welcome [] 2011... · the 51st bvfa-abaf award for the best financial information - 13 october 2011...

THE 51ST BVFA-ABAF AWARD FOR THE BEST FINANCIAL INFORMATION - 13 OCTOBER 2011

1

WELCOME


2

Hans BuyssePresident, ABAF/BVFA


3

THE 51ST BVFA-ABAF AWARDFOR THE BEST FINANCIAL INFORMATION


4

We are not alone on this planet


5

http://effas.net/


6

Companies, large & small,enhancing transparency


7

Our new training programme

The CIIA diploma promoted by EFFAS and ABAF has an awarding body status in the United Kingdom and is recognised by FSSC (Financial Services Skills Council) as a Key 2 qualification (Fact sheet CIIA UK Recognition).


8

The Awards forBest Financial Information have become so much more than a rewardfor excellent financial analysis.


9

Programmeof the evening


10

Marc Grynberg, CEO


11



12

Robert PeirceSenior Partner, PriceWaterhouseCoopers


51st Awards Ceremony forBest Financial Information

13 October 2011

Corporate reporting: a perspective from the future

Robert PeirceSenior PartnerPwC

13


Agenda

The reporting landscape

Today’s corporate reporting

The drivers of change

What does the future hold?

Integrated reporting

14


A “jigsaw” of parties

15

Employees

Management information and data relevant to

the reporting process

Communication channels

Annualreport

Audited

CSR/ Sustainability

Reporting

Corporate communications

(including Investor

Relations)

continuous

information

Creditrating

agencies

Otherinformation analysers & aggregators

Primary users

Investors

Other users

Government

agencies

NGOs

Other external sources of information

BankersCustomers &

suppliersOther external

sources

Board



Pace of changes

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400 Prudential annual report pages - 1850-2008

'Back end' pages 'Front end' pages

16 Source: Investis research



17

In the 50s, reporting gave a complete and satisfactory picture of corporate performance.

In those days:

- Most assets were tangible;

- Revenues were easy to define;

- Accruals were straight forward;

- Model produced most of mgt info required.


Pace of changes


18

• Today’s model has remained relatively static apart from the explosion of footnotes whilst:

- Business has become more complex;

- The one-size approach ignores industry differences;

- Mgt relies on information undisclosed in financial statements;

- Risks have significantly increased;

- Shareholders have become diversified.

• It is today generally recognized that company accounts have become long and complex, and increasingly difficult to decipher. As a result many investors have struggled to see warning signs of the risks inherent in a company’s strategy and performance.


Pace of changes


19

Percentage of market value represented by physical and financial assets versus intangible factors, some of which are explained within financial statements, but many of which are not.

Source: International Integrated Reporting Committee


Pace of changes


20

• State of affairs

• Risk and uncertainties

• Performance indicators (fin. & non fin.)

• Financial instruments (MGT, hedging, risks)

• Subsequent events

• AC Framework

• R&D

IFRS Consol. Acts

B Stat. Acts

Disclosure notes

Comply or explain

Internal controls

Risk Management

Share holdings

Board & Committees

Remuneration

CSR

An heavily regulated picture...


FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

MANAGEMENT REPORT

CSR

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE


21

Unsuited to today’s information needs


Management’s Valuation

$$$ Value gap $$$

Investors/Analysts Market Value

Reliability of Information

Quality Gap

Importance of a Measure

Reporting Gap

How Actively a Measure is Communicated

Importance of a Measure

Information Gap

How Adequately a Measure is

Communicated

Perception Gap

Understanding Gap

COMMUNICATION GAPS PREVENT MARKET VALUE FROM REFLECTING UNDERLYING VALUE

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

7 0%

80%

90%

100%

Profit and loss account

Balance Sheet

Cash flow statement

Segmental information

Debt pay out schedules and term

disclosures

Other notes to the

financial statements

Management discussion

and analy sis (MD&A)

Corporate governance information

Historical summary

Importance

Adequacy

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

7 0%

80%

90%

100%

Profit and loss account

Balance Sheet Cash flow statement

Segmental information

Debt pay out schedules and

term disclosures

Other notes to the

financial statements

Management discussion

and analy sis (MD&A)

Corporate governance information

Historical summary

Importance

Importance

Adequacy


22

... With many missing metrics ...


Measurable in €’s – Disembodied Embodied – Immeasurable in €’s

Commodities

Physical assets

• property;• plant;• machinery.

