Tag: Big 4

Let’s Speculate About Why Deloitte and KPMG Aren’t on the America’s Largest Private Companies List

Riddle me this, oh wise Going Concern readers – Forbes’s list du jour is America’s Largest Private Companies and its Top 10 has two familiar names: PwC and Ernst & Young but Deloitte and KPMG are nowhere to be found.

Here’s a rundown of companies, their revenues in billions and # of employees:

1. Cargill – $109.84, 130k
2. Koch – 100.00, 70k
3. Bechtel – $30.8, 49k
4. HCA – 30.05, 190k
5. Mars – 28, 65k
6. Chrysler – 27.90, 41.2k
7. PwC – 26.57, 161k
8. Publix – 24.32, 142k
9. E&Y – 21.26, 141k
10. C&S – 20.4, 16.6k

Just for the sake of not opening a bigger canner of worms we’ll ignore the enormous drop in revenues from #2 to #3.

Both firms have over $20 billion in revenues – Deloitte’s the biggest of the Big 4 for crissakes – so that puts them in the top ten easily, yet they’re completely MIA.

If you look at the methodology, you’ll find that both firms should easily qualify to make the list:

In addition to our $2 billion revenue requirement, the companies on our list have either too few shareholders to be required to file financial statements with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or have shares whose ownership is restricted to some group, such as employees or family members. We exclude foreign companies, companies that don’t pay income tax (like Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority), mutually owned companies (like State Farm Insurance), cooperatives ( like Central Grocers), companies with fewer than 100 employees, and companies that are more than 50% owned by another public, private or foreign company. We also leave out companies whose primary business is auto dealerships or real estate investment and/or management.

If you take a hard line here, “companies that don’t pay income tax” should probably disqualify all the firms but obviously Forbes made at least two exceptions. As for the rest of requirements, nothing really jumps out so it’s anyone’s guess.

Perhaps Deloitte and KPMG just got their applications in late? Maybe they were “meh” on the whole list? Maybe they don’t support the flat tax so Teve Torbes just said “To hell with them.” ? The editors for the piece don’t have emails included in their bios but we’re pretty curious as to how this whole thing came together, so please get in touch.

Theories (DWB is going with “because they both suck”) on the alleged oversight/snub are welcome.

PwC Reject Wants to Know If Making Another Run at the Firm Is a Good Idea

Welcome to the Hump Day edition of Accounting Career Couch (or as Adrienne puts it, “advice from a bunch of asshole accountants”). Today we have a PwC reject who is going back for round two. Does previous rejection mean that P. Dubs has its mind up about how big of a loser you are? Maybe!

Feeling rejected and looking job soon? Unhappy at your current firm who doesn’t provide any training to turn the frown upside down? Need some advice on to get your co-workers to loosen up? Email us at advice@goingconcern.com and we’ll make everyone happy.

Returning to our glutton for punishment:

Dear Going Concern:

I interviewed earlier this year for a full time tax position with PwC. I made it to the final round and was given an office tour, lunch, 3 interviews and all that good stuff. Unfortunately, I did not receive an offer.

It is now the fall on campus recruiting season and again I am applying for a full time tax position with PwC. The lead recruiter already knows me from the recruiting process earlier this year. I’ve managed to speak with him once already at an on campus event and will see him at a career fair again next week. My question is can the fact that I’ve been rejected earlier this year hurt me in my attempt to get another interview and hopefully a full time offer. I plan on asking the recruiter this question next week but I get the feeling he will tell me that it’s okay and it won’t hurt me in anyway. However, being the cynical and skeptical person that I am, I need some perspective.

Dear Cynical and Skeptical,

Dealing with rejection, eh? Lots of that going around today. Unlike the Democrats, you have done nothing wrong. You made it to the very end and you simply didn’t make the cut. That happens. However, you are taking it in stride (not cursing PwC, blamestorming, etc.) although you are carrying the standard neurosis that comes with said rejection.

Your previous rejection by PwC should not dissuade you from your chances at a job with the firm. For whatever reason unbeknownst to you, the firm passed you over. It’s likely that it was a difficult decision on their part and your interest in the firm will be seen as a positive.

We understand that somewhere in your head, you’re thinking that the firm was just toying with you. Stringing you along, only to crush your Big 4 dreams at the last minute. The only scenario we can foresee where this would be a reality is if a recruiter/partner had the hots for you and eventually their belief in your “talents” were overruled. Fortunately, the odds of this being reality are slim.

