Criticism was fierce when it emerged that Shell will stop organizing press conferences around the publication of its quarterly and annual figures. The Financial Times reported last week that the oil and gas company is canceling its traditional press question time during those moments, partly because competitors such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP and Total also do not hold them. Instead, journalists can listen in on the ‘call’ with investors and analysts that CEO Wael Sawan and his financial right-hand man Sinead Gorman also hold on these days. But they are not allowed to ask questions there.
Journalists’ union NVJ reacted angrily. Secretary Thomas Bruning saw it as an attempt by Shell to “close the door” to the outside world and to “take control” of the information that is distributed. Follow This, an activist shareholders’ association that, like other critics of the fossil energy company, believes that Shell is doing far too little to green, criticized the fact that Shell is placing itself “even further outside society”.
Events
Is that criticism justified? The importance for journalists of press conferences about company results must first be put into perspective somewhat – although this may be the result of a deliberate tactic on the part of companies. At ‘numbers press conferences’, journalists are regularly allowed to ask no more than a few questions, which are then answered in general terms. The microphone is then passed on to the next reporter. There is therefore not much question of real questioning or newsworthy statements. Press conferences are generally tightly orchestrated ‘events’.
In any case, Shell is not the only stock exchange company to abolish the earnings press conference. There are other concerns that have done that, sometimes years ago. Some they never even organized. Insurer ASR does not keep them, nor does beer brewer Heineken – a large, international company, just like Shell. At Heineken, journalists are also allowed to listen to the call with investors, but they are not allowed to ask questions.
Companies that still organize press conferences usually do so less often than Shell did for years. With a press conference every three months, Shell was actually an exception among the AEX companies. Financial institutions NN, Aegon and ABN Amro hold ‘only’ two press conferences per year. Seen in this light, Shell is not so much an anomaly as the norm – and perhaps a late ‘follower’.
From an international perspective, Shell is certainly no exception, says Arent Jan Hesselink, director of Europe, the Middle East and Africa at marketing agency Edelman. “In the United States and the United Kingdom, press conferences when publishing results are the exception rather than the rule. In fact, most companies there do not even publish quarterly figures, only half-yearly and annual figures.” According to him, the lack of press conferences is mainly because for companies at those times it revolves around the shareholder.
Alternative
However, there are also listed companies in the Netherlands that continue to adhere to the quarterly press conference and consider it important and necessary. Telecom company KPN, for example. According to a spokesperson, this is because “as a company we are at the center of society, and this means that you are prepared to provide an explanation of your results to the media.”
Shell further defends the change of course by pointing out the large amount of work involved in preparing and organizing press conferences, and the burden they would place on the company’s top management. Board chairmen work extremely long hours during the publication of results, partly due to the different time zones in which the company operates, says a Shell spokesperson. “These are really bizarre days for a top executive.”
But Shell also says it offers an alternative: so-called one-on-one interviews, in which journalists are given a number of minutes to discuss individually with the chairman of the board. According to the spokesperson, this, plus some other ‘guarantees’, means that reduced access for journalists will not be too bad. “Journalists can also ask questions via the regular channels, which will then be answered by our spokesperson, possibly ‘on behalf’ of the chairman of the board. For Dutch journalists specifically, we can put forward our local director.”
This one-to-one model is also popular with other exhibition companies, at home and abroad. Philips, for example, organizes such conversations, but also Ahold Delhaize, ASR, ASML and Heineken. NXP, a chip manufacturer listed on the American Nasdaq, also works this way.
According to the companies, many journalists also ask for this themselves – and they are even better served with the one-on-one conversations than with a general press conference. “Journalists prefer one-on-one, so they have more time and can delve deeper into the matter,” says the Philips spokesperson. At KPN, they also see that their enthusiasm for press conferences is decreasing, partly because of this need for depth. “Our press meetings were better attended a few years ago,” says the spokesperson.
But it is of course nice for companies themselves. Many companies will not readily come forward, but they regularly have doubts about the usefulness of the question sessions. In their view, it happens that journalists are barely prepared, or that questions shoot in all directions during a press conference and the level remains superficial. For example, at a press conference after the publication of de Volksbank’s half-year figures in August, only one question was asked by the handful of reporters present.
Scarce conversations
However, Shell does have a comment to make about the specific one-to-one model it has in mind. Shell will probably only hold individual conversations with “one or two” media organizations, the spokesperson says. These are probably Anglo-Saxon media such as Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal than Dutch, because Shell is currently strongly focused on the American investment world. Shell shares have recently been less popular with US investors compared to US competitors such as Exxon. And then it makes more sense to ‘engage’ with those investors through Anglo-Saxon media than through Dutch ones. That’s the media they read. “It will be different,” the Shell spokesperson acknowledges.
Companies such as Philips, Unilever, Heineken and Ahold organize significantly more one-on-one conversations, and more often with Dutch journalists. Philips publishes between ten and twenty reports per quarter, the spokesperson says, with journalists from the Netherlands and other countries. “We try to serve everyone who wants to.” Heineken organizes such conversations with, among others The Financial Times, NRC and de Volkskrant, as well as with media in other countries. Unilever is also talking to several Dutch media.
In that light, Shell’s step is in line with the growing distance between Shell and its old home base, the Netherlands. At the end of 2021, Shell moved its head office from The Hague to London, where, among others, the Anglo-Saxon shareholders on whom Shell is increasingly focusing are located. There were even reports recently that Shell has also looked at a further move to the US – although Shell strongly denies that this idea is alive.
A version of this article also appeared in the October 2, 2023 newspaper.