Saving the planet, one improvement at a time

New upgrades and planned future releases to our class-leading iRoadshow and IPO Research Online platforms – adding value to Research, Syndicate, Equity & Debt Capital Markets and IR professionals.

Events this week have highlighted the urgency of moving towards ecologically sustainable solutions. Printing & distributing IPO Research and Investor Roadshow materials have a materially adverse impact on the environment, as our graphic below shows, which is why more and more clients are turning towards iRoadshow and IPO Research Online.

Following detailed user feedback, we’ve added some new functionality to increase investor engagement and provide an unrivalled Deal Manager experience on both platforms, as well as providing a more ecologically-compelling solution.

Please take a look below – you’ll also notice we’ve included feedback directly from our recent client and user survey, in blue text within grey boxes, giving you an idea of what you can expect from iRoadshow and IPORO.

 

New functionality releases to help close your deal

Follow the leader

Take control of what your investors see during a conference call. Now you can share your screen and control the turning of pages/slides in your investor presentations, allowing you to support your value proposition and focus on deal closing specific points.

At the same time, the Annotations function allows parties to review any annotations added by the Deal Manager or specific investor during the call.

iRoadshow allows for multiple documents in one room, which is a beneficial feature. Better price point too~Survey feedback

 

Annotations with options – iRoadshow

As a Deal Manager, you can now save your annotations within iRoadshow – and you also have the option to share them with your team alone, or with investors and all parties accessing the iRoadshow.

iRoadshow & IPORO allow users to change presentations themselves ~ Survey feedback

 

Enhanced tracking metrics within IPO Research Online

Drawing on all available data with the IPORO, we can now provide even greater oversight on investor behavour, including graphs portraying a summary overview on all investor engagement; most viewed pages; individual views and company views per document, among others.

IPORO & iRoadshow rated 9/10 for Value and Reliability by all users ~ Survey feedback

 

PLANNED FUTURE RELEASES

A new Dashboard overview with detailed project information


We’re also adding a new Dashboard to give you key information at a glance.
At a glance, detailed statistics on key investors engagement in your iRoadshow adds significant value, and will help your equity sales team quickly focus on those investors who have displayed the most interest via a variety of metrics

100% of clients said we got things right first time, every time ~ Survey feedback

 

Freehand drawing

To complement the other new annotations features, we’re planning a freehand drawing tool to add another layer of functionality within iRoadshow

100% of clients said they would recommend iRoadshow or IPORO ~ Survey feedback

 

Our latest digital service, IPO Research Online, provides unrivalled management information including Page Level Reporting.

Our latest digital service, IPO Research Online, provides unrivalled management information including Page Level Reporting.

We’ve analysed data from over 21 IPOs for which we’ve provided the service this year to uncover trends in investor activity – from how many investors typically login to view your IPO Research, how long they spend on each page, to who the key investors are and what they’re really interested in – and the results are enlightening:

European ECM 2018: what does the future hold in store? – a view from the Thomson Reuters ECM Roundtable with IFR

It’s a challenging time for ECM issuance. European issuance is down 36% compared to previous years, with only Germany and the UK making it into the top ten global issuers of Equity deals to date in 2018. So what does the future hold in store, according to the panel at this morning’s Thomson Reuters IFR ECM Conference?

Clearly this past week we’ve seen some high-profile issues struggling. General market confidence has meant sellers pushing up pricing, leaving investor appetite diminished and negatively affecting performance. The panel’s view is that investors are, understandably, generally getting cold feet at the first sign of negativity; and while it’s attractive to blame ‘naked shorting’ for this, the general view is that it’s something of a red herring, and that pricing of an IPO is a much more important element in determining the initial performance of a new issue.

Underlining this, globally IPO issuance is up 16%. The strength of US demand continues, and new rules in Asia mean some highly attractive and successful new market entrants there; some European IPOs have been equally successful but the ‘equity story’ needs to be strong and pricing needs to be aligned. Investors have some risk appetitive but no tolerance for negative performance. Investors will continue to look for price concessions to mitigate their recent aftermarket losses.

Investors and issuers alike need to understand that it can sometimes be a rocky couple of days at the date of issue, but that the IPO market is not a one-day market. Fundamental investors should be the cornerstone of any IPO: investors who understand the company and who’ll take a long-term view of their investment. Digging deep into understanding the needs of, and aligning with, ‘Conviction investors’ is more likely to yield greater success, and advisors may need to adapt their marketing accordingly.

