28
Investor Opinions of Russian Companies J.P. Morgan Depositary Receipts Group November 2013
Investor Opinions of Russian CompaniesJ.P. Morgan Depositary Receipts Group
November 2013
J.P. Morgan’s DR Group
– A history of leadershipRecord number of “firsts” in the industry – from launching the first DR from Europe in 1927, Latin America in 1960 and Asia in 1961 to inventing the first Hong Kong DR in 2010
DR bank for the largest ever GDR IPO globally - $6.4 billion for Rosneft’s London listing in 2006
DR bank for the largest ever ADR IPO globally - $4.5 billion for Banco Santander Mexico’s New York listing in 2009
DR bank for the largest ever DR capital raising - $10 billion for Petrobras’s follow-on offering in 2010
DR bank for the largest DR IPO globally in 2013 - $1.1 billion for TCS Holdings PLC’s London listing
The only DR bank to have successfully executed DR IPOs in all major international exchanges - NYSE, Nasdaq, LSE, Luxembourg Exchange, Singapore Exchange, Hong Kong Exchange
Programs managed by J.P. Morgan, on average, are significantly more liquid and attract the highest investment value amongst all our competitors
In the last 12 months, J.P. Morgan was mandated as the successor DR bank by several large issuers globally. Issuers with DR programs aggregating a balance of almost 2 billion DRs and a DR market value of over $32 billion
Introduction
I am pleased to share with you the findings of our 2013 survey of European and
North American institutional investors. Each year we commission a study to explore
investor opinions of public companies in Russia. We believe our study’s insights can
be beneficial to Russian depositary receipt issuers - insights that can help inform their
capital strategies and compete more effectively for capital on the global stage.
This year’s survey reveals investor views on a number of new issues, such as
the new Moscow Exchange, the introduction of new securities regulations in Russia,
and the possible introduction of Euroclear/Clearstream settlement in Russia’s equity
market. Our study also uncovers investors’ principle areas of concern about Russian
companies, such as governance standards, and how such problems impact these
companies’ market valuations and their ability to raise capital in Western Europe
and North America.
Again this year, we gauge investor opinion on corporate governance and investor
relations in Russia. We also compare them with the practices found in comparable
emerging market countries and identify which of Russia’s public companies serve as
models for best practices. Among other findings within this report, we share with you
the steps that investors recommend Russian companies take in order to attract more
emerging market-dedicated capital from Europe and North America.
Providing keen capital markets insights such as these are among the many ways we
help Russian issuers increase the effectiveness of their DR programs and optimize
them over the long-term. If you think J.P. Morgan could be of assistance to your
company in this regard or if you have any questions about this survey, please do not
hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Vikas Taimni
Emerging Markets Client Management, Depositary Receipts Group
European and North American Institutional Investors Survey 2013
Survey Methodology 01
Executive Summary 02
Survey Findings 04
Three-year Outlook on Russia 04
Hurdles to Investing in Russian Equities 06
Russia Compared to Other Emerging Market Countries 07
Views on Russia’s Sectors 09
Russia’s IPO Market 10
Listing and Settlement Considerations 11
Investor Relations Benchmarks 14
Corporate Governance Benchmarks 15
Key Factors Leading to Investment in Russia 16
Investor Meetings with Senior Management 17
Attracting Capital from Outside Russia 18
Survey Questionnaire 19
Provider of Choice 21
Contents
1
J.P. Morgan’s Depositary Receipts Group commissioned Corbin Perception1 to conduct an online survey of Europe and North America based investors on the topic of investing in Russia.
Contributing analysts and portfolio managers are currently invested in, plan to invest or have previously invested in Russian equities.
The anonymous survey was completed in August 2013. In aggregate, the 54 contributing institutions hold $4.9 billion in Russian companies.
For scalar questions, a 5.0-point rating system was employed, where 1.0 is the lowest (worst) possible score and 5.0 is the highest (best) possible score. Certain questions allowed multiple responses.
