Measures to reduce the current public sector deficit will have to be of a scale and significance to make an appreciable dent in this figure, in a bid to put Britain back in the black.  In order to obtain an expert view on the issue, business analysts Lindsell Marketing canvassed the views of the private sector professionals who have to make such hard financial decisions every day of the week.  Over 1,000 UK company finance managers were surveyed during May and June 2010.  The sample of respondents provided representation of the national business community in terms of region, size and sector.

While 48% of respondents focused the need to make spending cuts on central government departments and quangos, only 9% thought that NHS spending should be cut, and just 4% thought policing budgets should be reduced.  Even local government was largely designated a ‘no go’ area by company finance managers, with just 13% of respondents pinpointed this sector for cuts.  Education was also earmarked as a relatively low priority, with just 15% of respondents wanting priority cuts in this area.  In contrast, however, Defence was highlighted by 33% of UK company finance managers for spending cuts.

Paul Lindsell, Managing Director of Lindsell Marketing, notes, “In terms of spending cuts, finance professionals are advising the government to leave the Police, NHS, Local Government and education largely alone, and instead focus on cutting waste in Central Government departments and Quangos, and the Defence budget. This key finding may suggest that finance managers believe health, law & order and local government to be ‘leaner’ than central government departments and quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisations, and that therefore these two categories hold the highest potential for cost savings.    An alternative interpretation may be that law & order, health service and local government spending should be retained for reasons of social responsibility, stability and cohesion.

“This clear indication to steer clear of law & order, healthcare and local administration when implementing budget cuts only partly endorses Government policy.  NHS spending has been ring-fenced, although the shadow health secretary is now saying this policy will drive reductions in local and community services.  Policing budgets, in contrast, are facing cuts, with Scotland Yard’s head of counter-terrorism warning of adverse affects on his part of the service and the president of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) stating that reductions in police numbers would be inevitable.   Local government has been told to find £1.165bn in savings in the Chancellor’s emergency budget, representing the largest single contributor to the Government’s cuts programme.  Yesterday’s survey from the Local Government Association gives corroborative support from voters for cuts to steer clear of front-line local services.

“This study gives the clearest possible indication that private sector professionals consider cuts in socially important areas such as health, policing and local services as a very dangerous game indeed.  Moreover, the emergency budget largely ignored the need, pointed out in previous recent studies from Lindsell Marketing, to substantially raise income tax for earners below the newly introduced upper rate threshold of £150,000 per year.  The coalition government has a honeymoon period in which to really address the public sector deficit, but it may well turn out that fudging the politically sensitive area of income tax is a critical mistake.”

Methodology

1,021 finance managers at British firms were interviewed between June 5^th and July 3^rd 2010.  The sample of respondents provided representation of the UK business community, by company size, sector and region.  Respondents were asked which areas of public spending should be the main focus for cuts during the term of the current government.

Measures to reduce the current public sector deficit will have to be of a scale and significance to make an appreciable dent in this figure, in a bid to put Britain back in the black.  In order to obtain an expert view on the issue, business analysts Lindsell Marketing canvassed the views of the private sector professionals who have to make such hard financial decisions every day of the week.  Over 1,000 UK company finance managers were surveyed between May 4^th and May 14^th 2010.  The sample of respondents provided representation of the national business community in terms of region, size and sector.

Overall, income tax must rise, according to British finance managers, as around two thirds firmly point government towards this unpalatable, but necessary priority.

In contrast, only a quarter of respondents thought that rises in VAT or the establishment of a £1m+ property owners tax would be moves worthy of priority government attention.  Making changes to National Insurance, or putting Inheritance Tax rates up were seen as a priority by even fewer finance managers, possibly respondents feel such initiatives to be essentially ‘unfair’, hitting the pockets of the least well-off in society in an indiscriminate approach.

In terms of the threshold for higher rate income tax, UK private sector finance professionals think that the current £150,000 threshold may be too high to have any meaningful effect.  A quarter of respondents recommended prioritising tax rises for £150k+ earners, but a further fifth thought this should be reduced to £100k+, and a further fifth felt the threshold should be just £50k.  Working from HMRC figures[1], the authors of this report have shown that an increase of 10% in income tax revenues from £150k+ earners would raise just a few hundred million pounds, whereas a 10% increase in income tax revenues from £100k+ earners would deliver several billion pounds into the exchequer.

In terms of spending cuts, finance professionals are advising the government to leave the Police, NHS and local government largely alone, and instead focus on cutting waste in central government departments and Quangos.  This key finding may suggest that finance managers believe health, law & order and local government to be ‘leaner’ than central government departments and quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisations, and that therefore these two categories hold the highest potential for cost savings.    An alternative interpretation may be that law & order, health service and local government spending should be retained for reasons of social responsibility, stability and cohesion.

