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 : Iomega Thread without Iomega -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: maaad who wrote (9154)4/16/1999 1:05:00 AM
From: David S.  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 10072
 
Maaaaaaad, I don't get it. What are you mad about? And Reg S, it this a puzzle thread? How about a little info to go with your insight? Do you expect the average person to know what Reg S. refers to? Don't dangle candy, por favor.

Regards, David S.
INTC DELL HD WCOM LU IOM ANSC UNPH SDLI PGTV



To: maaad who wrote (9154)4/16/1999 2:07:00 AM
From: Naggrachi  Respond to of 10072
 
Maad

Arthur Anderson has issued an unqualified (clean) opnion on the overall fairness of the financial statements. The "except for" indicates that this is a dual dated report. This means that the auditors performed additional audit procedures on a subseqent event that took place after 12/31/98. Therefore, rather than assuming responsiblity for everything that took place untill Jan 28, they dual dated the report. The only thing the auditors are responsible for after 12/31/98 is note 6, everything else they're only taking responsiblity upto 12/31.

There's 2 kinds of subsequent events, one that took place before balance sheet date (type I:requires statement adjustment,) and one took place after balance sheet date (type II: note disclosure.)

Nonetheless, the auditors rendered an unqualified (clean) opinion : Financial statments are fairly presented, clear of material misstatements, and are in conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.

Zead
David S., you're on a tear dude!! You sound like you're due for a vacation, no?