Sid Cato -- April 2004 Quiz Answers

(Answers for April 2004)

1. You say glowing things about the IBM annual report, though it doesn't even score the minimum, 100 points. But don't you have a conflict that bears revealing? True or false?
Answer: True—and false. Since IBM has agreed to sponsor the conference-commencing reception at San Antonio this fall, there's the potential, obviously, for conflict of interest. But if you read my newsletter, you'd know I disclose all such potential conflicts—right on Pg. 1 of my newsletter (April 2004 issue). And IBM's score continues to fall short of the minimum 100 (of a potential 135) to be classified as having achieve "world-class status."

2. You're a victim of N.I.H.—"not invented here." True or false?
Answer: False, I'd say. I give IBM all the credit for suggesting this fall's roundtable on "Future of the print annual report." Wish I'd thought of it!

3. Everyone makes errors, but you seldom if ever admit to making any. True or false?
Answer: On the contrary: As a journalist, my ethical standards mandate that I immediately (or, at least, as soon as possible) own up to errors. Otherwise, I have no credibility, the death knell for a professional writer. In my April newsletter, for instance, I correct my misunderstanding concerning how Canada's Aliant came to be. I thought it was the merger of one other company. Come to find out, it's the combination of four telecoms.

4. It's said (by those in the annual report industry) you never fail to have a story to tell. True or false?
Answer: Well, that may often be true. But in my April newsletter, of seven succinct critiques of late-arriving 2002 books on one page, I only had anecdotal material concerning two of the companies—Hartmarx and Pacific Gas & Electric.

5. God love ya: Even you admit when you've overreacted—in the case of Progressive, the insurance company, for one. True or false?
Answer: Again, on the contrary. I despised the Progressive report about a decade ago, haven't changed my opinion one bit in the ensuing years. I found other things to criticize in its 2003 book. Methinks its leaders have a strong streak of juvenility (if there is such a word).

6. If folks don't send you their annual in time, you simply blow them off. True or false?
Answer: Try telling that to the dozen 2002 books I just received, a year late—and evaluated in my April 2004 newsletter.

7. If you're so hot, why don't you have repeat-attendees at your annual "International Annual Report Conference"?
Answer: Each year, of the 70 or so attendees, at least half (on average) have attended earlier Cato conferences. Last year, for instance, Nancy Fuller attended. She was at the very first conference, in 1988, at New York City. Lonnie Ross attended. She was at San Francisco in 1989. And Steve Khail, who was at Chicago in 1990, attended last fall, and is reserved for San Antonio—as is scribe Steven Eckerstrom, who spoke in Chicago—and has agreed to speak again this fall, 14 years later.

Return to April 2004 quiz page

Test your knowledge by taking previous monthly quizzes


	1.	You say glowing things about the IBM annual report, though it doesn't even score the minimum, 100 points. But don't you have a conflict that bears revealing? True or false? *Answer:* True—and false. Since IBM has agreed to sponsor the conference-commencing reception at San Antonio this fall, there's the potential, obviously, for conflict of interest. But if you read my newsletter, you'd know I disclose all such potential conflicts—right on Pg. 1 of my newsletter (April 2004 issue). And IBM's score continues to fall short of the minimum 100 (of a potential 135) to be classified as having achieve "world-class status."

	2.	You're a victim of N.I.H.—"not invented here." True or false? *Answer:* False, I'd say. I give IBM all the credit for suggesting this fall's roundtable on "Future of the print annual report." Wish I'd thought of it!

	3.	Everyone makes errors, but you seldom if ever admit to making any. True or false? *Answer:* On the contrary: As a journalist, my ethical standards mandate that I immediately (or, at least, as soon as possible) own up to errors. Otherwise, I have no credibility, the death knell for a professional writer. In my April newsletter, for instance, I correct my misunderstanding concerning how Canada's Aliant came to be. I thought it was the merger of one other company. Come to find out, it's the combination of four telecoms.

	4.	It's said (by those in the annual report industry) you never fail to have a story to tell. True or false? *Answer:* Well, that may often be true. But in my April newsletter, of seven succinct critiques of late-arriving 2002 books on one page, I only had anecdotal material concerning two of the companies—Hartmarx and Pacific Gas & Electric.

	5.	God love ya: Even you admit when you've overreacted—in the case of Progressive, the insurance company, for one. True or false? *Answer:* Again, on the contrary. I despised the Progressive report about a decade ago, haven't changed my opinion one bit in the ensuing years. I found other things to criticize in its 2003 book. Methinks its leaders have a strong streak of juvenility (if there is such a word).

	6.	If folks don't send you their annual in time, you simply blow them off. True or false? *Answer:* Try telling that to the dozen 2002 books I just received, a year late—and evaluated in my April 2004 newsletter.

	7.	If you're so hot, why don't you have repeat-attendees at your annual "International Annual Report Conference"? *Answer:* Each year, of the 70 or so attendees, at least half (on average) have attended earlier Cato conferences. Last year, for instance, Nancy Fuller attended. She was at the very first conference, in 1988, at New York City. Lonnie Ross attended. She was at San Francisco in 1989. And Steve Khail, who was at Chicago in 1990, attended last fall, and is reserved for San Antonio—as is scribe Steven Eckerstrom, who spoke in Chicago—and has agreed to speak again this fall, 14 years later.