IR Web Report > 10 Reasons Image-based Annual Reports Don't Work.

MANY companies have thought about changing how they publish their annual reports online. Their objectives may be to communicate better by moving up to a more interactive report, or to save money by going down to a less elaborate report.

In either case, they are likely to have run into a product that seems like a reasonable solution, but which on closer consideration should be avoided at any cost.

We're talking about image-based annual reports, which you may know better by such monikers as "Dynamic," "Interactive," or "mobular" reports. These cost more than PDF reports, but a lot less than HTML reports -- typically anywhere from US$2,000 to US$7,000 depending on the vendor.

Image-based reports provide a shortcut that works for companies but not investors
Image-based reports are cheaper than HTML ones because they're much easier to produce. In their crudest forms, vendors simply convert a PDF file of your report's pages into a series of snapshots that are then linked together by a clunky drop-down menu and linear arrow navigation scheme in a standardized masthead.

The process is similar to taking photographs of your printed report's pages and then stringing them together in a form of slide show. It take much less time and branpower than converting the report to a workable HTML document.

The problem, however, is that this short-cut produces an inflexible, low-quality document that is a poor alternative to either HTML or PDF. As such, it is likely to hurt the credibility of your IR website more than help it if you hare looking to trade up from PDF.

There are better options to save money or improve your report's communications value
If you want to save money by moving away from an expensive HTML or Flash report, go straight to a segmented and optimized PDF report. You'll provide a better document to investors, and potentially save your company an extra few thousand dollars.

If you currently publish your report in PDF and want to move up to a more dynamic presentation, then remember that image-based reports are likely a step down, not an improvement on what you're already doing. Here are your options for improving your report.

There are many reasons image-based annual reports fail to meet the grade for usability and communications value. Some of these are so fundamental that by themselves they'd be grounds to avoid the approach. In this article, I present 10 problems you should think about when contemplating an image-based report for your site.

1. You cannot copy and paste information from the report.
Investors, analysts, journalists and researchers often use information on investor relations websites to prepare their own documents. Making it impossible for them to copy information from your online annual report into their own reports or articles provides a disincentive for these important stakeholders to use your company's information. It may also increase the likelihood of errors occurring if users are required to retype information manually.

Analysts, journalists and researchers will be frustrated because they cannot copy information such as board of directors info. Try it yourself.

Since journalists and analysts are important voices in the markets, it makes no sense for you to discourage them from covering your company by providing information in inaccessible image formats. It also makes no sense to increase the likelihood of errors appearing in the information they publish about your company.

When people aren't able to get the information they need from your website, they are more likely to call the company to ask for it in other ways, most often by email. This increases IR costs and creates unnecessary work for IR departments. It's better to help users help themselves by providing information in formats that users find more convenient.

Both HTML and PDF allow users to copy and paste text into other applications.

NEXT: They are hard to read>