The ‘Early Look’ process can help but it’s frequently too vague and without enough detail; issuers often shy away from revealing too much granular financial information, in turn affecting the investor process which relies on detailed financials to take a position. The panel’s view is that Early Look feedback on pricing is critical and should be ignored at the peril of both issuers and advisors alike.

Key takeaways:

  • There will be some deals launching successfully before the 2018 year end, but some will fall away – this ‘natural selection’ is not a bad thing and means the market is regulating itself;
  • We’ll see more ‘carve-outs’ and Dual Tracks across Europe;
  • While European new issues may struggle given the difficult macro environment, issuers and their advisors fundamentally need to work on ensuring a really strong ‘equity story’ and sensible, fair pricing to ensure success.

How can Black&Callow help?

  • IPO Research Online and iRoadshow, the two newest additions to our online services, give issuers and their advisors unrivalled insight into investor engagement from Early Look through Investor Education to management Presentations and IPO Research.
  • This insight helps advisors and issuers understand who the most interested and engaged investors are, as well as their concerns and pressure points, via our unique Page Level Reporting – helping build a better strategy for, and a better success rate with, key investors
  • Equally our traditional financial printing services, alongside our online services, help speed up execution and meet regulatory compliance needs while helping reduce the cost of launching new issues.

For more information, contact Tim Black at Black&Callow on 020 3794 1720 or via tim.black@blackandcallow.com

This morning’s panel comprised:

  • Craig Coben – Bank of America Merrill Lynch
  • Luis Vaz Pinto – Societe Generale CIB
  • Suneel Hargunani – Citigroup
  • Silvia Viviano – JP Morgan
  • William Smiley – Goldman Sachs

10th October 2018

 

No copyright infringement is intended. All content is from notes taken at this morning’s event.

IPORO celebrates 15 projects in H1 2018

IPORO celebrates 15 projects in H1 2018

 

Officially launched in January 2018 as a springboard from our iRoadshow platform, IPORO (IPO Research Online) has already been used on 15 of the largest global IPOs in the first half of the year, including the biggest European Tech IPO – Adyen’s Eur 947m landmark offering.

IPORO has a 100% success rate in reaching key investors, and providing unrivalled data on investor engagement, from its unique Page Level Reporting – which pages are the most viewed by each investor – through to a granular level, highly detailed audit reporting on all investor activity.

Over the course of the fifteen IPOs, we’ve developed ‘Best Practice’ guidelines covering the process, initial engagement, disclaimers and other key areas of benefit to the rapidly growing IPORO community. For more information please contact us on 020 3794 1720 or email london@iporesearchonline.com.

Extel 2018 Winners

Extel 2018 Winners

Congratulations to Keplar Cheuvreux on its meteoric rise in rankings in this year’s Extel survey – we’re delighted & hope that our IPO Research Online platform has played a small part in helping move its Research onwards and upwards. See more here.

COBS 11A. 1.4 – are you prepared for July 1st? – how IPO Research Online may help

COBS 11A. 1.4 – are you prepared for July 1st? – how IPO Research Online may help

The FCA’s Conduct of Business Initial Public Offering (IPO) Research Instrument 11A. 1.4B has wide-reaching and dramatic implications for issuers seeking to IPO, as well as their advisors. The instrument comes into effect on July 1st and, according to a number of sources, many banks and issuers are scrabbling with how best to comply with its terms.

The main purpose of the Instrument is to ensure greater fairness and transparency, effected through the invitation of ‘unconnected analysts’ alongside connected analysts to management and information about the IPO to ensure the publication of balanced research.

Under the new COBS Instrument, an issuer will not be able to interact with connected analysts until either the analyst presentation or the banks’ roles are communicated in writing by the issuer. The time and date of availability to both sets of analysts must also be recorded. A further effect of the Instrument means increasing pressure on timetables, as the issuer’s financials and accounts must be reviewed and completed within 135 days of the ITF. The knock-on effect is that two weeks of investor education may be reduced to just one week, with further pressure on Blackout periods.

This raises a number of questions: what form should access to the IPO Research take for both sets of analysts, to ensure both have simultaneous, impartial access? How can restrictions on time and geography (bearing in mind some transactions may have jurisdictional restrictions, such as the ability to offer securities into the US) be imposed?