Areas of discovery focused on factors that impact investment decisions about Russian public companies.
Survey Methodology
Region2,3
61% Europe
39% North America
1 For more information, please visit www.corbinperception.com
2 Institutions located in the U.S. or Canada
3 Institutions located in U.K., Switzerland, Denmark, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, Finland, Greece, Austria and Ireland
4 “Value” comprises Core Value and Deep Value; “Growth” comprises Core Growth and Aggressive Growth; “Other” comprises Private Equity, Income Yield, Sector Specific, Specialty and Sustainability
Investment Style4
28% Value 20% Emerging Markets 13% Style Agnostic 11% GARP 11% Growth 4% Hedge Fund 13% Other
2
In general, surveyed European and North American investors report that while the valuation entry point for Russian equities is currently attractive, the country’s reputation from an investment perspective, which is perceived as being more negative relative to emerging market counterparts, serves as a hurdle.
In addition to concerns about corruption and country risk, subpar corporate governance is a consistent theme and seemingly a significant impediment for investors. Still, select companies, including Magnit, Novatek and Yandex are noted as best in class for their governance practices as well as their investor relations.
Indeed, Russian issuers can differentiate themselves and secure more emerging market investors by practicing good corporate governance, improving transparency to levels commensurate with developed market peers, and employing a forthright approach to investor communication.
Summary of key findings and investor recommendations:
¡ Survey participants’ three-year outlook for Russia is mixed:• 43% are negative, citing country risk, concerns surrounding oil prices and
deficient corporate governance practices;• 30% are positive, citing an attractive growth profile at current valuations
despite a “deserved negative reputation”;• 22% are neutral, suggesting valuations are cheap - but for a reason - and
pointing to “political stability and governance issues”. ¡ 69% consider Russian stocks riskier than other emerging market stocks, with China
and Brazil considered the most comparable markets. ¡ Leading perceived risks/challenges regarding investment in Russian equities are
corruption (89%), corporate governance (89%) and country risk (83%). ¡ Investors find the Consumer, Financial and Technology sectors most attractive; the
Materials and Utilities sectors are considered least attractive. Views on the Energy sector are decidedly mixed.
¡ 46% of investors do not think now is a good time for Russian companies to IPO due to distressed valuations, perceived country risk and limited investor appetite.
¡ In terms of listing considerations:• Opinions regarding the merits of a U.K. Premium listing, which a Russian issuer
can obtain by incorporating in the U.K. or in other countries as guided by the U.K. regulations, were mixed. 33% of respondents report that a premium listing makes a Russian company more appealing and 28% indicate that it does not;
• 17% of investors reveal that the formation of the Moscow Exchange and introduction of new securities regulations have impacted their investment decisions, while 35% report that these developments have not;
• The study group is divided on whether Euroclear/Clearstream potentially settling Russian ordinary shares will impact their investment decisions; 30% believe it will, while 31% report it will not.
Executive Summary
3
¡ On a 5.0-point scale, where 5.0 is the highest score, the investor relations of Russian companies received an average rating of 2.5 compared to 2.4 in 2012. The corporate governance practices of Russian companies received an average score of 1.8, in line with 2012 findings.• Investors consider the IR practices of Russian companies in line with those
of other emerging market companies, but note that the benchmark is relatively low;
• Russia’s corporate governance practices are generally viewed as weak compared to those of emerging market counterparts; key issues include “lack of [minority] shareholder rights”, limited transparency, and subpar investor communication.
¡ Companies considered having a best practice IR program and corporate governance are Lukoil, Magnit, Novatek and Yandex.
¡ Respondents indicate they learn about Russian investment opportunities primarily via internal research and the sell side (i.e., published research, conferences, sponsored trips).
¡ When meeting with Russian management teams, investors are most interested in hearing about the competitive landscape, including a company’s sustainable advantages, as well as opportunities/threats, in addition to covering operational issues and the corporate strategy.
¡ Ideally, investors would like to meet with Russian management teams once or twice a year.
