Their slide on the left, a suggested version on the right — built in our own copy of the deck's CSS, so nothing in Fede's file is touched. Where the suggestion is a new slide, the left is deliberately blank so the rows still line up one for one.
Source: /demo/leasing-renewals-demo-29891c v4, 17 slides · Suggested: 19 rows —
12 revised, 2 new, 2 unchanged,
2 moved, 1 cut · Fede's call on all of it
The through-line: every slide ends on a fact about Clara, and none ends on the reader. Most rows below change one line — the last one — so the story lands on the buyer's property instead of on the product. The two structural moves are a thesis slide near the front, and the limits pulled forward from 14–15 to position 4.
Same hook, but the subtitle now names the limit up front. A skeptic who is told on slide 1 that two of these end with Clara stopping reads the other fifteen differently. The eyebrow is where the recipient’s name goes — this deck was asked for by one person.
The deck has seventeen episodes and no thesis. This is the one sentence a champion can say out loud to his boss without the deck in front of him. Everything after it becomes the receipts.
Built from what is already on slides 13, 14 and 15 — just moved to the front and reframed as limits instead of wins. This is the trust purchase: an unbroken run of seventeen successes makes a skeptic invent the catch, and naming it first is what stops that.
No change suggested.
Nothing to change. This is the slide that earns the right to show the other fifteen, and the "verified in the PMS, not Clara's say-so" line is the strongest sentence on it.
The single best line in the whole deck was set as caption type under the player: "Clara catches that 4 PM is too close to Saturday closing and proposes 3:30." Every other proof point here is about speed. That one is about judgment — which is the thing a skeptic doesn't believe software has. Make it the headline.
Keeps the slide, adds the missing last step: a line that lands on the reader's property instead of on Clara. Every story slide in the deck ends on a fact about the product; none ends on the buyer.
Same slide, but the headline says who answers rather than what happened, and the point line does the work the caption was doing.
Folded into the slide above.
Cut, folded into slide 6. Four consecutive slides measure the same thing in the same unit — 12 seconds, 35, 23, 26 — and by the third the number stops registering. This is the weakest of the four: the "skips the closed Sunday" detail is real but it is the same beat as the 3:30 catch, told smaller.
The response time is the least interesting true thing on this slide. The buried detail is the one that sells: she changed her mind about the unit after being approved, and the switch cost nobody anything.
The showcase row. Same facts, zero invented — but written to put the reader in the dark office at 8:23 instead of handing them a summary of it. This is the difference between reporting and reliving, and it is the cheapest change in the deck.
The numbers are good and the slide doesn't say what they mean. One line turns a screenshot of a pipeline into a claim about the reader's pipeline.
Eight days out is the interesting fact and it was in the eyebrow. Lead with the clock — a renewal that close to expiry is the one every PM has lost.
Strong slide already. The change is the point line: a renewal that closes with no conversation is the one that would otherwise have consumed three of your team's follow-ups.
The resident's own words are already the headline, which is right. What's missing is the reply in her voice and a point line — this is the slide that shows she can move without asking permission.
Keep the slide exactly where it is — it answers the fear a PM won't say out loud. The only change is a point line, because "same answer for every caller" is the actual product claim and it was sitting in body copy.
Rebuilt as a card on the new limits slide.
Moved to slide 4 and rebuilt as one of the three limits. Nothing is lost — the $150 story is the first card on the new slide. What changes is that it now arrives before the wins instead of at 14 of 17, where a phone reader has already stopped.
Rebuilt as a card on the new limits slide.
Also folded into the new limits slide, as the third card. Same reason: framed as a boast at position 15 it reads as marketing; framed as a limit at position 4 it reads as honesty.
One line. "Live, not last month's report" is the claim an owner cares about, and it wasn't on the slide.
No change suggested.
Don't touch it. One property, thirty days, a number they already track, nothing to install — this is the lowest-friction close we could ask for, and it's already written.