IPO Research Online
from Black&Callow provides a ready-made solution which has been successfully used on many of this year’s leading European IPOs:

  • Simultaneous availability to connected and unconnected analysts – maximise the shortening timetables
  • Jurisdictional/geographical restrictions can be easily enforced via IP recording & reporting, and via bespoke Disclaimers
  • Democratised access – online availability makes it easy for all parties to access management and information in the best way possible
  • Shortened Investor Education and Blackout periods can be managed more easily – instant availability and ability to open and close at the touch of a button
  • Better information flow – the draft Prospectus and analyst or management Presentations can be housed in one secure site, including Dynamic Watermarking to prevent dissemination
  • Full audit trail – records of all issuer, advisor, connected and unconnected analysts’ activities such as time and date of each access – uniquely down to Page Level Reporting

For more information, contact Steve Pusey or Tom Ireland at IPO Research Online on 020 3794 1720 or via london@iporesearchonline.com

For more information see: https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/COBS/11A/1.html

EU-US Privacy Shield, GDPR, and challenges to personal data

EU-US Privacy Shield, GDPR, and challenges to personal data

On 20th September, representatives from the EU’s Data Protection division and the US Department of Commerce met to conduct the first annual review of the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework. The new framework was established in 2016 to replace the previous EU-U.S. Safe Harbour agreement, which, the European Commission stressed, “can no longer serve as a legal basis for transfers of personal data to the U.S.” (1), following the EU’s ruling in the Max Schrems v. Data Commission case.

A carefully-worded official Joint Press Statement notes that “The first annual review marks an important milestone for the Framework… U.S. and EU officials welcomed the information shared by Privacy Shield participants …. Officials noted that this input will lead to continued improvements to the functioning of the program.” (2)

 

So what does this mean?

It’s clear to commentators such as D2 Legal Technology LLP, writing in the respected Lexology website (3), that “the Privacy Shield remains subject to criticism that it does not fully protect the fundamental rights of individuals provided under EU privacy law. For example, there are concerns surrounding the lack of sufficient protection … Additionally, concerns remain that the Privacy Shield would not able to control how US government agencies access EU resident personal data, once it is in the US.”

It also notes that a successful challenge of the Max Schrems kind would mean that organisations relying solely on the Privacy Shield to effect legal transfers of EU residents’ personal data into the US “would face, overnight, the unenviable choice of being in breach of EU data protection laws or stopping such transfers.”

The Privacy Shield is already facing challenges from European officials who, behind the scenes, “remain unhappy about the US stalling on making changes that bring it in line with data protection laws(4). Both sides recognise that many companies have not signed up to the new Privacy Shield register while its fate remains uncertain. Other commentators note that the Privacy Shield is essentially a rebranding of the Safe Harbour agreement without offering additional protection to bring it into line with EU standards (5).

Additionally – the influential ‘Article 29 Working Party’ which is made up of a representative from the data protection authority of each EU Member State, the European Data Protection Supervisor and the European Commission – published a statement (6) following the establishment of the Privacy Shield. It noted “A number of concerns remain regarding both the commercial aspects and the access by U.S. public authorities to data transferred from the EU… It remains unclear how the Privacy Shield Principles shall apply to processors” – such as online Roadshow and IPO Research providers.

 

What effect will the GDPR have?

From May 2018, the General Data Protection Regulations come into force, signalling the most dramatic and far-reaching changes to data protection across the EU for 20 years. Despite the UK being in the Brexit process, it has signed up to inclusion of the GDPR along with its European neighbours.

The GDPR imposes significant restrictions on the transfer of personal data outside the European Union. Personal data within the meaning of the regulations includes all of the information typically required and collected by online service providers for Roadshow and IPO Research, such as names, addresses, email addresses, telephone numbers, and IP addresses.

Fines for unauthorised cross-border data transfer are steep: 4% of the organisation’s annual global turnover or Euro 20m. And according to Lexology “The GDPR also introduces regular reviews of Adequacy Decisions granted by the European Commission to non-EU jurisdictions. Such reviews would likely include the Privacy Shield, further increasing the possibility that the Privacy Shield may be found to offer insufficient protection under EU privacy law.”

 

So what does this mean for syndicate and capital markets teams and their clients?