Paul Lindsell, Managing Director of Lindsell Marketing, notes, “The new administration really needs to pay attention to the outcomes of this research.  Experienced finance professionals, who have to make hard decisions week in, week out, are telling the new boys on the block not to tinker around the edges, but to get straight down to the hard tack.  With the inter-party negotiations out of the way, the first hundred days of this government will be judged on one key issue – tackling the public sector deficit.  Dogma has to be thrown to the four winds, and the door opened to level-headed practicality.

“Income tax undoubtedly has to rise, with Britain’s finance managers saying that spending cuts – while necessary – are not enough.  Tinkering round the edges with insignificant tax revenue streams such as inheritance tax, capital gains or property taxes, is largely a waste of time.  Most important is to establish an income threshold for upper rate tax that brings in significant sums – and the findings of this report strongly suggest that this level should be around the £100,000+ mark.  This could raise several billion, while keeping that additional burden focused on the c.700,000 wealthiest taxpayers.”

For further press information, please contact:-

Lindsell Marketing on 0207 402 0510

Methodology

1,008 finance managers at British firms were interviewed between May 4^th and May 14^th 2010.  The sample of respondents provided representation of the UK business community, by company size, sector and region.  Respondents were asked, “At the time you answer this question, we will either be in the last run-up to the general election in the UK, on the day itself, or in the week following.  Whoever gets into power, they will have to deal urgently with the huge public deficit – currently around £160bn.  With this in mind, and regardless of the way you vote, which fiscal actions do you believe the incoming government should prioritise?”

Lindsell Marketing, April 2010

Management Summary

• Confidence in the economic management competence of the three main UK political parties is a key issue in the current election campaign
• Very few recent opinion polls have canvassed the opinion of British business, despite the fact that business people best qualified to judge the likely economic competence of each party
• Business analysts, Lindsell Marketing, have attempted to fill this gap by surveying over 1,000 UK firms about this crucial issue
• The ‘Clegg Effect’ is clearly reflected in the survey’s findings (LibDems, 27%), reflecting the Liberal Democratic boost resulting from recent exposure through the televised leaders’ debates
• Conservative support from business on the economic competence issue (Con, 30%), which was clearly in the lead last December, is now neck and neck with the Liberal Democrats
• In the eyes of the business community, Labour languishes in third place, an also-ran at just 17%
• This survey provides an evidence basis for debate around the issue of economic competence, and may encourage analysts to spend more time evaluating how the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats might work together to find common ground for economic regeneration policies and initiatives

Introduction

Recent weeks have seen the emergence of an apparent three horse race in the current UK general election campaign.  The Liberal Democrats have been the clear beneficiaries of prominence and visibility conferred by televised debates amongst the party leaders, although Labour supporters also claim that the Prime Minister’s image has also been assisted by his television performances[1].  The Conservatives, formerly a good distance ahead of both other parties in the opinion polls, now find themselves having to combat two apparently stronger rivals in the bid for a win on May 6^th.

As usual, a flurry of opinion polling has been taking place[2], with an extraordinary hike being seen in the polled voter opinion between 16^th and 18^th April[3] in support of the Liberal Democrats, following the first leaders debate.  Yet throughout these debates, and indeed across the whole general election campaign, no party has offered the electorate a detailed plan of how to eliminate the public deficit and put Britain back in the black.

In the calendar year 2009 the UK recorded a general government deficit of £159.2 billion, which was equivalent to 11.4 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP)[4].  At the end of December 2009 general government debt was £950.4 billion, equivalent to 68.1 per cent of GDP.  The Maastricht Treaty’s Excessive Deficit Procedure sets deficit and debt targets of 3 per cent and 60 per cent respectively for all EU countries.  Clearly, detailed and convincing planning is needed to reverse this situation over the term of the next government.

Economic competence is recognised as a critical issue in general elections, or rather the electorate’s perception of economic competence, perhaps most famously typified in Bill Clinton’s campaign headquarters sign which read, “It’s the economy, stupid.[5]”  However, while much energy in the UK general election campaign to date has (naturally) been devoted to overall polls of the electorate, few have been conducted amongst a similarly representative sample of British business (with the exception of outputs from the British Chambers of Commerce[6]).  The Conservative party has managed to attract qualified approval for some of its policies from the leaders of a number of large businesses[7], but this hardly forms a representation of the views of the two million UK trading companies.

The UK business community consists mainly of firms employing fewer than 50 staff, who (numerically) make up some 97% of British business employers.  Small and medium-sized businesses (up to 250 employees) also generate 50% of the country’s business turnover.

Understanding the views of British business, especially their appraisal of the economic competence of the three main political parties, is an important but neglected area of research and polling.  Business revenues create the larger part of a country’s gross domestic product, and UK firms may therefore be taken as highly expert judges of the economic competence of any current or future government.

