Women entrepreneurs startup

Start-ups led by women in the US use a third less capital than those led by men, according to US venture capital firm Illuminate Ventures. This has to be good news for ever-frugal seed investors in emerging businesses – and also good news for a new Australian offshoot of the business accelerator program, Springboard Enterprises.

The program was started in the US in 2000 and aims to help female entrepreneurs attract funding for their businesses. It has just launched in Australia, with the first round of applications now open.

More than 500 early-stage companies have participated in the US program, which has helped raise more than $US5.5 billion ($A5.3 billion) for participants.

An early alumnus of the program was Chicago-based entrepreneur and angel investor Lauren Flanagan. Through the program's coaching on how to speak the language of investors, she was able to raise $US23 million for her then business WebWare Corporation, a "software-as-a-service" company that offered software on a subscription basis, similar to the cloud computing model that predominates today. 

She now runs BELLE Capital, a venture capital fund based in the US midwest, is managing partner of Phenomenelle Angels Fund and chief executive of strategic advisory business SCIO Corp.

'Good old boys' disadvantage

Flanagan says the Springboard program helps bridge the gap between scalable businesses that are run by women and the investment community.

“It's often difficult for women to raise capital because of a lack of access to the 'good old boys' network,” she says.

She says the community Springboard participants gain access to is just as valuable as the entrée it delivers to the venture capital world.

“It's hard to be a CEO as a woman with no peer network, so having a peer network is worth even more than the funding," she says. "We say Springboard is a bit like the Hotel California – you can check out but you can't really leave because of the peer community.”

Flanagan says the coaching Springboard participants receive helps them to tell their story so investors can understand their business, figure out how they can make money from the enterprise and understand how founders have tried to de-risk their enterprises.

Commenting on the research cited above that shows women are more efficient with the use of capital, she says she suspects it is because women are able to do more with less or because they are more frugal generally.

Australian involvement

One of the Australian sponsors of the Springboard program is professional services firm Grant Thornton, which is also a sponsor of the US program. Paul Gooley is Grant Thornton's Australian national head of corporate finance and also a board member of Springboard's Australian franchise. He says the program helps young companies become commercially viable.

“Many businesses fail in that capital-constrained part of the investment cycle. Springboard helps bridge the gap from a business idea to commercialisation,” he says.

Grant Thornton is providing financial assistance to the program, although Gooley declined to say how much, as well as marketing and public relations support. It will also offer participants help in developing their financial reporting.

Why it's needed

Melissa Widner is a partner at venture capital firm Seapoint Ventures and co-founder of Head Over Heels, a network for female entrepreneurs. She cites a study by Dow Jones called Women at the Wheel: Do Female Executives Drive Start-Up Success? as a key reason why an initiative such as Springboard is needed. The research found that of all venture-capital backed companies, only 1.3 per cent are led by women.

“We need to focus on getting the 1.3 per cent figure up," says Widner. "We know that women are starting companies but they're not growing them because they don't have the same access to networks.”

Participants in the Springboard program will typically be looking to raise between $500,000 and $10 million. Businesses that go through the program generally come from the worlds of technology, new media and biotechnology.

These are the sectors where Springboard in the US has a track record. Although Springboard's capability in the US is primarily in these areas, it will also accept applications from female entrepreneurs with growth businesses from other sectors that are seeking capital. If those applications are successful, Springboard will then find investors who understand and are best matched to that business and their industry.

Plenty of interest

Flanagan says that despite the venture capital landscape being in its worst state for 10 years, investors associated with the US Springboard network have already expressed interest in investing in Australian early-stage ventures, as have investors from the Asia-Pacific region.

Australian investors already involved with Springboard's Australia arm include Investec, One Ventures, Starfish Ventures, Foundry, Right Click Capital, Anacacia Capital and AFG Venture Group.

Springboard participants also receive support after capital raising. For instance, they can tap into the network to get advice about how to establish a great board or how to get good legal advice.

The program aims to attract 20 participants in its first year, and 40 in its second. So far nine businesses have started the application process.

To qualify, companies must have a profitable market opportunity with competitive advantage, a track record of milestone achievement, a woman in a senior position with a significant equity stake, and a credible management team or ability to attract one. They must also be based in or have significant operations in Australia.

