SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : The Enron Scandal - Unmoderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: H James Morris who wrote (2048)5/5/2002 12:53:57 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 3602
 
Carving up the flagship office

Deloitte, KPMG lead recruitment chase
By Julie Johnsson
May 06, 2002
Crain's Chicago Business

Competitors of Chicago's Andersen are carving up its home office — the accounting firm's birthplace and flagship location — with deals for the once-vaunted audit practice here expected to be completed this week.

Andersen's rivals are also negotiating for many other components of its Chicago business, including the middle-market practice, financial services group and business consulting. Deloitte & Touche LLP, based in Connecticut, and New York's KPMG LLP have been the most aggressive in vying for Chicago partners.

The frenzied negotiations, touching nearly all of Andersen's operations in its largest office, signal that the accounting giant's future can be measured in weeks, not months, regardless of the outcome of its litigation in Houston and Phoenix.

"If that office goes, it means basically that the firm has been killed," says Stephen Presser, professor of business law at Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management.

The dealmakers got a boost Friday when a federal judge in Chicago refused to grant a temporary restraining order that would have blocked Andersen from canceling any non-compete agreements for 14 days. Andersen is charging would-be acquirers a bounty of $100,000 per partner to drop the non-compete restriction.

Up for grabs
A host of competitors are vying for pieces of Andersen's Chicago home office. They include:
Audit
Deloitte & Touche, KPMG, Ernst & Young
Tax
Deloitte & Touche, KPMG, PricewaterhouseCoopers
Middle Market
BDO Seidman, Grant Thornton, PricewaterhouseCoopers
Business Consulting
KPMG Consulting Inc.
Meanwhile, Deloitte & Touche and KPMG are battling for partners and senior staff in Andersen's commercial group, a marquee practice that once boasted a blue-chip client roster that included, in the Chicago area, Abbott Laboratories, Sara Lee Corp. and Walgreen Co.

Now, the Big Five rivals are bidding for staff — often at the request of former Andersen clients who wish to see familiar faces even though they're changing accounting firms. Representatives of Andersen, Deloitte and KPMG did not return phone calls.

Deloitte extended offers to 22 Andersen partners in the commercial group and 108 senior staff and managers last Wednesday, a source says. They have until Monday to accept or reject its terms. KPMG also extended competing offers to many in the group last week.

Leading the exodus to Deloitte is Deborah DeHaas, who is Andersen's top audit partner in Chicago as head of its assurance and business advisory practice. She is prominent in local civic circles, and headed the firm's Chicago office until last fall, when she returned to client duties.

The team of executives joining her includes Barry Kohn, a lead partner on the Sara Lee account and a rainmaker. Neither Ms. DeHaas nor Mr. Kohn could be reached for comment.

KPMG has lined up its own roster of Andersen all-stars, a source says. It has hired Stan Logan, who ran the audit practice before Ms. DeHaas and who was regarded as one of the firm's top salesmen for his work with Quaker Oats Co. and Walgreen. He could not be reached for comment.

Andersen has agreed to release partners and senior managers from their non-compete agreements, provided the acquiring firms pay $100,000 per partner and agree to take eight staff members for each partner they hire, sources say.

Staff scramble

This led to intense behind-the-scenes lobbying at Andersen last week as partners who've committed to either firm sought to persuade colleagues and rising stars to join them.

Deloitte, meanwhile, is the front-runner to gain the bulk of Andersen's tax practice, negotiating to hire about 350 tax partners nationwide, including about 30 in Chicago, along with their key staff. KPMG also has approached tax partners here, sources say. Both firms stand to see their Chicago offices swell by hundreds of employees as they hire Andersen tax and audit staff.

The two remaining Big Five firms are vying for smaller pieces of the Chicago office. New York's Ernst & Young LLP is in talks to acquire Andersen's financial services practice.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, based in New York, is also in the running to acquire Andersen's tax practice and is in talks to buy the middle-market practice here, which serves companies with revenues of $100 million to $1 billion. A spokesman for PricewaterhouseCoopers couldn't be reached.

Chicago-based accounting firms Grant Thornton LLP and BDO Seidman LLP are also negotiating with partners in that practice in Chicago and elsewhere, sources say.

An executive at BDO Seidman confirmed the firm is in talks, but declined to provide details. Grant Thornton issued a statement saying, "While our discussions with Andersen are preliminary, we will have no comment until there is a significant development."

The fate of ABC

Virginia-based KPMG Consulting Inc. emerged as the leading candidate to acquire the $800-million Andersen Business Consulting unit (Crain's, April 8). The consulting group's 38 Chicago partners had weighed other options but have decided not to cut separate deals for their practice here, which has a total of 508 employees, until the KPMG talks are resolved.

