Business Times ran a story of the poor corporate governance culture in Singapore with thoughts if it could be improved. One company was mentioned and it was none other than Best World International (which can be inferred). Truth be told, Best World has one of the worst corporate governance and is the best example for our school business univeristies to use as a case study module.
If you wish to read it, the link can be found here (except there is a need to be a paying member) so let me show where Best World was mentioned
It is likely the 3 Best World Independent Directors have not been active enough to help minority shareholders given how the discrepancy in pay received by the executives (which has to run through the approval of the 3 Indepedent Directors) while dividends are not given (ironically its the 3 independent directors who have a vote in this. Given their poor ability in helping minorities, these 3 directors deserve to be voted out and replaced
In all sense, while it is not yet criminal, it shows how unprofessional these 3 independent directors are. Professor Mak of NUS has covered about the failures of Best World as well; it is sad for a company to be paying each of its executives higher than the pay of even an OCBC CEO, relative to the pay of Best World against the banks; and not giving dividends to shareholders. Dividends could have been given when its shares were suspended from trading (this is allowed by listing rules, but the company refused to while granting its executives a higher pay, which became more than a local bank CEO). For context, Best World has 02 executives who are each earning more than OCBC's.
Thanks for reporting on behalf of Best World shareholders. How about Alibaba?
ReplyDelete