1.	A long-winded CEO automatically gets taken to the woodshed in your evaluation. True or false? Answer: False. A lengthy shareholder letter doesn't automatically mean it's bad. However...only 20 letters so far are twice so long as the worldwide average of 3.2 pages. (When those 20 are excluded, the length runs a more-palatable 2.3 pages.) One of the long letters, in the General Electric report, I view as a classic of the genre, if you will. Strangely enough, two of the ultra-long letters are by the heads of the leading soft-drink companies, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. The latter, the letter running over 11 pages, comprises the book's entire text.
	2.	So a short letter is your preference? True or false? Answer: True, sort of. I'd much rather have seen PepsiCo's CEO, for instance, devote two or three pages to his letter, with the remaining text handled as an independent editorial feature. In fact, one one-page letter (16 this year so far are that brief), in the Benetton Group report, didn't even bear the CEO's signature. And, strictly by coincidence, the Benetton report was named to this year's list of world's worst reports..
	3.	There's really no good way to handle a tribute. True or false? Answer: False. Kelly Services handled superbly death of its founder, William Russell Kelly...with a tissue interleaf, translucent paper stock through which showed a dedication page containing one of his favorite quotes. Plus a page-long tribute from the current CEO entitled "A personal note" that preceded his shareholder lettter. And, in a flap in back of the book, a self-covered, 12-page print piece that's a bit long on copy, short on photographs. All in all, a good template for others.
	4.	Cato is never wrong—or, at least, never admits he's wrong. True or false? Answer: False, though like a good journalist I try to minimize the times I have to apologize. One such instance: Several months ago (in the May issue of my print newsletter) I decried Chevron's "fall from grace" after 10 straight times among the world's very best reports. But I was wrong. It finished No. 8 after all, causing me to apologize "abjectly" and publicly, in the November issue of my newsletter. It wasn't because of sloppy work, and it wasn't intentional or because I wasn't paying proper attention. I simply didn't see some positives that existed. That's why each winner is evaluated half a dozen (or more) times.
	5.	Tell me: You don't really think all CEOs are mama's boys—or do you? True or false? Answer: The answer probably is false. (There's no way to tell.) Mama's boy is in reference to the sophomoric CEO of a Florida-based company, National Beverage. He loves exclamation marks, and reference to his mommy, the sauce maker who taught her son a perfectly horrible lesson: to say "DEE-licious!" which he does throughout his report. As well as capitalize willy-nilly, and punctuate with those ever-present !!!!!!!!! marks. A year ago, its report (for 1996) was recommended for the world's worst list by a journalist; the 1998 report (the firm is on a fiscal-year basis) already has been recommended by a stockholder for 10-worst status. And I couldn't agree more concerning its current report, for 1997.
	6.	One additional question: Is it true that anyone who attends your conference gets favorably considered for your 10-best list? True or false? Answer: False. Believe it or not, that never enters my mind. By coincidence, though, nine of the current year's 10 best (except DQE, the Pittsburgh-based public utility) have attended one or more of my conferences. But that leaves 65 attendees at the latest conference, No. 11, who DID NOT make the list. So there.