Colm O'Rourke vs. the GPA

Started by Jinxy, October 26, 2014, 07:30:31 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

five points

Quote from: Esmarelda on November 15, 2019, 11:57:16 AM
Quote from: five points on November 14, 2019, 11:00:30 PM
Quote"We're audited by Deloitte, a big four firm"

A telltale sign of an outfit with too much money
Yeah, better to get a small time crowd that won't raise too much suspicion. Damned if you do and all that.

Google "auditing scandals" and you'll find Deloitte way ahead of any "small time crowd".

Baile Brigín 2

Quote from: Hound on November 18, 2019, 12:59:39 PM


The GPA are the driving force behind USA fundraising trips and have been for half a century. Ha Ha  ;D ;D

Oh dear.

Esmarelda

Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 01:15:19 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 15, 2019, 11:57:16 AM
Quote from: five points on November 14, 2019, 11:00:30 PM
Quote"We're audited by Deloitte, a big four firm"

A telltale sign of an outfit with too much money
Yeah, better to get a small time crowd that won't raise too much suspicion. Damned if you do and all that.

Google "auditing scandals" and you'll find Deloitte way ahead of any "small time crowd".
Trying to figure out how to reply to that. Could you explain what point you're making with that post please?

five points

Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:37:37 PM
Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 01:15:19 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 15, 2019, 11:57:16 AM
Quote from: five points on November 14, 2019, 11:00:30 PM
Quote"We're audited by Deloitte, a big four firm"

A telltale sign of an outfit with too much money
Yeah, better to get a small time crowd that won't raise too much suspicion. Damned if you do and all that.

Google "auditing scandals" and you'll find Deloitte way ahead of any "small time crowd".
Trying to figure out how to reply to that. Could you explain what point you're making with that post please?

It's hardly cryptic.

Esmarelda

Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 02:42:20 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:37:37 PM
Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 01:15:19 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 15, 2019, 11:57:16 AM
Quote from: five points on November 14, 2019, 11:00:30 PM
Quote"We're audited by Deloitte, a big four firm"

A telltale sign of an outfit with too much money
Yeah, better to get a small time crowd that won't raise too much suspicion. Damned if you do and all that.

Google "auditing scandals" and you'll find Deloitte way ahead of any "small time crowd".
Trying to figure out how to reply to that. Could you explain what point you're making with that post please?

It's hardly cryptic.
Definitely not, just nonsensical.

An auditing scandal, as you might define it, is likely to have involved one of the big five accountancy firms as, to merit it being a scandal, it would probably need to involve an entity who engages a firm of such a size.

By your logic, the GPA shouldn't use one of these firms because they have been or are more likely to have been involved in a scandal. You seem to be suggesting (in the absence of you explaining your post) that the GPA would be better off hiring a small firm of accountants who haven't been found to be in a scandal as they're not large enough to make such headlines.

Or maybe there's something cryptic in there after all?

five points

Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:52:01 PM
Definitely not, just nonsensical.

An auditing scandal, as you might define it, is likely to have involved one of the big five accountancy firms as, to merit it being a scandal, it would probably need to involve an entity who engages a firm of such a size.

By your logic, the GPA shouldn't use one of these firms because they have been or are more likely to have been involved in a scandal. You seem to be suggesting (in the absence of you explaining your post) that the GPA would be better off hiring a small firm of accountants who haven't been found to be in a scandal as they're not large enough to make such headlines.

Or maybe there's something cryptic in there after all?

No, what I said was very clear. The GPA shouldn't be using them because their fees are astronomical, to the level that only very large companies, multinationals and those with very deep pockets use them. Your red herring that their work should be more dependable than smaller firms was and is easily rebuffed.

manfromdelmonte

Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 03:11:53 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:52:01 PM
Definitely not, just nonsensical.

An auditing scandal, as you might define it, is likely to have involved one of the big five accountancy firms as, to merit it being a scandal, it would probably need to involve an entity who engages a firm of such a size.

By your logic, the GPA shouldn't use one of these firms because they have been or are more likely to have been involved in a scandal. You seem to be suggesting (in the absence of you explaining your post) that the GPA would be better off hiring a small firm of accountants who haven't been found to be in a scandal as they're not large enough to make such headlines.

Or maybe there's something cryptic in there after all?

No, what I said was very clear. The GPA shouldn't be using them because their fees are astronomical, to the level that only very large companies, multinationals and those with very deep pockets use them. Your red herring that their work should be more dependable than smaller firms was and is easily rebuffed.
big five - corporate money, corporate sponsorship etc

why do the GPA need to go on a junket to NYC?

