1.	Let me get this straight: You disagree with the PRSA study that the annual report is an investor's best source for news, advice, guidance. True or false? Answer: On the contrary: I've been saying that all along. It's no longer chic, of course, to sing the praises of the old-fashioned print report, what with the lightening-fast Internet and everything becoming more and more avant-garde. But the race, as so often happens, belongs in this instance to the tortoise, rather than the hare. The PRSA study indeed confirmed our long-held conviction: that nothing surpasses the "old fashioned" annual report, print version, for investors and other groups.
	2.	You've pretty much found, over the years, that companies that do bad annuals aren't likely to change their stripes. True or false? Answer: Not necessarily. Take DTE Energy. I found its annuals over the years wanting. When the company landed a producer, Lonnie Ross, who had earned her spurs with at least two other prominent corporations (most recently, Ford Motor Co.), its annual took a dramatic turn for the better. In fact, as of now, it's the 1999 pack-pacer.
	3.	People "in the know" in the annual report industry say you play favorites. For example, some say the producer of the R.R. Donnelley report was destined to get raves, since he's one of your favorites. True or false? Answer: Untrue, again. The new Donnelley VP, if that's who you mean, will tell you he has taken his knocks over the years from yours truly. That he has done well has less to do with any perceived friendship than with his ability, his perception of what it takes to turn out a truly effective document. About the raves his current report received: He openly assigns credit where it's due: to the woman on the Donnelley staff who had most of the work done when he came aboard. And had the report been awful, he'd have shared in the blame. You takes your chances, for better or worse, with Cato. Friendship, I assure you, has nothing to do with my selections, whether good or bad.
	4.	There's one really big secret to producing an award-winner—that is, to make your list of world's best reports. True or false? Answer: True, I maintain. In fact, I'm devoting a weekend-only Blue Plate Special to the "keeper of the flame," the staffer assigned to insure a report is adhering to all the details, all the technicalities, required to do well. Without a Debbie Dougherty to see that requirements aren't ignored, for instance, the Eastman Chemical report went into the dumps. Someone has to count the number of financial highlights items, say, to be sure at least 13 non-operational ones are used. That sort of "eagle eye" is invaluable—nay, imperative to an award-winning report.
	5.	No one actually surveys the men and women responsible for their company's annual report, so we're all sort of flying by the seat of our pants, as they say. True or false? Answer: Perhaps—unless you count (I do!) my annual Producer Poll, now in its 15th year. Each year I survey the men and women on the firing line—concerning per-copy investment, size of print run, number of months spent on the project, CEO involvement, credentials for the job, and so on. Plus how they view their status with the company, and how they feel about the annual report itself. Year after year, at least three of four producers agree that working on the project can be hazardous to their health, "emotionally and/or mentally." And, I should add, physically.