Have a merry 2010

To all my friends and associates. I wish a fantastic 2010. May the winds of good fortune blow behind you with such vigour that your ears whislte.

Leading by Example

We all lose faith in our idols and they all disappoint us at some stage. Let’s look at world golfing sweetheart Tiger, who by latest count, is already 11 over par with extramarital affairs, Joost “powdering” his nose and a myriad of senior people drunk driving suburbia into a “non-walled” community. However I do think it is prudent that we look at ourselves. We literally gulp up gossip and so called failure of moral value stories but when a Government companies are crumbling left right and centre we just shrug and say something like “This is Africa”.

Julius Ceaser, was renowned and respected for the many battles he fought in the front lines, draped in his customary (very visible) red cloak. Many battles was perceived as lost till Julius arrived with a couple of men and turned the spirit of his soldiers and by that, the outcome of the battle. South Africa is currently fighting a battle against poverty, low moral fibre, despondency and a reputation of fraud and quick fix mentalities. In the forefront on this is the catastrophic board failures at the SABC, Transnet, Athletic SA and basically every state owned enterprise. Is this still the overflow of the Zuma/Mbeki power shift leaving us destitute and confused or is it just pure poor management and poor corporate governance. The more prudent question in fact should be when is our leaders going to put on a red cloak and turn public moral and allow us to win this battle.

Corporate Governance??? This is one of the new buzz words that is uttered over our airways, business corridors and board rooms. However can we see proper corporate governance within our institutions? The red cloak in this instance can be worn in the form as the newly published King III report and the simple application of it. With so many new boards being elected in and so many interim boards heading our transport infrastructure, judiciary, our television broadcasts and even our sports the implementation and application of proper corporate governance via King III should be simple mind set to entrench in these new boards. With the promulgation of the New Companies Act, which is due to come into effect in 2010, we as a general public should actually challenge the Government to take the proverbial tree out of their own eyes before investigating the small thorn in the private sectors eyes.

So to conclude. Make proper ethical, transparent and honest business the norm of government institutions. Make open communication with ALL stakeholders mandatory and stop hiding behind bureaucracy and eloquent language. Is it not the very government that made Plain Language a requirement under the National Credit Act, The Companies Act of 2009 and the Consumer Protection Act.

Ignorance or Ignoring

King III, the good for proper corporate governance, was published on the 1st of September 2009 and the codes apply to all entities. This is very different to the old King I and King II reports that was only applicable to public or listed entities. The question I however want to ask today is whether the property syndication industry are working along these ethical guidelines.
I firmly believe that they are probably not. This, to me, is evident from the constitution and guidelines of the Public Property Syndication Association (PPSA) that does not mention compliance to any of these codes. Two of the syndication companies I have had dealings with namely Blue Everest Investments and City Capital (Capital Investments), both of which are now defunct never conformed to King I or King II and it did directly apply to them as public companies. Further the Financial Services Board (FSB) also does not mention it at all as one of the 1.8 licence requirements.

Now the next question we have to ask is why? Is it ignorance or just ignoring it. Is it because the cost of compliance is excessive? Well before you answer that question for yourself, let’s look at why compliance to these codes are, at least in my opinion, important.
The King reports are all about conducting an ethical and transparent business. It is about disclosing all the facts to all stakeholders, giving access to required information, it is about accountability of company directors, it is about thinking of others. The codes also places strong emphasis on independent directorship and active shareholder participation. In conclusion it is about playing open transparent cards and honest commentary to everyone involved and respected writers like Bruce Cameron and Deon Basson has been claiming that is the last thing that they are doing.

Now that you have some information to make up your own mind on why the property syndication industry may not be applying these codes let’s focus on being active in demanding the application of the codes. Financial Advisors, Regulators and the public in general should demand the application of King III in all syndicated companies and fractional ownership schemes so that we insure that it is not avoided by ignorance. This will then make it extremely clear which promoters is ignoring ethical, transparent and honest business practices.

If you want to find out more about King III, the New Companies Act or the Consumer Protection Act visit http://www.sinkorswim.co.za/ or contact john@sinkorswim.co.za

Property Syndication and King III

Although King III was only “launched” on the 1st of September this year we have to already start asking whether the Property Syndication is gearing towards the compliance of King III. That said it may even be extremely prudent to ask if they have ever been King I or II compliant. As the aim of the King reports was directly related to Public and Listed companies.

A lot has been said about the Property Syndication industry with a wave of allegations made against the operators. Some warranted and some maybe not. I believe that most of the attacks have been along the wrong avenue. We have seen some esteemed writers hammering the syndication industry about shareholder communication, so called inflated returns and poor and expensive management principles. Although these items are obviously extremely relevant and more than just idle points of discussion I believe that more emphasis should be placed on whether property syndication promoters subscribe to the King II and now King III rules of governance.

The basic reality is that most may not even know of the King reports. For example the directors of the now defunct Blue Everest Investments never even attempted to subscribe to King I and II and I believe that this was due to ignorance to its existence. Is that an excuse? I don’t think so, Asset Manager City Capital also never attempted compliance to King. Why not? Is it pure ignorance from the public, the promoters and from brokers alike? Is it that the so called governing body ,the Public Property Syndication Association better known as the PPSA, does not even mention compliance of King in their constitution? Or is it because we never demanded it?

In an industry that is bombarded by negative press brokers still keep selling their products and we are led to believe that it is merely the high commission being paid that motivates selling the products. I am however of the opinion that the concept behind the industry is solid and could be a fantastic investment for investors, but only if the syndication industry is more aggressively regulated by us, the public. Having an FSB number is no longer enough to protect the public, as clearly evident in the Capital Investments debacle. Capital Investments was/is a fully licensed Asset Manager and millions of rands are alleged to have been lost in this investment platform.

The focus for the immediate future should be to look at items like proper governance, ie. King III and the broker industry should demand compliance to these codes.

To find out more about the New Companies Act, King III and the Consumer Protection Act please visit www.sinkorswim.co.za