Esmarelda

Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 03:11:53 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:52:01 PM
Definitely not, just nonsensical.

An auditing scandal, as you might define it, is likely to have involved one of the big five accountancy firms as, to merit it being a scandal, it would probably need to involve an entity who engages a firm of such a size.

By your logic, the GPA shouldn't use one of these firms because they have been or are more likely to have been involved in a scandal. You seem to be suggesting (in the absence of you explaining your post) that the GPA would be better off hiring a small firm of accountants who haven't been found to be in a scandal as they're not large enough to make such headlines.

Or maybe there's something cryptic in there after all?

No, what I said was very clear. The GPA shouldn't be using them because their fees are astronomical, to the level that only very large companies, multinationals and those with very deep pockets use them. Your red herring that their work should be more dependable than smaller firms was and is easily rebuffed.
"A telltale sign of an outfit with too much money"
"Google "auditing scandals" and you'll find Deloitte way ahead of any "small time crowd"."

No mention of fees in either of those two posts yet you feel what you say is very clear despite you deciding not to clarify when I invited you to.

And I didn't say their work would be more dependable as you can see.........very clearly.

RadioGAAGAA

Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 18, 2019, 03:15:07 PM
why do the GPA need to go on a junket to NYC?

Its only select members... or are they even members if they are full time employees... that get to go on the junkets.
i usse an speelchekor

five points

Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 03:20:18 PM
Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 03:11:53 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:52:01 PM
Definitely not, just nonsensical.

An auditing scandal, as you might define it, is likely to have involved one of the big five accountancy firms as, to merit it being a scandal, it would probably need to involve an entity who engages a firm of such a size.

By your logic, the GPA shouldn't use one of these firms because they have been or are more likely to have been involved in a scandal. You seem to be suggesting (in the absence of you explaining your post) that the GPA would be better off hiring a small firm of accountants who haven't been found to be in a scandal as they're not large enough to make such headlines.

Or maybe there's something cryptic in there after all?

No, what I said was very clear. The GPA shouldn't be using them because their fees are astronomical, to the level that only very large companies, multinationals and those with very deep pockets use them. Your red herring that their work should be more dependable than smaller firms was and is easily rebuffed.
"A telltale sign of an outfit with too much money"
"Google "auditing scandals" and you'll find Deloitte way ahead of any "small time crowd"."

No mention of fees in either of those two posts yet you feel what you say is very clear despite you deciding not to clarify when I invited you to.

And I didn't say their work would be more dependable as you can see.........very clearly.

"...too much money"
"...No mention of fees... "
::)

(It's only a minor point anyway. Hardly worth fighting over.)

trailer

Quote from: manfromdelmonte on November 18, 2019, 03:15:07 PM
Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 03:11:53 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:52:01 PM
Definitely not, just nonsensical.

An auditing scandal, as you might define it, is likely to have involved one of the big five accountancy firms as, to merit it being a scandal, it would probably need to involve an entity who engages a firm of such a size.

By your logic, the GPA shouldn't use one of these firms because they have been or are more likely to have been involved in a scandal. You seem to be suggesting (in the absence of you explaining your post) that the GPA would be better off hiring a small firm of accountants who haven't been found to be in a scandal as they're not large enough to make such headlines.

Or maybe there's something cryptic in there after all?

No, what I said was very clear. The GPA shouldn't be using them because their fees are astronomical, to the level that only very large companies, multinationals and those with very deep pockets use them. Your red herring that their work should be more dependable than smaller firms was and is easily rebuffed.
big five - corporate money, corporate sponsorship etc

why do the GPA need to go on a junket to NYC?

To celebrate 50 years of the GPA?

Esmarelda

Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 03:20:18 PM
Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 03:11:53 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:52:01 PM
Definitely not, just nonsensical.

An auditing scandal, as you might define it, is likely to have involved one of the big five accountancy firms as, to merit it being a scandal, it would probably need to involve an entity who engages a firm of such a size.

By your logic, the GPA shouldn't use one of these firms because they have been or are more likely to have been involved in a scandal. You seem to be suggesting (in the absence of you explaining your post) that the GPA would be better off hiring a small firm of accountants who haven't been found to be in a scandal as they're not large enough to make such headlines.

Or maybe there's something cryptic in there after all?

No, what I said was very clear. The GPA shouldn't be using them because their fees are astronomical, to the level that only very large companies, multinationals and those with very deep pockets use them. Your red herring that their work should be more dependable than smaller firms was and is easily rebuffed.
"A telltale sign of an outfit with too much money"
"Google "auditing scandals" and you'll find Deloitte way ahead of any "small time crowd"."