Material Supply

Contracts

• licenses & franchises.

Intellectual property

• copyright or patents;• trademarks & designs.

Other

• brands, know-how.

Competency map

• routine competencies;

• core competencies;• distinctive

competencies.

Capabilities

• leadership;• workforce;• networks;• reputation;• R&D in-process;• corporate renewal

capability.

1. Tangible goods

2. Intangible goods

3. Intangible competence

4. Latent capatilities

Hard Soft

TODAY'S COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES ARE INCREASINGLY INTANGIBLE


Shortcomings with today’s model

• Focus on status quo;

• Lack of awareness;

• Compliance fatigue;

• Investor demand;

• Competitively sensitive;

• Short-termism.

23

• Corporate crisis;

• Economic downturn;

• Climate change;

• Resource scarcity;

• Stakeholders increasingly vocal;

• Innovative companies.

Impediments to change

Catalysts for change



24

• Some reminders:

- book value market value;

- IAS 39 = "control standard“.

• Some criticism:

- massive unrealized losses misleading picture;

- pro-cyclicality snowball effect.

• FV = warning bell? Or = religious belief of IASB?

• FV concept prudential concept

Was Fair-Value a wrong choice?

The drivers of changes - Financials under fire

Two standards ?


25

Will "Fair-Value" stand-up when facing politicians?

• Politicians & regulators:

- Have taken actions:

? nationalizing "toxic assets“;

? nationalizing banks;

? … which have their own risk.

- Have a word to say;

- Have now a vested interest in accounting.

The drivers of changes - Financials under fire


26

Global macro trends are driving changeMajor shifts in our natural world, and in the way governments and consumers are responding are creating new risks and opportunities for corporates

The drivers of changes

Direct drivers:

Risk resilience

Sustainability mega trends

Regulation and Government

action

Biodiversity loss

Water scarcity

Population growth

Raw materials scarcity

Demand for energy

Growing importance of

emerging markets

Connectivity & information flows

Corporate leadership & competition

Urbanisation

Ethical consumerism

Climate change

Indirect drivers:

Regulations and

Reputation


27

Global economic power is shiftingTop 10 economies by GDP in 2050

Greenhouse gas emissions keep risingGHG emissions by regions


Source – WBCSD Vision 2050

And there are increasingly other interested parties

28

Natural disasters increase are a cause for investors’ concern

“The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) today adopted a mandatory requirement that insurance companies disclose the financial risks they face from climate change, as well as actions the companies are taking to respond to those risks.”

San Diego, March 2009

Source: MUNICH RE Topics Geo 2010


Regulators and investors are demanding reporting on climate risks


We are entering a new environment

• The unbelievable might become the norm.

• The cost of banks bailouts is staggering.

• The financial turmoil is not the only one we have to deal with:

- climate change;

- mass species extinction;

- higher energy costs;

- structural unemployment;

- ageing of societies.

29



Sustainibility reporting = advertising gimmick?

• Ecosystems risks are underestimated.

• "Ecological crunch" = xn financial turmoil.

• Fortunately many forward looking reporting initiatives are now on their way:

- The Global Reporting Initiative;

- The Word Business Council for sustainable developments;

- The Carbon Disclosure Project;

- The World Intellectual Capital Initiative;

- The EU expert committee on “non-financial information”

- … and many others.30


But: While 96% of CEOs from the world’s largest companies recognize that sustainability issues should be fully integrated in strategy and operations, only 21% report sustainability information.Source: Bloomberg, The sustaibability Edge, 2010


31

The world is changing – reporting must too

Thinking: Disconnected à Integrated

Stewardship: Financial capital à All forms of capital

Focus: Past, financial à Past and future, connected, strategic

Timeframe: Short term à Short, medium and long term

Trust: Narrow disclosures à Greater transparency

Adaptive: Rule bound à Responsive to individual circumstances

Concise: Long and complex à Concise and material

Technology enabled:

Paper based à Technology enabled



What does it mean?

• The integration of mainstream and sustainability reporting (ESG).

• The integration of financial, non-financial and narrative information.

• An alignment between key elements of reported information:

- Market dynamics, strategy and business model;

- Strategy, resource usage and environmental impacts;

- Strategy, risk and KPIs (financial and non financial);

- Remuneration with strategy and KPIs.