Using a US-headquartered provider of online Roadshows or IPO Research is now riskier than ever.  The GDPR, far from alleviating the situation, will put further strain on already precarious arrangements. Relying on the Privacy Shield to afford adequate cross-border data protection, and in advance of clarification of effective mechanisms under the GDPR and US-based providers’ introduction of measures to meet such mechanisms, means that clients’ data – and deals – remain vulnerable.

 

What’s the alternative?

Syndicate and capital markets teams can avoid putting their deals – as well as investors’ and clients’ personal data – at risk by using iRoadshow and ipoResearchOnline, which specifically host data in Jersey, officially recognised by the EU as providing adequate protection. iRoadshow and ipoResearchOnline additionally provide the most secure platforms available, protecting client files with dynamic watermarking, 128-bit and 256-bit encryption and a host of other security measures.

With alternatives such as iRoadshow and ipoResearchOnline available, why put your deals at risk?

 (1)  http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-15-6015_en.htm

 (2)  https://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2017/09/joint-press-statement-secretary-ross-and-commissioner-jourova-privacy

 (3)  https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=89b6f2a0-ffa9-415f-9e3e-a2aec357a610

 (4)  https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/22/first_privacy_shield_review/

 (5)  https://www.vpncompare.co.uk/privacy-shield-passes-first-annual-review-but-its-long-term-future-remains-uncertain/

 (6)  http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/press-material/press-release/art29_press_material/2016/20160726_wp29_wp_statement_eu_us_privacy_shield_en.pdf

On The Road – a newsletter for Roadshow, Syndicate and Capital Markets teams

In this edition of “On the road”, we interview Julian Macedo, the Founder and Managing Director of The ECM Team and former MD at Barclays, on the evolving IPO process in EMEA and the need for greater and earlier engagement between investors and companies...

OTR: Julian, you wrote in May 2017 about the “Early Look” or “Pilot Fishing” stages of an IPO, and how from a prospective investor’s point of view, earlier access to materials – such as the presentation and, potentially, draft Prospectus – would be beneficial. In practice, how likely is it that the company would have a well-formed investment case and advanced materials at this stage?
JM: The early look meetings typically take place 6-12 months prior to the target IPO date, and usually once the lead banks are appointed by the issuer. So the company’s equity story should be relatively well thought through. What investors can provide at this stage is genuine feedback on how they perceive the equity story and what changes if any they might appreciate. Often, this feedback is more insightful than at the time of the IPO.
By the time of pilot fishing, the equity story should be entirely set out. Investors don’t really appreciate being asked about major changes at this stage. Instead the conversation should be on market and sector conditions, and therefore possible participation/sentiment. Ideally, the company will already have met the investor in the early look meetings so the pilot fishing meeting will be an update on management’s progress towards targets.
In both cases, investors are however asking for a better framework for giving this feedback. They want more time with the presentation than just a 45 minute discussion after which the hard copy is taken away. Some will also appreciate a specific valuation framework and/or peers being proposed by the bankers, which makes it easier for the investors to formulate responses and challenges to the banker proposal.

OTR: Would a service like iRoadshow help with the “Early Look” or “Pilot Fishing” meetings?
JM: The investors would very much appreciate more time with the presentation before and after these pre IPO meetings. Based on what I have seen, iRoadshow gives investors secure and time limited access to the presentation materials on a compliance-friendly platform. The quality of discussion with investors should be better if investors have earlier access to the non-deal roadshow materials. What’s more, the issuer will then have page-level access information, so they understand exactly what the investor has spent time focusing on. Together, these changes mean the pre deal meeting moves away from being a basic introduction to the issuer’s business, to a specific and insightful discussion on what the investor liked and didn’t like.

OTR: We discussed the need for corporates to engage with potential investors and focus on the long-term story, how it stacks up and how will the company grow. How best can companies prepare and engage?
JM: New issuers should recognise that investors aren’t looking at them in a vacuum. Investors are judging the issuer against companies that have spent 20 years beating their numbers. IPO candidates should carry out an honest appraisal of the business plan and strategy, including how these tie into the historical track record. We guide issuers to be humble and factual about their achievements, and up front about areas that they don’t focus on and why.
Investors worry about a new issuer’s first months and years post listing. They recognise the transition to a listed company is not easy. While it is tempting to juice up the IPO equity story, management need to think carefully about how deliverable that will be, as they are on the hook for it.

