Min:24 °C Max:32 °C
» Weather Details
November 23, 2009 Monday

ST Breaking News | Blogs | On The Money, ST's Home Ground
Goh Eng Yeow
Markets Correspondent
Stand up and be counted
March 18, 2009 Wednesday, 02:13 PM
Goh Eng Yeow recounts DBS’ annual general meeting last year.

REPORTERS are sometimes invited to companies’ AGM as observers. They are given seats at the back of the meeting room to quietly observe the proceedings. They are not allowed to raise questions.

But last year, I decided to turn up at DBS’ AGM – not as a reporter but as a shareholder.

I had received a note a few days, after the annual report was mailed to me, giving details of a $1.8 million payout to former chief executive Jackson Tai.

It aroused my curiosity. Mr Tai was paid between $7 million and $7.25 million for the year in review and I wanted to know the reason for the additional payout.

In his reply,  DBS chairman Koh Boon Hwee said that the payment was for “non-solicitation” and “non-competition”. The payment was to “ensure that when he departs, he does not come back to solicit people and compete with DBS”.

I was quite taken aback by the reply but I held my peace.

Why should a guy, who was paid like a king during his long employment with DBS, want to turn on his former employer in such a manner?

He had, after all, listed his desire “to be with his family in the United States” as his reason for wanting to leave the bank.

There was another interesting twist at the AGM.

One elderly shareholder wanted to know why a director, Christopher Cheng Wai Chee, did not turn up for the meeting even though he was up for re-election.

She asked if Mr Cheng, who was then sitting on the boards of 152 companies including DBS, would have time for all his duties as a director.

Mr Koh had responded that Mr Cheng had attended seven of DBS’ eight board meetings since he was appointed in June, 2007. These meetings, added Mr Koh, were “more important for him to attend”.

This year, I will not be in town when DBS holds its AGM on April 8.

Much heat has been generated over bonus payouts at Merrill Lynch and American International Group so one issue which I would have liked to raise is how local banks and DBS, in particular, reward their top performers in the light of developments elsewhere.

I am under the impression that the bonuses of sales staff were linked with the rate of success they had in selling financial products to customers.

But in DBS, a few products like High Notes Five had turned sour and the subsequent fallout harmed the bank’s reputation in a big way.

Yet, I have been unable to recall if any top management staff had been taken to task for the damage.

Some will say that it is now water under the bridge and that we should move on.

But history has a sad tendency of repeating itself, unless we learn from our mistakes.

I want to know, for instance, who was the top management staff overseeing the unit who devised the High Notes products in the first place, and whether there had been adequate safeguards built into the system regarding their sales.

The bank may never recover the money which had been paid out as bonuses, despite having to cough up between $70 million and $80 million in compensation to customers in Singapore and Hong Kong for the Lehman Brothers-related products.

But the US Congress has led the way by its “name and shame” policy, pressing AIG to reveal names of counterparties in its flawed CDS contracts.

It is now threatening to punish beneficiaries of AIG bonuses payout with a hefty tax.

Meanwhile, New York Attorney general Andrew Cuomo is wrestling with Bank of America to get the list of names of those who benefitted from US$4 billion bonus paid by Merrill Lynch despite posting a fourth quarter loss of US$15 billion loss.

Before I end this entry, let me also record a note of thanks to those who had written in to support me on my subprime nightmare blog.

In writing in to air their views, readers have shown that Singaporeans are much more than regular worshippers of the five Cs.

But they can do more than that. For a start, why not attend the AGMs of the companies in which you are shareholders ?

Too often, investors have shrugged their shoulders in the belief that their views do not count. But if a listed company goes belly-up, their pockets are as badly hit as anyone else who has a stake in it.

Stand up, be heard and be counted. You can make the investing world a better one.



Tags: ,

 
Total comments: 3
Wutless Gonder
March 21, 2009 Saturday

"I was taken aback but held my peace"? Was that what you were holding?

Surely a shareholder or (shudder!) a journalist in search of the truth (it is out there) would have gone with the obvious follow up question.

comment 3313 | Offensive? Report this comment
DBS/SBD
March 18, 2009 Wednesday

Eng Yeow,

This is another hallmark write-up of yours. It's provocative enough to ask if Singapore lawmakers should consider adopting the proposed Australian action on bonuses and payouts to senior executives and mgrs i.e. to cap it or require shalholders' approval. Such a legal requirement if enacted would be more effective than standing up at shareholders meetings. After all, one can't be at every one at the same time - like Christopher Cheng!

comment 3216 | Offensive? Report this comment
Koon
March 18, 2009 Wednesday

Eng Yeow,

I would agree with you that one needs to take a less passive role in investing, at least by attending AGMs when possible. After all, you have your money invested in this company. Unfortunately, with the bear market and calls for 'selling into strength', more and more investors are taking short term positions.

Long term investors are replaced with 'specu-investors' whereby the latter are more interested in the share price on a short term basis. Given this backdrop, I am unsure if many investors out there would be interested in standing up, be heard and be counted. The relationship with the company is diluted.

In addition, I recall in one of your articles, you questioned the relevance of long term investing via 'buy and hold' strategy. In my view, the investment strategy would have an influence on the level of interest with the company. Decisions to invest these days are primarily dictated by the 'market sentiment' and neighbouring bourses' performance.


comment 3214 | Offensive? Report this comment

Your comments are welcome. The following rules apply:

(1) Stay on topic;
(2) No abuse, please;
(3) No personal attacks;
(4) No curse words;
(5) Don't SCREAM in ALL CAPS!

To encourage a meaningful and pleasant dialogue, comments may be deleted. We look forward to your participation!

Best viewed at 1152x864 resolution with IE 6.0 or FireFox 2.0 and above Copyright © 2007 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Co. Regn No. 198402868E | Privacy Statement | Terms & Conditions