Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Re: You got to be in it to win it!

Besides....

XCUD is trying to have their cake and eat it to.
On the one hand they argued that justice delayed was justice not served.
They complained that the CUD defendants were denied a quick trial which deprived them of their rights to have a quick resolution.
All the while they were doing all they could do to delay a quick resolution.
They huffed and puffed and failed to provide a defense.
The Court awaiting their response was simultaneously accused by the same defendants and their supporters of unduly extending the trial further denying them of a quick resolution.
At the end the Court exercised its only option when the defendants refused to put up a defense.
Now one can interpret why they refused to have a trial. Maybe the evidence was so overwhelming and incriminating that had a trial been conducted, the whole world would have seen how guilty they were in forming and directing an attempted insurrection.

Such a scenario would no doubt destroy them beyond repair.
In the US a defendant faced with overwhelming evidence pointing to his guilt will often accept a plea deal with the prosecution in order to receive a less harsh sentence.
Just maybe the CUD defendants chose to not mount a defense because their guilt was so overwhelming.
Finding themselves in a, lose-lose scenario, they just may have decided to defy the constitution so that a guilty plea would be entered and their guilt not exposed.
At the same time the engine that drives the buggy CUD formula quickly shouted that Justice was denied because the Court acted in haste making a decision.
Come on....they can not have it both ways.
They can not scream that justice delayed is Justice denied and then flip flop and shout Justice is not justice because it was done in quickly.

What a mess have these people created for themsleves at ever turn. How can one make so many mistakes? Amazing!


On 6/13/07, Dg; wrote:
Even more reason to go to court! You are under the critical eye of the Safeguarder of Democracy (USA, Bush) and as such, are subject to criticism and other actions if you act in an Undemocratic manner. I would think that every DEMOCRAT would be hoping for anything to criticize Bush and his new ally (meles) for their actions in Somalia or anywhere in general...
It would have been a smart move towards longevity of the opposition to do that.
Like I said from day 1, I was pleasantly surprised by CUD and the movement it generated amongst the people. But that doesn't make you ready to run a country. Anyone who thought they were should by now have realized that the party was a Lemon. Time always Tells.
Them guys quit when the going went rough. You do that when you are running a country and you open it up for corruption, scandal and risk of it becoming like a Nigeria (sorry Nigeria!).


T; wrote:
ya ya ya.........the usual excuses!


On 6/13/07, S; wrote:
Who you foolin? Meles is there as Bush's puppet because he invaded Somalia for him. He is the neo-cons darling now don't you know. No Somalia and Mele would not have been in this picture.

Re: You got to be in it to win it!

S, What are you talking about?

the winner in ETH's election was acknowledged by 2 of 3 independent observers. The 3rd observer turned out to be a campaign manager for the opposition and is still campaigning as we speak.

Do not make believe that the election was a shame. the whole rational world knows otherwise. To reassure you that the ETH gov't is widely accepted for its hard work to alleviate its people from poverty and for its legitimacy, check out this pic taken a few days ago at the G8 summit. No one fitting your description of the ETH gov't would be invited at such events.

Who are you trying to fool?



On 6/13/07, S wrote:
Bemba accepted a Supreme Court ruling that Kabila was the rightful winner. If a handful of his supporters still decide to act stupid and act up hey... Some of Segoline Royals supporters decided to act stupid too after she lost to Sarkozy in France. These are sore losers. Regardless in both cases we clearly know who won the election. Not so in Ethiopia.


On 6/13/07, T wrote:
But of couRse, his supporters think they have been disenfranchised!
They rioted as the style is for us Africans loosing opponents. They Rioted my brother!
There is still tension and military presense all over DRC due to this, months later!
and stop yelling!


On 6/13/07, S wrote:
IT IS IRRELEVANT BECAUSE HALF OF THE FREAKIN POPULATION IS NOT BEING DISENFRANCHISED. THE LOSING SIDE KNOWS THAT EVEN THOUGH IT LOST ITS VOTES WERE COUNTED PROPERLY, TRANSPARENTLY AND INDEPENDENTLY. THIS IS THE BASICS OF DEMOCRACY THAT A TWO YEAR OLD CAN TELL YOU. UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES THE LOSING CANDIDATE CAN CRY FOUL AND TAKE HIS RAG TAG MERCENARIES AND GO TO THE MOON FOR ALL I CARE. IF HIS SUPPORTERS ON THE GROUND DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY WERE DISENFRANCHISED HE WILL NOT HAVE A BASE OF SUPPORT WITHIN THE COUNTRY IN WHICH TO START A CIVIL WAR USING THE ELECTION RESULTS AS AN EXCUSE. THIS LEADS TO STABILITY AND PROGESS.


On 6/13/07, T wrote:
S,
How is this irrelevant? in Africa, this is the trend. All loser are sore losers. Independent or not the losers always call foul.
Besides, the DRC is a country the is trying to emerge from the rubbles of WW4, African style. it has to be seen in its own context. ETH '05 election has a different history and birth.


On 6/13/07, S; wrote:
Whether Bemba refuses to accept results is irrelevant. More fool him. The fact is the votes were counted and certified by an independent body. I thought you would be able to understand the difference between genuine disenfranchisement and just being a sore loser. Big difference my friend.


On 6/13/07, T; wrote:
S,
and what happended to the opposition in the Congo?
He, Bemba, refused to accpet the decision of the IEC, his security crew had gun battles with the military, and he is now in exile in Portugal, vowing never to return.
So what does this prove, even with the so called IEC outcome is the same.
Besides, in ETH 05, the election board and all other aspects of the institutional make ups were known and ageed upon by all oppositions. All went very smoothly until they found out they lost. Then they unleashed their mafiossos on the public.
The reason that truth is stranger than fiction is that fiction has to have a rational thread running through it in order to be believable, whereas reality may be totally irrational. And irrational is what the XCUD is!


On 6/12/07, S wrote:
S1 the Congo, which recently became a democracy, held general elections last year and guess what....the votes were counted by their Independent Electoral Commission (IEC). "The members of the electoral commission were designated on an equal basis between different entities and components formed during the Congolese talks in 2002 and 2003. This equall formation has henceforth consecrated its independence." Why did they only have wait a couple of years to get this very important institution of Democracy and we Ethiopians have to wait 100 yrs to get ours? Oh yeah I forgot. We have to be patient and play within the system. 16 yrs and counting. Can't wait.


