• http://twitter.com/dougchia Douglas K. Chia

    So what if Coke wants to set up a medium for discussion in a controlled environment? As you know, there’a a lot of garbage on Facebook, Twitter, Yahoo! Message Boards, and the various other open chat sites. What BR provides is a platform for discussion between the company and verified shareholders. It matters to the company that the people who are commenting are actually shareholders. And it also matters to the company how many shares they hold. Sure, it would be nice to have shareholders speak to each other (of course, shareholders who would benefit from that platform are free to set that up), and maybe that’s something that gets added further down the line, but for now, if comapnies and shareholders want a mechanism for direct feedback, this seems like a pretty good start. Otherwise, filtering out the garbage is very difficult and may not even be worth it given the high percentage of pure garbage.

    (FULL DISCLOSURE: The company I work for uses BR’s services, and I serve on an Advisory Steering Committee to BR on these and other shareholder communications issues. I provided direct input to BR during the design phase of this shareholder forum product.)

  • http://irwebreport.com Dominic Jones

    The point is this isn’t in any way a “medium for discussion.” No one discusses anything. Management doesn’t show up and neither do the directors. The shareholders speak/type into a form and it vanishes into the ether.

    It’s a complete sham. What are boards so worried about? The rest of the world gets on quite happily on the web, but they have to have control over it.

    Let there be open discussion with all stakeholders (or do directors now only represent the shareholders?) Then, let the shareholders decide in the vote.

    All will be well.

  • Pingback: CorpGov.net » The Annual Meeting: From Gloss to Dialogue

  • Pingback: This week in Investor Relations | IR Web Report