speaker notes generated for each slide from the talking-points content above.
7. Final deck + demo prep: Claude Design ships the deck; Dan rehearses both slides AND live demo three times on the actual demo laptop. Vercel preview spun up for post-meeting follow-up sharing.
8. Indianapolis — Wednesday May 12, 10am-noon, Brehob HQ. Deck flies, demo lands, leadership reacts.

Doc cleanup TODO (manual, Foundry UI)#

The following legacy duplicate sections are below this one and should be deleted manually (Foundry MCP API can't disambiguate identical heading paths):

• The placeholder ## Refinement Path and ## Open Questions / TBDs in the H1 body (empty, lines ~10-11)
• The legacy ## Open Questions / TBDs (the v0.2-era "Resolved in v0.2" content)
• The legacy ## Refinement Path (the v0.2-era 6-step path)

The ## Pricing Conversation Strategy section below remains valid — keep it.

Open Questions / TBDs#

Open Questions / TBDs#

Resolved in v0.2:

• Cold open content — locked: tagline + subhead ("Quotes in minutes, not days." / "Capturing 22 years of Brehob quoting expertise. Permanently.")
• GIFs vs live demo — locked: full live demo, no GIFs in this deck
• KPI dashboard scope — locked: in Year 1
• Datasheet auto-attach scope — locked: in Year 1
• Lead system tie-in scope — locked: out of Year 1
• Total value rounding — locked: ~$2M / ~$4M / ~$6M
• FTE jargon — locked: "two full-time employees' worth of capacity"
• Competitor speed claim — locked: dropped numeric competitor comparison

Still open:

• Ethos slide content (Slide 2) — Dan to draft the F1 / engineering specifics in his own voice
• Pathos slide content (Slide 17) — Dan to draft. Cannot be ghostwritten.
• The Ask (Slide 18) — Dan to lock based on conversation with Andy about what's realistically on the table
• LinkedIn recon — should we reference specific salespeople by name, or stay generic? Andy's call.
• Demo additions for leadership (Slide 6 accents) — Andy question: which of pricing card / quote completeness / dashboard preview / real customer regen lands hardest. Candidates listed in Slide 6.
• Minimum viable KPI dashboard for trip — ~1 day Next.js work to ship a basic chart for the demo. Decision: build before May 11 trip?
• Demo infrastructure validation — confirm localhost demo works on the actual laptop Dan is bringing (not just dev machine); Vercel preview spun up at least 48hrs before flight
• Visual treatment — once outline locks at v0.3, hand to Claude Design for the actual deck build

Refinement Path#

Refinement Path#

1. v0.1 (initial): strawman outline. Dan reacts; we adjust order, add/remove sections. ✅ Done 2026-05-01.
2. v0.2 (this version, locked 2026-05-04): annotation review locked. Cold open chosen, GIFs → live demo, scope additions, value rounding, jargon swap, competitor claim struck. You are here.
3. Andy review: schedule call with Andy. He reads v0.2. He pushes back on anything that won't land for leadership. We integrate. Particularly: which demo accents to feature, the Ask wording, LinkedIn recon, ethos specifics.
4. v0.3: final outline + per-slide content. Demo voiceover script written end-to-end. Ethos + pathos drafted in Dan's voice. Slide renumbering reconciled (Slide 7 was folded into Slide 6).
5. Claude Design hand-off: v0.3 + style direction (PowerPoint, Brehob-friendly visual tone, no GIFs in this deck — live demo on the laptop).
6. Final deck + demo prep: Claude Design ships the deck; Dan rehearses both the slides AND the live demo three times on the actual demo laptop. Vercel preview spun up for post-meeting follow-up sharing.
7. Indianapolis: week of May 11-15. Deck flies, demo lands, leadership reacts.

Pricing Conversation Strategy#

Pricing is intentionally NOT in the deck. But leadership WILL ask. Pre-decided answers:

• "What does this cost?" → "I'd love to walk through commercial terms separately — today's about whether the value proposition lands for you. Happy to come back with a structured proposal."
• "Roughly how much?" → "In the range of a sales support hire's loaded cost per year, with a structure that scales with the value we deliver. Let's go through it properly in a follow-up."
• "Can you give us a number now?" → "I want to give you a number that's calibrated to what we agree the value is. Let's land that first."

If pushed harder, defer to: "Andy and I have been working on a value model — I'd rather walk you through that with the proposal than throw out a number that doesn't reflect the analysis."

Reference: business-model.md § Pricing Strategy for the actual recommended numbers when the follow-up conversation happens.

This is a living doc. Update after every iteration with Andy. Hand to Claude Design at v0.3.

Purpose (v0.3)#

Doc state: v0.3 (locked 2026-05-09). Next: Tuesday May 11 Andy virtual review, then Claude Design hand-off.

🟢 Read this section, then jump to ## Slide-by-Slide Outline (v0.3). The legacy ## Purpose, ## Open Questions / TBDs, and ## Refinement Path sections below contain v0.2-era content and are slated for manual cleanup (MCP API can't disambiguate duplicate-heading sections).

Working outline for the leadership pitch deck Dan will deliver in Indianapolis on Wednesday May 12, 10am-noon at Brehob HQ.

Audience (per Andy's transcript-confirmed room intel):

• Brian (President) — conservative, "asks analytical questions about things he half-knows," gets overwhelmed easily ("if you throw too much at him, he will just kind of crawl into his wubby"). Plain language + no hard numbers + conservative claims = lands. AI-hype framing = repels.
• Ed (VP) — "the man," practical-minded, will talk in circles. Andy will redirect. Dan stays anchored.
• Caleb (Andy's #2) — ex-salesperson, marketing degree, KPI-fluent. The dashboard moment lands hard with him.
• Andy — champion-co-presenter. Will tee Dan up + run interference. "I want you to win."

Outcome we want: leadership signals "yes, let's start" — concrete next step (90-day pilot, MOU, or "send terms next week"). NOT walking out with a signed deal; walking out with a clear forward path.

Format: PowerPoint deck (7-slide spine) + full live demo of the app. Demo carries 60-70% of meeting time. Slides are breadcrumbs; talking points carried verbally so Dan can read the room and modulate.

• In-room: localhost on Dan's laptop. Bulletproof under unknown wifi.
• Follow-up sharing: hosted Vercel preview, spun up at least 48hrs before flight.

Architecture principle (new in v0.3): high-level info on slides + talking points off the slides. Each slide carries a HEADLINE and at most 1-2 anchor visuals/bullets. Everything else is delivered verbally. This:

• Lets Dan read the room (skip / expand / pivot based on energy)
• Avoids overwhelming Brian (per Andy's coaching)
• Keeps the deck conversational, not lecture-shaped
• Removes hard numbers from being arguable artifacts — Dan can verbally elaborate when prompted

Pricing is intentionally NOT in the deck. Per Andy: leadership won't negotiate hard, Andy will manage the commercial follow-up. If asked in-room, defer to "happy to walk through commercial terms separately."