Various commentators have noted that all three main political parties do not seem to have paid enough attention to the views of the business community.  In one recent example[8], Joy Nichols, chief executive of the CMB2 Group and a spokesman for The Enterprise Trust, a think tank for industry, criticised all three parties for their piecemeal approach to government procurement through SMEs.

In order that the views of UK Ltd may be better represented in the UK general election debate, business analysts Lindsell Marketing decided to devote one of its regular business opinion surveys to this very question of economic competence amongst the three main parties.  1,011 companies, representing a wide variety of business size brackets, sectors and geographical locations around Britain, were canvassed on a single key question: “Which of the three main political parties do you believe is best placed to give business the kind of intelligent support needed to enable reliable and rapid economic recovery?”  The research took place between 18^th and 25^th April.  Fieldwork was conducted through a combination of online and telephone surveys.

It is hoped that the results of this survey will form an objective data basis to inform the debate over economic competence during the rest of the general election campaign, particularly to policy analysts investigating the most relevant and effective business support strategies in any future government.  Such harmonised policies and co-ordinated government will be critical to creating business health, economic growth and what Digby Jones (now Lord Jones) recently described as “boring stability”[9].

Lindsell Marketing is an independent research organisation and has no political affiliations whatsoever.

Results

The results of the Lindsell Marketing business survey immediately reveal that the Clegg effect has taken as remarkable a hold on the British business community as on the electorate at large.  When the same question was asked back in December 2009, clear water was visible between the Conservatives (43%) and the other two parties, with Labour on 18% and the Liberal Democrats on 17%.  Now, however, the issue of economic competence is starkly revealed as a two horse race –between the Conservatives (30%) and the Liberal Democrats (27%), who are running neck and neck.  Labour, on the other hand, trails on a mere 17%, apparently suffering from the jaded view so often taken of any incumbent government after over a decade in power.

Interestingly, the findings of this business survey show that the residual support for Labour amongst the general electorate is not felt in commerce.  A combination of current consumer opinion polls shows the three main parties all hovering around 30%, but business opinion seems to have discounted Labour.

It may also be significant that 26% of the businesses polled took the view that none of the three main parties was competent to manage and stimulate reliable and rapid economic recovery.  This may leave the issue of economic competence as a space to be occupied with everything to play for.  Should Labour manage to take just a further ten percentage points from this floating business vote, then it would draw level with the other parties.  Either of the front runners could win over this undecided or unconvinced community to establish a clear lead over rivals.  Or, in Scotland and Wales, this business vote could be snapped up by the SNP or Plaid Cymru respectively.

Results by Size Bracket

Respondents answers were also grouped by size bracket.  Four groups were analysed – small businesses (1-49 employees), medium sized businesses (50-249 employees), smaller corporates (250-2499 employees) and larger corporates (2500+ employees).  Peaks of support were observed.  The highest opinion of Conservative economic competence was seen amongst small businesses, whereas for both Labour and the Liberal Democrats, greatest support was seen amongst smaller corporates.

Results by Region

Marked variations were also evident around the different regions of the UK.  Within England, Liberal Democrat support was high in the North East (35%), the East of England (32%) and the South West (32%), but lowest in the Midlands (21%).  The Conservatives showed a surprisingly high level of business good opinion in Wales (42%), with an even higher score in the Midlands (44%) and lowest in the North East (20%).  Labour’s peak of business support in England was in the North East (26%) and lowest in the South West (11%).  Labour’s showing amongst Scottish business was extremely high at 36%.

Conclusions

Reflecting the opinion of the overall electorate, the business community has also experienced a surge of support for the Liberal Democrats, following Nick Clegg’s performance in the recent televised leaders’ debates.

Although the balance of findings from this survey differ substantially between England, Wales and Scotland, the race for business opinion in England appears to be largely a contention between the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats.

As a result of this survey, policy analysts may now wish to spend more time evaluating how the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats might work together to find common ground for economic regeneration initiatives.

About Lindsell Marketing

Lindsell Marketing Limited is a business analysis and marketing consultancy.  Founded in 1994, the company has been researching and investigating business issues for over 15 years in order to provide its clients with important insights into their sectors, markets and business management techniques.  Lindsell Marketing has operations in London, Oxford and Turin.   The company has no political affiliations, and delivers objective insights for its clients.

Methodology

• Online and telephone survey
• 1,011 UK companies
• Respondent profiles: general management, marketing & sales management, financial management, operations management
• Period: 18^th-25^th April 2010
• Representativeness:-
  • Size
    • 1-49 employees                      32%
    • 50-249 employees                  23%
    • 250-2,499 employees             25%
    • 2,500+ employees                   21%
  • Region
    • Scotland                                  9%
    • Wales                                      5%
    • North East                               11%
    • North West                              12%
    • Midlands                                  13%
    • East of England                       9%
    • South West                             11%
    • South East                               31%

• Industry

Representation from:

[2] See particularly, ComRes, Harris, Ipsos-Mori, ICM, Populus, YouGov

[3] Ref. BBC Poll of Polls

[4] Office of National Statistics, UK Government Debt & Deficit, 31 March 2010

[5] James Carville, Bill Clinton’s political strategist in the 1992 election, placed a sign over his desk in the Little Rock headquarters: ‘It’s the economy, Stupid!’