The lens is Vinh Giang, a communication coach whose method is built on the gap between telling someone what happened and putting them inside it. Three of his rules do most of the work here: relive, don't report (slide 09 is the clearest example — same facts, no invented numbers, the reader standing in the dark office); the point and the link, where every story ends with a line that lands on the listener rather than on the teller; and pick what the story buys you — stakes buy attention, vulnerability buys trust, and seventeen consecutive wins buy neither, which is why the limits move to the front.
Sources: vinhgiang.com ·
Stage Academy breakdown.
Left column is a screenshot of the committed v4 deck (ea4cd77e74), unmodified. Right column reuses
the deck's own evidence images and a copy of its CSS — nothing was written back to their file. No suggested
line adds a fact the deck doesn't already carry; the one blank left deliberately is the portfolio name on the cover.
Two real picks, three removals. Add Ethan's apartment-matching call and a Spanish-speaking Ridgway call. Remove the three email "fast reply" slides (6, 7 and 9). Every call in the deck today is Camellia; these would be the first from a second client.
About 36 Western Slope calls were left after removing staff tests, robot callers and short hand-offs. Scores are Clara right, caller got it, flow, memorable, audio (each out of 5).
| Caller | Call id | Date | What they wanted | Demo moment | Scores |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ethan | conv_3101m3fpcmzken0rn6hkba0gy8kn | Sep 26 | 2 bed, about $1,600, pets, laundry | Matches budget, flags the pricier option, books Sunday | 4/4/5/4/4 |
| Spanish speaker | conv_7701m38ajmt1f7x9s1rd1b9rdye8 | Sep 23 | 1-bedroom in Ridgway | Switches to Spanish, explains self-access showings | 5/3/5/3/4 |
| Karen | conv_3401m2tygv4zesqshxffb0h5cn41 | Sep 18 | Ember Estates homes | Quotes the special, books Saturday (flawed, see below) | 2/5/5/4/4 |
| Jennifer | conv_7001m3wpcqzce348ry6skeytt2ht | Oct 1 | 1-2 bed under $1,200, housing voucher | Fair-housing moment | 3/3/4/4/4 |
| Ember homes caller | conv_4101m354mnx2ey3rg7hcp8rzyvjd | Sep 22 | Where the homes are, odd traffic routing | Honest "not on file", no invented answer | 4/2/4/3/4 |
1. Looking around: Ethan. Two options, one flagged as over budget.
"The Elm Avenue one is right at your budget... Want to come see the Elm Avenue place, or would you like to hear a couple more options?"
2. Spanish: the Ridgway caller. Clara stays in Spanish for the whole call. Whisper heard unit 211 at $1,550; the transcript says 201 at $1,750. Check before quoting.
"Los hogares en Ridgway son de acceso propio con caja de llaves... el equipo le envía las instrucciones de acceso directamente por mensaje de texto."
3. Specific listing and local expertise: no real example yet. Test-call stand-ins, to be labeled as tests:
conv_4101m2f58abdfaevh2b8a3wc599t. "Grand Junction actually gets milder winters than most of Colorado..."conv_0101m3hckftae6wr4j28qkher7r7.conv_2901m2rx24che9dtkd09x5gvwptv.| Slide | Why |
|---|---|
| 7, Saturday tour booked in 35 seconds | A fourth "fast email reply" in a row; the new calls cover booking. |
| 9, Sunday self-serve reschedule | Same "no staff touched it" beat as slides 7 and 8, and the weakest of the set. |
| 6, Friday web inquiry (12 seconds) | Oldest example (Apr 24), same speed message; slide 8 already shows pricing and a switched unit. |
The slide list comes from the app code (v5.1, Aug 26); the live deck needs a login and could not be opened, so it may differ slightly. Still missing: a real caller asking about schools or commute, a correct price on a specific home with a booked tour, and a Spanish call with a booked tour.
Logged for Fede; nothing changed in the product from this report.