On 6/12/07, S1; wrote:
N, you are making my point for me. The country has moved forward in the last 15 years faster than it has moved in the last thousand years. Could it have moved even further? Sure it could have with some policies here and there being tweaked. But that is crying over spilled milk. You got to play in the system to expedite the process so it won't take 100 years. In my opinion, CUD should have defended themselves in the courts and proven to the international observers and their supporters how shameful the judiciary system under the EPRDF is run. The bottom line is I don't see the gain they made by not defending themselves.

Re: You got to be in it to win it!

S

How is this irrelevant? in Africa, this is the trend. All loser are sore losers. Independent or not the losers always call foul.
Besides, the DRC is a country the is trying to emerge from the rubbles of WW4, African style. it has to be seen in its own context. ETH '05 election has a different history and birth.



On 6/13/07, S wrote:
Whether Bemba refuses to accept results is irrelevant. More fool him. The fact is the votes were counted and certified by an independent body. I thought you would be able to understand the difference between genuine disenfranchisement and just being a sore loser. Big difference my friend.


On 6/13/07, T wrote:
Sirak,
and what happended to the opposition in the Congo?
He, Bemba, refused to accpet the decision of the IEC, his security crew had gun battles with the military, and he is now in exile in Portugal, vowing never to return.
So what does this prove, even with the so called IEC outcome is the same.
Besides, in ETH 05, the election board and all other aspects of the institutional make ups were known and ageed upon by all oppositions. All went very smoothly until they found out they lost. Then they unleashed their mafiossos on the public.
The reason that truth is stranger than fiction is that fiction has to have a rational thread running through it in order to be believable, whereas reality may be totally irrational. And irrational is what the XCUD is!


On 6/12/07, S wrote:
S1. the Congo, which recently became a democracy, held general elections last year and guess what....the votes were counted by their Independent Electoral Commission (IEC). "The members of the electoral commission were designated on an equal basis between different entities and components formed during the Congolese talks in 2002 and 2003. This equall formation has henceforth consecrated its independence." Why did they only have wait a couple of years to get this very important institution of Democracy and we Ethiopians have to wait 100 yrs to get ours? Oh yeah I forgot. We have to be patient and play within the system. 16 yrs and counting. Can't wait.


On 6/12/07, S1; wrote:
Nemo, you are making my point for me. The country has moved forward in the last 15 years faster than it has moved in the last thousand years. Could it have moved even further? Sure it could have with some policies here and there being tweaked. But that is crying over spilled milk. You got to play in the system to expedite the process so it won't take 100 years. In my opinion, CUD should have defended themselves in the courts and proven to the international observers and their supporters how shameful the judiciary system under the EPRDF is run. The bottom line is I don't see the gain they made by not defending themselves.

On 6/12/07, N; wrote:
I haven't read all the postings, but I'll just add this limited point.
The US civil war ended in 1865. This was a huge huge war, needless to
say. And yet brothers only got to vote in the south of the US in 1965.
I don't know what point you were trying to make, but 100 years of Jim
Crow is not the historical model we should wish upon Ethiopia. And it
wasn't just dogs and police batons bro. There were plenty of "strange
fruits hanging from the poplar trees" as Billie Holiday sang...

-N-

Thursday, February 22, 2007

I wonder how the pessimists will react to such news...


02-20-07
World Bank
Modestly Satisfied



Ishac Diwan, World Bank’s country director to Ethiopia and Sudan, arrived in Addis Abeba only two years after Ethiopia came out of its bloody conflict with Eritrea. Not only was the loss horrendous in terms of human life, Ethiopia’s economy was devastated because of the war and a huge loss of international development assistance and the subsequent famine of 2003 that put the lives of 14 million people at risk.

The priority then was to rehabilitate the economy through institutional capacity building and help the country climb out of the poverty trap. That needed the design and implementation of the Bank’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) programme to Ethiopia, which ended in 2005.

Then came another trying time for Ethiopia, centered around internal political stresses that plagued the nation following electoral disputes that led to the death of 193 people, and arrests of opposition leaders, journalists and civil society workers as well as their subsequent charges of treason and genocide. It also led the Bank to question the government’s record on governance and introduced an interim programme – Protection of Basic Services – until such time that it is satisfied with improvements made in good governance.

Mr. Diwan says that the World Bank is now satisfied with the progress made in openness, transparency and the quality of governance the Ethiopian government has achieved in the past year. It is due to this modest satisfaction that the World Bank has begun developing the second country assistance strategy programme under Mr. Diwan’s watch, who has only five months before he leaves the country for another assignment. He said the focus of the new programme will be growth and the improvement of the quality of governance. The following is an excerpt from an exclusive interview he had with Tamrat G. Giorgis, Fortune Managing Editor.

Fortune: When you arrived in 2002, there was Ethiopia’s Country Assistance Strategy (CAS) developed by the World Bank. I am aware that you are developing a new one now. In between, there was a kind of gap as a result of what happened after the May 2005 national election . . .

Mr. Diwan: When I arrived, I developed one and then we developed a second and transitional programme for 18 months. This one will be for three years.

Tell me what the different aspects of developing the country strategy are when you first arrived and the one you are doing now?

In 2002, the country had come out from the war with Eritrea; during the war, we had scaled down our activities to some extent. Our main effort then was to help stabilize the economy, as well as rehabilitate the parts of the country and the population that were affected by the war.
The first strategy that I worked on was part of a post-rehabilitation which focused mostly on institution development, capacity building, decentralization and push on infrastructure. Since then we have focused on two other broad topics: food security - putting together programmes on productive safety nets - and a major effort focusing on growth. What would it take to get growth going? We came up with new products and lots of analytical works focusing on growth.
Of course, during the election and since then we began to focus on good governance where we found many important empty points that were a wake up call that we were not working enough in that area.
We were also working on the capacity of the financial management; we started working more on empowerment of citizens and the accountability of civil servants through much more transparency in information. All our projects and those outside our projects are made public, thus creating room for the voices of civil society and their efforts to hold government accountable. It is just to say that the next country strategy for us would be very much focused on growth and good governance.

Prime Minister Meles Zenawi made a statement two weeks ago that it is not possible for the West to buy good governance in Africa.