¡ To capture additional investor mindshare and capital, survey participants recommend Russian companies improve corporate governance standards and enhance transparency.
4
Survey Findings
Three-year Outlook on RussiaNearly half of survey participants - comprising a group evenly divided between Europe and North America based investors - have negative outlooks on Russian companies. These investors consider investing in Russia “akin to gambling” and “unattractive” because they fundamentally “do not trust the [corporate] governance structure” and are concerned about the country’s ability to generate sustainable economic growth under current government policies. Indeed, they note that the future could be “messy” and maintain that corruption, at times excessive government control, lack of minority shareholder rights and overreliance on certain exports, such as oil, during a difficult price environment “all play a role” in what is driving their negative outlook.
Investor Commentary“Russia’s negative population, corruption, LNG prices and shale gas drives my sentiment.”
“It is more about the quality of underlying companies and their practices rather than the
country itself. Intra-country stock correlations are low.”
“I am negative on oil pricing. There needs to be governance reform, higher payouts and
better liquidity.”
“Most interesting Russian companies are not being run for shareholders. Fundamentally, I do
not trust the governance structure.”
However, 30% of investors - mainly Europe-based institutions - are positive, despite the aforementioned risks. They note that Russian companies are “misunderstood” and “far too cheap” to turn a blind eye towards. This finding suggests that it might be easier to attract investment from European money managers or that perhaps Russian issuers need to spend more time meeting with and educating North American investors about the nature and scope of the above risks. According to this group of respondents, Russia has “huge” potential and while the macro picture “doesn’t look great”, they remain optimistic about the possibility for “positive fundamental change”. To a lesser extent, they cite the upcoming 2014 Winter Olympics, taking place in Sochi, as a positive catalyst.
What is Your Three-year Outlook on Russian Investments?
30% Positive
22% Neutral
43% Negative
5% NA
5
Investor Commentary“Valuations are very attractive. Corporate governance is a main problem but could
improve over the next few years as Russia joined WTO in 2012. If corporate governance
were to improve meaningfully, I would be very bullish on Russia.”
“It trades at a deep discount to peers and there are positive structural changes on the
horizon. Despite its deserved negative reputation, we expect improvements on the legal,
structural and corporate governance fronts.”
Finally, the remaining survey participants report that Russia’s growth potential and attractive valuations are offset by systemic political and governance issues; this group is of the mindset that Russian equities are “cheap but for a reason”.
6
Hurdles to Investing in Russian EquitiesA key view emerging from polled investors is that governance in Russia and transparency levels - both of which are within issuers’ control - are subpar on an absolute and relative basis and as such, are identified risks to investing in the country. According to survey participants, improvement in these areas would go a long way toward instilling confidence in Russian issuers and are necessary to attract more investment from emerging market-dedicated investors.
Investor Commentary“It all starts with institutions, even though it is sympathetic towards Russian interests as
rightly perceived by Russia itself.”
“Politics.”
What do you see as the main risks/challenges to investing in Russia?
Corporate Governance
Corruption
Country Risk
Transparency Levels
Accounting Practices
Financial Communication
Trading Liquidity
Non-Compliance
Currency Fluctuations
0 20 40 60 80 100
89%
89%
17%
8%
21%
34%
53%
66%
83%
7
Russia Compared to Other Emerging Market Countries
Comparable Markets
While survey constituents point to China and Brazil as most comparable to Russia - citing commodity-driven economies, corruption and some country risk - 43% of the study group, including 52% of investors based in North America, are of the opinion that Russia is unlike any other emerging market country and that it is generally perceived to be in the bottom quartile.
These investors maintain that Russia’s economy and political environment are “unique” among large developing countries, in that there is “little commitment to private property rights, which doesn’t foster an equity culture”.
To a lesser extent, 13% of contributors point to India as most comparable, similar for its corruption, unique political environment and general “opacity” in accounting practices.
