Category: Big 4

If it happens at a Big 4 accounting firm, we’re talking about it here.

(UPDATE) Grant Thornton Employees Prohibited From Accessing WikiLeaks, Even in Their Spare Time

~ Update includes email sent to all KPMG employees and further details on communication within PwC.

Confirming some chatter in last Friday’s post on the banishment of WikiLeaks at Deloitte, notification at Grant Thornton was sent out late on Friday.

So not even after a long, hard day doing Stephen Chipman’slowed to read catty messages between diplomats or war logs on your personal computer. What’s next? Firmwide emails instructing lonely accountants not to visit Fleshbot (NSFW)?

Personal time aside, judging by the conversation on the Deloitte post, it appears that KPMG has also communicated ‘no peeky at wiki’ but we haven’t seen the official communiqué. And since all the major firms have contracts with the Feds, we decided to call around to see find out the scoop. So far, a source at PwC did inform us that the WikiLeaks website is accessible but no official policy on accessing the site has been communicated to the firm at large.

[UPDATE: We have learned that PwC’s Washington Federal Practice did receive communication prohibiting access, downloading, etc. etc. to WikiLeaks, however, as we’ve updated above, a firm-wide communication was not sent.]

Messages with E&Y and KPMG were not immediately returned. If there has been official lines have been drawn in the cyber-sand, kindly email us with any communication.

Earlier:
What if Accounting Firms Had Their Own Version of WikiLeaks?

UPDATE: The message from KPMG, courtesy of the sagacious Judge Sven Erik Holmes:

Date:December 10, 2010
To:All KPMG Personnel
From: Sven Erik Holmes, Vice Chair, Legal and Compliance
Subject:Government Notice Regarding Web site Access

PLEASE DO NOT DELETE THIS E-MAIL WITHOUT READING

In response to the recent well-publicized release of government documents on the WikiLeaks Web site, the federal government has begun notifying its contractors regarding restrictions on accessing classified documents included in that release. As a provider of services to several federal agencies, KPMG is a federal government contractor and has begun receiving such notices from its federal agency clients. This e-mail contains important instructions regarding access to such classified information, which are applicable to all firm personnel.

KPMG personnel should not access information marked or labeled as classified (including material publicly available on the WikiLeaks Web site or other Web sites) using government or KPMG computers or other devices that access the Web (such as PDAs or Smartphones) as doing so risks placing material that is still classified on non-classified systems. This restriction does not limit employee or contractor access to nonclassified, publicly available news reports (and other nonclassified material) that in turn reference classified material, as opposed to the underlying classified material itself (whether or not in the public domain).

The government’s notices remind us that federal contractors are obligated to protect classified information pursuant to all applicable federal laws, and to use government information systems, whether classified or unclassified, appropriately. Unauthorized disclosures of classified documents (whether in print, on a blog, or on a Web site) do not alter the documents’ classified status or automatically result in declassification of the documents. To the contrary, classified information, whether or not already posted on public Web sites or disclosed to the media, remains classified, and must be treated as such by federal employees and contractors, until it is declassified by an appropriate U.S. government authority.

If you believe that you may have downloaded classified information to a government or KPMG computer or other device that accesses the Web (such as a PDA or Smartphone), please contact [a KPMG lawyer who will ask you a ton of questions and probably scold you] in OGC at [lawyer’sname]@kpmg.com.

KPMG personnel are also reminded that firm policy requires personnel to maintain the confidentiality of any information that they obtain from a client in connection with a client engagement. It is important that the confidentiality of any such information be maintained.

No WikiLeaks for Deloitte Peeps

Funny how slow TPTB were to react this (message is dated today). Assange isn’t even haunting our dreams any more. Nevertheless, NO. PEEKY. And if you’ve already taken a look, you need to report yourself, ASAP.

ALERT: New federal government guidance on accessing or downloading classified information

Published: 10-Dec-10

The following is a message from [redacted], chief quality officer.

In the wake of the recent WikiLeaks disclosures of U.S. classified information, the U.S. Office of Management & Budget (OMB) and the Department of Defense (DoD) published guidance that prohibits federal government employees and federal contractor personnel from accessing the WikiLeaks website to view or download classified information. As federal contractors, the Deloitte U.S. Firms and their professionals are obligated to protect the integrity of classified information.