No mention of fees in either of those two posts yet you feel what you say is very clear despite you deciding not to clarify when I invited you to.

And I didn't say their work would be more dependable as you can see.........very clearly.

"...too much money"
"...No mention of fees... "
::)

(It's only a minor point anyway. Hardly worth fighting over.)
I agree with the bit in brackets, but who's fighting?

I've no vested interest in the GPA. I just want a balanced view of what's going on there. Saying that using a Big Five accountancy firm is a sign of a firm with too much money sounds like an argument in favour of an already formed opinion rather than a balanced one.

five points

Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 05:42:26 PM
Saying that using a Big Five accountancy firm is a sign of a firm with too much money sounds like an argument in favour of an already formed opinion rather than a balanced one.

Big Four actually.

Maybe it is.

Baile Brigín 2

Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 05:42:26 PM
Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 03:20:18 PM
Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 03:11:53 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:52:01 PM
Definitely not, just nonsensical.

An auditing scandal, as you might define it, is likely to have involved one of the big five accountancy firms as, to merit it being a scandal, it would probably need to involve an entity who engages a firm of such a size.

By your logic, the GPA shouldn't use one of these firms because they have been or are more likely to have been involved in a scandal. You seem to be suggesting (in the absence of you explaining your post) that the GPA would be better off hiring a small firm of accountants who haven't been found to be in a scandal as they're not large enough to make such headlines.

Or maybe there's something cryptic in there after all?

No, what I said was very clear. The GPA shouldn't be using them because their fees are astronomical, to the level that only very large companies, multinationals and those with very deep pockets use them. Your red herring that their work should be more dependable than smaller firms was and is easily rebuffed.
"A telltale sign of an outfit with too much money"
"Google "auditing scandals" and you'll find Deloitte way ahead of any "small time crowd"."

No mention of fees in either of those two posts yet you feel what you say is very clear despite you deciding not to clarify when I invited you to.

And I didn't say their work would be more dependable as you can see.........very clearly.

"...too much money"
"...No mention of fees... "
::)

(It's only a minor point anyway. Hardly worth fighting over.)
I agree with the bit in brackets, but who's fighting?

I've no vested interest in the GPA. I just want a balanced view of what's going on there. Saying that using a Big Five accountancy firm is a sign of a firm with too much money sounds like an argument in favour of an already formed opinion rather than a balanced one.

The reality is its notions. A company with that staff and that turnover could be audited by any one man band at a fraction of the cost. The GAA itself doesn't go big 4.

manfromdelmonte

Quote from: Baile Brigín 2 on November 18, 2019, 06:58:36 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 05:42:26 PM
Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 03:23:20 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 03:20:18 PM
Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 03:11:53 PM
Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:52:01 PM
Definitely not, just nonsensical.

An auditing scandal, as you might define it, is likely to have involved one of the big five accountancy firms as, to merit it being a scandal, it would probably need to involve an entity who engages a firm of such a size.

By your logic, the GPA shouldn't use one of these firms because they have been or are more likely to have been involved in a scandal. You seem to be suggesting (in the absence of you explaining your post) that the GPA would be better off hiring a small firm of accountants who haven't been found to be in a scandal as they're not large enough to make such headlines.

Or maybe there's something cryptic in there after all?

No, what I said was very clear. The GPA shouldn't be using them because their fees are astronomical, to the level that only very large companies, multinationals and those with very deep pockets use them. Your red herring that their work should be more dependable than smaller firms was and is easily rebuffed.
"A telltale sign of an outfit with too much money"
"Google "auditing scandals" and you'll find Deloitte way ahead of any "small time crowd"."

No mention of fees in either of those two posts yet you feel what you say is very clear despite you deciding not to clarify when I invited you to.

And I didn't say their work would be more dependable as you can see.........very clearly.

"...too much money"
"...No mention of fees... "
::)

(It's only a minor point anyway. Hardly worth fighting over.)
I agree with the bit in brackets, but who's fighting?

I've no vested interest in the GPA. I just want a balanced view of what's going on there. Saying that using a Big Five accountancy firm is a sign of a firm with too much money sounds like an argument in favour of an already formed opinion rather than a balanced one.

The reality is its notions. A company with that staff and that turnover could be audited by any one man band at a fraction of the cost. The GAA itself doesn't go big 4.
Shouldn't the GAA itself be auditing the GPA themselves?

Considering they fund most of it.