Anyhow, I intend to express my own views, which are based on 24 years of experience. It will be clear that this will become “Point/Counter-point”. But I promise not to call you “Jane” (reference to the old Saturday Night Live skits, where they did a parody of the 60 Minutes show)

Lastly, feel free to use anything I post in anyway you see fit.

With regard to my comment about the lack of value in the auditor’s opinion, my opinion is shared by many others and is being heard more and more these days outside of the self-serving circles of the firms and the regulators who serve them. See the links in the post for more critics.

Immature? Oh, to have the luxury of immaturity and naivete. Unfortunatly I am burdened by age and broad, no pun intended, experience.

Can I use your comment as a book jacket blurb?

I write a blog (not a column in a global media owned magazine or newspaper,) and I work independently, so I can be biased. It’s my bias, my opinions, my twenty-plus years of experience, non-filtered by anyone else’s strategy or agenda.

You can take it or leave it.

For example, the AIG matter, a balanced view would have included that a big big part of the issue was the fabricated fair values for financial instruments (i.e., CDOs, sub-prime MBS, and other complex or structured instruments) that were sourced from broker quotes or a pricing service that used a proprietary model. Companies and auditors likely relied upon those quotes to support valuations contained in the financial statements. It will turn out that many of these models are flawed or insufficent, or that the brokers had a vested interest in the values. Should management and the auditors done more? Probably. But lets also include blame for the corrupt or inadequate system that still exists today to determine fair value for complex, structured or illiquid investments.

If you have a better alternative, then say what that might be. Would you want the government to take over that role? Would you want auditors to examine every transaction? What do you want?

If you have a better alternative, then say what that might be. Would you want the government to take over that role? Would you want auditors to examine every transaction? What do you want?

The real reason restatements will decline is because the hysteria to restate for things that don’t matter is waning fast. No one has really gotten any smarter or is better. Even the SEC has latched onto the concept of requiring restatements only when there would be reasonable expectation that an investor would care.

In any event, you, just like so many politicians, so easily declare something broken and then propose a solution.

I suggest that you invest in third-world markets where perhaps the lack of transparency and oversight would make sense to you.

George