A quick update on the Satyam auditor front: Exactly as I had predicted in yesterday's blog post, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu (which in India is represented by S.B.Billimoria & Co.) has been appointed as the new external auditors.
S.B.Billimoria & Co. have an untarnished reputation in India. They represent big multinationals and large Indian conglomerates such as the TATA group, HDFC, HDFC bank etc.
Full Disclosure: I worked with S.B.Billimoria in India for close to 4 years.
The ongoing Satyam saga has made me very curious about the level of disclosures as well as corporate governance practices that were being followed there. Unlike U.S. public companies, which are required to make certain disclosures of their governance practices, Indian companies have a relatively lower disclosure threshold. Ofcourse, the fact that Satyam has its ADR's listed on the NYSE makes it subject to a few of NYSE listing requirements. These requirements are considerably fewer in number as compared to a U.S. company whose shares are listed on the NYSE.
On a detailed reading of Satyam's latest 20F Annual Financial report (for the year ended March 31, 2008) filed with the SEC in August 2008, I found the following striking oddities:
None of Satyam's Board Members appear to have any financial experience -accounting or auditing or any other kind of financial expertise. It is no therefore no surprise to see how the CEO could have scammed the entire Board and gotten away with it for so long.
None of the members of the Board's Audit Committee are financial experts within the meaning of 'financial expert' as laid down by the NYSE. Their review and oversight procedures while acting as members of such a Audit Committee remains a mystery.
The company does NOT have a corporate governance or a nominating committee. This naturally leads us to question the basis on which Board members were appointed. There might have been a potential conflict of interest or board interlocks which went unsupervised.
Close to 14% of the external auditor's 2007 remuneration was from "Other Services". There has been no disclosure on the details behind these "Other Services". In order to prevent auditors from performing services that may constitute a conflict of interest, many country's corporate laws or listing standards discourage auditors from performing other services other than financial or tax audits. How does one trust financial statements that have been audited by auditors who could have potential conflicts of interest?
Only 5 of their 9 Board members were independent outside directors. The other 4 were employee directors. Satyam did not follow the practice of having its non management directors meet independently without the employee directors being present. Total lack of independence in their Board and its functioning indicates weak governance practices and a lack of oversight by independent directors of the Board.
Audit Fees paid to PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) increased from $800 K to over $1 million in 2008. No explanation for such an increase has been provided.
One of the outside independent directors has been paid a special remuneration of $0.2 million which is far higher than is the norm. This has been supposedly provided for his "professional services". If he is being paid for professional services, doesn't that make him a non independent director?
The entire non executive board (non-management Board) was paid through commissions. The amount of such commissions is not disclosed nor is the basis of such computation of commissions given. How does a shareholder ensure that these 'independent' directors don't inflate profits to allow them to receive fat commissions?
It will be interesting to see whether and how the new Board at Satyam addresses these issues. With Mr. Deepak Parekh (chairman of HDFC corp.) on its Board, Satyam shareholders and employees can be ensured of an honest and indepth review. The Board's first step of replacing PwC as the auditors has been in the right direction. Given the fact that HDFC has had the same auditors S.B.Billimoria & Co. (member firm Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu) for over 15 years, that maybe one of the shortlisted audit firms for Satyam. Lets wait and watch.
Update 9 p.m (EST): Few of Satyam's strategic clients are looking to re-evaluate their contracts with Satyam as "they are no longer satisfied with the intent and focus of the company."
India has been in the news a lot lately....unfortunately for all the wrong reasons...here is one more...
Satyam Computers, an Indian computer services firm with ADR's listed on the NYSE, is facing a a severe governance fiasco. Satyam recently announced its decision to buy controlling stakes in two infrastructure companies in which the chairman and promoter of Satyam had sizable stakes. Founders of the Indian company Satyam held as much as 30 to 35% in the infrastructure companies - Maytas Infra inc and Maytas properties. According to analysts, the deal was not only overpriced (at $1.6 billion) but was also questionable on the grounds that the businesses (computer services and infrastructure) were not complementary by any stretch of imagination.
Satyam faced its shareholders' ire and saw its ADR price drop 55 % to a 52 week low of $5.70. You can see the price fluctuation in the last 5 days for Satyam especially a sharp dip to the $5 levels.
Of course, seeing the market reaction, Satyam has abandoned its acquisition plans...but not without some beating to its reputation. Ironically, the company had recently been awarded the coveted Golden Peacock Global Award for Excellence in Corporate Governance for 2008. If this is the kind of governance measures that a "top governance" company practices what about the others? I shudder to think...... Satyam now faces an inquiry from India's Ministry of Corporate Affairs into the board decisions behind this acquisiton plan. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has become more stringent on Indian companies, with a recent proposal that would require all companies, whether public or private, to have atleast a third of their directors to be independent.
Satyam has had a bad year overall...in October of this year, Satyam was banned from carrying out an offshore work for the World Bank after news one or more Satyam contractors were accused of installing a spy software at the World Bank workstations. Satyam had been the vendor of choice at the World Bank for a long time.
The Satyam governance debacle could possible be a culture issue specific to India and maybe other South Asian countries. A sizable number of large multinational corporations in India have started as family owned businesses. Even after these companies are made public, they continue to be governed at the whims and fancies of the promoter family. Personal relationships drive many business agreements....
A case in point is the ongoing battle between the Ambani brothers who run the Reliance group of companies. According to Forbes Magazine, both the Ambani brothers figure in the top 10 richest men in the world. Rich they maybe, but unfortunately, as far as corporate governance goes, they lag far behind. Their ongoing personal feud scuttled Reliance Communications' potential merger with South African MTN Communications.
Lack of governance measures maybe the norm in India but there are some notable exceptions too...on top of the list would be Infosys Technologies or the ICICI Bank ....maybe a few others. There aren't too many of them but hopefully Satyam's governance fiasco will prove a lesson to family owned businesses.
Keep checking back for updates on the Satyam story...