[6] British Chambers of Commerce, Growing business unease over prospect of a hung parliament, 26^th April 2010

[7] The Daily Telegraph, Business leaders give guarded approval to Tory manifesto, 22 April 2010

[8] Panel reception ‘Women in Public Policy’ chaired by Baroness Symons in the House of Lords, Tuesday 20^th April

[9] BBC Radio 4, The Today Programme, 24^th April 2010

(London, Tuesday 27^th April 2010) New research amongst British business about the economic competence of the three main political parties has revealed evidence of the Clegg Effect in the country’s commercial community.  The new survey, conducted by business analysts Lindsell Marketing, shows British firms believe the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats on a par for economic competence, but Labour trails far behind.

Over 1,000 firms responded to the Lindsell Marketing survey, which ended on 25^th April.  They were asked, “Which of the three main political parties do you believe is best placed to give business the kind of intelligent support needed to enable reliable and rapid economic recovery?”  The Conservatives came out on top with 30% of the business vote, closely followed by the Liberal Democrats on 27%.  However, only 17% of businesses thought Labour the most capable party to bring the country back into strong economic growth.  This marks a fundamental change in business opinion, which in December 2009 put the Conservatives firmly in the lead on the question of economic competence.

Within the UK, there were country differences.  Scots businesses put Labour in the lead, whereas Welsh businesses put the Tories top.  Peaks of business support for the LibDems were seen in the North East (35%), the South West (32%) and the East of England (32%).  Conservative strongholds were seen in the Midlands (44%) and the South East (34%).   Small businesses (1-49 employees) strongly favoured the Tories, whereas smaller corporates (250-2,499 employees) came out in favour of the Liberal Democrats.

Paul Lindsell, Managing Director of Lindsell Marketing, comments, “Pre election polling naturally concentrates on the full electorate.  Yet this time round, we face a £159bn government deficit – the size which doubled between 2006 and 2008, then doubled again in a single year into 2009.  The folk who are going to generate the economic growth which reverses this appallling situation are the country’s business people.  Not only should their collective voice therefore be heard, but the electorate will also be critically interested in their expert opinion on which party they feel most competent to get the country back in the black.

“Given the results of our business poll, which so definitively places the Tories and LibDems neck and neck in front, policy analysts and advisors in both leading parties should be working even harder to find the common policy ground which would provide the basis for a viable five year plan to balance the nation’s books.”

– Ends –

For a copy of the full report please call 020 7402 0510 or email us at feedback@lindsellmarketing.com.

Survey Methodology

• Online and telephone survey
• 1,011 UK companies
• Respondent profiles: general management, marketing & sales management, financial management, operations management

• Period: 18^th-25^th April 2010
• Representation by: business size bracket; region; sector.

April 2010

More than half of investment management companies are failing to take full advantage of marketing opportunities with their customer communications, new research from direct marketing specialist GI Direct shows.

The GI Direct study found that 58% of investment management companies are not making the most of investor statements and need to do a better job of using them as a tool to engage clients and target them with tailored information packages that include details on other products as well as the funds they already invest in.

While 42% of the companies studied in the report consider the investor statement as a valuable communication tool, 50% consider it only somewhat useful and 8% see it simply as a regulatory mailing sent out to comply with FSA regulations.

Different investors have different values for a business and the research looked at how this affected the way investment management firms are communicating with various categories of investor, particularly when it comes to personalising the statement.

The survey found that only 25% of firms are sending personalised communications to all of their clients, even though 79% say they have the capability to do so and 63% believe that personalising and tailoring communications would build loyalty or improve satisfaction with their investors. Conversely 13% saw no benefit at all in doing so.

Patrick Headley, Sales Director, GI Direct comments: “Evidently some investment management companies have already realised the potential of investor statements to communicate with their investors on a personal level and provide them with information specific to their needs. This gives these firms a clear advantage over their competitors who, by not tailoring their investor communications, are throwing away the opportunity to strengthen client relationships and build customer loyalty.

“Print communications technology now makes it possible for investment firms to tailor the information they send out to each client at the touch of a button and the benefits are evident. Investment management companies can provide personalised and easy-to-understand information on fund performance as well as eye-catching marketing communications that can encourage investors to take interest in additional products or services.

“Nevertheless, a significant proportion of firms are not yet maximising the communication opportunities afforded by investor statements and there are yet others who refuse to see the benefits of tailoring communications. These firms could fall behind as the UK economy recovers and investment activity starts to thrive again.”