This notice is designed to facilitate compliance with the OMB and DoD guidance. All personnel should note the following:

Despite the unauthorized public disclosure by WikiLeaks, the information disclosed retains its classified status. The decision to remove classified status must be rendered by a government classification authority. In short, the information remains classified in spite of any public disclosure.

The access or download of classified information could be determined to be a security violation that requires immediate remediation, including removal of such information from our systems. A security violation could pose risks to the operations of Deloitte’s Federal practice and could negatively affect our client service capabilities.

You should not attempt to access the classified information on the WikiLeaks website or any related website. If you previously visited the WikiLeaks site or any related website to view or download classified information, you should immediately report a “Federal DOS Incident” via 1 800 Deloitte (option 5).

If you possess a security clearance, keep in mind that you are personally obligated to uphold the requirements for appropriate handling and dissemination of classified information, as outlined in your respective Classified Information Non-Disclosure Statement.

If you have any questions, please send them by e-mail to [redacted: presumably someone inside Deloitte who is familiar with these sorts of things].

[redacted]
Chief Quality Officer
Deloitte LLP

What if Accounting Firms Had Their Own Version of WikiLeaks?

We were a little surprised to learn that both KPMG and PwC had brief mentions in the WikiLeaks cables, however it is far less surprising that they were quite humdrum and didn’t bring anything new to light.


From the Swiss site, inAte>Wikileaks published cable referenced 09MOSCOW3144, created December 30, 2009, classified as confidential and originating from U.S. Embassy in Moscow, on alleged pressure that the Russian government has exerted on PwC to disavow its “clean opinion” audits in the Yukos Oil, aided by the reported raids on PwC office in Russia and threats to recall Russian audit license of PwC, closing this market for the Firm.

[…]

Wikileaks also published (09LONDON2598, for official use only, originating from U.S. Embassy in London, created November 11, 2009) KPMG’s sceptical reaction on the Queen’s opening speech in Parliament on November 18, 2009, where Her Majesty sets out one of the priorities for new legislative session – to develop a new Financial Services Bill, requiring form systemically important banks to establish plans for recovery and resolution, that ensure banks’ financial continuity, later called by journalists “living wills”.

Like we said – meh.

Now, what happens within a Big 4 or other large accounting firm is rarely a matter of national security (Francine may disagree with us) but there’s little doubt that firm CEOs, partners and other notables have said things that would range from the slightly embarrassing to the absolutely mortifying. Consequently, reactions to those statements would also range widely from mere chuckles to ”OH NO YOU DI’INT!” Because our imagination has a tendency to run wild, we’ll dispel a few of our own scenarios that we imagine being in the Big 4/mid-tier version of WikiLeaks:

• Prior to the unveiling, Bob Moritz emails Tim Ryan, “Between you and me, the new logo looks like a half-finished Lego™ project.”

• Barry Salzberg and Jim Quigley are known inside some Deloitte circles as “Team Propecia.”

• After the OT loss to Michigan State, John Veihmeyer is so upset that he sends an email to Henry Keizer stating, “THAT’S IT! NO RAISES THIS YEAR.” Keizer responds to JV, reminding him that ‘if that punk Jimmy Clausen had stuck around’ they wouldn’t be in this situation and he shouldn’t take it out on the firm’s employees.

• Emails between two Ernst & Young partners in Jericho, reveal that they’ve been hoarding the extra bathroom keys because they can’t stand asking the receptionist.

• Various Deloitte partners are quaking because it is common knowledge that Arnie and Annabel McClellan have an elaborate spreadsheet detailing their various fetishes.

• In numerous exchanges Stephen Chipman begs Ed Nusbaum to let him ‘drop this ridiculous accent’ just like Ross did on Friends.

• High-level executives at McGladrey considered putting ecstasy in the punch so people would be happier but ultimately decided against it (Phoenix/Vegas went their own way) because it would have resulted in too many accountants dancing for no apparent reason.

• Jack Weisbaum = The Most Interesting Man in the World. (Just like several actual WikiLeaks, everyone knew this to be true but it was not discussed openly.)

Perhaps you have your own theories or documentation regarding other exchanges. Please share with the group at this time or email us.