Companies that apply will undergo a rigorous screening process before being selected to participate in the accelerator program. Applications close December 15.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/small-business/startup/funding-springboard-to-boost-female-entrepreneurs-20121022-280cl.html#ixzz2AObwRnbj

Senior Bonds

After covered bonds and deposits, the next safest major bank investment is a “senior-ranking” but unsecured bond, rated “AA-”. Today this pays a return of about 4.3 per cent, which is also better than the average deposit.

Like covered bonds, these senior bonds are not easy to access as they are traded in the wholesale market and require minimum investments of $500,000. Two ways to tap into them are through a managed fund that focuses on fixed income, or via a broker like FIIG, which breaks bonds up into smaller chunks.

In the past year, Westpac, ANZ Banking Group and National Australia Bank have listed on the ASX $4 billion worth of “subordinated bonds”, which rank behind senior creditors but ahead of everyone else. These are not to be confused with hybrids, which give banks the option of not paying you dividends, have ultra-long if not perpetual terms, and convert into equity under adverse scenarios. The new ASX subordinated bonds have fixed maturities and legally binding payment obligations. They currently offer interest rates around 6 per cent.

What are covered bonds?

The safest of all bank investments is a “covered bond”, which is secured by a specifically identified pool of assets. If the bank goes bust, you have recourse to these assets ahead of anyone, including depositors. In fact, the “AAA” covered bond rating is higher than the bank’s “AA-“ rating.

While covered bonds may have a five-year term, you can trade in and out of them every day. They are bought and sold in the liquid “wholesale” bond market, and settled via a platform called Austraclear, which the Australian Stock Exchange owns. And, like a variable or fixed-term deposit, you can get “floating” or fixed covered bonds.

A fixed covered bond pays the same coupon over its life. The variable option provides a predetermined margin above a variable benchmark that is reset every quarter. This benchmark broadly tracks the RBA’s cash rate, and is called the 90-day bank bill swap rate. Today it is around 3.2 per cent. CBA’s variable rate covered bond currently pays 3.9 per cent, which is slightly better than the average bank deposit.

There has been a striking compression in the cost of bank bonds. When CBA issued its first covered bond in January, it was required to pay investors a margin of 1.75 per cent above the bank bill rate. Today the same bond offers a margin of only 0.7 per cent. While incoming investors are receiving lower returns, the original ones made terrific capital gains through an increase in the bond’s price as CBA’s perceived risks declined. This highlights a distinction from normal deposits. Whereas bank deposits never get “revalued”, bonds are repriced every day based on investors’ assessments of the institution’s creditworthiness.

WHERE DO THE MILLIONAIRES LIVE?

Asia-Pacific has overtaken North America as home to the most millionaires for the first time, boosted by a rise in the number of wealthy in China and Japan, a report released on Wednesday showed.

The region had 3.37 million high net worth individuals (HNWIs) in 2011 compared to North America's 3.35 million, a study jointly published by consulting firm Capgemini and RBC Wealth Management found.

Europe possessed 3.17 million HNWIs, which are defined as those having investable assets of $1 million or more excluding their primary residence and luxury possessions including art.

"Asia-Pacific is now home to more high net worth individuals than any other region for the first time," Barend Janssens, head of emerging markets for RBC, told a press conference in Singapore.

Asia-Pacific overtook Europe in 2010 to take second place and a strong growth in the millionaire population -- particularly in Japan and China -- coupled with a fall in the number of the rich in North America led to the region taking first, Janssens said.

"The most significant finding is that Asia-Pacific's population of high net worth individuals grew at a rate of 1.6 percent in 2011, twice the rate of the global population of 0.8 percent," he said.

"This is driven by growth in Japan of up to 4.8 percent and China of up to 5.2 percent."

Japanese formed the bulk of the HNWIs in the Asia-Pacific, constituting 54.1 percent of the total regional population of the rich.

China and Australia ranked second and third at 16.7 percent and 5.3 percent respectively.

Together, the three countries accounted for 76.1 percent of HNWIs in the region.

Despite hosting the most HNWIs, Asia-Pacific still lagged behind in terms of total investable wealth at $10.7 trillion, compared to $11.4 trillion for North America.

International factors such as the eurozone crisis coupled with domestic issues, including, sinking property prices and inflation bit into the pockets of millionaires, said Claire Sauvanaud, vice president of Capgemini Asia-Pacific.

