Seeking Alpha

Milkweed

 
View as an RSS Feed
View Milkweed's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Did NQ Mobile Actually Announce PwC Was Fired? [View instapost]
    The requirement for the auditor to respond is triggered by a change in auditor, it doesn't matter whether the auditor resigned or was fired.

    "IF" by some remote chance an ADR is not required to get their auditors response there would be nothing for PwC worry about as far as their reputation if their side of the story never came out. Right after NQ said there were no disagreements they noted PwC had wanted to expand the scope of the audit. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know one of those two statements is wrong and given NQ disclosed a couple weeks earlier that they were "considering" PwC's request to expand the audit we know which one is incorrect. The stocks probably still going to crater when PwC finally points it out though.
    Jul 27 09:49 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did NQ Mobile Actually Announce PwC Was Fired? [View instapost]
    O.K. dlongava, I updated my pending article. Feel free to take some props if it gets past the editors.
    Jul 27 09:40 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did NQ Mobile Actually Announce PwC Was Fired? [View instapost]
    I've seen plenty of ChiScam auditor resignation letters however I can't remember if there were any for ADR's or not. I would find it hard to believe they're not required to get the auditors response and if by some wild chance they were not, a non filing does not suggest PwC agreed with NQ's press release it would only mean NQ didn't disclose PwC's disagreement. I seriously doubt they're not required to file a response from PwC.
    Jul 27 08:52 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did NQ Mobile Actually Announce PwC Was Fired? [View instapost]
    dlongava,

    I think I agree with you except I'm not sure that the 6K filed actually counts as the required disclosure of the termination of PwC because the information was not contained in the body of the filing but in press release that was attached to the filing as an exhibit. You note above that NQ would have to file PwC's response within two days of receiving it. I find it hard to believe PwC would not have responded to an official disclosure of the termination on their services by now and I suspect the reason why they have not responded is because there has been no official disclosure of the termination of their service yet. IE: set up the already filed 6K with just the press release attached as an exhibit because they knew this would not qualify as the required disclosure so they wouldn't have to include PwC's response. What else explains why we haven't heard PwC's response by now?
    Jul 27 08:23 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did NQ Mobile Actually Announce PwC Was Fired? [View instapost]
    I've seen a few filings for changes of auditor and the disclosure is in the body of the 8K filing it's not an exhibit attached to the 8K and there is always an exhibit attached with the auditors response. I don't know for sure but I suspect the 8K that was filed does not qualify for the disclosure noted in your SEC link and the real disclosure will be filed at the last minute with PwC's response attached. I suspect this is how they managed to keep PwC's response undisclosed this long, they haven't made the official SEC mandated change of auditor disclosure yet. I suspect the 6K with the press release attached only counted as a material event filing.
    Jul 27 08:02 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did NQ Mobile Actually Announce PwC Was Fired? [View instapost]
    BTW I used the source I found because it discussed the requirement for the auditor to respond which is what interested me the most. I don't care what NQ has to say about the end of the relationship, I care what PwC has to say. I also didn't see the SEC page until after I posted but it doesn't discuss the requirement for the auditors response so it's still not what I was looking for.
    Jul 27 07:48 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did NQ Mobile Actually Announce PwC Was Fired? [View instapost]
    Again they filed a 6K with the press release attached as an exhibit but no exhibit with PwC's response that I've seen with every other announcement of a change of auditor and that Prof. Gillis stated was required. I'm not sure this filing meets the SEC disclosure requirements and I suspect the real filing is yet to come. Yes my link is outdated and the timing could be off but there should still be a filing with PwC's response that looks like it's going to come out at the last possible minute. I think the 10 days are business days which will put it mid week.
    Jul 27 07:44 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did NQ Mobile Actually Announce PwC Was Fired? [View instapost]
    I saw this after I posted. If I'm right that the 8K with just the press release attached as an exhibit does not qualify for the above disclosure then we'll probably see the official 6K with PwC's response tomorrow.

    After I did the instablog I decided to clean this up a bit and submit it as a full fledged article. If they publish it this will probably be the second time in a row news trumped my article.
    Jul 27 07:30 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Did NQ Mobile Actually Announce PwC Was Fired? [View instapost]
    I'm not arguing that PwC wasn't dismissed just that they may not have made this official with the SEC yet and that we have yet to hear PwC's take on the termination. It looks like NQ is holding back on the disclosure with PwC's response, and I'm sure it's not because there was no disagreement.
    Jul 27 07:19 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • NQ Mobile Rises 93% In One Week From Its 52-Week Low [View article]
    Did NQ Mobile Really Fire PwC (officially)? You make the call:

    http://bit.ly/1Amp06Q

    We should find out soon enough.
    Jul 27 11:59 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • NQ Mobile Rises 93% In One Week From Its 52-Week Low [View article]
    Obviously logic is not your strong suit so let me help you out, since the lawyer was the entity hired to investigate Muddy's claims the report reflects the lawyers opinion NOT D&T. Ipso Factso the report DOES NOT REFLECT D&T's opinion one way or the other.

    All but delusional longs knew that Muddy's accusations were accurate thus NQ lost 2/3 of it's value on Muddy's report, PwC let themselves be fired and D&T isn't the new auditor they chose to downgrade to the "Auditor to the Frauds" instead.
    Jul 26 10:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • NQ Mobile Rises 93% In One Week From Its 52-Week Low [View article]
    Do you have a hard time keeping a straight face when you type this gibberish? You delusional longs want it both ways, it's the equivalent of an audit when you incorrectly argue D&T was responsible for the "investigation" but now it's not equivalent to an audit when you can't explain why D&T isn't the replacement auditor. Conflict of interest? How about this Berstein guy apparently proclaiming NQ innocent right after M.W. initial report. Yeah O.K. these guy will be "independent" auditors. Explain what conflict of interest D&T has other than knowing they'd never be able to sign off on the 20-F either.
    Jul 26 10:04 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • NQ Mobile Rises 93% In One Week From Its 52-Week Low [View article]
    The lawyer was hired by the special committee to investigate Muddy Waters claims, the lawyer hired D&T to "assist" them in the investigation. The report is the lawyers opinion NOT D&T. Why do you think D&T ain't the new auditor?
    Jul 26 09:56 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • NQ Mobile Rises 93% In One Week From Its 52-Week Low [View article]
    BTW if D&T already did the equivalent or better of an audit and found no fraud why aren't they the new NQ auditor? All they have to do is sign on the dotted line at this point...no? See my post above for the reason why D&T isn't the new auditor.
    Jul 26 09:07 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • NQ Mobile Rises 93% In One Week From Its 52-Week Low [View article]
    For the umpteenth time the lawyer is the one who was hired to "investigate" Muddy Waters claims NOT D&T. The lawyer generated the report and the report reflects the lawyers opinions, NOT D&T. Did anyone really think the lawyer was going to find their client guilty?
    Jul 26 09:04 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
1,067 Comments
1,222 Likes