Deloitte’s Sharon Allen Will Be Having a ‘Big Party’ to Celebrate Her Retirement

Sharon Allen has spent 38 years at Deloitte. Doing the math on that, it probably feels more like a millennia. Accordingly, Ms. Allen has decided to hang up her green dot and chillax in Pasadena (Q&A with Accounting Today and we’ve picked out some of the highlights, including yes, a par-tay.


For starters, Sharon is a closer!

It’s a good time to leave when you’re on a high. I feel very confident in future leadership and the direction of our organization, and I think it’s just absolutely the right time to turn the reins over to others and proudly watch them continue to lead the firm in a good direction.

There will be a retirement rager, natch.

I’m going to have a big party. Yes.

Retirement will involve quality time with the hubby (but not so much that he goes nuts) and leading the Village People.

First of all I plan to spend a lot more time with my husband, family and friends, but of course there will probably be a limit on how much togetherness he can stand.[…] I have already committed to becoming the chairman of the board of the national YMCA board, which is an organization I’ve been involved with for over 25 years. I’m sure I will find ways to keep productively busy.

In case you weren’t aware, she doesn’t have a Y chromosome.

I am proud of many firsts that are in front of the titles I have carried. I was fortunate to be the first woman to become an office managing partner, the first woman to become a regional managing partner, the first woman to be elected to the board at Deloitte, and that’s been some years ago now. But I have to say my proudest accomplishment, I believe, was to have been elected as the first independent chairman of Deloitte’s board of directors. We separated our chairman and CEO role and created a full-time independent executive chairman of the board. It is an elected position by our partners, and I was very proud to be elected to that role. I always say, “Oh, by the way, I’m a woman.” It’s a very important distinction for me.

She’s more like you than you think – she got passed up for a manager promotion because her supervisor was clueless!

[P]erhaps one of the most important challenges that I had as I was coming up through my career also turned out to be one of my best lessons. That was when I was about four years into the firm and I expected an early promotion to manager, and I was passed over for that promotion. Interestingly, as I walked into my supervisor’s office and clicked off all the reasons why I thought I should have had the promotion and had earned it, he kind of sat back in his chair and looked at me and said, “I didn’t even know you did all those things.”

What about this boys club mentality?

I do think that there still is an underrepresentation of women in senior leadership in business generally and certainly in the board room of corporate organizations today. I do believe that organizations need to examine how they are recruiting, how they assure women are proportionally given the best assignments.

You know, back in the day, we basically had to come to work in drag.

There is a very big difference between today’s women and women of my era when I started in the profession because, in those days, honestly, you almost had to pretend there were no differences. I came up in the business world of wearing a suit and a little bow tie and trying to dress like the men and, of course, fortunately, men and women both can acknowledge the difference and benefit from that.

Leave Sharon your well wishes (or food and entertainment requests) below and if you get invited to this party, email us the pictures.

Comp Watch ’10: KPMG Town Hall Results in More Questions Than Answers

After hearing that KPMG was following suit with a mid-year compensation surprise, we’ve now been tipped that any hope you had of seeing a little extra moolah has been crushed:

Last night was KPMG’s New York Office (NYO) townhall meeting. During this meeting, close to 2,000 NYO employees of the firm gathered in a hotel in Time Square to listen to a series of presentations from the CEO, COO and Office Managing Partner (OMP). During this four hour presentation, they covered an array of topics, including: compensation and benefits, technology, etc.

Depsite hearing that the firm will be allowing staff (associates and senior associates) have KPMG email access on their iPhone, Android or BlackBerry phones, no further details were provided about what they will be paying for, if anything.

They also announced that they were keeping up with the average regarding compensation, but made it a point to mention that with every average, someone must be below the average, hinting that we were that someone. After finding out that there will be no mid-year bonsues or raises, some left the meeting rather disappointed… at least there was free booze and food (like any other normal KPMG event).

But wait! This sounded a little weird to us since our sources on the original story were solid, so we checked in with another source who told us the message was simply non-committal, “They didn’t really confirm/deny what was going to happen with the mid-year stuff.”

So all this “Yes? No? Maybe so,” probably isn’t so helpful but that’s where things appear to stand.

