Claude Haiku 4.5: On-time delivery: what is going wrong and what to fund
For the board and the company's three main investors. The decision it supports: whether to fund 40 more drivers or a trunk re-plan with 10 drivers.
Verdict
Not presentable
Deck rating
635
Slides
6 (brief: 5-8)
Design quality
50%
Why it is not presentable
Layout defect: something off the slide, colliding, too small or too faint to read
A slide the judges rated as needing work
In detail
Slide 2: chart 3 and text 5 collide.
Slide 6: text 4: 11 pt body text.
Slide 6: text 4: 11 pt body text.
Slide 6: text 4: 11 pt body text.
Slide 6: text 6: 11 pt body text.
Slide 6: text 6: 11 pt body text.
Slide 6: text 6: 11 pt body text.
Slide 1AcceptableThe title introduces the topic rather than stating the funding recommendation; the main takeaway is buried in a bullet.The title wraps to two lines, and 'fund' sits flush against the bottom edge of the header band, so the title looks cramped and about to spill out.
Slide 2Needs workThe footnote overlaps the week labels along the horizontal axis.The footnote overlaps and collides with the x-axis labels (W29–W33), making both unreadable.
Slide 3PolishedAll bars are the same colour; the late trunking bar is not highlighted even though the title singles it out.
Slide 4AcceptableThe comparison is concentrated at the top, leaving most of the slide unused.Roughly the bottom 55% of the slide is empty, so the space is unbalanced.
Slide 5AcceptableLong, full-width bullets require substantial reading rather than enabling a quick scan.The slide is text-heavy with long sentence bullets and no visual support.
Slide 6AcceptableThe two panels are much taller than their contents, leaving large empty areas inside both.The large rounded boxes are about 75% empty, which wastes space, and the content sits in the top corner.
