Quote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 02:42:20 PMDefinitely not, just nonsensical.Quote from: Esmarelda on November 18, 2019, 02:37:37 PMQuote from: five points on November 18, 2019, 01:15:19 PMTrying to figure out how to reply to that. Could you explain what point you're making with that post please?Quote from: Esmarelda on November 15, 2019, 11:57:16 AMQuote from: five points on November 14, 2019, 11:00:30 PMYeah, better to get a small time crowd that won't raise too much suspicion. Damned if you do and all that.Quote"We're audited by Deloitte, a big four firm"
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".
It's hardly cryptic.
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?