Investor Commentary“Brazil, India, China, Turkey, South Africa and Indonesia: There is huge potential, weak
political institutions and a restless middle class.”
“Brazil, India, China – Differences outweigh similarities, though. The other BRICs are
purer development stories yet they have much better functioning institutions and better
rule of law.”
“Russia is unique as it has a declining population and its wealth is largely based on
commodity prices….”
“Russia’s economy and political environment are unique.”
Comparable Markets5
China
Brazil
India
Africa
Turkey
Indonesia
North Korea
Kazakhstan
10 20 30 40
30%
28%
2%
2%
4%
4%
9%
13%
0
5 Africa comprises Nigeria, South Africa and Zimbabwe
8
Relative Risk
Underscoring investors’ general lack of confidence in Russia’s political environment and “non-compliance with social responsibility investment guidelines”, 69% of surveyed investors, including 67% of respondents based in Europe, report they perceive Russian stocks to be riskier than those of emerging market counterparts and specifically point to:
¡ 35% | Corruption ¡ 32% | Country risk ¡ 27% | Inadequate corporate governance standards, including transparency levels ¡ 14% | Macroeconomic risk
Investor Commentary“Accounting practices, governance, treatment of shareholders and level of transparency
sums it up.”
“Shareholder value does not seem to be high on the agenda, plus there is
the corruption.”
Those who do not feel that investing in Russia is riskier (31%), note that the government “appears stable” and believe that valuations are “reasonable,” with one surveyed investor commenting that “all markets are overtly risky”.
Investor Commentary“The valuations are reasonable enough to offset the risks.”
“Risk is compensated by growth potential.”
“The country has infrastructure and a middle class already in place. The government
appears to be stable but I do question finances.”
Are Russian investments riskier than other emerging market counterparts?
69% Yes31% No
9
Views on Russia’s SectorsMost Attractive Least Attractive
47% Consumer Goods
¡ “Growing demand”32% Materials
27% Technology
¡ “Quality engineers”
¡ “Know-how”
¡ “Intellectual capabilities”
¡ Low penetration/growing demand for e-commerce
32% Utilities
¡ Complexities
¡ Regulation
10% Industrials 14% Chemicals/Potash
10% Telecommunications/Mobile
Mixed
Energy
43% Positive
¡ Large supply
¡ “Strong market position”
¡ Growing consumption globally
50% Negative
¡ Particularly Oil and Gas
¡ State controlled
¡ Price environment
Metal and Mining
13% Positive
¡ “Vast resources”
¡ “Cheap”
23% Negative
¡ China slowdown
¡ Overcapacity of steel
Financials
30% Positive
¡ Valuations relative to “structural growth”
¡ “Improvement in margins”
23% Negative
¡ Corruption
¡ Global competition
10
Russia’s IPO MarketOnly 15% of surveyed investors believe that now is a good time to go public, highlighting that the implementation of investor relations and corporate governance practices that are higher than prevailing standards in Russia would be necessary to complete a successful initial public offering.
Nearly 40% declined to answer the question while 46% of surveyed investors cite the following reasons why Russian companies should not go public at this time:
¡ Russian valuations are “too distressed” ¡ Investors’ heightened awareness of risk and a lack of appetite for emerging
market stocks ¡ Country risk, and a “strained” business climate
Investor Commentary“Corporate governance is at an all-time low.”
“The multiples don’t support placements.”
While investors were challenged to identify suitable IPO candidates, a minority broadly suggested certain sectors:
¡ Technology, specifically IT and “High Tech” ¡ Consumer, including Retail ¡ Healthcare
Is now a good time for Russian companies to IPO?
46% No39% NA
15% Yes
11
Listing and Settlement Considerations
U.K. Premium Listing6
The merits of a U.K. Premium listing are somewhat mixed. Findings indicate that 33% of investors believe that a Premium listing increases the appeal of a Russian company, mainly because it improves credibility and transparency levels. These participants report that U.K. Premium listing standards are more stringent and that a Premium-listed Russian company would require greater oversight by its board of directors. They also report that a Premium listing provides increased trading liquidity and removes the “timing of settlement” issue that serves as an investment hurdle for some.
