Standard Group, I have this creepy feeling about the company.

As stated by @accelriskconsult, this discussion has been had and is now just being duplicated... CMC is STILL a going concern and Deloitte signed off that they are.. Where did you get the impression that it is not? The responsibility of an external auditor is to verify on behalf of the shareholders that the financial statements are a true and fair reflection of the company's state of affairs whether positively or negatively.. i.e. they can give an unqualified opinion saying that the company made a 20B loss or a 20B profit. There is absolutely no requirement for the auditor to report to shareholders that the company is paying too much to suppliers. They may report to the board but not to shareholders. I would also still love to know how the auditors would have detected that invoices from the CMC suppliers were +0.5%.. the Purchase orders had the +0.5, the invoices had +0.5 and the payments had the 0.5%.. Even if someone thought the vehicles should have been cheaper by 0.5%, that would have been a reflection of management's poor negotiation skills with their suppliers which again is NOT a reportable issue until and unless the 0.5 was going to cause CMC to cease operations by the end of the next 12 months... This argument smacks of hiring a housegirl to wash clothes and then expecting extras..

and what exactly is the EXTERNAL auditor supposed to do about the above?? They've already reviewed the statements and declared that the amount of losses reported is CORRECT...That is all they're supposed to do.. The responsibility of keeping the company profitable belongs to management ama what is the CEO paid for?? This is ridiculous.. you expect the auditors to run the company as well
@Gathinga considering that you once requested for audit software, I have to assume that you're an auditor.. Quit and find out what your work is first.

An unofficial panel of experts cleared global accounting groups KPMG and Ernst & Young of any responsibility for a $1.7 billion accounting fraud at Japan's Olympus Corp.

The scandal, one of corporate Japan's worst, had raised questions over the role of the two audit firms, which signed off on the accounts of the maker of medical equipment and cameras before the 13-year fraud finally surfaced in October.

The panel effectively found the fraud, identified by a separate investigation as having being hatched by two former top executives in the 1990s to conceal losses, had been too well covered up for the external audit firms to have unraveled it.

"The masterminds of this case were hiding the illegal acts by artfully manipulating experts' opinions," the report said

Read more..
http://finance.yahoo.com...ng-firms-000637463.html