International capital outflows from the region also held back its rich, with China and India seeing $1.6 billion and $4.09 billion in foreign institutional investor funds leave their markets last year, data showed.

But Sauvanaud said the region -- led by economic powerhouses China and India -- would be able to weather the problems.

"The diverse nature of Asia-Pacific exports and economies means the outlook for the region as a whole remains very strong," she stated.

"China and India are the ones to watch. Despite their challenges they are likely to remain two of the fastest-growing economies in the world in the very near future."

How competitive is Australia

The World Economic Forum (WEF) has updated its list of how countries around the world stack up on its competitiveness scale.

In The Global Competitiveness Index 2012-2013: Strengthening Recovery by Raising Productivity, the WEF “define[s] competitiveness as the set of institutions, policies, and factors that determine the level of productivity of a country”.

The 12 categories the Forum measures uses to decide rankings are: institutions, infrastructure, macroeconomics, health and primary education, goods and market efficiency, higher education and training, labour market efficiency, technological readiness, financial market development, market size, business sophistication, and innovation.

On the updated scale, Australia comes in at No. 20, holding steady at it’s ranking last year, which was down four spots on the year before that. The top 10:

1. Switzerland (No. 1 last year)
2. Singapore (No. 2 last year)
3. Finland (No. 4 last year)
4. Sweden (No. 3 last year)
5. Netherlands (No. 7 last year)
6. Germany (No. 6 last year)
7. United States (No. 5 last year)
8. United Kingdom (No. 10 last year)
9. Hong Kong (No. 11 last year)
10. Japan (No. 9 last year)

The WEF highlights the strong performance of Asia-Pacific countries in the 2012-2013 survey, noting that six countries from the region made the top 10 (Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, Taiwan, the Republic of Korea and Australia).

On Australia it says: “After losing four positions to faster-improving economies last year, Australia retains its rank of 20th and score of 5.1, just behind Korea. Among the country’s most notable advantages is its efficient and well-developed financial system (8th), supported by a banking sector that counts as among the most stable and sound in the world, ranked 5th. The country earns very good marks in education, placing 15th in primary education and 11th in higher education and training.

“Australia’s macroeconomic situation is satisfactory in the current context (26th). Despite repeated budget deficits, its public debt amounts to a low 23 percent of GDP, the third lowest ratio among the advanced economies, behind only Estonia and Luxembourg.

“The main area of concern for Australia is the rigidity of its labour market

(42nd). Indeed, the business community cites the labour regulations as being the most problematic factor for doing business, ahead of red tape. In addition, although the situation has improved since last year, transport infrastructure continues to suffer bottlenecks owing to the boom in commodity exports.”

Among Australia’s top 10 trading partners for goods and services in 2011 (as defined by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade) the leaderboard stacked up as follows:

1. China (No. 29 in WEF rankings)
2. Japan (No. 10)
3. Republic of Korea (No. 19)
4. India (No. 59)
5. United States (No. 7)
6. United Kingdom (No. 8)
7. New Zealand (No. 23)
8. Taiwan (No. 13)
9. Singapore (No. 2)
10. Thailand (No. 38)

As for the world’s 10 least competitive countries in descending order out of the 144 nations ranked by WEF, Burundi headed the pack:

1. Burundi
2. Sierra Leone
3. Haiti
4. Guinea
5. Yemen
6. Chad
7. Mozambique
8. Lesotho
9. Timor-Leste
10. Swaziland

September RBA Monetary policy Decision

At its meeting yesterday, the Board decided to leave the cash rate unchanged at 3.50 per cent.

Financial markets have responded positively over the past couple of months to signs of progress in addressing Europe's financial problems, but expectations for further progress are high.

In Australia, most indicators available for this meeting suggest growth has been running close to trend, led by very large increases in capital spending in the resources sector. 

At the meeting, the Board judged that, with inflation expected to be consistent with the target and growth close to trend, but with a more subdued international outlook than was the case a few months ago, the stance of monetary policy remained appropriate

Enough already!

Tying gender targets to the remuneration of senior leaders would prevent them from "weaseling" out of initiatives to address the imbalance of women in leadership positions in their organisations, according to Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Agency director Helen Conway.

Speaking to an audience in Sydney on Tuesday night, Conway said we've got more than enough research to show the business case for gender equality in the workplace is clear.

