Opinion | Disclosure rules make it hard to sift facts from farce
Investors aren't served by meaningless announcements scripted by lawyers, especially when the verbiage hides what's really going on
Recently, I spotted a company announcement that left me scratching my head. On July 11, a diversified holding company called South China published an open letter to Sinosoft Technology "regarding a certain representation made in a prospectus … issued by Sinosoft Technology Group which is incomplete or, to the best of our knowledge, inconsistent with the relevant fact".
What makes this company announcement intriguing is the mix of huffiness (Sinosoft and South China are locked in a public dispute) and the utter vagueness of South China's complaint. What is this "certain representation"? What is the "relevant fact"?
Welcome to the world of company announcements. These missives to shareholders published on the Hong Kong exchange website and in newspapers are required by regulation. They are meant to give all shareholders disclosure about share-price sensitive information on listed firms at the same time.
The changes followed the collapse of the internet bubble in 2001, during which analysts colluded with issuers and bankers to pump up the price of dodgy dotcoms.
Nowadays, if a listed company wants to say something to shareholders, it can't go through a favoured analyst. It needs to make a public statement. It's a nice idea. But at best, these announcements are jargonistic and confusing. At worst, they deflect investors' attention from the true story.
In the "good old days" before regulators took over, investors and analysts could ring up a company's management for input on a range of company issues. Now, companies are required to disclose everything and anything in public announcements that are apparently written by lawyers, and which are extremely lacking in information and insight.