32

Integrated Reporting

“Connectivity”

Reflects the “integrated collective thinking” of those charged with governance to monitor and manage the value-creation process.


33

CompetitorsMacro-economics

Regulation

RiskGovernance

Remuneration

FinancialOperational

Social contributionEnvironment

Business modelDependencies

High level proposed unified view


Reporting needs to reinforce critical connections:

• Front and back half of report;

• What’s reported and strategy;

• Strategy and market context;

• Strategy, business model, risk, KPIs and remuneration;

• Financial, non-financial and narrative information.


34

No “one size fit all” answer ... but relevance is key

Category What’s clear What’s not clear

Market context 74% talk about the future

13% explain what it means

Strategy 90% include strategic priorities

12% base reporting on strategy

Risks75% talk about risk mitigation

35% provide comprehensive insights

Delivering strategy

65% refer to their business model

29% identify resources/relationships

Performance 88% explicitly identify KPIs

25% align KPIs to strategy

Sustainability61% give sustainability-related KPIs

15% link sustainability to strategy

CompetitorsMa cro-economics

Regulation

RiskGov ernance

Remuneration

FinancialOperational

Social contributionEn v ironment

Bu siness modelDependencies



35

Some suggested key drivers


• Investor returns:

- Dividends;- Interest.

• Total Tax Contribution:

- Taxes paid;- Taxes collected.

• Employment:

- Direct;- Indirect;- Health & safety.

• Products & services:

- Innovation;- Brand.

• Supply chain:

- Operation efficiency;

- Integrity & fair trade.

• Environmental impact:

- Greenhouse gases;

- Waste;- Resource usage.

..... retaining the licence to operate


36


Some examples


Risk profileAfren plc

37

Integrated reporting – Some examples


38

Communication hierarchyMan Group

Top Slice

Strategic and

material

Data Set

Other information

Additional information required to meet the requirements of accounting standards and

company law

Integrated reporting – Some examples


39

Range of organisations involved



40

“You can never have an impact on society if you have not changed yourself. ”Nelson Mandela

“Setting an example is not the main means of influencing others; it is the only means. ” Albert Einstein

“The threat from climate change is serious, it is urgent, and it is growing. Our generation’s response to this challenge will be judged by history, for if we fail to meet it - boldly, swiftly, and together - we risk consigning future generations to an irreversible catastrophe.” Barack Obama

“…we must look well ahead to the possible depletion of sources, to the saving of material, and to the finding of substitute materials and fuels.” Henry Ford, Founder of Ford Motor Co., 1926

Concluding comments


41

Zoe KnightDirector Climate Change Strategy, HSBC


42

Non-financial reporting for financial analysts

Brussels, October 2011

Zoe Knight*

Director, Climate Change strategy

HSBC Bank plc

+44 20 7991 6715

[email protected]

m

* Employed by a non-US aff iliate of HSBC Securities (USA) Inc, and is not registered/qualif ied pursuant to FINRA regulations

View HSBC Global Research at: http://w ww.research.hsbc.comIssuer of report: HSBC Bank plc

Disclaimer & Disclosures:This report must be read w ith the disclosures and the analyst certif ications in the

Disclosure appendix, and w ith the Disclaimer, w hich forms part of it

ABCGlobal Research


43

Helping HSBC and its clients integrate climate change into investment strategy

Analysing key

economic,

political, scientific

and technological

drivers

Evaluating market

implications in

terms of risks &

opportunities by

sector & theme

Macro Markets

Equities

HSBC Climate Change Centre of Excellence

Working with

equity teams to

identify

investment

opportunities


44

Principles for responsible investment:

• 6 principles relating to factoring in ESG

• Engagement with companies

Inclusion of SRI / ESG in broker review process

Drivers of non-financial reporting I: Investors

Inv estment managers

56%

Asset ow ners

26%Serv ice prov iders

18%

18.5

22

30

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2009 2010 2011

USDtrn

Split of signatories

Assets under management of PRI signatories

Source: UN PRI Annual Reports


45

“By directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.”

An inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, vol. 1 (1776)

•Differentiation is key for sell-side analysts

Drivers of non-financial reporting II: Analyst motivation

05

1015202530354045

AN

HE

US

ER

-

BU

SC

H

BE

LGA

CO

M

UC

B

KB

C

GR

OU

P

SA

NO

FI

TO

TA

L

LVM

H

GD

F S

UE

Z

PH

ILIP

S

UN

ILE

VE

R

KP

N K

ON

ING

GR

OE

P

HE

INE

KE

N

FranceBelgium Netherlands

Number of analysts covering stocks

Source: Company reports, Thomson Reuters Datastream


46

Non-financial reporting is undergoing change

1. Focus on operational ESG

2. Niche ESG engagement with companies

3. Direct materiality (costs)

1. Focus on strategic ESG

2. Mainstream ESG engagement with companies

3. Indirect materiality (reputation)

Historical ESG Analysis Future ESG Analysis


47

Operational versus Strategic

Water Food

Energy

Biofuels

can be less CO

2

intensive, but crops for fuel

compete w

ith foodEne

rgy

can

be w

ater

inte

nsiv

e, c

limat

e ch

ange

exac

erba

tes

wat

er s

tres

s

Climate change impacts manifest through water Ğ increased flooding

or shortage, both factors for agricultural productivity

Climate Factor

Agr

icul

ture

is a

maj

or

sour

ce o

f G

HG

Õs, a

nd

clim

ate

chan

ge im

pact

s

effe

ct a

gric

ultu

ral y

ield

s

Fossil fuel energy is a significant CO2 emitter, contributing to climate

change

Water Food

Energy

Biofuels

can be less CO

2

intensive, but crops for fuel

compete w

ith foodEne

rgy

can

be w

ater

inte

nsiv

e, c

limat

e ch

ange

exac

erba

tes

wat

er s

tres

s

Climate change impacts manifest through water Ğ increased flooding

or shortage, both factors for agricultural productivity

Climate Factor

Agr

icul

ture

is a

maj

or

sour

ce o

f G

HG

Õs, a

nd

clim

ate

chan

ge im

pact

s

effe

ct a

gric

ultu

ral y

ield

s

Fossil fuel energy is a significant CO2 emitter, contributing to climate

change

Source: HSBC, Scoring Climate Change Risk, Which

countries are most vulnerable? August 2011

Resource stress is increasing, but natural capital the ‘E’ factor not integrated into

macro/country analysis


48

Operational versus Strategic

Source: HSBC

Source: HSBC, Scoring Climate Change Risk, Which countries are most vulnerable? August 2011

Resource stress is increasing, but natural capital the ‘E’ factor not integrated into

macro/country analysis

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

2011 2015 2020 2030 2050

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

BAU G2 BAU G2

GDP per Capita, US$ % Grow th

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

2010 2050 'If Only '

Coal OilGas Renew ablesNuclear Biomass and w aste

m toe

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

2005 2030 2005 2030 2005 2030

OECD BRIC RoW

Sev ere Medium Low No

million

Unconstrained energy demandBenefits of green growth Rising water stress


49

Move to strategic analysis necessitates (unintended?) mainstreaming

Countries with the highest vulnerabilities are those expected to drive

global growth

Niche versus Mainstream

Source: HSBC, Scoring Climate Change Risk, Which countries are most vulnerable? August 2011

Country vulnerability to Climate Change(top right most vulnerable, bottom left least vulnerable)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

Meteorological Hy drological Climatic

Argentina

Australia

Brazil

Canada

China

France

Germany

India

Indonesia

Italy

Japan

Mexico

Russia

Saudi

ArabiaSouth

AfricaKorea Turkey

UK

US

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0Exp osure

Sen

siti

vity

ArgentinaAustralia

Brazil

Canada

China

FranceGermany

India

Indonesia

Italy

Japan

MexicoRussia

Saudi

Arabia

S Africa

Korea

Turkey

UK

US2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0Adaptive potential

Ad

apti

ve c

apac

ity

Rising natural disasters


50

PREVIOUSLY:

• Direct management responsibility for materiality of impacts

- Cost / process issue

- Sector specifics (resource intensity and environmental impact)

- Peers benchmarking, but unknown timing entity

NOW:

• ‘Unintended’ macro ESG drivers are difficult to manage, and difficult for analysts to identify, they require regional supply-side analysis; to date, regional analysis has been demand biased

- Resource use

- Social unrest

- Political governance

Previous good practice in reporting might not be enough

Direct versus Indirect


51

Points for Debate

Are ESG factors set to become more material?

áYes

Does the knowledge disconnect between company costs and geographical source of costs from a non-financial perspective matter?

áYes

Whose responsibility is it to drive the non-financial analysis agenda forward?