All deals, of course, are contingent on Andersen resolving its liability and non-compete issues. If the firm dissolves, the assorted parties suing it for damages will be hard-pressed to collect from departing partners who violate non-compete agreements, notes Robert Schweihs, managing director of Willamette Group, a financial advisory firm based in Chicago. "I can't compete with Andersen if they don't exist."

Reporter Sarah A. Klein contributed to this story.

©2002 by Crain Communications Inc.



To: H James Morris who wrote (2048)5/10/2002 2:26:23 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 3602
 
Enron-Andersen Ties Ended in Disaster

By Jeff Franks
Thursday May 9, 8:45 pm Eastern Time

HOUSTON (Reuters) - Accounting firm Andersen bent over backwards to please its lucrative client Enron Corp. in an unusually close relationship that ended in disaster for both, according to testimony on Thursday in Andersen's obstruction of justice trial.

A picture emerged of Enron constantly looking for ways to polish its financial statements by skirting conventional accounting rules and Andersen all too frequently going along, after a little internal anguish.

Their chummy relationship came to an end last fall when Enron reported a series of staggering financial losses tied to off-balance sheet partnerships the company used to disguise debt and boost profits.

The energy trading giant declared bankruptcy on Dec. 2 and Andersen, discredited by its permissive auditing of Enron, is struggling to survive the loss of hundreds of clients.

The Big Five accounting firm is charged with obstruction of justice for allegedly destroying thousands of Enron audit records to keep them away from investigators.

Prosecutors say Andersen wanted to cover its role in Enron's collapse because it feared losing its license to practice after involvement in previous accounting scandals at Waste Management and Sunbeam corporations.

Two high-level Andersen partners, Ben Neuhausen and Carl Bass, described an ongoing tug-of-war between Enron and Andersen in which the energy trading giant enlisted the local Andersen accountants to fight for its financial schemes against senior Andersen people advising caution.

"They (Enron) operated in areas (where) the accounting wasn't real clear..it was sort of pushing the envelope of what other companies would do," Bass told the jury.

SKIRTED REGULATIONS

The battles were often over Enron's numerous off-balance sheet partnerships, where the company skirted federal regulations about ownership, conflict of interest and financial reporting, they said.

Neuhausen told of a 1999 exchange in which Andersen's lead Enron accountant David Duncan asked whether it would be OK for Enron's then-chief financial officer Andrew Fastow to run and be part-owner of one of the partnerships.

Neuhausen, like Bass a member of a high-level Andersen standards committee that resolved accounting questions, shot back a memo saying there was "conflict of interest galore" in the proposal and that no board of directors "in its right mind" would approve such a deal.

But, in the end, both the board and Andersen OKd Fastow-run partnerships that earned him a reported $30 million.

Bass told of how he opposed several Enron proposals, including accounting treatment of the off-balance sheet deals, then one day his managers took him off all Enron work because Enron thought him to be an obstructionist.

Enron blasted him in a client satisfaction survey as "too rule-oriented" and his bosses said the company viewed him as "caustic and cynical toward their transactions," he said.

Aside from the personal blow of being removed from working with Andersen's biggest Houston client, he said he thought it dangerous for a client to be dictating personnel decisions to its auditor, who is supposed to remain independent.

The two witnesses, in a mirror of Andersen's overall strategy in the trial, appeared to pin the blame for their firm's cozy Enron relationship on Duncan, who they thought too willing to do Enron's bidding.

'PUSHED TO EXCESS'

Duncan has pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice by shredding Enron documents so investigators would not see them. He is scheduled to testify in the trial, perhaps as early as Friday.

"They (Andersen's Enron team) would often push for an aggressive interpretation of the accounting standards," Neuhausen said. "I thought many times, yes, he (Duncan) pushed to excess on aggressive interpretations."

He said Duncan and his team defied his committee's recommendations about how to book the off-balance sheet deals, with the result that Enron took a $1.1 billion charge to its 2001 third quarter earnings and restated results for four years.

Both men said relations between them and the Duncan-led group were tense last fall as Enron began to unravel. They said top-level Andersen managers got involved to try to come up with accounting methods to reduce the third-quarter blow, but Enron released the figures before they reached a solution.

Things only worsened when shortly afterwards Enron was forced to write down shareholder equity by $1 billion because of an Andersen error.

"There was a billion-dollar debit that needed to find a home somewhere," Neuhausen said.

Neuhausen also testified that he deleted Enron-related e-mails at the height of Enron's problems in October, but said he was simply cleaning up his files, not hiding information from investigators.

"It didn't dawn on me that anybody would have an interest in them," he said.

biz.yahoo.com