- ENDS -

Notes to editors

Other key findings of the research include:

• 17% of respondents named building customer loyalty as the main objective of the investor statement
• 29% said it was to build brand awareness,
• 12% said that making investors aware of other relevant funds was the main objective.
• 42% said the main objective was highlighting fund performance

• 74% of respondents said that when choosing a communications supplier it was most important to have one they could trust
• 17% said getting the lowest cost was most important
• 9% said it was most important to find a supplier that could offer the greatest capability for targeted and personalised communications

For further information please contact:
Naomi Bloomer or Hugh Filman at Lindsell Marketing

020 7087 8053 / 020 7402 0510

naomib@lindsellmarketing.com / hugh@lindsellmarketing.com

About GI Direct:

At GI Direct, we cater for clients’ complicated transactional mailing requirements. Our state of the art software and solution integrity bring clients peace of mind, knowing their critical mailings are securely delivered with 100% accuracy.

Our highly skilled specialists handle every stage of the statement and billing process from document composition and processing to mailing and fulfilment across a wide variety of sectors including  investment funds, pension funds, banking and insurance.

Our operational solution spans two sites providing both contingency and robust resilience. Our Birmingham facility specialises in short run applications, with powerful cut sheet digital capabilities and highly intelligent, fully automated fulfilment to either paper or polythene. The Leicester site focuses on higher volume continuous printed output across both digital and laser platforms, with paper fulfilment capabilities mirroring the Birmingham site.

To find out more, please call 0116 232 1711 or visit

www.gi-solutionsgroup.com

LONDON – The latest research from London-based working capital solutions provider Demica shows that firms are increasingly seeking to raise finance from traditional asset categories such as trade receivables. The report, which surveyed over 1,500 firms with over 50 employees in the UK, France and Germany, revealed that Europe is turning back to trade receivables, considered to be one of the most liquid and creditworthy asset categories on the balance sheet. The current scarcity of credit was listed as a major setback, encouraging firms to raise a greater proportion of finance in this way. A significant number of firms also reported having no other choice but to offer asset categories such as trade receivables if they were to convince banks to extend lines of credit.

Some 36% of European companies (UK 31%, France 43% and Germany 34%) reported that they had already raised finance against the security of their trade receivables. Furthermore, finance raised on this asset category is set to grow substantially over the next 12-18 months. Just under half of respondents (44%) said they planned to increase their levels of finance raised against the security of trade receivables. Germany and the UK (48% and 44% accordingly) showed the most interest in developing this technique, suggesting that they will soon match already elevated levels of uptake in France..

The European Securitisation Forum forecast overall securitisation issuance to fall to €272 billion in 2008, the lowest level since 2004.[1] However, the decline in overall securitisation activity is thought to be a direct result of problems caused by low quality assets – with solid assets such as trade receivables not experiencing the same negative impact. Securitisation of more robust, stable assets such as trade receivables is expected to rise. Demica’s research sought to quantify this, and found that 56% (UK 54%, France 53% and Germany 61%)  of European firms believe the scarcity of standard bank credit will see large firms choosing to raise a greater proportion of their finance on the basis of trade receivables securitisations.

Banks seem equally keen for firms to offer this asset category, as the solution lifts the lid on lending without taking on unacceptable risk. Over the last year, commentators have witnessed a rising demand for greater levels of security from banks’ clients to avoid facing caps on their credit limits. Demica’s research showed that 61% (UK 57%,  France 64% and Germany 63%) of European firms had experienced this, recognising that certain banks are unwilling to extend credit unless businesses can offer stable assets such as trade receivables as security.

Demica CEO Phillip Kerle comments: “Scarcity of traditional credit has become a real problem over the last two years. If European firms are to raise finance successfully in the future, the focus will have to be taken off liquid assets. Trade receivables are leading the way as invoice debt is seen to be a high quality security and therefore has the ability to improve access to credit significantly.

“Astute firms are finding ways around the current liquidity crisis by expanding the level of finance raised on the security of their trade receivables. These lines of finance have the additional benefit of being less complex than other transactions and although, to a certain extent, they remain complicated, they are relatively easy to monitor and therefore incur less risk. Specialist technology-based services are available that automate these processes and provide regular monitoring and reporting of the asset base. We can expect take-up of such services to soar over the next year. “

For further press information, please contact:

Marc Gossage – marc@lindsellmarketing.com – +44 (0)207 402 0510

Paul Lindsell – paul@lindsellmarketing.com – +44 (0)207 402 0510

About Demica
Demica Limited is a market leading provider of specialised working capital solutions providing consulting, advisory and technology services to a diverse range of multi-national clients. Demica works with the world’s leading banks, private equity sponsors and global corporations to implement innovative solutions to their securitisation and supply chain finance requirements. Demica’s technology is used around the globe running invoice-based transactions on its Citadel® platform. Based in London, Demica is a wholly owned subsidiary of the J.M. Huber Corporation, one of the largest privately held companies in the United States.