OTR: Does the growth of ‘passive investors’ mean that the “investor universe” is evolving in a way which would make emerging markets IPOs more difficult?
JM: The world of equities is shrinking. The growth of passive investing, the cost pressures at the investment banks, and the changes in equity research from MIFID II, are making it harder for all but the very largest companies to reach investors.
In the EM world, I was at the LSE’s CIS and CEE capital markets conference in March. It was striking how many speakers said actively listening to investors is increasingly important for them.
One issuer preparing for an IPO said “It’s important to have an IR department. We have been investing in roadshows for two years already, before our IPO.” Even five years ago, this would have been extremely unusual to find. And a recent issuer said “We wished we had listened harder to investors and research analysts before, on what information and data they required on top of the regulatory disclosure”.

OTR: We discussed that “The IPO is not an end in itself”. What one piece of advice would you give companies exploring an IPO?
JM: The IPO is one of the most important strategic steps a company can take in its growth. It is importantly a transition to a new environment, one that management can be very unprepared for. We spend a lot of time in our work with issuers preparing, not for the IPO – but for becoming a listed company and servicing all the new public market stakeholders in the business.
After all, as a recent issuer said at the 2015 LSE IPO conference “We only realised after the IPO that we spent all this time flirting with the bankers, but we married the research analysts”!

CP17/5: Reforming the availability of information in the UK equity IPO process

CP17/5: Reforming the availability of information in the UK equity IPO process

The Law Society this month published its detailed and considered response to the FCA’s consultation “CP17/5: Reforming the availability of information in the UK equity IPO process”.

The FCA consultation paper proposes amendments to the Conduct of Business sourcebook (COBS), one of which amendments – COBS 11A.1.4B R – proposes:

“The firm [involved in the production of investment or non-independent research] must ensure that a range of unconnected analysts … are given the opportunity … either:
(a) to join the firm’s analysts in any communication with the issuer team that is made or received before the firm disseminates any investment research or non-independent research about the issuer client or the relevant securities as described in COBS 11A.1.4AR(1); or
(b) to be in communication with the issuer team in a way that satisfies the following conditions:
(i) the mode of that communication must be reasonably appropriate for the purposes of enabling those unconnected analysts to receive information from and make enquiries to the issuer team, so that the unconnected analysts are able to form a substantiated opinion about the issuer client or the relevant securities as described in COBS 11A.1.4AR(1).”

With regard to this, The Law Society responded:

“Issuers should be able to choose the form of communication (face to face or electronic or a combination) that is most appropriate to the circumstances of the issuer and the relevant offering. Issuers should be able to impose additional restrictions on electronic access, where relevant (for example, regarding the length of time that any presentation may be viewed electronically).”

Bearing in mind the FCA’s desire to widen the scope of the IPO process to ensure access to relevant persons and materials by unconnected as well as connected research analysts, we believe the Law Society’s recommendation of using, as an alternative, a secure electronic platform such as iRoadshow, with the ability to facilitate restrictions on access including length of viewing time, is eminently sensible.

iRoadshow provides the next generation of online roadshow and can be specifically set-up for either Pilot Fishing/Early Look stages, or Investor Education/ IPO Research or Management Presentation stages. It features advanced security, including Dynamic Watermarking, and is designed to democratise and facilitate access: users can participate on mobile, tablet or PC, rather than having to download an App (in certain jurisdictions) or sit in front of a PC.

In addition, iRoadshow provides the most detailed audit reporting of any electronic roadshow platform, including Page Level Reporting – providing underwriters, syndicate and management with unrivalled insight into exactly which pages investors and other users are – and aren’t – viewing. Detailed, granular-level reporting which can be generated in real-time and downloaded to CSV, PDF or Word formats provide a permanent record for compliance, also keeping with the FCA’s consultation paper proposal which includes:

“Article 10 and 14 of MAR respectively prohibit unlawful disclosure of inside information and insider dealing by any person. The handling of potential inside information is, therefore, of significant importance for market participants. It is important that all persons involved with the information chain during an IPO have a process to identify whether the information they disclose or receive is inside information.”