áInvestors, corporates, analysts? (Regulation?)


52

Douglas GeddesDirector, The Crew Research


53



54

Luc Van der ElstVice-President, BVFA/ABAF


55

Screening Process

54 Companies (=) 68 analysts (+) 211 surveys (+)

0

50

100

150

200

250

# Cies # Analysts # Scores

2008 2009 2010 2011


56

Screening Process

68 analysts: 39 Sell-side including 15 FR/NL

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

S-Side B-Side Inv. Magaz. Other Total

2008 2009 2010 2011


57

Screening Process

211 surveys: 3.9 surveys/ company (> minim. 3)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

1 2 3 4 5 6

2008 2009 2010 2011


58

Company Scorecards


59

As previous years, the survey includes four major aspects of financial Information and Communication:

• Annual Report

• Press Releases

• Investor Relations

• Website

All questions are rated on a 5 point scoring scale:

Followed by a text box to clarify the given score

For some questions

• Guidelines are added. These guidelines set some hurdle rates or make it clearer what kind of specific information we wanted to be evaluated.

• A 6th answer option is provided ‘not applicable’

Company Scorecards — Survey

Very poor Poor Good Very good Excellent

1 2 3 4 5


60

Score card: overview

This company was reviewed by analystsx

Average Average AverageOverall M&S Bel20

OVERALL 500 412,0 332,1 318,3 357,4

1. ANNUAL REPORT 100 78,7 63,7 61,3 68,1

2. PRESS RELEASES 100 87,5 63,8 59,8 71,0

3. INVESTOR RELATIONS 200 176,0 139,2 134,7 147,5

4. WEBSITE 100 81,5 65,4 62,6 70,7

SECONDARY CLASSIFICATION

Info regarding the past 125 101,8 80,3 76,6 87,1

Info regarding the present 285 244,2 197,2 189,6 211,4

Info regarding the future 90 72,0 54,5 52,2 58,9

BenchmarksCompany

score

Theoretical

max.

Highest

score


61

Scorecard – Annual report


1. ANNUAL REPORT 100 78,7 63,7 61,3 68,1

1.1 Key figures & ratios 10 9,0 6,4 6,1 7,0

1.1.1. Key figures & ratios 5 5,0 3,6 3,5 3,8

1.1.2. Years of history 5 5,0 2,8 2,6 3,2

1.2 Products & Services and Segments 10 9,0 6,7 6,4 7,3

1.3 Competitive position 10 8,0 5,2 5,0 5,5

1.4 Strategy 20 16,0 11,6 11,1 12,5

1.4.1. Info on strategy 10 8,7 6,5 6,3 6,8

1.4.2. Medium to long term objectives 10 8,0 5,1 4,9 5,7

1.5 Financial section 30 27,0 20,6 19,9 22,1

1.5.1. Quality financial statements 10 9,0 6,8 6,6 7,3

1.5.2. Quality of the notes 20 18,7 13,8 13,3 14,7

Eg info on intangible assets 5 4,7 3,4 3,3 3,5

Eg info on financial debt 5 4,8 3,5 3,3 3,8

Eg info on pension deficit 5 4,8 3,2 3,0 3,6

Eg info on financial instruments 5 4,7 3,4 3,3 3,7

1.6 Risks 10 9,3 6,5 6,4 6,8

1.7 Other (relevant) info 10 8,0 6,6 6,4 7,0

Useful and good quality items

Key Events 100% 100% 48% 44% 55%

Message to the shareholders 100% 100% 59% 61% 54%

Group structure 100% 100% 33% 33% 34%

Info on shareholders 100% 100% 26% 25% 28%

Info on share price 100% 50% 6% 8% 4%

Info on stock options 100% 75% 20% 20% 20%

Corporate Governance 100% 100% 19% 12% 30%

Info on sustainability 100% 100% 14% 11% 21%

Lexicon 100% 75% 9% 6% 13%

Company

score

Theoretical

max.

