|
A copy of the Broadridge report summarized below, as well as a subsequently released report on the subject, can be downloaded from the following links:
For reports and legal views relating to other SEC rules for shareholder communications, see |
Investor Relations Magazine, February 15, 2008 article
Broadridge gets clients to open up about e-proxy experience Feb 15, 2008 Microsoft among companies giving positive review NEW YORK -- Among the early adopters of e-proxies are Microsoft, Sara Lee and Pharmos, and this week they have shared their impressions in an interesting Q&A posted on the Broadridge Financial Solutions website. IROs and corporate counsel in each of the companies, under questioning by Chuck Callan, SVP for corporate affairs at Broadridge, describe a generally positive experience in moving to internet distribution of proxy materials, detailing big cost savings, few glitches and minor impact on meeting outcomes. In the six months 'notice and access' was available for use, only 69 companies decided to use it in the run-up to their shareholder meetings, representing less than 10 percent of all issuers eligible, Broadridge reports. More are following, but many companies are taking a 'wait and see' approach because of all the uncertainties surrounding cost, preparation time and shareholder receptivity to this new shareholder communication option. All three companies said they were prompted by cost savings and environmental concerns. Sara Lee and Pharmos say they saved $268,000 and $130,000, respectively, by moving to e-proxy. Microsoft IRO Dennie Kimbrough says her company had an additional motivation: 'We wanted to be able to drive people to the internet and use technology in this process.' Pharmos corporate development director Gale Smith says her biggest concern was getting the proxy finalized within the earlier deadlines set by the SEC. Companies are finding they lose about seven to ten days of prep time in order to mail the notice 40 days in advance of the annual meeting. In the Q&A, Microsoft raises the idea of trying to get the SEC to give back five days on the timeline. The respondents also say the SEC rules surrounding the writing the actual notice are too restrictive and suggest design improvements. The full paper, 'A frank discussion on notice & access: A good start and a promising future,' will be available at www.broadridge.com on Tuesday. Go to 'investor communications solutions,' then tab for 'corporations' and 'notice and access.' By
Anna Snider |