It's time to implement sweeping cultural and infrastructure changes that can address the issue.

And with EOWA's data on women in leadership positions across the ASX 500 due in November, she said the early results indicate that the gender imbalance is even "uglier" across leadership positions in the ASX 200 to 500, surveyed by EOWA for the first time.

Conway told the UN Women and Australian Human Resources Institute event that responsibility for the imbalance must be taken out of the HR department and made a key business priority. She said real change in organisations will require a business model that identifies leadership, focus and accountability as key to success, like any other business initiative.

"It's what people see every day in business," Conway said. "The problem is that people really haven't thought that gender equality is important. Why would you apply a [business] model to something you thought was a piece of trash you put down in the HR department?"

Conway said organisations should set clear, numerical targets for appointing women to leadership positions that do not compromise the merit principle. And the CEO, board and senior leaders must continually and visibly reassert their commitment to gender goals.

"Once you have these targets in place, you must have action plans, you must transparently report your progress against these targets, and there's no other option but to tie it to people's remuneration.

"I've sat in corporates too long to see people weasel out of initiatives. But I tell you they do not weasel out of things when it affects their pocket ... I know this is a crude initiative, and a crude way of doing it. But we're living in a crude world and we need to get progress."

In addition to setting targets, Conway said leaders must commit to cultural and infrastructure change to better address the family and caring responsibilities of employees.

"We need a full complement of flexible practices that are accessed by men and women without disadvantage to people's careers, and we also need to manage flexible careers.

"It is just not right that we are not in a position at the moment where it's not culturally acceptable for men to access flexible work arrangements."

EOWA – which will soon be reformed under new legislation expected to be passed by the Senate in August – recognises the huge challenge ahead for business, said Conway, and is looking to work with the "carrot rather than the stick".

"If we can't crash through a bit now, we will never get to the point of a critical mass of women in these leadership and management positions that we need to be able to create momentum, get traction and to drive ongoing change," she said.

"Once you get that critical mass, change is easier."

But, she added, there's only a limited window of opportunity for change before we run the risk of "gender fatigue", and see equality in the workplace consigned to history as a failure.

"We really don't have a lot of time to hang around on this," she said. "It's quite clear that what we've been doing in the past isn't working. We need a real breakthrough."

Angela Priestley is the editor of Women's Agenda, a new website by Private Media for career-minded women, launching in August.

RBA

The RBA was indicating it had plans to cut rates even further this year and yesterday it did just that by a more modest 25 basis points.
But I wouldn't say that things are all that much worse. It seems to me
that the latest move is all about confidence, and mostly about what's
happening in the rest of the world. Governor Stevens barely mentioned
the domestic economy in his explanation yesterday.

And right before the RBA met on Tuesday, global markets had a little
bit of a freak out. US jobs data came in worse than expected on Friday,
as did data on Chinese manufacturing. With Europe still looking like a
basket case, markets had no one they could turn to, and promptly fell
like Wiley Coyote from a cliff. Billions were wiped off the major stock
markets, and when the Australian market finally opened on Monday, it
immediately followed suit, wiping off all the hard-fought gains it had made
since the start of the year (though it has since put much of it back).

Markets are funny things, which is why I prefer property as an investment
class. I don't think the data justified the kind of turn-around in outlook that
followed. But sentiment is everything, and people were panicking. That's
why I think the RBA's move this month is almost entirely about confidence.
As I noted a few weeks ago, it's got heaps of room to move if it wants to,
and so probably figured 25 basis points was a bargain if it could keep
Australia from getting the jitters.

Not that everything in Australia is looking rosy. Far from it. House price
data released last week are a major concern. They show house prices in
the Australian capitals fell 1.4 percent in May to the lowest level in six
years. Hopefully 75 basis points worth of cuts in two months will start
to turn this around. Quickly.

The fundamentals of the Australian economy are still solid, and on a
global scale, are positively outstanding. The RBA will be hoping that
Australians don't lose sight of the ball and get spooked by all the chaos
happening off-shore. If we can do that, we should be able to muddle
through.

