Commentary

The Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing recently decided not to place any limit on the number of directorships anyone can hold. This could very well encourage talented executives to hold high numbers of directorships, to the detriment to very companies they are meant to provide valuable board oversight to. There is a limited pool of good quality independent directors available in Asia and indeed, the world. As such, it is natural that working or retired executives with strong business experience and networks are invited to become board members at a variety of companies other than their own. Many of the highly sought directors after hold over six to eight board memberships each. (These are just the board seats on listed companies that we know about and do not even include official or unofficial directorships at privately held companies). Often times, the more reputed a CEO or senior executive, the larger number of external boards he/she tends to sit on, according to a study by Dinesh K Padmanabhan1 & Chinmoy Ghosh (2009). Cash compensation for such executives also increases with both their reputations and the number of external board seats they hold. Having executives who hold external board seats within their peer groups or industry can be useful to companies. The authors state that companies reach higher levels of profitability when their CEOs sit on other well performing companies’ boards. Multiple directorships are hence recognized as a good thing, but to a point. The same study showed that when a CEO hold a “large number of outside directorships” however, his/her cash compensation decreases, due to shareholders’ worry that their CEO may be spending too much time away from their own firm. In another 2007 study, “Multiple Directorships and Acquirer Returns”, authors Seoungpil Ahna, Pornsit Jirapornb, and Young Sang Kimc argue that multiple directorships affect the quality of managerial oversight. In studying 1,163 announcements of mergers and acquisitions over a period of six years, the authors found that the acquiring firms experience more negative abnormal returns, when their directors hold more outside board seats. They interpret this result as suggesting that directors serving on multiple boards allow value-destroying acquisitions when they become too busy beyond a certain point. The demands on board directors are increasing. Regulations are on the rise and the business world is ever more complex. To be effective, directors need to be able to contribute independent perspectives, essential skills and experiences, and an understanding of the evolving global marketplace. They should not be deterred by the increased demands placed upon corporate directors, even when those demands involve greater potential liabilities, difficult travel schedules, or complex leadership challenges. Such responsibilities call for dedicated time and effort. Membership in a large number of boards limits anyone’s ability to provide proper corporate governance in all of one’s board appointments. From observing and advising boards in Asia over the past 15 years, it is evident that a board director who is not tied to a full-time executive job can still effectively contribute if he/she sits on a maximum of five or six boards, and no more. Fully employed executives are best advised to take up only two or three board positions at most. The Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing should not bow to the argument that those hoping to make a full-time job out of independent directorships should be able to accept several – with no limit. Mainland regulators currently limit the number of board seats an individual can hold to five, and Hong Kong should consider the same.

Global investments and talent have gravitated towards Hong Kong and Greater China since it began its integration efforts with the global economy, and the red dragon has since ascended rapidly as a world economic power.

The growth of developing economic powerhouses in Asia is starting to impact personal fortunes with a fast increase in households with more than US$ 100,000 investable assets – according to a TNS survey conducted in 24 countries worldwide.

As social media continues to grow, businesses are taking a more sophisticated view of how to use these new channels to market – both with customers and internally within their organisations.

Our Common Goal: Growth Growth is the engine of our economy, the main pursuit of businesses and the ambition of countless people. Growth is about hope and desire; the hope that our children have a better life than ourselves, the desire to accumulate wealth, the ambition to gain knowledge, acquire experience, but also to become a better human being. Growth per se may not be a good thing; it requires the right direction, speed and choices - and it has to be balanced in order to be sustainable.

There is a growing concern in Hong Kong’s private sector: The city is facing a crisis of quality office space whilst demand is continuously increasing. Predictions are that the annual average supply of new office space coming online over the next three years will be 50% of the past 15 year annual average, which will force rents upward. Hong Kong already has the most expensive office space globally by a significant margin, causing affordability issues and the latest research is showing that even Wanchai rents are now on par with central London.

“The social development and increasing wealth cause more and more flexibility, especially of the increasing middle class. Rail- and road infrastructure is under construction, while aviation infrastructure is still in an early planning and development stage due to delayed environmental assessment, air space congestion and Asian wide constraints. The year 2010 was crucial for decision making for most of the Asian countries, to define the strategy and way forward how to develop the necessary domestic, Asian and international air transportation network. Finally also the Chinese government has come up with an implementation strategy and budget schedule, which allows for the first major aviation infrastructure projects to commence implementation.”

Hong Kong and the countries around it are vulnerable to natural hazards of almost every kind – from earthquakes to droughts, from floods to tsunamis. Experts argue that the situation will get even worse with the impact of climate change.

Mainland China and Hong Kong SAR have emerged as the economic and financial hubs of Asia, attracting scores of businesses engaged in the manufacture and distribution of goods from around the world. Despite both being economically active, people may view the two territories in stark contrast. Mainland China’s economy is strictly regulated, with a complex tax regime and relatively high trade barriers. Conversely, Hong Kong SAR is a free port that charges practically no customs duties and maintains a simplified tax system with minimal transactions costs. Dealing with two varying sets of regulations and regimes is part of reaching the markets to which Mainland China and Hong Kong SAR grant access.

The Chinese antitrust agencies issued implementing measures which will allow for an increased level of enforcement against cartels and other kind of anticompetitive conduct in China, but do they really mean business?

The Hong Kong Government published last summer the long awaited Competition Bill which is intended to introduce a general competition law in Hong Kong.

The rights of both the bank and borrower when it comes to non-financial covenant default will not remain a question anymore.

Providing banking and other financial services to the poor has always presented particular challenges. By definition, people with little or no money lack all but the most basic financial resources and economic influence. Their exclusion from the financial system means they have no credit history and no basis for participating in modern financial transactions. Poverty means they have little if any collateral to underpin lending. In large areas of the world, poor people also live in remote rural regions without access to the infrastructure of modern commerce and communications. This inability to benefit from financial services plays a large part in preventing the poor from making even modest improvements in their lives, and helps to trap them in poverty. More than 1 billion of the world’s population subsist on less than US$1a day.