Investor Commentary“Yes, it does because it leads to more oversight, better reporting, and perceived
stronger shareholder protection in the U.K.”
“There are actual requirements to a Premium listing that engrain changes in
management behavior and require Board oversight.”
“A premium listing isn’t essential but it would help a lot. There is generally greater
liquidity in the U.K.”
However, 28% of survey participants report that a Premium listing does not change the investment appeal of Russian stocks, with 13% of this group commenting that it is “not necessary”.
Does a U.K. Premium listing make a Russian company more apealing as an investment?
24% Unsure15% NA
28% No
33% Yes
6 A Russian issuer can obtain a U.K. Premium listing by reincorporating in the U.K. or in other countries as guided by the U.K. regulator
12
Investor Commentary“Russia needs a credible, modern settlement system that demonstrates institutional and
government commitment to ownership rights in order to be taken seriously as an equity
market worth the name. Transparency is a close follower requirement, which is only
papered over by London plc shares.”
“I previously thought it would improve corporate governance but was shown that is not
the case.”
“Liquidity should be concentrated in one place and is best in the home market.”
“The U.K. listing is expensive to trade and not necessary.”
Nearly one-quarter of investors indicated they do not have sufficient knowledge regarding the topic while 15% declined to answer.
Moscow Exchange
According to 17% of survey participants, the creation of the Moscow Exchange – formed through the merger between MICEX and RTS – and the new securities regulations that followed have brought “slightly better” market visibility and trading liquidity, as well as improved access to Russian stocks.
Investor Commentary
“It made me think there is a glimmer of hope that things will improve.”
“It will make trading easier than using MICEX/RTS switches.”
“It’s the most logical place to trade Russian stocks but there is still a need for better
settlement procedures, etc.”
“It will provide slightly better liquidity and visibility.”
Thirty-five percent of investors indicate that the Moscow Exchange and new regulations have not impacted their investment decisions. They point to the need for improved public company business practices and a track record of value creation for shareholders. Nearly half of the study group indicated they did not have enough knowledge to answer or declined to answer.
Has the creation of the Moscow Exchange and new regulations impacted yourinvestment decisions?
31% Unsure17% NA
35% No
17% Yes
13
Investor Commentary“Liquidity has never been a constraint.”
“No; a proven record needs to be established.”
Euroclear/Clearstream
Euroclear/Clearstream’s role in the settlement of Russian ordinary shares, tentatively scheduled to begin in mid-2014, is expected to improve the image of Russia’s equity market and attract more investors to it, according to 30% of surveyed investors. Specifically, this group believes Euroclear/Clearstream settlement will boost trading liquidity and provide investment managers “higher comfort” when investing.
Investor Commentary“It will provide more confidence and liquidity.”
“I may buy more local shares if transaction costs go down to the level of ADRs/GDRs.”
“It should have a positive effect and increase investor participation,
mine included.”
“I am eager to concentrate trades on the local market, likely the most liquid continental
European one.”
Thirty-one percent of investors maintain that Euroclear’s/Clearstream’s program launch will not impact their investment in Russia’s public companies while 22% are unsure.
Investor Commentary“If the DVP [Delivery Versus Payment] in Russia works, there is no need for Euroclear. If
the DVP is not available, the Euroclear settlement will not amount to much.”
Will the future role of Euroclear/Clearstream in settlement impact your investment decisions?
22% Unsure17% NA
31% No
30% Yes
14
Investor Relations BenchmarksInvestors were asked to rate the overall IR practices of Russian companies relative to emerging market peers, using a 5.0-point scale, where 1.0 was the lowest possible score (Worse) and 5.0 was the highest possible score (Better). (Not every respondent provided a score or feedback on every measure.)