Swan promises and renigs

Wayne Swan has given tax relief to SMEs with one hand and taken it with the other.
The SME community should feel pretty special. In a Federal Budget that contains relatively few spending initiatives for the 2012-13 year, the Treasurer has put Government support for small business firmly in the spotlight by formally announcing the loss carry-back tax break for companies 90% of which it estimates will go to businesses earning under $2 million.
It's a policy the tax experts and industry advocates are broadly supportive of. While businesses have long been able to carry tax losses forward and offset them against future profits, the ability to carry tax losses back and claim refunds against tax paid on profit in the past is just as important as it provides relief to businesses when they need it most.
"Our multi-speed economy is putting pressure on businesses that aren't in the fast lanes," Swan said in his Budget speech.
"Our $714 million loss carry-back scheme will support businesses in need, to help them compete. We'll encourage companies to invest and innovate by offsetting a current year tax loss of up to $1 million against tax paid in previous years; a refund of up to $300,000."
It's a good measure, but the devil is very much in the detail when you look closely at the ledger of new spending and saving measures for 2012-13.
The measure will cost the Government just $6.7 million next financial year – close enough to nothing in the context of the Budget – and most eligible companies won't be able to access the tax break until 2014.
And then there's the little matter of paying for the loss carry-back tax break.
In order to fund this initiative, the Government has decided to dump the long-promised company tax cuts (30% down to 29%) that were supposed to start kicking in from July for companies with under $2 million in turnover.
That's very disappointing, given the fact that these company tax cuts have been sold for the best part of two years as the business community's dividend from the mining tax.
Scrapping the tax cuts means that $316 million in relief that would have gone to small business in 2012-13 is gone (remember, small business got a one-year head start on the cut).
But the loss carry-back will deliver just $6.7 million in relief.
In terms of new measures announced in this Budget, that's a $310 million turnaround for small business in terms.
True, small businesses will from July be able to access a $6,500 immediate asset write-off and a special $5,000 immediate deduction on the purchase of motor vehicles. These measures, which were announced well before today's Budget, are worth around $1 billion in 2012-13, according to Treasury.
But they will only be benefit businesses that have ready money available to buy assets and make investments. How many SMEs will be in a position to access these benefits remains to be seen.
Of course, in a Budget with $32.6 billion of cuts over the next four years, it was inevitable that SMEs would be required to shoulder some of the burden. And the fact that the small business community has at least got something in return – the loss carry-back initiative – is welcome.
But the decision to axe the tax cuts does represent something of a broken promise for the small business community.
While it is true that the Government has struggled to get the company tax cut past the Opposition and the Greens, it is also true that the Greens were prepared to support the cut for small business and even enlarge it to cover SMEs with up to $5 million in turnover.
Swan could have done a deal, but in the end he's decided that Labor's surplus was much more important.
The loss carry-back tax break is good policy, even if it has its limitations. The tax write-offs and immediate asset deductions are welcome.
But Swan and his small business ministers have spruiked the company tax cuts for the best part of two years – and now they are gone.

RBA

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has dropped the official cash rate by 50 basis points at its Board meeting today, from 4.25 per cent to 3.75 per cent.

This decision was based on information suggesting that economic conditions have been somewhat weaker than expected, while inflation has moderated.

In the Residex release of its March housing market statistics and commentary last Friday, Residex CEO John Edwards predicted today’s outcome.

“The interest rate reduction is going to provide the much needed consumer confidence boost. Without some form of stimulus, we would have been likely to continue seeing housing values decrease across much of Australia. Today’s RBA decision should stop the heavy adjustment process which would have otherwise been inevitable in the Melbourne market, and it will help push all markets which were passed the bottom of the correction phase”.

Mr. Edwards went on to say, “Depending on the content of the upcoming Federal Budget and its assessed impact, a further 25 basis point adjustment could come in June”.

Residex does not expect the rate adjustment to cause significant house price rises in most markets due to unaffordability issues which will still remain.

