It shouldn’t be, but it might be of some comfort to long-suffering customers of MTN to know that the company appears to be as dismissive of shareholders’ interests as it is of its customers.
At least that’s how it felt after watching the shoddy affair that was passed off as an MTN AGM last week.
According to chair Mcebisi Jonas there were 13 other directors present at the meeting. Well, we’ll take his word for it. They may all have been visible briefly at one stage when my attention was momentarily diverted, but for the most part all that was visible was Jonas and two-and-a-bit directors.
That’s apart from the two-minute video explaining how to vote and Ralph Mupita’s eight-minute trading update for the first quarter of financial 2025.
The essence of the meeting was captured in a comment by Jonas made 27 minutes and 14 seconds into the affair, which followed six minutes and 32 seconds of questions and answers. “Due to time constraints we might not be able to go through all the questions.” There was no explanation as to what the time constraint was. Jonas did add that any additional questions submitted would be answered after the meeting and, if necessary, published on MTN’s website.
It was only thanks to Mehluli Mncube from ESG Insight SA that the meeting was saved from being utterly dreary. He asked the only questions. One on gender equity, one on governance of AI and a third on cybersecurity.
Presumably in an effort to seem reasonable Jonas did invite any shareholder who specifically required that questions be answered “now” to raise their hands.
You’ve probably guessed. No hand was raised. And so, 34 minutes after it started the MTN AGM was closed. All the resolutions had been passed with enthusiastic support from the overwhelmingly mute institutional shareholders.
The only resolutions that didn’t receive over 88%-plus backing were all those relating to remuneration, with the vote on the remuneration implementation report getting just 59.18% support.
The amateur nature of the affair was certainly at odds with Jonas’s introductory remarks which referred to the success of previous virtual-only AGMs. “We’ve worked extensively to ensure we follow a similar rigorous procedure for this AGM.” Hmmm.
They’d all obviously worked so hard that they were “certain electronic participation will continue to provide us with the opportunity to engage constructively, allowing participants to interact with us from anywhere in the world”. These introductory comments raised expectations of a Berkshire Hathaway-type production.
What a disappointment. Apart from Mncube there was no engagement, constructive or otherwise.
So, here’s the rating for MTN’s shabby offering – zero points for not offering a hybrid option; five points – the max – for ease of guest access to the meeting; quality of video-feed gets five points out of a possible 20; and written and verbal questions were allowed – sort of – so 10 out of 10 points.
On the quality of communication by shareholders participating at the meeting, given the “time constraints” stressed by the chair, it’s not really possible to allocate more than eight out of 20 points.
Currency was unable to track down the minutes of last year’s AGM so, zero out of five points for that.
So, MTN gets a remarkably pathetic 28 out of a possible 75 for its shabby AGM performance.
A slick affair
It is possible MTN’s performance would not have seemed quite so shabby if it had been followed by Dis-Chem and Clicks, but that wasn’t the case. Sadly, for MTN the following day, two of the top performers – in AGM terms – held their general meetings.
Nedbank’s meeting kicked off early on Friday morning and from the get-go it was a slick hybrid affair with a steady stream of video sightings of the various directors as well as interested parties who attended in person.
Chair Daniel Mminele could have sounded a little more engaged in his address but Jason Quinn – in the CEO seat for just one year – delivered a useful trading overview.
Forty minutes into the meeting, it was time to open up to questions which ran for an unhurried 34 minutes.
Hubert Brody, who chairs the remuneration committee, provided an unpersuasive response to Mehluli Mncube’s (yes, the same Mehluli from ESG Insights) concerns about the group’s remuneration policy. Brody tried to assure Mncube that the policy is in line with shareholders’ interests. And the shareholders did seem to buy it; only 5% of them voted against the policy.
The only sign of any general shareholder unhappiness was reserved for Phumzile Langeni, whose re-election was opposed by 12.5% of the shareholders.
Mncube questioned whether Langeni, who is on five boards, was not “over-boarded” (as they say in boardroom-speak). He was assured by the chair and CEO that she is committed. “I’m completely confident that Phumzile has sufficient capacity,” said Mminele, adding that the regulators scrutinise these sorts of issues.
Quinn provided interesting comments about growth opportunities in the market in response to a question from shareholder activist Chris Logan, who reminded the meeting about the inroads being made by Capitec. “The one part of the economy we’re seeing growth is SMEs – commercial and mid-corp clients,” said Quinn, adding that the bank is becoming more competitive in that space particularly in the agricultural, logistics, mining and retail sectors, as well as technology. “We have great propositions to serve these sectors better,” Quinn told the meeting and acknowledged that Capitec is a strong rival in these sectors.
(Perhaps if the MTN meeting hadn’t been under such time pressure some shareholder might have had the wit to ask the board what plans it had in the event Starlink enters the South African market.)
The questions were wrapped up by 9.44am and, after the resolutions were voted on and counted, the meeting closed at 10.14am.
So, Nedbank gets 15 points for its hybrid meeting; five points for ease of guest access; 20 points for a fluid and glitch-free video feed; 10 points for allowing written and verbal questions; 20 points for the easy participation of shareholders and; five points for easy access to comprehensive minutes of last year’s AGM.
That’s a deserved 75 points for a company that really does seem to take its shareholders seriously.
A top performance
For a long time they were part of the same large family so it’s perhaps not surprising that Old Mutual demonstrates a similarly respectful attitude to its shareholders.
The meeting kicked off at 10am with voting instructions and an introduction from chair Trevor Manuel. (National Treasury and the Reserve Bank are evidently good feeder schools for listed boards.)
New CEO Jurie Strydom, who officially assumed the role at the close of the AGM, did not attend in person as he was at his daughter’s graduation. But he was available remotely at the beginning of the meeting, introducing himself to the shareholders and thanking outgoing (and remarkably relaxed looking) Iain Williamson for his assistance during the handover period.
Although a former Sanlam executive, Strydom is not entirely new to Old Mutual; he’s been on the board since 2023.
The question-and-answer session ran from 10.32pm to 11.12pm covering a wide range of issues from environmental to the below-par share price performance.
Acting head of Old Mutual Investments didn’t provide a persuasive answer to Just Share’s query about how it views Sasol’s recent high-carbon-emitting growth plans given its own target for emission reductions.
By contrast chief financial officer Casper Troskie provided a frank explanation for Old Mutual’s underperforming share price. There were “elevated expenses in the [past] few years” which are now being acted on. In addition, shareholders are concerned about Old Mutual’s customer collections in the “mass and foundation” market segment and about its competitiveness in the group’s personal finance business.
Troskie also told the meeting the performance of the newly launched Old Mutual bank will be essential to the share’s rating in the coming years.
And so, after the voting and counting, the meeting closed at 11.25pm.
All in all a top-rate performance. Here is the score: 15 points for the hybrid facility; five points for ease of guest access; 20 points for its smooth video feed which provided visuals of the directors and attendees in the auditorium; 10 points for allowing written and verbal questions; 20 points for ease of shareholder participation in the meeting; and five points for comprehensive minutes that were easy to find.
So that’s another 75 points, which means two full scores on the same day; see MTN, it is possible.
Sign up to Currency’s weekly newsletters to receive your own bulletin of weekday news and weekend treats. Register here.
