While it is true that Excel is a proprietary format (except the Excel 2008 format has been certified as an open standard) it is also widely known and used. In fact, I think you would be hard pressed to find any application of that type regardless of developer that does not have the ability to import data from Excel. So, in a way, it is a “standard.”

XBRL, on the other hand, while open is not very well known outside of a small community of users. At least today.

So, while I do not have any insight into the internal decisions made at Colgate, I would guess that the decision was likely made based on both the universal nature of Excel among not just investment professionals but savvy non-professional investors as well, and the fact that it is also a little bit easier to create the Excel file.

However, I would guess that the time is coming when your paradigm will emerge victorious. As you may be aware, this is the year the SEC starts requiring the first wave of US companies to file some regulatory reports in the XBRL format. I recently wrote about it here:

http://www.corporate-eye.com/2009/01/interactive-data-for-financial-reporting-and-ir/

So, there is no doubt that the XBRL format will become more and more widespread over the next couple of years.

In the meantime, I belive that there is an XBRL plug-in available for Excel if you are interested. In true Microsoft fashion, the files it generates leave a lot to be desired standards-wise, but it might be a good jumping off point for interoperability purposes.

-Brian

Granted, XBRL requires an investor to have a custom program to be able to digest the data and present it in a human-readable form. But, XBRL has the advantage of being a standard, so investors won’t have to customize the report for each company. Funds and other professional investors would probably prefer an XBRL feed, for that reason.

In contrast, an Excel format will require the investor to manually create formulas for any custom analysis he wants to perform. It would seem to be a good choice for individual investors with a small portfolio and limited computing resources.

Was this initiative driven by requests from investors? Or did the company internally decide to distribute data in this format?