The investor relations of Russian companies received an average rating of 2.5, slightly above the 2012 score of 2.4. In general, surveyed investors consider the country’s IR practices in line with to slightly worse than those of other emerging market companies.
However, select areas of investor relations in Russia - specifically One-on-One Meetings and Investor Presentation Content - received higher marks from contributors. Conversely, Expectations Management was the lowest rated measure and considered worse by 25% of respondents.
While concern about the level of transparency and disclosure provided by Russian public companies is prevalent among investors, a number of issuers are seen to be demonstrating best-in-class IR practices:
¡ 38% each | Magnit and Yandex, for “good” communication and transparency ¡ 31% each | Lukoil, because it has “good” communication; and Novatek ¡ 15% each | M.video, because they “answer questions”; Gazprom, for high accessibility;
and Sberbank
Other companies mentioned by some survey participants include Polymetal, Uralkali and MD Medical Group, all of which investors cite as having “helpful” IR, as well as Mobile TeleSystems (MTS), Norilsk Nickel and Eurasia Drilling Company.
Investor relations benchmarks
Worse Slightly Worse In Line Slightly Better BetterNA
Accessibility
Proactive E�orts
Response Time
Investor Presentation Content
Expectations Mgmt.
Earnings Calls
Roadshow Frequency
One-on-One Meetings
Sell Side Coverage
0 20 40 60 80 100
15
Corporate Governance BenchmarksEmploying the same 5.0-point scale, where 1.0 was the lowest possible score (Worse) and 5.0 was the highest possible score (Better), investors were asked to rate the overall corporate governance practices of Russian companies relative to emerging market peers.
Russia’s corporate governance received an average rating of 1.8, in line with 2012 study findings. Ratings on corporate governance measures came in below that of investor relations practices. Of note, Treatment of Minority Shareholders earned the lowest overall score, with 58% of contributors rating it worse than Russia’s emerging market peers.
The companies cited above for demonstrating best-in-class IR, were also identified by investors as exhibiting best practice corporate governance. They are:
¡ 50% | Magnit ¡ 40% | Novatek ¡ 30% | Yandex ¡ 20% each | Lukoil; Gazprom; MTS; and M.video
One-off mentions include Rosneft, MD Medical Group and Norilsk Nickel.
Corporate governance benchmarks
Management Honesty/Candor
Transparency (Ownership Structure)
Treatment of Minority Shareholders
Board Independence
Financial Reporting
Transparency
Management Accessibility
0 20 40 60 80 100Worse Slightly Worse In Line Slightly Better BetterNA
16
Key Factors Leading to Investment in Russian CompaniesSurvey respondents indicate that internal research, including utilizing proprietary databases and screening software, and sell side research, conferences and sponsored trips, are the leading sources of investment ideas, with regard to investing in Russian issuers.
How do you typically learn about Russian investment opportunities?
Internal Research Proprietary Database
Sell Side
Independent Research
Journals, Publications
Colleagues
Third Party/Corporate Access
Proactive Outreach
Social Media Platforms
0 20 40 60 80
60%
52%
14%
16%
22%
30%
34%
42%
17
Investor Meetings with Senior Management The majority of investors would like to meet with the senior management teams of Russian companies one to two times a year.
When meeting with management, they report a keen interest in learning about the competitive landscape and what sets the company apart from competitors and gives it sustainable advantages.
Investors also expect management to provide an overview of the company, in terms of the strategy, operations, and opportunities and threats. Covering these areas is crucial to securing investment.
Of note, only 30% of surveyed investors prefer a Q&A format for management meetings, a preference that underscores the importance of utilizing investor presentations.
With regards to meeting with Russian companies, what is your preferred frequency?
17% Not important28% Once a year31% Twice a year
6% Quarterly18% NA
18
What topics are you most interested in discussing with management?