I agree with the Prime Minister that you cannot buy good policies. We all agree with this, although we have not always agreed on this because it took us a while to understand that this was perhaps the main part of Western attitude. But I think the Prime Minister was referring to the earlier period of the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) in Africa as opposed to referring to the World Bank in Ethiopia today. What we are doing is not trying to buy good governance; we are rather offering our services to the government to help it accomplish its own good governance goals.

Last time I interviewed you (right after the May 2005 crisis) you had made a statement that there could be a new country assistance strategy programme provided that the Bank is satisfied with the good governance measures the Ethiopian government was about to take. The other alternative was to extend the provisional programme of Protection of Basic Services. You are now working on the third country assistance strategy programme. Does it mean that the Bank is satisfied with the measures the Ethiopian government has taken on good governance areas?

We usually operate with two or three years strategy programmes and it is very abnormal for us not to do that. It requires a very bad situation to happen. We have been satisfied that there are improvements and indeed we have made the decision to do a three-year strategy.

Can you mention some of the improvements?

Our main involvement after the crisis has been the protection of basic services which has been an instrument through which the government could demonstrate progress on good governance. In particular, there were three elements which we have been monitoring very closely.
One of them was that all financial transactions and transfers to the regions would not be affected by political motives. Indeed, we have been checking on this every quarter; the latest check conducted in October 2006 has revealed that this is developing in all the cases. The second test is that the government will increasingly be more open and transparent on its budget management which it has committed to under its own capacity building programmes. Again, we have been verifying that federal, regional and wereda budgets are becoming available to the public, allowing citizens to know exactly what is happening and therefore ensure that money is reaching where it is supposed to.
The third, which I would say is more transformational for Ethiopia, is government’s commitment to actually work with the civil society. There has been progress on this agenda, although it has not yet totally converged. Part of that operation, however, is to finance civil society organizations working on what we call social accountability mechanisms such as report cards or working with communities on participatory budgeting. We have hired a management agent to manage those funds and created a steering committee comprising members from the government, civil society and donors in order to make decisions; this committee has held several meetings and completed a study on what would be useful social accountability mechanisms for Ethiopia.

If I recall correctly, the interim programme of the Protection of Basic Services was approved by your Board in May 2006. You had put the first installment of 90 million dollars a few months ago; now you are trying to put the second installment. Having your experience limited to basically one quarter, is it not too early to claim satisfaction with the governance measures this government is taking?

All we are saying now is that the situation has improved and is continuing to improve. This is a continuous process; now good governance comes into our financing decision, thus the amount of funds we provide to a country depends on the quality of policies that we measure every year. Part of this measurement focuses on the aspects of governance: Ethiopia is a bit above the average in Africa on the index of good policy, which has a rating of one to five. The average for Africa is about three points, and Ethiopia is at about 3.5.
On many aspects, Ethiopia reaches much above other countries. For instance, on the pro-poor orientation of its policies, which is very important for us, it reaches on the top because spending as the share of GDP going to pro-poor sectors is number one in Africa. It also is quite well on macro-stability as well as on fiscal discipline. We are satisfied so far. If it was not, however, for lower than average rating on good governance, Ethiopia’s rating would be steadier and its [funding] allocation would have been much larger.
While we measure governance pretty carefully and we also see some improvements, there obviously is a long way to go.

Why the World Bank had to come up with an interim programme was due to what happened after May 2005, which had a lot to do with the elections. Despite promises by the government that opposition leaders, journalists and civil society members now in jail would have open and speedy trial, they are still on trial a year after their arrests. Their case being one of the reasons why the Bank had to do “the abnormal” in the aftermath of the election, and a huge number of their supporters in Addis Abeba and elsewhere have issues yet to be resolved, how would you say that you are satisfied with progress made by the government on the governance front?

Governance has many aspects. We, at the World Bank, mostly focus on issues of economic governance which have to do with adaptability of government officials with the local justice system, and making sure that money is not stolen but used for what was intended. We focus less on the politics although we live in this world where we also focus on the politics rather to some extent.
Clearly, what we all hope is that Ethiopia would be able to grow at 10pc for the next 20 years and the services will continue to improve as they have in the past few years. This is going to take social stability, thus the politics is very important; one cannot ignore that. The problem with the politics is the fact that this trial is still going on and that the whole issue of the election has not yet been totally resolved, although it has been to some extent resolved with Parliament becoming more dynamic and having better rules.

Is it a part of the discussions at the Bank and with the government?

It is part of the conversation, of course. But, the trials are in the judicial system.

The judicial system is a big part of a governance issue.

Yes, the performance of the judicial system is an issue. And why is the trial dragging is as much an issue but it is one of the issues.

Coming back to the Country Assistance Strategy programme, you said earlier that you will be focusing on growth. When do you think Ethiopia will be graduating from the International Development Assistance (IDA)?

I don’t know, a long time. Just do some quick arithmetic; the GDP per capita [of Ethiopia] is about 130 to 135 dollars now. It was 100 dollars a few years ago when I first arrived here. Graduating from IDA requires a country to reach at least at 600 or 700 dollars GDP per capita. You need four to five fold increases in income. If the GDP was to grow at 10pc, how long would that take, 30 to 40 years?

When you first arrived, the economy was in such poor shape that people were talking a lot about a poverty trap. Indeed, there were not the big investments that we are seeing now; neither were there shortages of supplies of important commodities. Everything seems to be exploding now. How come neither the Bank nor the government were able to prepare for this? How is it possible that a country wherein almost every economist was talking about poverty trap turned out to be in a growth mode in only three years?

Enormous efforts were made for several years to pull this economy out of a trap. It is very good now that we are focusing on a different kind of problem, which has to do with growth, and scarcities of cement. Nevertheless, you are right. Why Ethiopia’s growth is happening now is a mystery.
In retrospect, there are several possible explanations. The war with Eritrea stopped the process which was peaking up in 1997/98; it also hurt the private sector whose assets were reduced. The banking sector increased the size of its nonperforming loans (NPL), which took several years to clean and rebuild the asset base.
Another explanation is that your investments in infrastructure would not give you a return at the beginning when you start with such a lower base. It takes a little while to get a return. This is a thesis we are developing in a recent report on growth that we are putting out in a few weeks.
The third important reason I would say is the rose factor. I think the roses have played a very important role.

They are only generating a quarter of a million dollars a year. Why are they such a big deal?

