Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: paul_philp who wrote (53546)	1/29/2003 1:50:34 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Paul, SEC just announced that they are charging KPMG with fraud Charging the company (as they did with Arthur Andersen) or charging particular employees? Do you have a link? --Mike Buckley

To: paul_philp who wrote (53546)	1/29/2003 4:54:04 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

I've been thinking about Paul's observation that KPMG will likely go the way of Arthur Andersen and I'd love to hear from the legal and accounting gurus about that. If I remember correctly, Arthur Andersen's suit was criminal. And if I understand the SEC correctly, their suit against KPMG by definition is civil. It seems to me that one reason Andersen folded is because having been convicted of a crime of that proportion, the SEC regulations were such that they were no longer permitted to audit publicly held companies. If KPMG loses a similar civil suit, does the same restriction apply? If not, the Andersen and KPMG situations are not exactly analagous. But what the heck do I know? That's why I'm asking for help with this. --Mike Buckley