Competitive Di�erentiators
0 20 40 60 80
Competitive Landscape
Operational, Strategic Information
Opportunities/Threats
Capital Allocation
Outlook, Forward- Looking Information
Value Proposition
Company Background, Basics
Key Performance Metrics
Product Outline
Industry Overview
Financial Data
Macroeconomic Environment
73%
68%
63%
63%
55%
53%
50%
48%
45%
43%
43%
40%
28%
19
Attracting Capital from Outside RussiaTo secure more investment from outside Russia, surveyed investors recommend the following:
¡ 55% | Improve corporate governance standards, including demonstrating fair treatment of minority shareholders
¡ 36% | Enhance transparency and disclosure, including providing realistic and reliable guidance
¡ 18% | Serve as stewards of capital, with a focus on shareholder return ¡ 9% | Employ an honest and forthright approach to investor communication ¡ 9% | Increase visibility through sell side coverage
Investor Commentary“Demonstrate the value proposition of your particular company and alignment
with investors.”
“Be realistic about timeframes and the markets in which they compete.”
“Be transparent; provide honest answers as well as realistic and reliable guidance.”
“Be transparent and carefully align interests among controllers, management and
minority investors.”
“Seek highest corporate governance standards.”
“Become known to the investment world through sell side international brokers.”
“Other than a strong business case, there has to be trust in the CEO and the Board and
who is in charge.”
“Focus on return potential of the investment.”
“Do not invest all cash flow.”
“Increase payout, maintain a stable level of dividend growth, avoid rights issues and
show better capital discipline.”
“Hold IR and governance to Western standards and institute a dividend policy.”
20
1. Do you currently invest in, plan to invest in or have you ever invested in
Russian companies?
2. How would you classify your investment style?
3. What is your market cap mandate?
4. What coverage areas do you follow?
5. What is your three-year outlook for Russia?
6. Briefly, what is driving your sentiment on Russia?
7. What do you see as the main risks and/or challenges regarding the Russian
investment space?
8. From your perspective, which emerging market countries are most comparable
to Russia? Why?
9. Do you perceive Russian stocks to be inherently riskier than other emerging
market stocks? Why?
10. In comparison to emerging market peers, how would you rate
the following in regard to Russian companies’ IR efforts and
corporate governance?
• Management Accessibility
• Management Honesty and Candor
• IR Accessibility
• IR Responsiveness
• IR Proactive Outreach/Calls
• Disclosure, Transparency
• Financial Reporting/Accounting
• Managing Investor Expectations
• Investor Presentation Content
• Earnings Call Content
• Non-deal Roadshow Frequency
• One-on-one Meeting Quality
• Sell Side Coverage
• Transparency: Ownership Structure
• Treatment of Minority Shareholders
• Board Independence
Survey Questionnaire
21
11. In your experience, which Russian companies have best practice investor relations
and why?
12. In your experience, which Russian companies have best practice corporate
governance and why?
13. Which Russian sector(s) do you see as the most attractive and why?
14. Which Russian sector(s) do you see as least attractive and why?
15. Is now a good time for Russian companies to IPO? Why/why not?
16. With regard to the current Russian IPO pipeline, which companies do you believe
have the best opportunity of listing? Why?
17. Does a U.K. Premium listing via plc shares make a Russian company generally
more appealing than if it were listed via GDRs or in Russia only? Please explain.
Why/Why Not?
18. Has the creation of the Moscow Exchange and introduction of new securities
regulations impacted your investment decisions? Please explain. If yes, how?
19. It is expected that starting in mid- 2014, Euroclear/Clearstream will be allowed
to settle Russian ordinary shares. Will this impact your investment decisions?
If yes, how?
20. How do you typically learn about Russian investment opportunities?
21. When meeting with a Russian management team, what do you want them to
cover? Please select all that apply.
22. In an ideal world, how often would you like to meet with Russian management?
23. In general, what advice would you give Russian companies seeking to attract your
investment capital?
22
Provider of Choice
J.P. Morgan is the premier provider of customized Depositary Receipts solutions to the world’s leading issuers. We leverage our distinct strength as a global Equities leader to help our clients navigate the capital markets and attract high-quality investors. Guided by J.P. Morgan’s core principle of “first class business in a first class way,”
DR issuers have relied on us for over 85 years for the trusted advice and long-term partnership that only we can offer.