It is not the money; it is the psychology. Before the roses, members of the private sector were pessimist and would tell you that you cannot do anything in this country. Distances are too far, you cannot export, there is no internal market, and the chains do not exist. Nothing works.
The roses demonstrated that it can be done; actually you have an external market and you are not that far from the coast, while for high value goods you use Bole International Airport. It demonstrated that anything can be done and it changed the psychology of local investors after all these foreign investors coming here telling them that they are much better than the neighboring countries.

How come nobody was able to project this and advice the government what to do before it was totally caught by surprise, not even being able to provide cement. Wasn’t it the job of your economists to advice?

It is hard to foresee the future; you do not know when it happens. It is also important to be agile and resolve problems as they arise. However, I visited one of these rose farms very early on and before the boom. I had urged the government to go check it out, convinced that if one is working out there is not reason why there should not be thousands. The response from the leadership was fast on this one and they organized the sector, offered land, tax holidays, and fixed the cargo issue.
Now let us think of cement where supply response was not quick enough and it was blocking the whole economy: it should have been possible to import faster. Nevertheless, I hear now that cement is being imported, prices are stabilizing, and there are many investors that have started investing.

The downside of this growth is inflationary pressure on the economy. There has been quite a debate about the source of inflation in Ethiopia. I would like to pick your brain on this: What do you think is the source of Ethiopia’s inflation that has been in double-digits for almost a year now?

Oil is a good part of it. Growth is the other reason; whether it is cement or other goods that are becoming scarce. But then there is another form of inflation which we are trying to understand more: food inflation. Prices on food have increased fast in spite of faster increases in supply; agricultural products have increased by about 15pc a year for the past three years. There seem to be several reasons and we are trying to study them to see which ones have won off and which ones would continue so that one could find ways to reduce those pressures. Part of it is on the supply side, the reduction in food aid, and the increase in food exports. Even though it is not serious, farmers have moved to produce cash crops such as sesame and other things and buy their cereals.

How do you attribute inflation to food at a time when government is claiming to have perhaps the largest agricultural productivity ever?

It is a mystery because food prices are rising while supply is rising too. It must be that demand is rising even faster and at the same time the other elements of supply of food, such as food aid, is coming down where a lot of it is now done through the safety net.

The World Bank is one of the donors that are providing hundreds of millions of dollars in “cash for work” programmes. Economists have attributed this cash inflow into the economy boasting farmers’ ability to buy a lot more stuff than they would have otherwise. Would you agree with this view?

We are looking into it. This is only one of the reasons because safety net still provides humanitarian assistance half in cash and half in food.

Who do you think is the most affected by this inflation?

The urban poor, definitely! In rural areas, their income is rising and we are going to have a supply response with these higher prices; there is going to be more food growing. But it is very important now to figure out how to bring the urban poor into this economic boom. What is happening to the saving of the farmers, they should be buying more of consumer goods produced in towns. This is now a very important area to focus on to bring the urban poor in to this boom.

Who cares about 15pc of the entire population; is it too small to worry the powers that be?

I think 6,000 small towns in 600 weredas are centers of growth. Without them, I do not think we can sustain growth because they are the ones that offer the services, the secondary education, and the small hospitals. They are the ones where you have the market for inputs for agricultural output; it is where the agricultural output has to be transformed with added value. Clearly, after years of neglects, perhaps because of political and ideological backgrounds, we are seeing intensified investments in towns not so much for political as it is for economic reasons. I also heard that the EPRDF is trying to expand its membership base in towns.

Do you see the government being keen to have programmes on the ground to salvage the urban poor from the burden of life?

I see a lot of efforts being made and delivered to the urban poor. The government is asking us to put much more effort into urban areas; a 100 million dollars grant will go to our Board in few months for labor intensive works on water and sanitation in all the major cities.

Speaking of weredas, I suppose that you have traveled extensively in Ethiopia in the past five years. what are the towns that strike you most?

Take Assela, for example. Few years ago nothing was happening there. It is another town now; you have buildings and it is like a construction site. In small towns, you used to find the only private activity a few years ago limited to mills; even the mills were all using a generator. Now you have mills for half the price on cheap electricity and you have cafés and hotels, photo and photocopy shops and all kinds of consumer goods and bank offices. You have private hospitals, training centers for computers and internet cafes. There is a view of transformation happening.

This is attributed largely to major infrastructural works – such as roads and hydroelectric projects - financed by the public sector. Another area where the government lately is spending huge amounts of money is in constructing mega dams which the World Bank has for years been staunchly against. There appears now a change in policy, that it may be alright for the Ethiopian government to finance these mega dams. Why a change of heart?

It is partly because successful economies such as Uganda, Tanzania and Ghana are suffering dearly from scarcity of energy as they grow. That is one of the first big constraints. And part of it, I think, is because the World Bank had ignored the sector for the past 20 years, first by thinking that it is environmentally too touchy.
I think we have exaggerated in being sensitive to those small NGOs, although environmental and social norms are still very important. However, one can also build good dams that do not harm the environment. And we realize for example that all those countries in the west that have been so much against it, actually have grown through it, although they do not need it anymore. It is too easy to be against it now. Nonetheless, Ethiopia has perfect conditions for a few large dams.

Does it mean that the World Bank has dropped its reluctance to finance dam projects in Ethiopia? For instance, I know that you are very passionate about the Nile Basin project. Four or five years ago, it would have been unthinkable for a World Bank representative in Ethiopia to be passionate about such a very sensitive area that has a lot to do with geopolitics of the region.

There are constraints to these projects, which you have to deal with. There are other populations enjoying the same water that you have to make deals with. Obviously, the Nile Basin has been a tremendous forum for this; there is already an agreement on what is called the first fast-track projects which we are working on. This includes small hydro-irrigation and flood control projects as part of these agreements.
The second constraint is financial, which still exists. A big dam needs several billion dollars that are not on the table yet. Where is the money coming from? You need financial muscle because donors are not going to give it. You need the private sector, bank financing, and collateralize the exports of electricity. Ethiopia is not up to these tricky financial transactions yet. You need to start first with the smaller ones - the pilots - in order to get your name known in international financial circles, which is going to take some time.
Finally, we have our environmental and social standards which we hope would be enforced here. All the signs are that this government cares about these standards and would like to apply them even when we are not financing the projects. For example, we are working on an irrigation scheme around Lake Tana where the government will build five small reservoirs in order to collect more water and put them into the Lake during the dry seasons to generate more electricity and have the waterfall.
They are applying our standards for these reservoirs which we are not financing. And they are using our model as a capacity building to learn how to use those standards. I think there is simply recognition that whatever you do, you want it to be sustainable that you do not want it to lead the environment into disaster in the future.