Back to our original tipster, who is now hearing talk of next fall’s associates receiving a boost in their starting salaries:

Later that evening, however, many of the recent hires (new associates in 2010) were beginning to hear that the 2011 new hires (for next year) were already receiveing salary adjustments (upwards into the $60,000’s), in addition to their already higher starting salaries and sign-on bonuses.

So my question is: Does KPMG plan on compensating the new associates (that started in 2010) that did not receive a sign-on bonus this year, or perhaps have any plans to bring their salary closer towards the industry average?

Starting salaries have been consistently rising over the years and with increased competition among the firms for the best recruits, you can expect that to continue. Whether that results in adjustments for KPMG’s latest class of new associates remains to be seen, since a mid-year surprise is still uncertain. We should say, however, expecting more money after being on the job for 2-3 months is a little presumptuous. We understand the frustration but, seriously? You can barely open Excel at this point.

As you hear more regarding the mid-year compensation (or lack thereof) email us with the scoop.

Update on Censured Ernst & Young Manager

Just a brief follow-up on the manager who received the disciplinary action handed down by the PCAOB on Monday.

We attempted to reach Jacqueline Higgins late yesterday at her office number in Boston, however we discovered that when we were transferred to her extension we simply bounced back to reception, who needless to say, was very confused about that phenomenon. After attempting to page Ms. Higgins, only then did the receptionist learn and then relay to us that Ms. Higgins was no longer with the firm.

We checked with Ernst & Young spokesman Charlie Perkins on this development and he confirmed that Ms. Higgins “will be leaving the firm at the end of the year.”

And lest there still be any confusion due to the carefully worded E&Y statement, the partner and senior manager in question have been dismissed from the firm.

We’ll keep you updated if we hear more from inside at the firm or if further action is taken by the PCAOB.

KPMG Partner Who Missed $1.9 Billion Error Having No Problem Blaming Others

Apparently it’s auditor punishment Monday. Or Tuesday, if you’re Down Under:

A lead KPMG auditor who only learnt about a $1.9 billion [about USD $1.88 billion] error in his audit of Allco Finance Group through a report in BusinessDay was benched for nine months by the corporate regulator yesterday.


To be completely fair, it sounds like it may have been a tricky audit:

Christopher Whittingham, a KPMG partner, led a core team of 20 audit staff that signed an unqualified audit report on the notoriously complex accounts for Allco for the year ended June 30, 2007.

Or was it?

The error detected by BusinessDay involved the 2007 accounts classifying $1.9 billion in liabilities owed by Allco as non-current, telling investors they fell due more than a year later. The liabilities were, in fact, current liabilities, meaning they were due within the year. The amount of current liabilities is a significant issue for shareholders when considering whether a company can meet its debts when they fall due.

Whatever the case may be, Mr Whittingham shouldn’t sweat it too much:

[T]he Australian Securities and Investments Commission released an enforceable undertaking with Mr Whittingham, which included a nine-month suspension, a $10,000 fine and 10 hours of professional education.

Well, at least he’s taking responsibility for his mistake and isn’t pointing his finger at anyone else or making excuses, right?

Mr Whittingham said he had relied on managers for aspects of the audit, the error had no bearing on Allco’s collapse and he had reissued its accounts the day after he became aware of the error.

Oh.

Regulator suspends senior KPMG auditor [Sydney Morning Herald]

Earlier:
(UPDATE) PCAOB Gives Ernst & Young Manager the Charlie Rangel Treatment

(UPDATE 2) PCAOB Gives Ernst & Young Manager the Charlie Rangel Treatment

~ Update includes statement from Ernst & Young.

~Update 2 includes statement from Claudius Modesti, PCAOB Director of Enforcement and Investigations

Today in obscure accounting oversight board enforcement actions, an Ernst & Young Manager in the Boston office was censured by the PCAOB for repeated violations oy to Cooperate with Inspectors, and Auditing Standard No. 3 (“AS3”), Audit Documentation.


The violations occurred when 27 year-old Jacqueline Higgins “(1) added documents to the working papers without indicating the dates that documents were added to the working papers, the names of the persons preparing the additional documentation, and the reason for adding the documentation months after the documentation completion date; and (2) removed a document from the working
papers after the documentation completion date.”

The timeline goes like this: E&Y was given notice by the PCAOB that an inspection of the unknown company’s audit was being performed on March 30, 2010 and the partner, senior manager and manager on the engagement were given notice on March 31, 2010. The inspection fieldwork was set to begin on April 19, 2010.

