| 
 | Printable version | 
| From: | "G Stolwyk" <stolwyk@wave.co.nz> | 
| Date: | Wed, 27 Dec 2000 00:09:43 +1300 | 
| Hugh, Let us talk about Directors, who are 
in one of the following groups and 
who (1) Think that the company 
must have its own executive 
plane and want the Board to make it a priority item 
on the agenda. (2) Feel that such a highly visible item 
should be exchanged for some Bentleys and a luxury office with plenty of 
entertainment!   (3) Don't want planes, Bentleys or luxury 
offices but want increased fees to be the first item of 
business. They feel that because they are called 'directors', they are entitled 
to more money. They hardly work or prepare for meetings. This will result in the CEO and/or 
Chairman having to control the affairs of the company and could lead 
to the collapse of the firm. Not many will now be in that 
category.     (4) Say, that because more stringent rules 
apply, they now have to work harder. Cynical shareholders say that 
these directors relied on the CEO 'carrying' the Board, and were not 
sufficiently active before the change of rules! (5) Are the so-called professional directors. They 
can earn a tidy sum when their directorship's fees are added up. Some perform quite well; others don't 
because they can only talk about balancing the 
books. .  Some attend meetings of too many companies 
and may produce mediocre results.  6) Use their position mainly for share 
trading.    (7) Do work and question the 
CEO when clarification is needed. Many perform very 
well. (8)  Are 
Chairmen or CEO's. Their performance varies. (9) Top 
flight Chairmen and 
CEO's. NZ has not enough of these. They 
are well known and deal with very complex matters.  I don't begrudge their salaries or options! 
Given time, they tend to attract excellent board members as well. 
Some restructure large rundown companies. They always look for ways to grow 
the company. They are the 
company! H: Would you agree that groups 1 and 2 were 
'wiped out' in the 1987 crash? Many directors of these 2 groups were 
incompetent and tended to attract their own kind.  Publicity was their 
tool and this never discussed the true 
cost of acquisitions. Once they obtained majority control on the 
Board, the fate of the company was sealed. Yes, and some like to come 
back! Shareholders- particularly those of unlisted 
companies- will need to keep track of Management 
contracts. Some can be very onerous and/or may not be 
fully disclosed. G: An investor needs to refer to 
the CV's of the directors and look at the composition 
of the Board. This should reflect the nature of the business. An example 
could be SKC, their website: < www.skycity.co.nz >  This 
company has a highly regarded CEO, Board and Management who 
are focussed and have a vision. The departure of a competent CEO can have a 
detrimental effect on the share price. When a new Board takes over, it is 
possible that, given time, a company will perform 
very well. An example could be AFF, their site: 
< www.affco.co.nz 
>. They are also rebuilding an existing plant and 
the outcome of their restructuring will be closely 
watched!    Gerry (Holds SKC and 
AFF)     | 
| 
 |