|
Issue: June/August 09
Editorials
STAKEHOLDER RELATIONS
The letter that J R never wrote
Sometimes, a better policy than honesty is to say nothing. To help a certain chief executive, we’ve dreamed up what he might have said.
Dear TT
As a London-listed company, we’re grateful to the JSE (where
we have our secondary listing) that it has no rule compelling
us to video-conference the agm to our many SA shareholders.
If it did, pests like yourself and Theo Botha would be
able to attend. You’d force us to engage in debate. London
directors don’t appreciate this kind of thing.
They consider it impolite. They go out of their way to avoid
controversy. Imagine how embarrassed they’d have felt if a
shareholder had asked, for example, about how much money
we’d taken from SA and how we’ve spent it. We’ve got the golden
goose by the short and curlies, if you know what I mean.
While it’s unfortunate for you that we couldn’t be in
the country that generates our profits, there are other solid
reasons for having held the agm in London rather than
Johannesburg. The snacks provided by the Guildhall are better
than we might have expected from the Sandton Holiday
Inn. And we could easily get to the meeting in our limos
rather than negotiate our way past your taxis.
Frankly, we can’t understand why you’re kicking up a
fuss. Of course, dear boy, you could have come to London.
We didn’t offer to pay for you because, our profits being what
they are, it already cost us an arm and a leg to pay for our two
esteemed SA directors to sit in the front of the plane. Although
I’m sure you would have been prepared to sit at the back, it
wasn’t in the interests of our shareholders (always our top
concern) to incur the additional cost. Anyway, if we’d made the
offer I suppose you’d have said we were trying to buy you off.
Now let me come to what you fancifully describe as “propositions”.
I can tell you that there are two things we’ve learned
from our US experience. The one is how to lose money. The
other is how to plead the fifth amendment, i.e. not to answer
questions likely to prove incriminating. As we pay a small fortune
to Merrill Lynch for advising us – a good choice, given how this US bank lost money – I’m going to learn from its experience
and won’t say anything more than absolutely necessary.
You carry on about our destruction of capital. Ha! Some
analyst hotheads in SA put the amount at R50bn over the
past 10 years. Ha! Don’t we always tell you not to try timing
the markets? Why don’t you think about the next 10 years?
And the 10 after that? We think of markets for the long term,
as you should be thinking too.
I notice your obsession with the collapse in our share
price. Your argument is unbalanced. Okay, so people who
bought our shares a year ago have seen the price halve. But
those who bought in March have seen the price double!
Timing, dear boy, timing...
You blame the board for an offshore strategy that went
wonky. Remember that in this company we only fire the
chief executive, not the directors who approved the strategy. I
should know, having been its financial director for years.
Then you get onto those poor BEE comrades who’ll
struggle to pay the interest on their loans because we’d passed
the dividend. Well, since one of the comrades is Bulelani
Ngcuka and a few others are said to be supporters of Cope, I
guess your government won’t be crying too many tears. We
obviously made the right choices at the time.
Don’t consider my comments frivolous. Our decision to
pass the dividend was painful. But once Anglo had done it, it
was easy. The proper order of priorities is to worry about our
executive bonuses now and our BEE partners later.
Don’t consider my comments frivolous. Our decision to
pass the dividend was painful. But once Anglo had done it, it
was easy. The proper order of priorities is to worry about our
executive bonuses now and our BEE partners later.
You suggested that we don’t do anything in London, that
there’s no need for a London head office. You’re wrong. You
yourself have calculated that the cost of the London head
office has been almost R1bn over the past two years. (It’s
probably a lot higher, but we won’t go there.) Obviously, it’s
impossible to spend this kind of money by doing nothing.
No hard feelings. When you get to the UK, do look us up.
You’ll find that where we hang out in the English countryside
is most congenial. We’ll happily treat you to some awfully
pleasant tea and scones which we can comfortably afford on
our sterling remuneration.
Your friend
J R
OFFICIALLY, FOR THE RECORD
Old Mutual Plc was asked by email on
April 24 to let TT know how much
money has left Old Mutual SA for Old
Mutual Plc in each of the past three financial
years and how much Old Mutual Plc is wanting
to take from Old Mutual SA in the current
financial year.
A spokesperson replied. He gave details of
SA government policy on dividends received by
SA non-residents being freely remittable, and
added: “We do not disclose the flow of money
between any of our businesses or between our
businesses and Old Mutual Plc.”
On the day after the company’s agm, this
email was received in response to the TT
request for its propositions (see article on
previous pages) to be addressed:
We received a number of requests for
questions to be addressed at the agm.
Therefore a decision was taken to respond
to these requests individually. As yours are
not specific questions but rather the principal
points in your article you wish us to pick up on,
I trust that the following response addresses
them adequately.
With regards to our international strategy, as
Julian Roberts said in March, we recognise that
our portfolio of businesses is too broad. We
operate in too many geographies and have too
many lines of business, a number of which are
sub-scale in their respective markets. This makes
the Group complex and difficult to manage on
a decentralised basis as we have done in the
past. It therefore requires simplification.
However, in the current environment, major
rationalisation of our portfolio of existing
businesses would be extremely difficult and, if achievable, would almost certainly destroy
value for our shareholders. It will therefore
take some time to achieve our optimal business
structure and any streamlining activity will be
based on enhancing efficiency and our strategic
focus.
With respect to your comments about Old
Mutual’s board structure and its SA component,
we have two very distinguished SA nonexecutive
directors (B Nqwababa and R J
Khoza) on our board, as well as Russell Edey,
who has a large amount of SA experience and
is chairman of Anglogold Ashanti.
You also made reference to the issues in
our US business. We recently announced that
Old Mutual Bermuda had been closed to new
business and announced yesterday that further
steps are being taken to reduce the risks in
its existing book by restricting the number of
funds that holders of certain of its products can
invest into. We have also taken steps during
2009 to reduce the number of products sold
by our US Life business and have significantly
reduced our target level of new sales as part
of the restructuring and rightsizing of this
business.
While our share price has underperformed
relative to our SA peers, it needs to be
seen in the context of the global economic
environment and the performance of our UK
peers against which we are benchmarked.
These are extraordinary times and, unlike our
SA peers, we have been significantly impacted
by the global market turmoil. It should be
noted that, so far this year, Old Mutual is
actually outperforming the rest of the UK
insurance sector and last year we were exactly
in line with the sector.
|