On April 5th, the three Ernsters began preparing for the inspection and that’s when problems started cropping up which led to more trouble. The order has the details:

First, Respondent reported to the Engagement Partner and the Senior Manager that a “Review Procedures Memorandum” was missing from the external working papers. The Engagement Partner and the Senior Manager directed Respondent to create and print out the missing document, and to backdate the document to November 30, 2009. The Engagement Partner and the Senior Manager directed Respondent to backdate her sign-off on this working paper to November 30, 2009, and to add this document to the external working papers.

17. Second, Respondent reported to the Engagement Partner that the tie-out of the financial statements contained in the external working papers was performed upon a pre-final set of financial statements. The Engagement Partner directed Respondent to remove this document from the external working papers, and to replace it with a newly created document which tied-out the final financial statements, and which the Engagement Partner directed Respondent to backdate to November 2009.

18. Third, Respondent reported to the Engagement Partner that the Average Forward Foreign Currency Contracts Calculation (“A3a Working Paper”) was missing from the external working papers. The Engagement Partner directed Respondent to gather the missing document, backdate it to November 2009, and add it to the external working papers.

19. Finally, Respondent reported to the Senior Manager that three checklists were missing from the external working papers. The Senior Manager directed Respondent to assemble the missing checklists as a single document (“HH6.8 Working Paper”) and to backdate her sign-off on this working paper to November 2009. The Senior Manager directed Respondent to add the document to the external working papers. The Senior Manager and Respondent reported to the Engagement Partner the facts and circumstances related to the creation of the HH6.8 Working Paper, and the Engagement Partner took no steps to cause the document to be properly dated, or to have it removed from the external working papers.

So those are the wonky details. Where this particular story is most interesting (in our opinion) is that Ms Higgins was, prior to this little mishap, on the fast track. According to the order, she graduated in May of 2005 and started with E&Y in September. She was promoted to senior associate in October of 2007 and then promoted to manager in October of 2009. Now, perhaps she was an audit-savant or perhaps not but in just over four years, she was a manager, which is a much quicker pace than usual.

Granted, she was still under the supervision of the senior manager and partner on the engagement but a young manager nevertheless. Now, you might be asking yourself, “what about the senior manager and partner? Are they getting their wrists slapped?” Conventional wisdom tell us, “absofuckinglutely” but the PCAOB isn’t saying. We were told by a spokesperson that the Board cannot comment on any other action related to this case.

As far as what a censure by the PCAOB actually entails, we were told that “It is an official reprimand from the PCAOB.” Some might call it a wrist slap but we’re damn sure you don’t want that in your file when you’re 27 years old. The action also states that Ms. Higgins was removed from the engagement in July 2010 and “at that time Higgins ceased participating in issuer audit engagements.”

Messages with E&Y spokesperson Charles Perkins and A message left with an attorney for Ms. Higgins were not immediately returned.

Ernst & Young has issued the following statement:

Our firm policy clearly prohibits persons from supplementing audit workpapers in circumstances like those described in the disciplinary order. When we determined that firm policy had been violated, we put the three individuals involved on administrative leave and subsequently separated the partner and senior manager. We have advised the PCAOB of these facts and have cooperated fully with the PCAOB throughout its investigation of this matter.

Based on the above, you might conclude that more disciplinary action will be coming from the PCAOB but like we said, they’re not talking.

UPDATE 2 – circa 3:30 pm: Claudius Modesti, PCAOB Director of Enforcement and Investigations, explained the seemingly light punishment in an email to Going Concern:

As to the censure, under the facts and circumstances, the censure is appropriate given Higgins’ relatively junior position on the audit team and her overall role in the conduct. We also considered the fact that she settled the matter without requiring the Board to commence litigation, which would have been nonpublic as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.”

It was then explained to us that the PCAOB has never explained a disciplinary action in this way: “We also considered the fact that she settled the matter without requiring the Board to commence litigation, which would have been nonpublic as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.”

