Big 4 Land on Vault Consulting Firm Rankings by Practice Area

For those of you that love all-things-lists, Vault unleashed a few more rankings yesterday for the consulting folks, breaking it down to practice area. We’ll dispel with the pleasantries and get right to where the Big 4 (and their spin-offs) crash-landed on various lists.


Economic
9. Deloitte

Energy
4. Accenture
6. Deloitte

Financial
2. Ernst & Young
3. Deloitte
4. PwC
6. KPMG
10. Accenture

Human Resources
5. Deloitte
10. Accenture

Operations
3. Accenture
4. Deloitte
10. KPMG and PwC (tie)

Pharmaceutical and Health Care
6. Deloitte

Business Advisory
5. Deloitte
6. Accenture
7. PwC
8. Ernst & Young

Oh, and because you’re wondering, McKinsey & Co. finished #1 in all but three of the practice areas. Carry on.

Earlier:
Big 4 Have Big Presence on Vault’s Prestige List, Less So in Top 50

Will Defecting from E&Y to PwC Change Anything?

Today in makeshift accounting therapy, a fed up E&Y vet is contemplating a move to arch-rival PwC and wants to know if this is a suicide move.

Have a question about your career? Need advice on how to explain why your Fantasy Football league is always up on your laptop? Looking for advice on how to best flirt with recruits without being creepy? Send us an email with your query to advice@goingconcern.com and will give you the best free advice you’ll ever get.

As for our potential E&Y Benedict Arnold:

I’m at EY, looking at a position one-level above where I am at PWC. Is this a frying-pan/fire situation?

EY as “more people friendly” is a concern, because EY is horrifically NOT people friendly.

I’ve know the guy I would be working for at PWC very well and I think I’m maxed out at EY.


Okay, so not a lot to go on here but we’ll take a stab at this. First off, if you’re maxed out at E&Y then looking for a new gig is the right move. The timing isn’t bad (assuming you’re not in the tax practice) and it sounds like you’ve got a decent lead at PwC. That said…

What makes you think PwC will be better than E&Y? Has the guy that you would be working for told you explicitly that he’s having the time of his life over there? That, besides the PwC Experience, you’ll be getting 40-50 hour weeks, happy hours devoid of assaults and access to professional oral sex providers on a regular basis?

More questions to consider: Does “the guy” stand to get a referral bonus for poaching you? Can you see yourself working for him? This could turn out to one hell of an epic mistake if he gets a few thousand bucks and you end up working for a whip-wielding taskmaster.

Now that we’ve planted the skepticism seed, if “a position one level above” is a legit promotion (title and salary bump), that might be worth considering. If it’s more of a lateral move, then we’d suggest passing unless there were perks like we described above.

Other important things to consider: 1) You will be torching many bridges at E&Y. Are you okay with that? 2) Is your potential new job really what you want to do. We’re making the assumption that you like your work but you’re over life at E&Y. If you don’t like your work then you’ve got a whole other problem. 3) Do you really, really, really, really want to stay in Big 4? Have you seriously asked yourself that question?

Ultimately, the opportunity may be a great one but you’re still taking a big risk assuming your life will be infinitely better working at PwC over E&Y. Proceed with caution.

Are Big 4 Audits in Russia Worthless?

Maybe not in so many words but this whole PricewaterhouseCoopers/Yukos situation has got some people wondering. The FT and the Wall St. Journal both published articles yesterday about the Mikhail Khodorkovsky and Platon Lebedev trial that is close (?) to wrapping up after 18 months. The two men are accused of embezzling mega bucks from Yukos, the Russian oil company.

Khodorkovsky and Lebedev’s lawyers are now claiming that PwC “acted improperly” by withdrawing ten years worth of audits under pressure from the Kremlin. Pressure, the lawyers say, in the form of “a prriminal investigations and a slew of court cases threatened to undermine its ability to operate in the fast-growing Russian market.” Basically, they threatened to throw PwC out of Russia. And it’s pretty difficult to grow your BRIC business without the “R” so PwC pulled the audits.

The firm claims that they up and changed their minds after the prosecutors showed them some evidence that led them to believe that they had been lied to by Yukos management.


Douglas Miller was the lead partner on Yukos – and who is also reportedly under investigation by the California Board of Accountancy – claims that the accusations are is more or less bullshit and that he stands by his decision to pull the audits.

However, Miller also said in his interrogation by prosecutors that “I believe these issues are being examined not so much by the
company’s Russian office managers, but by executives at PriceWaterhouseCoopers’ global, world level.” The Journal reported, “a PWC official said the decision to withdraw the audit opinions was made by Mr. Miller and others in PWC’s Russia office.” Miller is obviously speculating about what the BSDs at PwC Global were discussing over their muffins but obviously this is a problem.

As is pointed out in the FT, this doesn’t really bode well for audit firms – hell for anyone – trying to do business in Russia:

Regardless of where the truth lies, what is emerging is a situation where global audit firms operating in Russia may all be vulnerable to the double jeopardy of auditing the books of notoriously opaque companies, while being regulated by a government able to launch arbitrary attacks. This lose-lose situation could call into question the value of audits that have been hotly sought as a western seal of approval ever since Russian companies began to access international financial markets.