We provide a differentiated approach to Depositary Receipt solutions:
¡ Focused client base ensures an exceptional client experience
At J.P. Morgan, we focus our attention on the quality - not quantity - of clients
and programs we serve. This allows us to deliver a client experience centered on
individualized attention and service.
¡ Excellence and innovation is in our DNA
With a record of “firsts” in the industry – from launching the first ADRs in Europe,
Asia, and Latin America to inventing the first Hong Kong DR in 2010 – J.P. Morgan
exemplifies a heritage of innovation, leadership, and commitment to the DR
business. Our team’s extensive experience and proven track record in executing
complex transactions for issuers in both mature and new DR markets helps to give us
the added edge in the DR marketplace.
¡ Moscow-based senior-level DR client coverage executive
J.P. Morgan is the only bank with senior-level DR presence and full-time coverage
of DR clients from Moscow allowing for faster turnaround to client requests.
Our Moscow-based colleague, Danny Khoussainov, has extensive experience in
investor relations from his previous role in IR at Mobile TeleSystems (one of the most
liquid and active DR issuers from Russia). Danny is supported by a Russian-speaking
team in London, DR Client Coverage expert, Daniela Utane and Client Services
specialist, Djamilia Kurmanbaeva. Their prior experience is in Equity Capital Markets,
Equity Research and Equity Derivatives.
23
¡ An integrated, firm-wide approach to the issuers’ IR and capital markets needs
As the world’s leading investment and depositary bank, J.P. Morgan is uniquely
positioned to provide clients with a truly integrated equity solution – connecting
the issuers with our extensive network of buy- and sell-side market participants,
along with giving them access to IR and capital markets professionals who guide the
issuers step-by-step in growing their DR programs. Our advisory-based approach
helps the issuers identify and attract new investors, while deepening relationships
with existing ones.
¡ A partner and an ally, to both the issuers and their investors
Everything we do is with our clients’ best interests in mind. Since many of our clients,
and their investors, have broader relationships with J.P. Morgan, we will always act in
their long-term best interests and uphold the highest standards of integrity in all our
actions. Issuers can count on us to partner with them every step of the way.
¡ Outstanding track record of transfers
J.P. Morgan has an outstanding track record of transfers away from competitor
depositary banks. In the last 12 months alone J.P. Morgan has been chosen as the
successor depositary bank by several large issuers globally, including Alcatel-Lucent,
Teva, SABMiller and Gerdau. Programs aggregating a balance of 1.8bn DRs with a
market value of $32.3bn have moved away from other depositary banks to
J.P. Morgan during this period. The main driver behind this decision to transfer has
been superior client service and the quality of the team that J.P. Morgan offers.
The products and services featured above are offered by JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., a subsidiary of JPMorgan Chase & Co. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. is authorised by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency in the jurisdiction of the U.S.A. Authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority in the jurisdiction of the U.K.. Subject to regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority and to limited regulation by the Prudential Regulation Authority. Details about the extent of our regulation by the Prudential Regulation Authority are available from us on request. J.P. Morgan is a marketing name for businesses of JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its subsidiaries worldwide.
©2013 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved.
For more information, please contact your J.P. Morgan representative or visit: jpmorgan.com/investorservices
Contacts
Vikas TaimniEmerging Markets Client Management+852 2800 [email protected]
Danny KhoussainovRussia Client Management Head+7 495 [email protected]
Daniela UtaneRussia Client Management+44207 134 [email protected]
Djamilia KurmanbaevaRussia Client Service+44207 134 [email protected]
Ivan PeillHead of Investor Relations Advisory Services+1 212 552 [email protected]
Greg LevendisHead of Transaction Advisory Services+1 302 552 [email protected]
Monica WernerHead of Proxy Advisory Services+1 302 552 [email protected]