Additionally, the CP17/5 Consultation paper also addresses cost in its ‘cost benefit analysis’ Annex. This states:

“Our proposals also allow the issuer or syndicate banks to provide unconnected analysts with an opportunity to be in communication with the issuer’s management …. assuming that the mode of communication is a physical meeting through an analyst presentation (separate to connected analysts), the issuer or banks would incur additional costs for hiring a venue… the total cost of hiring a typical City of London venue for 60-100 unconnected analysts is estimated to be approximately £25,000-£30,000. .. If, rather than a physical meeting, any separate communication between the issuer’s management and unconnected analysts were to be facilitated through one or more web-based communications, conference calls or email exchanges, the above costs would reduce significantly.”

Compared with the cost of physical meetings, the use of iRoadshow provide significant cost savings as well as greater access for parties unable to attend a physical meeting. Added to this the benefits of helping compliance with MAR via detailed audit reporting, we think The Law Society, in encouraging electronic access, may just be onto a winner.

The FCA’s consultation paper can be viewed here
The Law Society’s response can be viewed here

On The Road – a newsletter for Roadshow, Syndicate and Capital Markets teams

On The Road – a newsletter for Roadshow, Syndicate and Capital Markets teams

Q: EM’s clients such as Aeroflot and Phosagro produce ‘best in class’ Reporting as evidenced by the Investor Relations Society’s recent awards. How do you work with them to understand their investors’ needs?
A: We have longstanding relationships with our clients that often date back to the time of their IPO and sometimes well before. Although much of our day-to-day work is with IR and PR departments, we also develop close relationships with senior management or beneficial shareholders and therefore gain an understanding of our clients that goes well beyond a narrow IR perspective. This is particularly important in Emerging Markets such as Russia. EM has offices in Moscow as well as the major financial centres of London, New York and Hong Kong, and we are uniquely placed to bridge cultural differences. In our experience, many Russian companies are extremely professional and keen to produce ‘best in class’ reporting and disclosure. However, sometimes they need to be guided into what types of disclosure investors expect and how to present certain information. We also regularly carry out investor perception studies for our clients and most of the times the feedback we receive with respect to our clients’ quality of Investor Relations is indeed very positive.

Q: How important is it for companies to gain a better understanding of what their investors want?
A: For companies to understand what their investors want is of supreme importance. Certainly, for our Russian clients this has always been the case but perhaps nowadays more so than ever. A strong IR function can contribute significantly to a company’s share price and valuation as investors appreciate the transparency and clear insights gained from good investor relations. Moreover, we have seen that investors are becoming increasingly active and hands-on. Activist shareholders campaigns to hold management to account when they are unhappy about the company’s direction or performance are becoming increasingly common and therefore companies need to be on their mettle. To work closely with your investors is absolutely imperative in this context, so there are no surprises for either side.

Q: Are there any geographical differences, ie do Russian investors have different concerns to W. European investors?
A: If we are talking about domestic institutional investors, the Russian universe is still fairly limited, but overall their concerns are the same as those of Western European investors. Although in recent years it has been particularly challenging for the Russian market to attract Western European investors, the fundamentals that those investors look for haven’t changed. A good example is the successful IPO of Detsky Mir (“Children’s World”) earlier this year, where EM acted as the Financial PR and IR advisor. This was the first globally marketed IPO out of Russia since the beginning of Western sanctions against Russia in March 2014, and it was striking that 90% of total demand for the shares came from international investors (including 35% from UK and 25% from US). Since Western sanctions started, it had been virtually impossible for Russian issuers to attract trust and attention of international investors due to geopolitical tensions, volatile rouble, and a struggling economy. To re-open the market for Russian issuers, the Detsky Mir deal therefore required unusually thorough briefing of international media, analysts, and investors. Detsky Mir, a market leader in the attractive sector of children’s goods, with a fantastic brand, strong ownership and first class corporate governance (another “hot topic” in our markets) stood out as an extremely attractive investment in this context.

Q: How do Russian & CIS roadshows differ – if at all – from W. European roadshows?
A: In my experience, there is little difference. Nowadays the sophistication of issuers and their advisors in Russia and CIS is on a par if not higher than many Western European examples. Clearly the addressable investor universe is more limited for Russia and CIS and this guides to a large extent where the roadshow will go.

Q: Crisis communications and reputation management’: you look after Aeroflot, what lessons can be learned from the recent United Airlines PR disaster?
A: Obviously United Airline staff made a mistake in the first place with what happened, and then compounded the problem with the initial management reaction.  Of course together with Aeroflot we looked carefully at the fall-out and any lessons to be learned. I don’t think I am close enough to give an informed opinion, but It certainly highlighted the importance of social media and the speed with which this type of news reaches a global audience nowadays. One of the key things therefore is a very swift and completely honest reaction and damage limitation. It again proved the truth of Warren Buffett’s famous quotation, “It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it.”