As a Bank, do you have any programme for the peripheral states, for instance in Somali, Afar, Benishangul and Gembella regional states? We do not seem to hear quite a lot about these regions.

I think you are right. We just realized, for example, that we have only a couple of our programmes running in the Somali Regional State; they are not running very well.

Is it due to security reason or incompetence by regional authorities?

These emerging regions have governance difficulties and lower capacity compared to other regions. If you take Somali and Afar, you have the pastoralist modes which are very different frame of minds and require different services all together. I agree with you that not enough efforts have been put in these regions and it seems to me that now is a good time to focus more efforts in the coming years; we have been talking with the [federal] government and other donors in particular about the Somali region.
Afar is perhaps a different and an interesting case because a couple of years ago we started getting more involved, talking to the government there, and working with them on regional plan. There is obviously a lot of potential such as in agriculture; it is also close to Djibouti. One could even think of an industrial zone.

http://www.addisfortune.com/INTERVIEW-World%20Bank%20%20Modestly%20Satisfied.htm

Wednesday, February 07, 2007

Investment...

I heard about this venture and was pretty excited about it.A friend had shown me the prospectus. While debating if this would be a good and profitable investment with myself, I ran accross this article on AddisFortune.

Criticism from an unknown person is there followed by a rebuttle by the company, Access Capital.

http://www.addisfortune.com/Ermias_Almegas_Details.htm
What promoters of a new venture describe as a credible and awesome investment outlet is being challenged by critics as yet another pyramid scheme in the making.
The Devil in the Details
Back in November 2006, a group of people started to distribute a 28-page document, a.k.a. prospectus; it aimed to sell 100,000 shares to the public, worth 100 million Br. This, according to the prospectus, would create a new company, Access Capital Services S.C., which will invest the funds it raises into 15 projects: from agro-processing to forming a leasing firm to ultimately establishing a commercial bank bearing the same name.Promoters of this business model - chief among them are Ermyas Amelga, a pioneer in the water bottling industry and Haileleul Tamru, one of the partners of HST Chartered Certified Accountants & Authorized Auditors – argue that their company “provides investors an attractive risk-adjusted rate of return.”They are not alone in promoting Access Capital: Berhane Ghebray (PhD), who runs a law and consultancy firm, and André DeSimone, executive director of Kestrel Capital (East Africa) Ltd, a Kenyan stockbrokerage and corporate finance firm, are listed in the prospectus as promoters of this company, which promises deployment of capital “with the twin objectives of minimizing risk through diversification and maximizing returns through well-researched and managed investments.” According to promoters, Access Capital is a product of an extensive research conducted in the past six months, identifying sectors that would pay prospective investors what existing alternatives are far from offering.Promoters, whose office is located inside the posh marble building at Ethio-Chinese Friendship Road, a few meters from the Ibex Hotel, had opened share offers on November 30, 2006, originally anticipating that they would come to a close on Wednesday, January 31, 2007. Although they claim to have raised over 30pc of the capital they aspire to receive, which they argue is good enough to launch the company, closing of share offering has been postponed by two weeks; at least three financial firms are considering the project for possible involvement, pending decisions by their respective board of directors, according to one of the main promoters.Prospective investors are promised a lot from their involvement in this company; required to put a minimum amount of 52,500 shares, investment in Access Capital would bring back a risk calculated rate of return that is up to 40pc, while it will be the first company that gives the opportunity of a fast exit when shareholders want to get out, according to promoters.Nevertheless, their claims are strongly contested by many in the business circle in Addis as the legal foundation of Access Capital is far from being clear. In the absence of a regulatory framework and agency with an oversight power on capital market, which would regulate a company that ventures into the business of buying and selling shares, is seriously questioned. Whether Access Capital is simply a private equity fund, responsible in managing money from a selected number of investors or if it aspires to push the line to a share dealing firm are issues that promoters are confronted with.Critics of this venture warn that without addressing these fundamental issues, investors are exposed to enormous risks in their investments at Access Capital; promoters argue that their company is involved in the service sector that is fully covered and governed by existing laws under the country’s Commercial Codes.Following a submission of a critical article from one of our readers who claims to have been exposed to what is in the prospectus, Fortune has approached the main promoters to respond to their critics; Ermyas Amelga has responded in writing to several points that many believe are sticky points to Access Capital.I would like to convey my disappointment that I am forced to respond to a collection of uninformed, misguided and malicious assertions by an anonymous attacker, being presented in the guise of an intelligent critique in the pages of Fortune. Time will show that the attacks are unfounded and, at worst, merely lead to extra cost and frustration.It seems usual in Ethiopia for any dynamic step forward in the economy to meet press “critiques” from people who chose not to reveal their identities and who either misrepresent or are misinformed about the true nature of what is being undertaken. However, as the overwhelming interest shown by the private (not public) potential investors and entrepreneurs we that have approached already indicates, many people actually involved in business in Ethiopia are aware of the dire gaps that Access Capital aims to fill.Our office is already host to many entrepreneurs with expansion projects seeking capital, including some very attractive opportunities that may meet our criteria. In addition, applications for shares are coming in as investors follow our confidence that filling this gap will mean both a contribution to achieving the desired economic and private sector growth, and achieve strong returns for shareholders.

Critique:
http://www.addisfortune.com/View%20Pont-Critic%20On%20Access%20Market-%20A%20Million%20Dollar%20Question.htm