If that’s not quite clear, consider this: It is significant because, had Ms Higgins acted in the alternative (i.e. not settled), litigation would have been necessary and no one outside of the PCAOB, Higgins, her lawyers and E&Y would have known about the proceedings. Granted, it’s fairly common for lighter disciplinary action to result from a settlement but it also makes sense from a PR perspective (not to mention, transparency and investor protection) if the PCAOB can actually announce that they are taking action against people who break the rules. Part of the challenge the Board has faced is convincing anyone that they have teeth.

It will be interesting now to see if the senior manager and partner follow the same track as Ms. Higgins and how the PCAOB will respond to their cooperation (or lack thereof).

Jacqueline a Higgins CPA[1]

Compensation Watch ’10: KPMG Discussing a Mid-Year Bonus (or Something)

After moves by Deloitte, PwC, McGladrey and now Grant Thornton, we have now heard that KPMG is discussing a mid-year surprise.

The only thing is, there aren’t a lot of details at this point. The firm’s first quarter is not over until the end of this month, so the pool likely hasn’t been determined and it isn’t known whether the mid-year comp will be paid as a bonus or as a merit increase. Our source on the matter speculates that it will be a bonus rather than a raise but it is fairly certain that it will be structured in a way that will incentivize employees to stay with the firm. There has been steady stream of people leaving (which is not atypical this time of year) and there are hopes that this show of love will stem the tide.

So while it appears that the House of Klynveld has heard your grumbling about anteing up, time (and the amount of money) will ultimately determine if this will satisfy the troops.

If you’re familiar with the talks or you have more details, email us the details and discuss your thoughts below.

UPDATE – circa 2:10 pm: Some thoughts on a non-bonus approach:

Pure (educated) conjecture on my part, but I would assume that the mid-year “surprise” would be a raise, as the firm is apprehensive at this point about giving bonuses, because people could just take them and leave. Harkening back to our SOX-404 years (2005), we gave multiple raises, bonuses and awards throughout the busy season (i.e., if you worked 60+ hours in a week, immediate $200 award) with a bonus at the end of the tunnel. I seriously doubt any early 2011 compensation would be front-loaded.

And then, in case you weren’t already aware, there’s this:

In other news, [the Dallas] office has been reaching out and giving offers to people they have previously laid off and are seeking out experienced hires. Not sure if it’s firm-wide, but an interesting sign of desperation nonetheless.

Insider Trading Charges Throw a Wrench into Former Deloitte Employee’s Plans for Sexy Mobile App

[caption id="attachment_22306" align="alignright" width="260" caption="Drew Altizer Photography via The Bay Citizen"][/caption]

Having a nice Friday evening, Going Concern faithful? Wonderful. Ordinarily, we would leave you to your weekend activities but something came to our attention that simply couldn’t wait.

Earlier in the week, we told you ��������������������, the former Deloittians who were charged with insider trading by the SEC. Arnold and Annabel were giving tips to Annabel’s sister, Miranda Sanders, and her husband, James, who traded on the information. The SEC alleges that the scam amounted to approximately $23 million in gains for everyone involved.

For all intents and purposes, Arnold McClellan probably was your run-of-the-mill tax partner at Deloitte until he opted to use his insider knowledge to make some money for himself and his in-laws. Likewise, you might expect that Annabel was just a humdrum Deloitte employee who landed a partner (he’s 13 years her senior) who got involved in a insider trading scam. But someone sent us a link to a report in the Bay Citizen that informs us that she had a very interesting venture in the works.

You see, Annabel left the firm (exactly when, is unclear) after working in the London, San Jose and San Francisco offices and presumably was ready to be a stay-at-home mom. When that became monotonous, she and a friend figured they would take their interest in knockin’ boots to launch a mobile app called “My Nookie.”


The website for the app has been taken down but the Bay Citizen was able to get a lot of the details:

The “about” tab for McClellan’s website details a vision for a new kind of social networking site:

My Nookie

Friends love to talk about sex and My Nookie is the app your sex life and social life can’t be without. Journal and rate your partners and sexual encounters. Share sexperiences with your closest friends, take sexting to the next level and relive your rendezvous with those five star partners.

Fun and tasteful with activity illustrations, My Nookie is fully loaded with features to flirt, play, tease and share. Feeling adventurous? Shake your phone and dare to try something new. Keep it handy on your iPhone because you never know …..