Q: What one piece of advice would you give ECM, DCM, Syndicate or roadshow teams looking to engage with a wider audience in Russia or the CIS?
A: One thing I would say is not to underestimate the power of new digital technology. At EM we are firm believers in the power of social networks and digital solutions and we increasingly see how this can make a material difference as to how companies interact with their investors and indeed how they can attract new investors. As I mentioned before, the addressable investor universe for Russia and the CIS is by definition narrower than a full global audience, and therefore any marginal gains to attract the widest possible audience are very important. For example, Black & Callow’s “iRoadshow” initiative is something that we would highly recommend. Not only can it be used to reach a wider audience, the analytics behind it is very impressive and will let the issuer and its advisors gain a priceless insight into investor motivation and behaviour. And if I can give a second piece of advice, I would encourage ECM, DCM and Syndicate or Roadshow teams looking at Russia and the CIS to subscribe to our EM AM daily newsletter, which will give you a great snapshot of the most important Russia related news for the day. Subscribe here.

MiFID II and the drive to cut costs, increase transparency and democratise the industry

MiFID II and the drive to cut costs, increase transparency and democratise the industry

Much has been spoken about MiFID II, the second instalment of the European Union’s Markets in Financial Instruments Directive legislation, and its drive to increase transparency, coordinate regulation, improve compliance and boost supervision of financial institutions across the EU. For the sell-side, unbundling costs and demonstrating clear value for the client engaged in accessing corporates is critical.
iRoadshow helps both deal- and non-deal roadshows reduce costs to a manageable £1,500 per roadshow, and provides unprecedented investor feedback including Page Level Reporting. Full audit trails detail all investor activity including times, dates and documents accessed, which can be downloaded to PDF and XLS and stored to comply offline to comply with MAR and other regulatory needs.

For more information contact Tim Black or the team on +44 (0)20 3794 1720 or at london@iroadshow.com

Snowdog Roadshows on the challenges for roadshow teams in 2017

Snowdog Roadshows’ Tamsin Miles has over a decade of experience running Roadshows in both European & US banks and Private Equity. Here she gives us some insight into this rapidly evolving industry.

OTR: What are the challenges currently faced by roadshow teams?
TM: Modern roadshow co-ordinators face two major challenges. The first is ‘local knowledge’. What else is going on in a city where the roadshow is planned? A trade show could mean there are few good hotels available; or roadworks might make it difficult for investors to get to meetings on time. An IPO may be two years in the making, but if not enough thought is given to the roadshow, investor meetings could be wasted opportunities. The second major challenge lies in ensuring compliance with ongoing regulatory updates. It’s important for everyone to ensure that any engagement with potential investors meets the needs of compliance, which needs great communication all round.

OTR: Will physical roadshows ever be eclipsed, or even replaced, by online meetings?
TM: There’s no doubt the landscape is evolving. There are companies such as Phoenix IR’s CorporateAccessNetwork, Ingage & WeConvene who are matching investors with issuers, and who are getting colossal numbers of hits on their websites every day. The uptake of online roadshows is increasing year-on-year, and as investors can be geographically widely-spread, it’s difficult to engage effectively with them and remain cost-effective. A flat fee of £1,500 for an online iRoadshow is one example where the move online has helped, reaching a wider audience and – via the ability to permanently record all investor activity – better meet the needs of compliance. Nothing, however, is ever likely to replace the strength of relationships built via face-to-face meetings with investors.

OTR: How can online services help with these challenges?
TM: Matching investors with issuers speaks for itself, but the online forensics offered by other companies in the sector is another matter. For instance, QuantiFire has pioneered a highly successful form of perception research, and actively encourages marketing to a wider geographical spread of investors. And of course, iRoadshow’s Page Level Reporting helps issuers and bankers understand exactly which pages of a presentation or Prospectus each investor is spending time on, helping them understand exactly what is – and isn’t – important to the investor, which is invaluable in preparing ahead of their meetings.

For more information about Snowdog Roadshows and how they can help you, contact Tamsin Miles:
Tel: +44 20 3051 5003
Email: tmiles@snowdogrs.com
Web: www.snowdogrs.com