Preview image. Unlock full-res
Two tall cards, gray for traditional museums and hot-pink for Arkive, compare Source, Acquire, and Preserve steps side by side on black.
Summary
A head-to-head comparison: a muted gray "Traditional Museums" card next to a hot-pink "arkive" card, each stepping through Source, Acquire, and Preserve, with the left text column explaining the shift.
Visual description
Black background. The left third is text: a two-line white headline "Traditional vs. Arkive" up top, and below it a block of white body copy about shifting from consolidated curatorial power to crowd-sourced intelligence. The right two-thirds holds two tall rounded cards. The left card is light gray with dark text, headed "Traditional Museums", listing three stages down a vertical line with downward arrows: Source (select few board of directors), Acquire (from museum endowment), Preserve (under 5% on display). The right card is solid hot pink (#FF2E55) with black text, headed "arkive" in the brand wordmark, listing four stages: Source (tens of thousands of members), Vote (weeks of debate), Acquire (global network), Preserve & Share Upside (100% public display, member-retained value). Tiny vertical labels run up the pink card's inner edge ("Crowdsourced intel", "Take advantage of value to ownership"). The "arkive" sidebar runs up the far left.
Key takeaway
Color-coding the comparison so the two models are legible at a glance: muted gray for the old way, the brand's hot pink for the new way. Repeating the same vertical step structure in both cards makes the extra Arkive step (Vote) read as the differentiator.
Reuse notes
A clean us-versus-them slide for any pitch positioning against an incumbent model. Works best when both sides share the same step labels so the additions and upgrades pop. Assign your brand color to the winning column and a neutral to the incumbent; avoid two saturated colors competing.