Features:

• Detailed diary of your sexual activities with date, partner, location, ratings and notes

• Partner contacts with profile, including photo, rating, activities performed, notes and tally

• Sex activity illustrations and descriptions, with the option to add your own

• ‘Shake It’ feature which suggests an activity to try

• Personal profile with ‘nookie’ summary

• Share all or some of your entries, partners, and profile

• Send a sexy invite to a partner or potential partner with alluring pictures

• Email, text or call your partners right from the app

What happens in My Nookie stays in My Nookie with optional pass code lock and discreet mode.

The Bay Citizen reports that My Nookie isn’t available in Apple’s app store (frankly, we’ll be surprised if passes Steve Jobs’s sniff test) but they have some screen shots (examples are on the following pages).

Unfortunately, now that Annabel has legal troubles to contend with, the Citizen reports her partner in the My Nookie venture, Milly Hanley, has taken over the project entirely. Arnie’s lawyer stated that he wasn’t involved with this venture while Annabel’s counsel simply stated that My Nookie was unrelated to their involvement and referred the Citizen back to Ms. Hanley who claims she can’t recall how she met Annabel.

The story around the McClellans is even weirder the more we poke around. Andrew Ross quotes a source in the San Francisco Chronicle:

“While they’ve been described as socialites, they’re definitely not at the top of that heap. I think a more apt description is they were attempting to scale the social heights.”

According to a report Wednesday in the online Bay Citizen, “in recent weeks, citing vague legal troubles, the couple had told friends that they were considering moving their family, which includes two school-aged sons, to South Africa.”

Perusing around a little bit more, Annabel’s Facebook page seems pretty locked up (definitely not accepting new friends) and we found the blog “My Nookie” which has the same feel as the mobile app and was started by “three friends in our 30s and 40s,” the third woman possibly being Jeanette Harris, who, the Citizen article states, hosted a benefit last year with the other two women.

From the blog’s “About Us” page:

We’re three friends in our 30s and 40s who realized that somewhere between meeting our husbands and getting married, we clammed up when it came to talking about our sex lives. MyNookie.com is where we can open up about everything we’re thinking about when it comes to sex and sexual health. And it’s where you can turn to for creative solutions and accurate information—because sex is too important to feel like you’re missing out.

Sure sounds like it could be our three amigas, doesn’t it? So with these developments, this story has gotten exponentially more interesting. We invite anyone with knowledge about the situation to email us and we’ll keep you updated as we learn more. Oh, and be sure to leave your thoughts on the app in the comments. Ms Hanley is probably looking for feedback.

Ernst & Young Study: U.S. Is Great for Renewable Investment If You Don’t Count the Red States

China has everyone beat, no shocker there, but if you don’t count Sarah Palin’s real America the red, white & blue is #2!

Ernst and Young counts only perhaps half (or is it three quarters?) of the 300 million people in the US as “US”, by considering only those states that are doing anything about renewable energy, like California…The “US” excludes all the dirty states that lack renewable policy; states like Wyoming, Indiana, North Dakota, Kentucky, Oklahoma and so on.

Ernst & Young: U.S. Blue States Nearly as Attractive as China for World Renewable Investment [Reuters]

One E&Y Office Is Under the Impression That KPMG Is Not Their Competitor

This marks the time of year that your firms ask you to give back to your community in various ways. The most common way that we’re aware of is to contribute to your firm’s respective United Way Campaign. This push usually involves numerous emails and maybe even a little dog and pony show where one partner essentially guilt-trips you into giving to the charity of the firm’s choosing rather than your own.

The Big 4 firms are quite competitive in their fund-raising efforts and a tipster had some thoughts on the tally in the Atlanta office of Ernst & Young (photo after the jump).

[A]pparently EY Atlanta doesn’t believe that KPMG exists (or is considered their competition)

Not to mention that these progress indicators are oddly phallic-looking…


It’s also worth calling attention to E&Y’s abysmal phallic filling performance compared to Deloitte and PwC. Our tipster’s points are duly noted and we’ve concluded that it’s either an obvious show of disrespect by E&Y Peachtown aimed right at KPMG OR the House of Klynveld happens to be blowing everyone out of the water and the Atlanta brass is saving everyone the embarrassment.

Knowing what we know about KPMG employees’ enthusiasm for the United Way Campaign, the latter scenario seems unlikely. Other theories and reactions are welcome at this time.