<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Next Tier Or Next To Fail?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://retheauditors.com/2008/03/31/next-tier-or-next-to-fail/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://retheauditors.com/2008/03/31/next-tier-or-next-to-fail/</link>
	<description>The Business of the Big 4 Audit Firms</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 21:24:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: SEC Stacks The Deck Against Investors At PCAOB - Francine McKenna - Accounting Watchdog - Forbes</title>
		<link>http://retheauditors.com/2008/03/31/next-tier-or-next-to-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-152072</link>
		<dc:creator>SEC Stacks The Deck Against Investors At PCAOB - Francine McKenna - Accounting Watchdog - Forbes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2011 21:13:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://76.12.174.187/?p=636#comment-152072</guid>
		<description>[...] National Office of Audit and Accounting. McGladrey is the next tier public accounting firm with the alternative practice structure and exposure to Madoff and Petters fraud litigation as well as responsibility for the Sentinel [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] National Office of Audit and Accounting. McGladrey is the next tier public accounting firm with the alternative practice structure and exposure to Madoff and Petters fraud litigation as well as responsibility for the Sentinel [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: re: The Auditors &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Improving Contingency Disclosure? Just Keep Doing The Shuffle</title>
		<link>http://retheauditors.com/2008/03/31/next-tier-or-next-to-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-139084</link>
		<dc:creator>re: The Auditors &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Improving Contingency Disclosure? Just Keep Doing The Shuffle</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:24:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://76.12.174.187/?p=636#comment-139084</guid>
		<description>[...] on because your vote doesn&#8217;t count. The firms almost always capitulate (except poor schmuck BDO) by settling and they admit, by default, that they are not willing to defend themselves. I&#8217;m [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] on because your vote doesn&#8217;t count. The firms almost always capitulate (except poor schmuck BDO) by settling and they admit, by default, that they are not willing to defend themselves. I&#8217;m [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: re: The Auditors &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Is Deloitte The Perfect Firm?</title>
		<link>http://retheauditors.com/2008/03/31/next-tier-or-next-to-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-132608</link>
		<dc:creator>re: The Auditors &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Is Deloitte The Perfect Firm?</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 00:52:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://76.12.174.187/?p=636#comment-132608</guid>
		<description>[...] community, in reality, to keep up.  It&#8217;s one of the reasons I&#8217;ve said that the next tier don&#8217;t have a chance at catching up. Not enough critical mass to ever be good enough to audit the largest companies. So [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] community, in reality, to keep up.  It&#8217;s one of the reasons I&#8217;ve said that the next tier don&#8217;t have a chance at catching up. Not enough critical mass to ever be good enough to audit the largest companies. So [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://retheauditors.com/2008/03/31/next-tier-or-next-to-fail/comment-page-1/#comment-483</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 14:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://76.12.174.187/?p=636#comment-483</guid>
		<description>One thing I would say is that Grant Thornton was named with other accounting firms, a law firm, and a few banks.  I believe this case becomes one of joint and several liability (correct me if I am wrong).  The Refco case will be litigated for a very long time.  Even if the plaintiff wins, I doubt Grant Thornton will have to foot the $2 billion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One thing I would say is that Grant Thornton was named with other accounting firms, a law firm, and a few banks.  I believe this case becomes one of joint and several liability (correct me if I am wrong).  The Refco case will be litigated for a very long time.  Even if the plaintiff wins, I doubt Grant Thornton will have to foot the $2 billion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