A Million Dollar Question
It is always a pleasure to see ambitious and pioneering projects starting-up in developing countries like Ethiopia. And it was with excitement when I received the prospectus for Access Capital from a potential investor asking for investment advice. For reasons that will become clear shortly, my client has strongly requested that my recommendations be made available, as soon as possible, to other potential investors and the public at large.
Access Capital is expected to be a share dealing brokerage cum private equity/ fund management cum investment consultancy start-up with an ambition to raise 100 million Br from domestic and foreign investors. It has produced what seems to be a professional looking prospectus for potential investors to make a decision on. And it is with this document, as any investor or advisor would, that I have based my findings. Here are key points worth mulling over.
After integrity, commitment to a project is probably one of the most important questions raised by a potential investor.
How committed are the founding partners?
Partners at such an institution with a lot public funds on their hands are expected to commit not only fulltime to their working hours, but in fact, their whole waking hours and more. But the partners of Access Capital are all part-timers who have their day jobs in other firms and probably only committing ‘some time’ to this enormous project.
Just to give you a feel for the size of the project, the amount of money to be raised is equivalent to what is required to start a private bank in Ethiopia. And I do not recall any private banks being run by part-time managers.
It is normal practice for professional financial institutions to offer some kind of security or guarantee for money raised for financial speculation. And there is no indication or statement in the prospectus of any security offered for the funds raised from the general public.
What guarantee is Access Capital offering its investors promising no one is going to fly away with their funds?
It is the norm for regulators like the National Bank of Ethiopia (NBE) to be the guarantor of last resorts. What steps has the NBE taken to ensure that investors’ money is safe in the hands of Access Capital?
From what is written in the prospectus, Access Capital has as much security as the popular, but probably illegal, pyramid schemes that are currently engulfing the unsuspecting and ill-fated public in Ethiopia.
The NBE is the regulator of all banking and financial activity in the country. And it is surprising that Access Capital has not sought clearance from the NBE before launching a fundraising activity. From conversations with my contacts at the NBE, it is already clear that the founding partners have already violated a number of banking regulations.
For example, and as the banking regulation clearly states, the financial sector are closed to not only foreign financial institutions but also to foreign nationals. Access Capital is not only seeking foreign investors but some of its founding partners are also foreign passport holders. It is surprising that the ‘financial experts’ who are seeking investors to trust them with their money have failed to grasp this fundamental regulatory flow in their prospectus.
This is a classic question that advisors always ask partners in financial ventures. It is fundamentally important that fund managers do not have any potential, either direct or indirect, sources of conflict of interest. When a fund manager is entrusted to invest the public’s money, he should not be in any position to personally gain (other than what is already stated as remunerations in the prospectus) from the transactions he enters.
Here there are two clear sources of conflict of interest: As the partners have their own investment advisory related activities in their other companies, there is no guarantee or protection offered that they would not gain financially at the expense of Access Capital investors. The prospectus states that Access Capital will engage in advising clients on investment opportunities while it reserves the option to invest itself on certain investments. If one was an investor seeking advice, how can one be sure that Access Capital is giving him the best advice while it also reserves the right to cherry pick the best investments.
Access Capital outlines four main areas of business that it is intending to embark on from the word go. These are selling shares on behalf of others, buying and selling shares, providing investment advice and investing with its own funds. For a start-up company, this is taking on too much in one go. But for a start-up company entering uncharted waters, where the business of brokerage and private equity can also be considered as start-up sectors, it is definitely a recipe for failure. But the story does not end here.
Access Capital partners are also in the process of setting up two further businesses in the financial sector, each requiring a similar amount of funds to be raised and managed. I understand that they are planning to start up Access Bank with a capital of 100 million Br within the coming three months to be immediately followed up by Access Leasing - another cash hungry financial business.
At the very least, this fact should have been clearly stated in the prospectus, as it will have material impact on Access Capital. Nevertheless, for a business that is to be run by part-time managers whose experience does not cover the areas of the proposed business, it seems to be bordering on the irresponsible in trying to accomplish all of these highly risky businesses, almost in one go. The saying ‘Jack of All Trades and Master of None’ comes to mind.
Says the prospectus: “Investment return likely to beat inflation could be better than existing alternatives.”
A professional investor will only commit to an investment if he is clearly convinced of the expected rate of return. Here, the statement is no more than a flitting remark about maybe beating inflation – without even speculating what Access Capital is forecasting inflation rate to be in the coming few years. And with regards to the investment being ‘better than exiting alternatives,’ what comparisons or studies have been done? What rate of return do existing alternatives provide and how does Access Capital propose to be better than these? When private banks are offering an annual dividend rate of 25pc, who in their right mind would be queuing up to buy Access Capital’s ‘inflation beating’ investment offer?
Even if the rest of the prospectus was convincingly enough, it would fail just on this crucial and fundamental issue. It appears that the quality of the argument on rate of return is as consistent as the standard of the whole prospectus.
The prospectus’ main argument for Access Capital and its services is the need for equity financing or what it calls the ‘equity gap.’ Again there is no quantitative argument or justification that backs this claim. There is a great debate about the availability or otherwise of local capital whether in private hands or sitting in the vaults of private or state banks. Unless Access Capital can convince potential investors that it understands and can articulate the real corporate capital demand, it does not deserve to be entrusted with investor’s funds.
The partners at Access Capital have not clearly stated that they are trying to raise equity for investment in other companies as well as to establish Access Capital itself as a business. And before any professional investor makes any new investment, he must see how the business is going to utilize the new capital. This is done through a business plan. And there is no mention of any business plan, financial plan, business implementation plan or any growth strategy. What should be a real concern is not just that there was no business plan developed for Access Capital but that the founding partners, the investment experts who we are asked to trust our money with, did not realize that they would need a business plan before launching a business.
Access Capital makes great play about its ‘first mover advantage.’ The brokerage business that is proposed is a non-starter in such an illiquid environment and non-existent marketplace.
Nevertheless, it is impossible to give a detailed analysis of the prospectus in such a short review note. But to concur with the famous saying that ‘the devil is in the details,’ I will close my high level review with one point of detail.
The prospectus states that the main promoters have made a ‘contribution in kind’ equivalent to 10pc of the shares to be issued. For a 100 million Br share issue, this equates to 10 million Br. But the prospectus also states that ‘the start-up expenses will have totalled approximately one million Birr and are financed by the main promoters with the cost reimbursement to be handled in terms of shares issued. In that case, why are the partners asking for 10 million Br when they have ‘only’ spent one million Birr in start-up costs?
This seems to be a contradiction of a major proportion. The difference between the two figures is nine million Birr (about one million dollars): what is a million dollar for?
I am sure the partners of Access Capital will be rushing-off their feet to defend and answer the questions and concerns raised here. But the point is, all these questions should have already been unequivocally answered in the one place that matters - the prospectus. Unfortunately, the partners have utterly failed to do so.

Editors have withheld the writers name upon request.


