1.	You never take to task subscribers to your newsletter. True or false? Answer: False. A year ago, subscriber Texaco had the year’s most unreadable letter to shareholders, as indicated by its first 100 words, which fact we widely publicized. This year, two with unacceptable writing, Merck and AMP, are subscribers.
	2.	This thing about boards of directors seen to exclude women and minorities—again none of the guilty is a subscriber. True or false? Answer: False. Manitowoc and Reuters, both long-time subscribers (their annual report producers men I like and admire), continue to see points deducted from their score because of their lily-white boards. Reuters’ AR producer, in fact, will share a podium with me June 3 in London. Unpleasant as it may be, that can’t keep me from zinging him and his company for excluding women and minorities from the board.
	3.	You critique annuals for companies—true or false? Doesn’t that place you in a compromising position? Answer: True. And, no I don’t think so. As my corporate policy clearly states, "If you believe retaining us to critique your report will keep us from criticizing it in news interviews, or in my monthly newsletter, you’re going to be sorely disappointed." In fact, among the year-ago world’s-worst reports, three—for Tenneco, Armstrong World Industries and SPX—were recipients of paid-for critiques. In other words, they paid me to tell them the truth about their annuals—and paid for it royally, by making my list of 10-worst reports!
	4.	The magazine approach is one you advocate. True or false? Answer: True. And by that we mean not only appearance of a commercial publication (a Time or Newsweek, for example), but the external orientation all of those publications have. In other words, they’re not written for staffers, but for the public. Fewer and fewer annuals, I’m pleased to say, are inbred; that is, have a decided internal orientation. Most likely culprits on that score would be old-line manufacturing firms. One of the best examples of what I advocate is the UtiliCorp United report. That of Armco, the steel company, similarly fills the bill.
	5.	Annuals are getting better. True or false? Answer: True, at least preliminarily. At year’s end among 1996 reports, of the 442 analyzed in depth from around the world, 52 or 12% reached the pinnacle—i.e., scored at least 100 of a possible 135 points. Among early-arriving '97s, 28 of 200 or an improved 14% (one in seven) have achieved "world-class" status.