Monday 30 November 2009

The wonder of a Woolworths administration – part three

Further to our recent blog on the challenges facing insolvency practitioners (ISPs) in the current business climate, it now seems that the corporate insolvency market is to be the subject of an Office of Fair Trading (OFT) enquiry .


Some of you will find it hard to have any sympathy for these under fire ISPs, reasoning that as they must be so rushed off their feet at present, a squeeze on their fees would not seem out of order. However it is not all sweetness and light in the world of insolvency. Yes, there may be rich pickings at the top end of the scale, which deserve to be scrutinised (Lehman Brothers anybody?) but at the lower end the picture is much less rosy. Due to the reluctance of the banks and HMRC, the two organisations most likely to put a business into insolvency, to pull the plug on businesses, ISPs, while busy, are not that busy.

Also, as so many businesses now operate on a virtual basis, there are very few, if any, realisable assets available. These barely cover the costs of insolvency never mind leave anything left to pay out to creditors.

I still have my doubts about the way the Woolworths administration was handled, but somebody has to clear up the mess that poorly managed businesses leave behind, and in that regard the insolvency profession in general still does a pretty good job.

Friday 20 November 2009

That’s football isn’t it?

Thierry Henry is a cheat. A fantastic footballer, and for all I know a pleasant and charming individual, but on the evidence of this week’s World Cup qualifying play off second leg match in Paris between France and the Republic of Ireland a cheat.


Football and sport are often used as metaphors for business, mainly in terms of teamwork and people management. However there is also a belief that the spirit in which any game is played is as important as the skill level, and this is another ethos that can be applied to business, as in other walks of life.

There is a way of doing things that is honourable and that does not involve using an unfair advantage to get ahead. You can of course have endless debates as to what is fair or not, but deep down most of us know what is right and what is wrong in business.

Listening to Ronnie Whelan and Alex McLeish two experienced professional football people who were on Sky Sports after the game, both said that while it was clearly heartbreaking for the Irish team, they understood why Henry had done what he’d done, and therefore the Irish had to accept it and move on. “That’s football” seemed to be their message, to which the only possible reply is “Well it damn well shouldn’t be!”

Thursday 19 November 2009

The wonder of a Woolworths administration – part two

Rumblings persist concerning the way that the administration of Woolworths was handled, something that we raised in our blog back in December 2008. Indeed Woolworth’s former management have now added their voices to those who believe that more efforts could have been made by the administrators, Deloittes, to keep the giant store group afloat questioning whether there was a conflict of interest in their provision of advice to the company’s banking syndicate prior to their appointment as administrators. Not surprisingly Deloittes have robustly defended their actions, pointing out that the business simply ran out of money, and that they had been called in with the management’s blessing.


Nobody is pretending that Woolworths was the best run company in the world. However the negative impact of its closure on many high streets up and down the country, and the fact that newly established imitators such as Alworths and Wellworths have seemingly thrived, indicate that the general public placed more value on Woolworths than the financial community apparently did.

With an upsurge in insolvencies expected in 2010, insolvency practitioners will face even more challenges in deciding how terminal the decline of such businesses is, and how far they can go in keeping them alive, whilst not being seen to reward poor management. I wish them all the luck in the world – they are going to need it.

Tuesday 17 November 2009

Non-execs – pain without the gain?

One of the biggest questions to emerge from the current banking crisis is what were the non executive directors doing while top banking executives were running their companies into the ground. Indeed this has been a question asked after a number of corporate failures in the past 10 years, such as Enron and Worldcom.


Some of the arguments advanced as to why these non execs were so ineffective in preventing what occurred include lack of accountability, insufficient knowledge of the businesses they were directors of, the fact that they were not selected from a wide enough pool of candidates, and the implication that their high levels of remuneration had compromised their independence.

This view on payment levels was expressed forcefully in last Sunday’s Mail on Sunday. And yet, when one takes into account the risks associated with being a director, the time and effort required to do the job in a way that discharges the legal duties of a director as well as satisfies the requirements of external stakeholders, and the knowledge and experience required to carry out the role properly, the question moves towards not whether non-execs are paid too much but are they actually paid enough to ensure that the right calibre of individual undertakes the role.

That is not to say that independence argument does not have merit, because it clearly does, but surely one of the reasons that a non executive is brought on board is for their ability to think and act independently, something that can obviously be established during the selection process. It is also difficult to establish what level of remuneration is excessive, in that £30,000 for some individuals would be a considerable sum whilst for others it would be pocket money.

We at Orchard have always been big fans of non-execs for all companies, and have had our own from the start. Good non-execs add considerable value bringing experience and knowledge to the party as well as providing a vital sanity check for executive directors and managers, and standing up for the interests of outside shareholders. One of the reasons that we have a strong relationship with the Non Executive Directors Association (NEDA) is the desire to promote good corporate governance through a strong non executive presence on company boards.

We all want knowledgeable, experienced, independent, diverse non executive directors in big and small companies who are willing to stand up to and challenge executive managers where necessary. We also expect these non execs to make available the necessary time to undertake their role, and to take full director risk and responsibilities when carrying out their role. We therefore cannot be surprised when they start to demand remuneration that reflects their skills, their time and the risks that they take.