For more information, visit www.demica.com

Volgens een nieuw rapport van GOAL Group, de leidende wereldwijde specialist in collectieve schadevorderingen, zgn. class actions, hebben Nederlandse pensioenfondsen in de periode van 2006 tot 2008 naar schatting €107 miljard aan beleggingen verloren. Volgens de projecties van GOAL Group wordt ca. €1,8 miljard van deze verliezen terugbetaald aan Nederlandse pensioenfondsen die deelnemen aan (voornamelijk Amerikaanse) class action claims uit deze periode. Het rapport zegt echter ook dat als er niet meer pensioenfondsen aan de class actions deelnemen, enkele pensioenfondsen hun rechten zullen verliezen om ca. €450 miljoen aan verhaalbare fondsen terug te krijgen, die vervolgens verdeeld zullen worden over de deelnemers aan de betreffende claim. Dit is een alarmsignaal voor de Nederlandse pensioenfondsen die momenteel geen gebruik maken van het recht om schadevergoeding te claimen via de Amerikaanse rechtbanken – ondanks de aandacht die is uitgegaan naar de rechtszaken van de Stichting Pensioenfonds Zorg en Welzijn (PfZW) en MN Services als eisende en mede-eisende partij tegen respectievelijk BoA en RBS. Als gevolg van de financiële crisis door de ineenstorting van de zgn. subprime hypotheekmarkt en de Ponzi-zwendel, zijn de Nederlandse pensioenfondsen zich veel meer bewust van class actions. Maar sommige pensioenfondsen hebben nog steeds geen claim ingediend.

Sommige commentatoren wijzen op het feit dat er nu waarschijnlijk veel meer houdbare rechtszaken zullen volgen, ook al zijn de toegewezen bedragen als gevolg van de financiële crisis veel lager, waarbij steeds vaker auditors als medegedaagden zullen worden genoemd[1]. De Wet collectieve afwikkeling massaschade, WCAM, heeft ook het geografische potentieel van class action claims uitgebreid en heeft een weg gebaand voor Europese rechtszaken. In juni 2009 werd Shell door het Gerechtshof in Amsterdam veroordeeld tot betaling van $450 miljoen als compensatie voor foute financiële verklaringen in de periode van 1997 tot 2003 over de olie- en gasreserves en de grote financiële gevolgen daarvan. Dit is de eerste class action die in Europa werd afgerond.

Als beleggers en fondsmanagers hun steeds groter wordende verliezen willen terugvorderen en deel willen uitmaken van het steeds grotere aantal class action claimprocedures, zowel in Amerika als in Europa, dan moet het indienings- en deelnameproces nu beginnen. Het is echter een feit dat het opsporen van kansen om een class action te starten en de succesvolle afronding van het benodigde proces, een gecompliceerde en intimiderende taak is, waarbij veel beleggers ten onrechte geloven dat de kosten en tijd die voor een claim nodig zijn, groter zijn dan de voordelen. Ze kunnen echter gebruikmaken van gespecialiseerde dienstverleners die de afhandeling van het deelnameproces voor een class action claimprocedure verzorgen, vaak op basis van no win, no fee.

Stephen Everard, Managing Director, GOAL Group zegt: “Volgens de juridische sector hebben institutionele beleggers de zorgplicht om claimprocedures te starten namens hun cliënten. Ons onderzoek heeft aangetoond dat naast de normale bedrijfsbesturing, Nederlandse pensioenfondsen veel meer moeten doen aan het steeds groter wordende pensioentekort. Nederlandse pensioenfondsen nemen volgens de sector een speerpuntpositie in bij verantwoordelijke beleggingsinitiatieven en lopen voor bij hun Europese collega’s. Desondanks wordt een alarmerend groot percentage van class action uitbetalingen niet opgevraagd, ondanks alle aandacht voor enkele recente high profile rechtszaken.

“Ook al zullen dankzij de Sarbanes-Oxley-wet en de Europese equivalenten daarvan gevallen als Enron en Parmalat nooit meer voorkomen, toch heeft de internationale kredietcrisis gezorgd voor een stijging van het aantal class action claimprocedures met betrekking tot pensioenfondsbeleggingen van plaatselijke overheden. Het zal vijf tot zeven jaar duren voordat deze zaken tot een einde worden gebracht. De recente RBS class action kan mogelijk leiden tot de grootste uitbetaling aller tijden in de geschiedenis van Amerikaanse effectenclaims, zelfs groter dan die van de Enron-zaak.