Rebuttle:
http://www.addisfortune.com/Ermyas%20Amelgas%20Response-Questions%20and%20Answers.htm

I would like to convey my disappointment that I am forced to respond to a collection of uninformed, misguided and malicious assertions by an anonymous attacker, being presented in the guise of an intelligent critique in the pages of Fortune. Time will show that the attacks are unfounded and, at worst, merely lead to extra cost and frustration.
It seems usual in Ethiopia for any dynamic step forward in the economy to meet press “critiques” from people who chose not to reveal their identities and who either misrepresent or are misinformed about the true nature of what is being undertaken. However, as the overwhelming interest shown by the private (not public) potential investors and entrepreneurs we that have approached already indicates, many people actually involved in business in Ethiopia are aware of the dire gaps that Access Capital aims to fill.

Our office is already host to many entrepreneurs with expansion projects seeking capital, including some very attractive opportunities that may meet our criteria. In addition, applications for shares are coming in as investors follow our confidence that filling this gap will mean both a contribution to achieving the desired economic and private sector growth, and achieve strong returns for shareholders.

Fortune: Can you explain what exactly Access Capital plans to do with the 100 million Br it plans to raise from the public? Is it a private fund management company with an ambition to change a course in due time to a share dealing group or simply an investment consultancy group?

Ermyas Amelga: As indicated above, we plan to make carefully selected and professionally managed investments into companies and projects in the agriculture, industry and service sector, using our own funds, raised from our shareholders. Access Capital is not a fund management company - managing other people’s funds - and has no intention of turning into a “share dealing group” or “investment consultancy group.” We believe that there are many opportunities in our economy and that will be able to achieve exceptional returns by applying the right tried and tested skills to selecting and managing our investments.


Many of the promoters of Access Capital have other engagements for their fulltime job in other firms. They seem to be involved in Access Capital with their spare time. Do you believe this is enough commitment in managing a huge fund collected from the public?

Access Capital is a share company that will have a board of directors formed in accordance with the Commercial Code of Ethiopia. These will be the stewards and will oversee the company, including the assigning and monitoring of full-time management staff. It is expected that the shareholders, through the directors they elect, will appoint Ermyas Amelga to be the Chief Executive Officer who had guaranteed to be available, although there is no guarantee this will happen.

The other promoters may or may not be elected to the board of directors at the discretion of the general assembly of shareholders but it is common in the business world that promoters and managers are not the same.


What guarantee does your project offers to prospective investors that “no one is flying away with the money” they may be putting in to your project?

This question betrays a sad lack of understanding about how properly-constituted share companies operate and the corporate governance structures in place to protect shareholders. Access Capital will follow the same standards of governance as other share companies in terms of Ethiopian law, which regulates the protection of shareholders’ funds, both at the inception and during the operation of a share company.

Access Capital will also work towards international standards of corporate governance, for instance in the structure of its boards, checks and balances. The company is being formed in accordance with Articles 304 and following of the Commercial Code of Ethiopia. At the inception, shareholders deposit funds into blocked bank accounts opened specifically for this purpose at five commercial banks. When the application process is completed, the promoters call a meeting according to Article 320 at which the shareholders will set up the company and elect all positions, including the board of directors, as laid out in the Memorandum and Articles of associations.

Once the company is formed, the directors must act in the interests of the share company and therefore its shareholders. For instance, the directors will authorize the banks to release shareholders’ blocked funds into the company’s bank account; appoint and supervise the management; and approve signatory powers including withdrawals from the company’s bank account.

When Access Capital makes investments into projects and businesses, as described in the prospectus, the directors would supervise, for instance through forming an investment sub-committee. By following Ethiopian and international tried and tested governance structures, investors’ money will be used in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.


In the prospectus, promoters of Access Capital claim that one of the many peculiarities of this project is to guarantee fast exit opportunity for prospective investors. Thus, they will keep 10pc of the capital they would be raising in order to pay back those who would like to be out for no other reasons. In the absence of a capital market, who determines the prices of these shares; the company or the investor? Who will protect investors from possible impositions from the company? Who regulates these transactions?

Access Capital believes that lack of a transparent way to moving shares from one shareholder to another has been a serious deterrent to potential investors in previous equity offerings. Access Capital will, on a monthly basis, set a price at which it will be willing and ready to buy back its shares from individual shareholders who may wish to sell. It will also set a price at which it will sell to investors who want to buy more.

After starting at book value, every month Access Capital will adjust the price up or down based on the supply-demand situation from investors wishing to sell or buy. The price of the shares is, therefore, determined by the shareholders themselves. Access Capital is offering it as a service to individual shareholders and all transactions are governed by the Commercial Code of Ethiopia (no restrictions will be made on the free transfer of shares according to Article 333 of the Commercial Code).


Which regulatory agency has an oversight power on behalf of the public that regulates your operational activities? Since any company involved in financial ventures is under the direct supervision of the National Bank of Ethiopia (NBE), would it be accurate to assume that NBE does this job? Have you been granted any permit from the NBE? Are you licensed?

Access Capital, as is normal for a share company, will have a business license from the Ministry of Trade and Industry; it will be governed in its activities by the Ministry’s directives and the Commercial Code of Ethiopia. This will follow the meeting of shareholders. Several other companies have previously been registered and operate with similar aims and objects. Access Capital is neither handling other people’s funds nor is it approaching the general public, but only selected potential investors. It is not a financial institution that requires regulation by the National Bank of Ethiopia (NBE).



Some of the promoters of Access Capital do hold foreign nationality. Is it not a violation of the country’s laws to involve foreign nationals in activities that is financial in nature?

It is one of the government’s priorities to encourage foreign investment and some Ethiopian-born potential investors have foreign passports but are very committed to using their savings and skills in developing our country. However, as explained above, Access Capital is not a financial services company and there is no reason why it cannot have foreign nationals as shareholders or promoters.


In your prospectus, you have said that Access Capital will select opportunities for direct investment, while at the same time it also says the company advises prospective investors in their decision where to invest. Doesn’t this bring a conflict of interest?

Access Capital is structured to achieve maximum benefits for its shareholders by aligning the Company’s interests with those of its shareholders. It would not, as a principle, offer investments to outside shareholders that it was not also investing into itself as a company after applying its due diligence procedures and systems. Moreover, prospectuses prepared by Access Capital clearly state that Access is not advising people to buy but offering the shares, and investors should seek their own expert advice before investing.

Because potential shareholders in future capital raisings are likely to be already invested in Access Capital, being offered shares would mean they are merely being offered opportunities to expand their interests in companies they may already be investing into indirectly through their ownership of Access Capital. Thus interests will not be in conflict but will be aligned to the interests of all parties.