[…]

[I]t underlines how all who operate in Russian finance – from global audit firms to oligarchs to pension fund investors – may still be vulnerable as the legacy of the chaotic era of Boris Yeltsin and the ensuing Putin clampdown lingers on.

In other words, audits seem to have even less value in Russia than they do in the United States. And here in the U.S. more or less everyone agrees that, at best, auditors are of limited usefulness and at worst, they should be stacked alongside the Charmin™.

But as we said before, PwC (or any other firm that wants to take advantage of Russia’s expanding economy) has billions of reasons to buckle to any pressure put on them by the Russkis. And nobody blames them – not even people close to the Khodorkovsky and Lebedev defense team quoted in the FT saying, “We don’t hold anything against them: they had a gun to their heads.”

Wall Street Journal and Financial Times Expose Serious Allegations of PwC Wrongdoing in Auditor’s Reversal on Yukos [Khodorkovsky & Lebedev Communications Center]
Oil Tycoon Says PWC Caved to Pressure [WSJ]
Russia: Chain retraction [FT]
More on PwC and Yukos:
Never Say Nyet – PwC and Moscow Update [Re: The Auditors]

A Whole Mess of People Aren’t Impressed with PwC’s Offer to Buy Diamond M&T’s Stock

PwC isn’t necessarily to blame, mind you, at least not yet. As it stands, Faruqi & Faruqi are investigating Diamond’s Board of Directors for accepting the $12.50 offer that PwC made last month.

F&F cites “at least one financial analyst values Diamond’ common stock at $14.00 per share,” hence, gypping investors. This is just the latest in a long line of investigations that were announced since the deal was announced. HOWEVER!


As far as we can tell only one actual lawsuit has been filed, in Delaware and it also notes that the deal was structured “that bars other bidders from making an offer” and includes a $9 million termination fee.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities firm headquartered in New York City, is investigating the Board of Directors of Diamond Management & Technology Consultants, Inc. (?Diamond? or the ?Company?) (NasdaqGS: DTPI) for potential breaches of fiduciary duties in connection with their conduct related to the sale of the Company to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (?PricewaterhouseCoopers?). The proposed transaction offers Diamond shareholders to only receive $12.50 in cash for each share they own. According to Thomson/First Call, at least one financial analyst values Diamond’ common stock at $14.00 per share.

Whether the Diamond’ Board of Directors breached their fiduciary duties to Diamond’ stockholders by failing to conduct an adequate and fair sales process to sell the Company prior to agreeing to this proposed transaction, whether the proposed transaction undervalues Diamond shares and by how much this proposed transaction undervalues the Company to the detriment of Diamond shareholders are the key focus of this investigation.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP is a national law firm which represents investors and individuals in class action litigation. The firm is focused on providing exemplary legal services in complex litigation in the areas of securities, shareholder, antitrust and consumer litigation, through all phases of litigation. The firm has an experienced trial team which has achieved significant victories on behalf of the firm’s clients.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Announces Investigation Related to the Acquisition of Diamond Management & Technology Consultants, Inc [Business Wire]
PWC, Diamond Management Sued Over $378 Million Buyout [Bloomberg BusinessWeek]

Why Did Dave & Buster’s Fire Ernst & Young?

Earlier in the month, adult playground company Dave & Buster’s filed an S-4 to register $200 million in senior notes. Everything seemed to be in order and the month of August just moseyed along as it does.

Until the 24th, when GOD KNOWS what happened and D&B’s audit committee up and fired E&Y. They then filed the amended S-4, letting the whole world know about it:

CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON
ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

On August 25, 2010, Ernst & Young, LLP (the “Former Auditors”) was dismissed as the Company’s independent auditors. The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company approved their dismissal on August 24, 2010.

The Former Auditors’ audit report on the Company’s consolidated financial statements for each of the past two fiscal years did not contain an adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion, and was not qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accounting principles.

During the Company’s most recent two fiscal years and through the subsequent interim period on or prior to August 25, 2010, (a) there were no disagreements between the Company and the Former Auditors on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedure, which disagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of the Former Auditors, would have caused the Former Auditors to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreement in connection with its report; and (b) no reportable events as set forth in Item 304(a)(1)(v)(A) through (D) of Regulation S-K have occurred.

Naturally, this invites rampant speculation as to the why, why and the why? It’s not the most high profile client on Earth but as Adrienne pointed out, Ernst & Young is now on a list with Vice-President Joe Biden and no one needs that.

Dave & Buster’s, Inc. Announces Dismissal of Independent Auditor [Business Newswire via JDA]

(UPDATE) Which One of You Left Your Benz Parked In Front of KPMG HQ?

Because you’ve caused a ruckus.


It’s an especially nice touch that the Shred-it truck is outside. Coincidence?

UPDATE: Said Benz has been towed and NYPD has re-opened Park Ave. Apparently it “appeared to be weighed down in an unusual way,” which leads to believe that the Shred-it truck was completely packed and some partner had pull around front to help get some sensitive docs out of 345 Park.

