• http://www.ry.com Richard Carpenter

    Dominic,
    While I fully support your initiative for ‘convenient’, well-structured online annual reports, there is one issue that needs clarification…mainly around the following requirement:
    “3. Promise us that your firm will never, starting from the time of your submission to us, sell reports that do not meet the SEC’s requirements, e.g. image-based, Flash paper, and PDF-only reports.”
    - We, like many other consultants, advise clients of best practice and the danger of not having accessible content or failing to develop content designed for the web…many think carefully on the back of such advice and tailor their communications accordingly.
    But, as I’m sure you’re aware, some clients simply don’t want to know even once they’ve been advised. They will rule out user-friendly online reports for various reasons and opt for, say, an image-based report or simply a PDF. Some do it for cost reasons; some because they don’t yet see the real value of the web. Many are probably a mix of the two. I believe that is the right of the client to make that choice – it is, after all, their communications programme.
    - Does that mean though that consultants would be excluded from your list of ‘great online annual report’ suppliers because they might then go on to provide what the client wants despite having advised those clients that, say, a PDF-only route might not be accessible or that image-based reports are not that user-friendly?

  • http://www.irwebreport.com/daily/ Dominic Jones

    Hi Richard,

    “Does that mean though that consultants would be excluded from your list of ‘great online annual report’ suppliers because they might then go on to provide what the client wants despite having advised those clients that, say, a PDF-only route might not be accessible or that image-based reports are not that user-friendly?”

    Yes, they will be excluded. We will not recognize any firm that participates in helping a client breach SEC requirements, even if that client is not subject to SEC requirements.

    The requirements are there to ensure easy access and use, accommodation of investors’ needs, and to afford investors the advantage of the inherent interactivity of the Web.

    That is the dictionary definition of “convenient.” A tough standard, for sure, but the right one.

    In essence, we are asking online annual report producers to stand up and do the right thing. I know it’s hard, and I know this will shorten the list substantially, but there are annual report producers who currently meet this standard. They just don’t do bad reports, even when the client insists.

    They deserve recognition.

    As for companies and vendors that currently are not meeting the SEC’s standards, and that’s most of them, they are going to have a tough time explaining why they ignored available research, international standards, and SEC guidance when this issue gets brought up in court.

  • http://investoreports.squarespace.com Simon Hammerton

    We have the same challenges as Richard mentions above, where we have legacy clients who are very attached to their “quickreports” for reasons of cost and convenience.

    However we are engaging all these clients in discussions to move them to proper W3C compliant HTML reporting – this is in their best interests.

    So yes, as so often, you are being dogmatic, a pain in the rear – and right.

    NASDAQ certainly need some counseling on best practice – what are they thinking by offering virtually free “dynamic documents” ?!?

    This is simply going to create a legacy of bad online reports, that could have significant negative impact on the view investors take on online reporting to shareholders, with associated collateral damage to the SEC Notice and Access initiative.

  • http://www.irwebreport.com/daily/ Dominic Jones

    “NASDAQ certainly need some counseling on best practice – what are they thinking by offering virtually free “dyanamic documents” ?!?”

    Wait. There’s trouble brewing on that front…

    As for the past. That’s done. We’re just looking for companies that can and will do the right thing.

    Clearly, there’s some education that needs to be done. I think we can do our part by drawing attention to the problems.

    I’ve already noticed some reaction to a couple of the items we’ve published recently, particularly the one on AMERCO. Mellon’s clients are now offering access to HTML alongside the image-based document, which is a backward way of doing it, but at least they’re responding. Now we just need a little navigation for the HTML options. LOL! Hell, it’s like pulling teeth.

    Broadridge, however, is oblivious. But not for long…

  • http://derek.abdinor.co.za Derek

    blame can be often be attached to the company’s traditional ATL agency, who may have a whiz-bang-flash approach to anything web. They give the report to some designers who don’t work in this field.

    Online reporting is a niche thing: its not B2C, not even B2B. Its become more PR than PR ever was.

  • http://www.geber.at/en Thomas

    Thanks Dominic, this is a great idea!
    My experience with companies asking for image based reports is, that they simple don’t know what HTML can do… Asking an agency to provide a PDF seems to me paradoxical: anyone can produce and load up a PDF to the web?

  • Pingback: Basic guidelines for online annual reports - IRWebReport.com

  • Pingback: Great online annual report designers -- the unbiased list - IRWebReport.com

  • http://www.FuzzyLogic.ca Micky Gulless

    I’ve put a few annual reports and other sorts of business reports online, usually for smaller companies. Usually I’m given a bloated PDF from someone who doesn’t know how to make a PDF for web use – a printer or designer for print. It isn’t Tagged so I can’t make it Tagged from what I’ve been given.

    If I can get a source document that I have the source program for (seldom), the document is usually is NOT constructed logically so that Adobe Acrobat would not be able to Tag it coherently anyway.

    In my experience, a company’s stressed-out management usually signs off on Annual Reports at the last minute, never allowing anyone – not even print people, let alone the forgotten website designers – any time to do anything properly.

    Although for annual report users I would want to prepare full HTML if I had my way and although I lobby hard for more useable versions, the best I’ve been able to manage for my clients is an optimized and well bookmarked PDF document. And my clients do not get complaints from their audience – at least none that I’ve been able to wheedle out of them.

  • http://investoreports.squarespace.com/ Simon

    Hi Dominic

    Our new set of reports – as listed on our very new international site http://investoreportsusa.squarespace.com – I think would largely comply with your requirements and in some respects, particularly in terms of usability, perhaps go a step further.

    These reports are/will be W3C compliant, although in some cases on the latest reports, due to timing, the precise compliance may follow a little later than the live date!

    You will see that we are not offering the “quickreport” product at all internationally.

    Locally we are persuading all our clients still on this platform to move up to proper HTML, and are not marketing the bottom end product any longer.

    We no doubt could still generate considerable revenue out of this product, both locally and internationally, but agree with you that its time is past; it would not be in our client’s best interests to present their reports in this format any longer.

    Regards
    Simon

  • Pingback: When you know, and do nothing… - IRWebReport.com