Highest

score

Benchmarks


62

Scorecard – Press releases


2. PRESS RELEASES 100 87,5 63,8 59,8 71,0

2.1 FY/HY results: Numbers 20 19,0 14,2 13,6 15,3

2.1.1. Is set of numbers complete? 10 10,0 7,4 7,1 7,9

2.1.2. Is there YoY comparison? 10 9,5 6,8 6,4 7,4

2.2 FY/HY results: Comments 30 26,0 18,9 18,2 20,4

2.2.1. Changes in topline numbers 10 9,5 6,3 6,1 6,6

2.2.2. Quality of comments 10 8,0 6,3 6,1 6,8

2.2.3. Info on segments/operating assets 10 9,0 6,3 6,0 7,0

2.3 FY/HY results: Guidance 10 8,0 5,6 5,4 6,2

2.4 FY/HY results: Publication delays 20 20,0 12,9 11,4 15,7

2.4.1. Time to publish full year results 10 10,0 6,6 6,2 7,3

2.4.2. Time to publish half year results 10 10,0 6,3 5,2 8,4

2.5 Quarterly results 10 10,0 6,0 5,5 6,7

2.6 Other 10 9,0 6,2 5,8 6,8

Highest

score

BenchmarksCompany

score

Theoretical

max.


63

Scorecard – Investor relations


3. INVESTOR RELATIONS 200 176,0 139,2 134,7 147,5

3.1 Availability 20 20,0 15,4 15,0 16,1

3.2 Reactivity 20 20,0 15,1 14,6 15,9

3.3 Consistency 20 20,0 14,3 13,5 15,7

3.4 Reliability 20 20,0 14,7 13,8 16,2

3.5 Access to senior management 20 20,0 14,4 14,8 13,9

3.6 Date alert 20 18,7 14,1 13,4 15,4

3.7 Analyst meetings & Conf. calls 20 20,0 14,2 13,9 14,8

3.8 Insight business model & activities 20 18,7 13,0 12,8 13,3

3.9 Updates on strategy 20 18,0 11,8 11,1 13,0

3.10 Guidance 20 18,0 12,2 11,6 13,3

BenchmarksCompany

score

Theoretical

max.

Highest

score


64

Scorecard – Website


4. WEBSITE 100 81,5 65,4 62,6 70,7

4.1 Operational information 25 20,3 15,7 15,3 16,5

4.1.1. Info on history 10 8,5 6,3 6,2 6,5

4.1.2. Info on services, products, markets 10 9,0 6,9 6,7 7,2

4.1.3. Links to other relevant websites 5 3,8 2,6 2,4 2,9

4.2 Financial information 30 26,5 19,0 17,5 21,7

4.2.1. Archive annual rep./press releases 10 10,0 7,6 7,5 7,9

4.2.2. Archive recent presentations 10 9,5 6,2 5,3 7,7

4.2.3. Info on financial debt 10 8,0 5,2 4,7 6,2

4.3 Investor relations 20 18,0 13,9 13,4 14,8

4.3.1. Contact details of IR 5 4,8 3,5 3,4 3,9

4.3.2. Subscription service 5 4,8 3,5 3,4 3,8

4.3.3. Financial calendar 10 9,5 6,8 6,6 7,2

4.4 Varia 10 8,3 6,7 6,4 7,1

4.4.1. Info on shareholder structure 5 4,3 3,3 3,2 3,5

4.4.2. Info on corporate governance 5 4,5 3,4 3,2 3,6

4.5 Organisation & navigation comfort 15 14,3 10,2 10,0 10,6

BenchmarksCompany

score

Theoretical

max.

Highest

score


65

Rankings


66

Ranking – Annual Report

= Mid & Small caps

= Bel20

5 D'IETEREN 73,8

4 HANSEN TRANSMISSIONS 75,0

3 AB INBEV 75,5

2 BELGACOM 78,5

1 COFINIMMO 78,7


67

Ranking – Press Releases

= Mid & Small caps

= Bel20


4 AB INBEV 79,0

3 MOBISTAR 80,7

2 BELGACOM 86,0

1 TELENET 87,5


68

Ranking – Investor Relations

= Mid & Small caps

= Bel20

5 BELGACOM 166,0

4 QUEST 167,3

3 AEDIFICA 168,0

2 GIMV 170,0



69

Ranking – Website

5 AGEAS 77,0

4 GIMV 78,0

3 DELHAIZE 79,0

2 AEDIFICA 79,5

1 BELGACOM 81,5

= Mid & Small caps

= Bel20


70

Ranking – Overall score

= Mid & Small caps

= Bel20

5 MOBISTAR 387,0

4 AEDIFICA 391,5

3 TELENET 400,4


1 BELGACOM 412,0


71


72


welcome [] 2011... · the 51st bvfa-abaf award for the best financial information - 13 october 2011...

Documents