The Chairman of our Audit Committee has recently attended a training meeting where it was suggested that some audit committees review the presentations given to analysts by the company. Given that these presentations are now published on our website after the event, we are wondering whether to amend the Committee’s terms of reference to include their review.
Do other audit committees include the review of analysts presentations within their remit?
As others, all Investor presentations are reviewd, discussed and approved by the whole board and hence although not strictly part of Audit Committee remit, they do review presentations
Not included within the remit but the Results PR and presentation is an agenda item for review by the Committee (on which all NEDs sit). No plans to include within remit.
Review of analyst presentations is not included in our Audit Committee’s terms of reference. Having said that, the Committee does review the draft announcement and of course the numbers in the presentation will all derive from the report and accounts which is reviewed by the Committee.
I’m not sure the suggestion is a good one as it starts to confuse the purpose of the Committee. That purpose is to consider and review the integrity of the numbers produced; it is not a gatekeeper on how those numbers are then used.
We have established a Disclosure Committee under whose remit this falls. It is not practicable, given time constraints, for this executive matter to be subject to review by the Audit Committee.
The analysts presentation is as much an announcement of the results as is the preliminary statement and may have even more impact.
It would seem inconceivable that the audit committee shouldn’t have sight of this in the same way as they do the reoprt/draft annoucement to ensure it is giving a fair and balanced reflection of the results.
As we are also listed in the US we established a Disclosure Committee that reviews annual report, 20-F, prelims, press releases containing significant financial information, analysts presentations etc. I think some non-US listed companies may also have gone down the route of establishing a DC. Prior to having a DC, the Audit Committee did not review/approve such material; it was approved by CEO, CFO and General Counsel/Company Secretary.
In our case the whole board reviews and approves the analysts presentation. This is manageable due to the small size of the board ((9 directors including the Chairman and non-execs). We find this process useful, not too onerous and it adds to the quality of the presentation
Our analysts presentation is done by the CEO, FD and Chief Operating Officer and is presented to the full board at the meetings which consider the full year and interim results. There is no separate review by the audit committee but the presentation is at a board which follows the relevant audit committee meeting (on which the audit chairman reports verbally to the board) so there is ample opportunity for any points which arose at the audit committee to be reflected.
The CEO and Finance Director prepare the analyst presentation which is presented to the full board on the day the prelim or interim results are discussed. The audit committee has no direct involvement in the presentation and, in the absence of the company providing a significant quantity of additional information, would not be able to properly review it.
The base information for the analyst presentation is taken from the management accounts, the systems and controls relating to which are included within the audit committee remit. Therefore, provided the information extracted is accurately reflected in the analyst presentation (which it is), there should be no requirement for the audit committee to look specifically at this one aspect.
Our board would review the draft prelim and interim analysts presentations at the same time as they were reviewing the draft results announcements. They sometimes review the trading update presentation or IMS. Our advisers (auditors/brokers) would also see draft copies and be able to put in comments. No plans to put it on audit committee list at present.
The analysts presentation is agreed by the Finance Director, Chief Executive and Chairman, the audit committee has no remit to review. However, if requested, there is no reason why they could not review the presentation.
The audit committee do not review the presentations and it is not part of their remit. That said, there’s no reason why they (or the board) couldn’t review a presentation if they wanted to – the right exists but it’s not used.
As with items of information made “public” by the company, the executive directors (and the company secretary) are trusted to ensure that the information is consistent and appropriate
No, and I don’t see how they would approve it without asking somebody else to audit it for them. I would be more interested in the Audit Committee taking an interest in the systems and processes for checking information put into the public domain than in them actually ticking and bashing it themselves. Interesting point though. Our auditors approve for release the prelims and HY press releases going out via a RIS. They see the analysts presentations, but feedback is informal. Hopefully the press releases dilute any liability from the analysts presentations.
Neither our audit committee, nor our board review analysts presentations
We get the Board to review the anaylst presentation not the Audit Committee.
Analyst presentations are reviewed at the full Board meeting immediately following the Audit Committee’s review of accounts. The presentation does not therefore form part of theAudit Committee’s remit.