“De crisis in de financiële markten zal voor een gestage stroom kleinere claimprocedures zorgen en het is duidelijk dat Nederlandse pensioenfondsen onmiddellijk actie moeten ondernemen om hun escalerende verliezen op permanente basis te herkrijgen, zodat de belangen van hun cliënten in de toekomst op juiste wijze worden behartigd. Het is inderdaad een feit dat voor deelname aan een class action tijdige en nauwkeurige informatie over de relatieve baten en procedures moet worden ingediend en dat er tijd en hulpmiddelen moeten worden ingezet om de relevante uitbetalingen te onderzoeken en evalueren. De beleggers moeten deze baten afwegen tegen de zeer gedetailleerde gegevens over handelsactiviteiten en de vaak zeer ingewikkelde documentatie die samengesteld en ingediend moeten worden voor een geldige class action claimprocedure.

“Er bestaan nu echter gespecialiseerde geautomatiseerde diensten op outsourcing-basis die deze class action claims kunnen aanpakken, zonder dat daar hoge kosten mee gepaard gaan, vaak zelfs op basis van no win, no fee. De pensioenfondsen die zich in een goede positie bevinden om de economische teruggang te overleven, zijn de fondsen die volop van deze diensten gebruik zullen maken.”

Methodologie

Openbaar beschikbare informatie over class action uitbetalingen wordt gecombineerd met de eigen datasets van GOAL Group om de verliezen van de Nederlandse pensioenfondsen te kwantificeren en om te voorspellen hoeveel waarschijnlijk uitbetaald zal worden als gevolg van Amerikaanse class actions betreffende effecten van 2006 tot 2008.

Neem contact op met Lindsell Marketing (zie hieronder) voor een exemplaar van “Incomplete Recovery”, het complete GOAL-rapport.

Voor meer informatie kunt u contact opnemen met:

Lindsell Marketing

Marc Gossage of Paul Lindsell

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7087 8050

E-mail: marc@lindsellmarketing.com

Over Goal Group Limited

De Goal-bedrijvengroep werd op 1 november 1989 opgericht en staat in de sector voor financiële diensten bekend om zijn innovatieve en creatieve oplossingen voor zeer gespecialiseerde processen.

Goal Group heeft een ISO 9001:2008 certificering en een wereldwijde blue-chip klantenbasis, waaronder enkele van de grootste wereldwijde bewaarnemers, asset managers, privébanken, pensioenfondsen, gemeentelijke instellingen, hedge fondsen, high net worth individuen, investeringsbanken, hypotheekmakelaars en fondsbeheerders in heel Europa, Azië en de Verenigde Staten.

De class action service van Goal Group wordt geleverd via de dochteronderneming Goal Global Recoveries Limited (GGRL) en ondersteunt beleggers en instellingen die een financieel verlies hebben geleden door het bezit van aandelen van een onderneming die zich schuldig heeft gemaakt aan verkeerd management en/of onwettig gedrag.

Voorbeelden van de bronbelastingoplossingen van Goal Group zijn GTRS, GQI, GOAL TaxBack en GDMS. Onderzoek door Goal heeft aangetoond dat meer dan USD 10 miljard aan bronbelasting elk jaar niet wordt opgevraagd door de rechtmatige eigenaars en begunstigden. De oplossingen van Goal zorgen ervoor dat ongeveer USD 11 miljard per jaar wordt teruggevorderd en helpen klanten om te profiteren van belastingvermindering, telkens wanneer dat praktisch mogelijk is.

Meer informatie over de Goal bedrijvengroep vindt u op www.goalgroup.com

A new report from Siemens Financial Services has identified €2.1bn of capital currently ‘frozen’ (inefficiently deployed or untapped liquidity potential that could be freed up) in the NHS – an increase of 17% compared to 2005.  The frozen capital is the result of insufficient use of asset finance to acquire medical equipment for healthcare institutions.  Freeing the frozen capital by making use of alternative asset-financing techniques, such as leasing and rental, could release much needed liquidity to implement other efficiency initiatives and, ultimately, help improve patient care.

Access to flexible capital is critical to the provision of healthcare technology and equipment.  The UK has been warned by the International Monetary Fund that reform is crucial to address the country’s overall budget deficit.  The introduction of the Health Act 2009 on 12 November has given further impetus to NHS reform, placing particular emphasis on: assuring quality accounts; direct payments for healthcare; a regime for unsustainable NHS providers; and new powers to de-authorise Foundation Trusts.  Therefore healthcare management is now keenly looking for ways of making the budgets work harder.  One area coming under scrutiny is how to make the acquisition of capital equipment more efficient and effective, as any limitation on the ability to invest in the latest medical equipment and technology has a large influence over the achievement of health system efficiency and patient care improvements.