Ernst & Young Loses a Special Houseguest

Or a loudmouth neighbor depending on your political preference. Either way you look at it, 5 Times Square won’t be the same.

Giuliani Partners, the consulting business formed by the former mayor shortly after he left City Hall, has vacated the flagship office it had on a floor of the Ernst & Young offices in Times Square for nine years, consolidating space with the ex-candidate’s law practice, sources confirm.

Giuliani Partners closes Times Square office [Maggie Haberman/Politico]

My GPA Sucks! Is My Accounting Career Over?

Today in “My life is falling apart and I’m an accountant” we have another poor sap that is plagued by a low GPA. Are they doomed for mediocrity? We’ll get to that, right after…

Are you wondering what your next career move is? Are you an auditor trying to put the moves on someone in tax and have no idea what to say? Wondering whether you should put the kibosh on your vegan lifestyle at your next partner lunch/dinner since you think it’ll make you look like a complete weirdo? Email us your inquiry to advice@goingconcern.com and we’ll put you at ease.

Back to our slacker du jour:

My undergrad GPA was a 2.99 cumulative and that’s been a killer in my application and job process. I’m currently with a very small CPA firm. Is there a point on continuing even if I pass my CPA? It seems no one really cares about any accounting experience for public unless it’s big 4 or mid-tier. My 2.99 has been a killer since the majority of firms are looking for a 3.00+. I’m looking at options at grad school, but I’m not sure if it would help if I wanted to go Big 4 still. I also believe I should pass my CPA first if I’m looking to go for a one year MBT or MACC (Masters of Accounting) program, but honestly I don’t know that I would get in considering my GPA unless I got stellar GMAT scores.


First of all, we’re not quite sure why you’re looking for a job when you already have a job. Do you intensely dislike this “very small CPA firm”? Our guess is yes since you’re writing us but take a serious look at your current situation and consider the experience that you are getting at your current firm. It may not be exactly what you’re looking for but the work experience you obtain will be valuable.

That being said, you then moving on to “Is there a point on continuing even if I pass my CPA?” Do we need to call the suicide hotline for you? Get your CPA. That will go a long ways to bolstering your career prospects, 2.99 GPA or not.

We definitely take exception with your “no one really cares about any accounting experience for public unless it’s big 4 or mid-tier.” There are plenty of Big 4 whores around these parts that might say that but don’t forget that small firms differ from the Big 4/second tier in some positive ways, so don’t dismiss the opportunity you have right now.

As far as Grad School goes, wait until you’ve got some work experience and CPA. Do you really want to rush right back to school? If you get some good work experience and you have some decent professional accomplishments, the graduate schools will take that into account. Yes, killing your GMAT will help your chances but you’re not doomed, friend; you’ve just got an uphill climb.

New Jersey Appeals Court Deals ‘Devastating Loss for KPMG’ Over Malpractice in Cast Art Merger

We briefly mentioned this case on Monday but since everyone seems to have checked out mid-week, we’re sure you won’t mind.

Way back in the dawn of the Clinton Administration, some financial reporting chicanery went down at Papel Giftware, Inc. so that Cast Art Industries of Corona, California would run into the company’s outstretched arms. More specifically, chicanery that consisted of ” ‘systemic, organized, improper accounting practices at Papel.’ ” Cast Art failed in 2003 which made everyone sad/mad.

KPMG was on watch as this all went down and a jury found the firm negligent in 2008 under the Accountant Liability Act.

The bitch of it is, the KPMG partner was thisclose to pulling out of the engagement, “[A] July 2000 letter by KPMG partner John Quinn that said Papel Chief Financial Officer Rick Wasserman gave an ‘unfair and misleading characterization of the accounting and auditing issues.’ Quinn said he was ‘very much inclined’ to recommend ending work with Papel after that year’s audit, according to the opinion.”

That ‘very much inclined’ didn’t result in “we withdraw from the engagement.”


However, since the KPMG is a professional services firm with the necessary means and a reputation to protect (according to some, anyway) they appealed the ruling and on August 26th a three-judge panel of the New Jersey Appellate Division still said, “yep, it’s accounting malpractice.”

This was a thrilling result for plaintiffs who are looking to squeeze more damages out of the firm:

“This is a huge win and no matter how KPMG wants to spin it, it’s a devastating loss for KPMG,” plaintiffs’ attorney Michael Avenatti said in an interview. “KPMG’s appeal of this case may go down as Exhibit A of ‘Be careful of what you wish for.’ Now, we have the ability to go collect potentially $10 million to $20 million more in additional damages.”

Right. The spin.

A KPMG spokesman, Daniel Ginsburg, said the firm is “considering our available options” after the ruling.

“We are pleased that the court affirmed dismissal of the plaintiff’s fraud claim against us, and also reversed the jury’s verdict by ordering a new trial on the issue of damages,” Ginsburg said in an e-mail. “We are disappointed, however, with the court’s ruling on legal issues regarding the plaintiff’s negligence claim.”

Actually, not much spin there. Just one of those kiss your sister/brother moments.

KPMG Committed Malpractice Tied to Cast Art Merger, Appeals Court Rules [Bloomberg]