According to the prospectus you have distributed to the public through your brokers/agents, Access Capital is set out to sell shares on investors’ behalf; buy and sell shares; invest with own fund; and provide advice on investments. It also wants to set up a commercial bank and leasing firm. Aren’t these too much to chew for a start-up company, if not making it a “jack of all trade?”

There is no foundation to the assertion that Access Capital also plans to “set up a commercial bank and a leasing firm.” Access Capital may invest in companies in these sectors in the future, but it will not be responsible for them. As an equity investor, Access Capital will invest into well-managed businesses, which can be existing businesses or new ventures. In the latter case, this will involve appointing for each company a management team with individual track records of excellence and a board of directors dedicated to its success. In each case, the quality of the management invested in will be one of the main determinants of an investment’s success.

Access Capital will ensure it allocates sufficient resources to each investment to protect and maximize its investment return, but will not seek to manage these businesses.


Your project claims to be different from other undertakings in that it promises a higher rate of return for an investment that is “likely to beat inflation and could give better return than existing alternative.” How is that so when some of the private commercial banks were rewarding their shareholders with an average 25pc rate of return on equity in the past five years?

Access Capital will generate returns for its shareholders by facilitating and making private equity investments in growing Ethiopian businesses. Access Capital expects to achieve its objectives by: recruiting and training the brightest talent; building strong relationships, based on competence, professionalism and integrity, with investors and entrepreneurs that will be our partners and clients; systematically and professionally researching and selecting the best from the wide range of investment opportunities available in Ethiopia; and working with the management of firms in which we have made private equity investments to add value through professional support in financial and strategic management.

Our business is about providing capital and services to the most promising opportunities, selected through rigorous research and analysis. Even in the competitive developed economies, where easier access to information makes opportunities for exceptional returns harder to find, private equity firms have generated returns of up to 100pc. Returns in excess of 35pc are not unusual.

The combination of capital plus management support will be particularly potent in developing economies. The private banks are driven to offer high returns in the form of dividends, but this reduces their capital available for growth, but investors still tend to value their shares at the initial offer price. Access Capital will exceed the dividend returns by offering its shareholders both earnings returns and the potential for capital growth in the value of their shareholdings since prices to buy back (or sell) shares will be set by demand and supply, which will be driven by investors’ understanding of the Company’s growth.

This combination will enable Access Capital to provide excellent returns while contributing to the growth of a vibrant, job-generating private sector.


What is the quantitative justification when the prospectus you have distributed claims that Access Capital addresses the issue of “Equity Gap?”

Many expert commentators have agreed that there is a severe shortage of risk sharing and long-term financing in Ethiopia; it is surprising that someone who claims to know about business in Ethiopia can think there is not a severe shortage of equity financing in the country. The government’s five year plan for Accelerated and Sustained Development to End Poverty speaks of a “severe shortage of capital” and the need for “financial sector reform to increase the availability of capital.”.

This gap is usually filled by “equity” (share capital) as well as by debt financing. The term “equity gap” refers to the shortage of capital available to entrepreneurs seeking equity financing to grow their businesses. The principal source of growth financing in Ethiopia is retained profit, since our capital markets are not yet developed, and there is a limit to the amount of debt that a firm can access or carry on its balance sheet.

The growth of our most successful companies is limited by the need to generate funds for new investment internally. Many of these companies need only five percent or 10pc more investment to become excellent, and yet there is no source for these funds. This constraint is strangling the ability of these firms to generate wealth and jobs.

At the same time, there are many individuals and institutions with funds available for investment, but for whom the opportunities to earn good returns are limited. Instead, they may currently be pouring funds into property developments and soaring land prices and buildings without being able to quantify where the businesses will come from that will rent all these properties when they are complete. This is another aspect of the “equity gap” between entrepreneurs seeking funds to grow their business and potential investors with funds available, but lacking the means to invest them productively.

Access Capital will bridge that gap, by providing a mechanism that will connect investors to entrepreneurs, allowing firms to grow more quickly, generating more wealth, providing products and services that are needed in Ethiopia, and generating new and more secure employment opportunities.


There is hardly any mention of either business or financial plans in the prospectus, least of all growth strategy. Is it not a norm to develop a business plan before launching a business?

It goes without saying that there is, of course, a very detailed business plan and strategy in place. Most of our carefully targeted investors have visited our office in person and heard the presentation of our business plan prior to investing. The business plan is not presented in the prospectus upon the advice of legal counsel who advised that it should cover the issues required by the Commercial Code of Ethiopia and nothing more. Any genuine investor is welcome to ask for our business plan and we can share this in detail.


Access Capital claims to be the first of its kind yet to emerge in the market, if we were to read the prospectus. Aren’t there other private fund management firms in Ethiopia? Were two of the main promoters of Access Capital involved in similar initiative before joining hands with this project? How do you respond to allegations that they have “pilfer an idea developed earlier by others?”

We still stand firmly behind this claim. Other companies have been licensed to carry on business in investing in growth opportunities. Notable among them was East Africa Investment Securities of which Ermyas Amelga was a partner but due to other circumstances, the plan to make such investments was never actualized. Where Access Capital is different from its predecessors, and so can claim to be “the first,” is the pool of expertise and resources which the promoters have already dedicated at their own risk to setting up the business before the share offer, so that it will be able to start operations as soon as the share company is incorporated in accordance with the law.


The promoters claim in the prospectus that they have a contribution of 10pc in kind from the total capital they would be raising. What justifies this claim? Can you elaborate in depth the contribution you have put in kind in developing this project?

It is normal practice in Ethiopia and elsewhere for entrepreneurs starting a new business and inviting investors to co-invest with them to earn “sweat equity” or “founders’ privileges,” representing the risks and energy they have put into creating future value for their investors. The Commercial Code of Ethiopia (Article 310) formalizes this by allowing founders for “a period not exceeding three years” to reserve personally, in addition to their rights as shareholders, “a share which shall not exceed one fifth of the net profits” (i.e. 20pc). Further, profit-share benefits for directors are also permitted by law.

In the case of Access Capital, the promoters have stated in the prospectus that they have chosen not to exercise this. The earnings drain could limit future reinvestment for growth and disadvantage fellow investors. Instead they have asked shareholders at the incorporation meeting to allot the lesser amount of 10pc of initial shares in recognition of their initiative and risk-taking as well as the skills and background they bring to the company.