Siemens Financial Services looks into healthcare financing in the UK and Europe and how healthcare systems are not making the most efficient use of available financing tools.  This is the latest in a reporting series which began in 2006 and tracks relative trends in the major European economies.  The total annual capital expenditure that is frozen in the UK healthcare system has risen by 17% from €1.8bn to €2.1bn, though lower than the two other large economies of Western Europe, Germany (€4bn) and France (€2.6bn).  In Europe as a whole this has grown from €10.3bn in 2005 to €11.9bn in 2009 – a 15% increase.  A significant proportion of this capital could be freed up if asset-financing techniques such as leasing and rental were more widely employed.  This year, for the first time, the report also looked into health systems financing in Scandinavia as well as in rapidly developing economies. Interestingly, almost €3.7bn of capital is frozen in China, over €580m in Poland and around €134m in Turkey – an enormous proportion compared to the investments in medical equipment in each country.  These figures are likely to rise rapidly with the expected fast-growing health expenditure, unless asset finance solutions are more widely used for equipment acquisition.

David Martin, General Manager, Public Sector, Siemens Financial Services, comments:  “The importance of freeing up frozen capital is becoming increasingly urgent in Western Europe.  There now appears to be growing political support in some quarters to introduce not just capping measures, but real-terms spending reductions – if not straight away, at least in the next few years.  In some countries, accelerating deficits are forcing this view on government.

“Leasing and rental are important financing tools which help healthcare systems afford the most up to date equipment and medical technology, as well as rapidly improving efficiency.  Technology tends to advance in sudden leaps and in some examples can be enhanced or upgraded within 12-18 months.”

Leading database marketing player takes name of pioneering transactional data firm it acquired, as it boosts its offering with full integration of activities

Customer insight and database management firm CDMS is undergoing a radical restructure as it rebrands under the Transactis name and merges its operations with those of the transactional data provider that it bought less than a year ago.

The merger of the two operations combines their complementary services and assets to create a powerful new offering. The new combined entity brings together the scale and range of secure database marketing capabilities that CDMS has established – it handles 1.5% of all UK mail and 7% of all B2C mail – with the retail transaction data pool Transactis has built through the 160 home-shopping and online brands that make up its membership.

The new Transactis (www.transactis.co.uk), whose clients include Nationwide, Betfair, HM Revenue and Customs, Damart and Shop Direct Group, is also unveiling a combined management team and new business focus. Data will be at the heart of the company’s activities, although it will continue to extend its print and mail business as Transactis Document Solutions, a division of the new merged operation.

The new Transactis offers its clients:

• Insight based on transactional data
• Transactional prospect data
• Innovative technology
• Data and database management
• Graphics, image management and catalogue production
• Bills, statements and customer communications
• Campaign management
• Campaign execution

David Steele will spearhead the new Transactis’ development in the data and direct communications marketplace as chief executive of the merged business. Steele, who joined CDMS in June, brings a strong record of business development in the customer loyalty, consumer insight and retail data world through his background as a senior executive at customer insight specialist dunnhumby. Steele has 15 years’ experience in customer loyalty and relationship marketing and was most recently managing director of retail at dunnhumby in the UK – leading its commercial relationship with Tesco – and general manager of its Ireland operation.

Steele explains that CDMS decided to adopt ‘Transactis’ as its brand and identity because the name encompasses the direction that the company is taking: “Our services are geared towards turning clients’ transactional data into actionable insight, and then using that understanding to enable clients to set customer strategies, deliver engaging communication and drive business profitability.”

He adds: “The Transactis data pool and customer transactions coupled with their reputation and industry profile makes Transactis the logical identity to take us forward.”

Chris Morris, the former managing director of Transactis who launched the company in 2004, will remain with the business as a non-executive director. Morris will continue to work directly with Steele – and with Transactis clients – as a key advisor.

Morris comments: “By putting the activities of the two operations together, we can extend services to both our clients and our members to boost their insight, targeting, digital print and delivery capability. That’s what the market wants.”

Steele and his management team lead a company that has won a number of awards for cutting-edge work in database marketing and communication over the past year, including top data and retail industry honours for work with clients Betfair, HMRC and Shop Direct. The new Transactis will be jointly based across two sites in London and Liverpool.

Steele notes: “Both CDMS and Transactis have strong data service offerings – exemplified in the industry awards won over the past year or so. We want to optimise these capabilities by fully integrating the two operations into a single, focused unit that continues to deliver innovative and efficient service to our clients.

“In a very tough economic climate, successful organisations need to really understand their customers’ needs, preferences and behaviour. By integrating the wide range of skills and assets available within our organisation, we are improving our ability to help clients do that more effectively.

“The data-led approach is central to our new strategy – enabling clients to realise the benefits of highly targeted, relevant communications, using our best-in-breed execution platforms to combine traditional print and mail with digital channels.

“In an age of greater personalisation, one-to-one communication and multiple contact touch-points, we are aligning our staff and resources to meet these changes and provide dynamic marketing solutions.”