Kimi K3: Manchester store investment review

For the board of directors (non-executives and the chief executive). The decision it supports: whether to approve £480k of capital for a Manchester store.

Verdict: Not presentable
Deck rating: 1,255
Slides: 7 (brief: 5-8)
Design quality: 64%

Why it is not presentable

Layout defect: something off the slide, colliding, too small or too faint to read
Left out a key finding
Did not give the analysis's recommendation within the first two slides
Made a material claim the analysis does not support
A slide the judges rated as needing work

In detail

Slide 5: “The 45-seat store needs 6 full-time-equivalent staff, with labour at about 28% of sales, in line with Leeds and Sheffield.” is not supported by the analysis.
Slide 5: “The store needs a manager, an assistant manager and two weekend part-timers.” is not supported by the analysis.
Slide 5: “Eight weeks are needed to recruit and train before opening.” is not supported by the analysis.
Slide 5: “There is no internal candidate yet for the manager role.” is not supported by the analysis.
Slide 5: “Manchester hiring is taking 6–8 weeks for similar roles.” is not supported by the analysis.
Slide 5: “The rota is built on two shifts across seven days.” is not supported by the analysis.
Slide 6: “£310k is an estimate, not yet a contracted price.” is not supported by the analysis.
Slide 7: “The £480k proposal only meets the payback rule if Christmas-level trading runs all year.” is not supported by the analysis.

Slide 1Polished
Slide 2Acceptable The two lower panels are much taller than their content requires, leaving large empty areas and weakening the balance of the layout.The two lower cards are mostly empty: the bullets fill only the top third, leaving large wasted space.
Slide 3Polished All bars are the same navy, so the key comparison (adjusted pop-up vs business case) is not highlighted.
Slide 4Needs work The dark 36-month reference line intersects the 34-month and 30-month annotations, interfering with their legibility. Reposition the annotations or give them opaque backgrounds.The 36-month reference line cuts through the '34 months — passes on paper' and '30 months — inside the rule' data labels, making them hard to read.
Slide 5Acceptable The oversized text panels leave substantial unused space below the bullets.Both cards are half empty below the bullets, which wastes space.
Slide 6Acceptable The title introduces a topic rather than stating a single takeaway.The slide is text-heavy, with paragraph-length mitigations.
Slide 7Polished