How to kill a nations entrepreneurial spirit

Seven companies, BlueScope Steel, Amcor, CSR, Rheem Australia, Capral, Boral and Incitec Pivot demand a government commitment to overhaul four areas: anti-dumping and industrial participation, industrial relations, access to energy and resources and regulation.
The seven companies make up a business coalition known as Manufacturing Australia which is meeting  today in Sydney.
In a communique issued from the meeting, Manufacturing Australia says, “Australian manufacturing is fighting multiple fires on multiple fronts, beset by challenges from high input costs and excessive or inconsistent regulation to the high Australian dollar.
“There is no ‘silver bullet’ solution to the sector’s challenges, but one thing is certain: the pattern of allowing Australia’s iconic manufacturers to decline, before being rushed into intensive care to be patched up with taxpayer funded subsidies, is simply not sustainable.
“As a nation, we must not allow the current difficult economic challenges to support a dangerous line of argument which contends that Australian manufacturing is beyond saving.”
The communique calls on the government to reduce the amount of cost, time and resources spent on administration and compliance with the Fair Work Act by removing the legislated default of third party employee representation.
It asks the government to strengthen anti-dumping regulations and to roll back manufacturing regulations generally especially where the regulations add no economic value or competitive advantage.
Finally, the communique criticises Australia’s energy policy.
“Australia is squandering one of its key competitive manufacturing advantages through shortsighted energy policy that favours sending our abundant natural resources overseas at the lowest point in their value chain, while other nations reap the benefits of adding value to our resources.”

Opportunity

An entrepreneur sees an opportunity and grasps it...

The mining boom is radically changing regional labour markets. In turn,
cashed-up employees are driving a surge in regional property markets.

Everyday we hear more and more stories about how the mining boom is
transforming regional areas. Perhaps we haven't seen anything like it in
Australia since the gold-rush.

Indeed, reports of astronomical salaries suggest that quite a few people
are striking it rich. And yet mining companies are still complaining about
chronic labour shortages.

In the Bowen Basin for example. there are an estimated 1500 open positions.
BHP's joint venture coal mines have 750 vacant jobs in central Queensland
while Rio Tinto has 530 vacancies at its global operations. The Queensland
Resources Council found that there were 4924 current internet job
advertisements for the mining industry in Queensland with 1300 posted in
just one week!

This has sparked a pay war between companies and between states, with
recruiters now offering big incentives to get the right people for the job.
According to recruiters Robert Walters, project managers in mining can
now earn more than $500,000 a year, while a mine deputy can get $200,000. 

Labourers are getting $100,000 and dozer drivers are earning
$50 an hour.

"I've seen sign-on bonuses for 50 per cent of a salary," Robert Walters' head of
mining and engineering Adam Harris said.

He said some executives were getting their home loans repaid, others had
their children's school fees covered and huge bonuses were being paid to stay
beyond three or four years.

The surge in cashed-up workers is of course driving a boom in resource properties.

Add to the mix growing frustration locals have with a fly-in, fly-out workforce.
Some complain that these transient workers, many of whom fly home for the
weekend, drain council resources without contributing anything in return.

In fact, Isaac Shire Council, in the heart of the Bowen Basin, has gone so far
as to call for a cap on non-residential workers.

"Our population is only 21,500 and there are 9000 itinerant workers and they
are using all our facilities," Isaac Mayor Cedric Marshal said. "The boom is going at
100 miles an hour. I think we need to take a serious look at it."

If caps are implemented, this will only drive property prices further.

There is gold in them there hills...

What is an entrepreneur?

A great description of an entrepreneur by Bill Zeng is
"Great entrepreneurs usually have something in common: great intellect and intuition as well as the capacity for original thought and the ability to inspire. They are the ones that tend to see direction from chaos and uncertainty that others don’t see."
I concur, most definitely  an entrepreneur has a fertile mind that finds a way through or around adversity and difficult situations or obstacles leading to a new answer or creative solution.
Its also most important to be aware that an outcome will most probably be something totally unique and unexpected as the thinking that lead to the original problem can't find a solution, only a new way of thinking will provide the solution.
Who was it that said "creativity is the mother of invention"?

Women Board members

Over the past year, 26pc of all non-executive director appointments in Britain's biggest 100 companies were female. In contrast, just 9pc of executive posts went to women, a report by Norman Broadbent found.

In the FTSE 250, those figures are 24pc and 7pc respectively.

Neil Holmes, of the search firm, said: "We are finding that women are appearing on shortlists, but the supply on the executive side is still lower than it should be and this requires companies to invest in long term cultural changes.

"This must be about quality derived from retention and experience, and not about tokenism."

The study also warned FTSE 100 companies will fail to meet Lord Davies' targets for getting more women on boards by 2015, just a year after they were introduced.

~New Year~

The tide has turned, the time is NOW

a new life awaits, so take a bow

step into a new life

Enjoy!!