So make another run at P. Dubs, reiterating your interest in the firm, reminding them why you’ll be a kick-ass associate and what you’ve done in the last few months that will get them hot for you all over again. Taking the “You made a biggest mistake of your life” is probably not the way to go, but a subtle hint at why you are everything they want and more may get them to see the error of their ways.

Will the Solution to the Big 4 “Too Few to Fail” Problem Come Out of China?

Adam Jones at the Financial Times takes a look at the Big 4’s too few to fail problem, noting that the recent green paper from the European Commission is a combination of A) lame ideas:

Its flakier suggestions included getting a regulator or another third party to appoint auditors to ease fears about their independence – a move that would disenfranchise shareholders to an unacceptable extent. A European quality certificate for auditing was also mooted as a way of helping second-tier firms show they could handle the biggest jobs. Such a badge would have limited credibility.


And B) points of discussion that need to be explored further, “[A] call for international talks on a contingency plan for the possible failure of one of the Big Four,” “enforced work-sharing also merits further discussion,” and “Brussels says it may also loosen rules requiring auditors to own the majority of an audit firm.”

All this talking gives us a headache and Jones admits that by allowing all ideas on the table it allows those happy with the status quo to distract from any real solutions:

The surfeit of ideas makes the debate comprehensive. But it also creates easy targets for those who want to preserve an inadequate market structure, detracting from more sensible suggestions made by Michel Barnier, EU internal market commissioner, and his team.

Despite the haters out there, the most interesting solution mentioned by Jones is the possibility of China – albeit a longshot – coming to the rescue:

Some think the danger might be eased by a Chinese accountant teaming up with a second-tier firm to create a new rival to the Big Four. Such an entity would face suspicion in the west, though, and it may be too soon to look to Beijing for answers.

For the market enthusiasts out there, this has to be the best idea you’ve heard even though it comes at the exception of the Chinese.

Think WeiserMazars but on a much, much larger scale. Maybe BDO’s U.S. firm is a target because of their legal troubles. Maybe Stephen Chipman will use his connections in China to parlay into some mega-international merger. We realize it’s hard to use your imagination when you’re staring at spreadsheets all day but ideas are needed people.

Solutions provided by the market will be a far better than something mandated by governments. China’s economy is still growing at a ridiculous clip and some say that’s good for the us here in the States.

Bottom line – we’re happy to entertain the possibility of China getting in the mix because as Jones says, “[W]hile this risk is broadly acknowledged, I have so far seen little evidence of a plan to deal with it.” And as it stands now, the bureaucrats are leading the discussion.

Big 4 Recruit Needs Advice on Table Manners, Office Visits

Today in “I need advice from strange accountants and Going Concern trolls,” a Big 4 recruit needs some insight into the office visit and how to behave when breaking bread with Big 4 professionals.

Need to know what to expect for your first busy season? Looking for pointers on how to subtly attract your rival’s employees? Want ideas that aren’t über-lame for your team’s next happy hour? Email us at advice@goingconcern.com and we’ll put our heads together like the Stooges.

Back to our aspiring Big 4 rube (KIDDING, we know some of you are sensitive):

What should I expect at an office visit for the Big 4? Also, how do I behave at a dinner or lunch?


Simple enough. The Big 4 office visit is standard operating procedure in the recruiting process and we asked our resident Kool-Aid™ mixer, DWB to give his take on these show and tell excursions:

I apologize in advance if my answer comes off as salty; someone must have spit in my Cheerios this morning. But really – what kind of question is this? I’ll remind everyone about my rant the other day about providing Caleb with greater details when submitting questions. So with that, I have some questions for you – are you a college recruit? What practice? What office? Is this a one-off tour or is it part of an official recruiting program?

Because your submitted question was useless, I will make the assumption that you’re going on an official visit. Expect a tour, an interview (I hope – why else would you be going?), and the normal HR run-around of work-life balance, salary growth, etc. I advise you to talk to as many individuals as possible – on the record, off the record, etc. Get business cards, and follow up with questions you might have later. NETWORK your ass off. The people you meet in the “casual” settings have just as much of an influence on whether you receive an offer as your interviewer does.

Well, the bad accountant angle is obviously out, so regarding your behavior at chowtime, some good rules of thumb:

1) No booze. We realize this sucks but you don’t get bonus points for being able to hold your liquor.

2) CHEW WITH YOUR MOUTH CLOSED.

3) Don’t be too chatty or too quiet. Nobody likes someone who talks without breathing throughout the entire meal but you will be noticed if you say nothing.

4) Topics of conversation to avoid: recent campus ragers; office visits that you’ve gone to at other firms; negative news about the firm you’re currently visiting; the hot server’s physical attributes.

These are just a few but in general, if you have to ask yourself, “could this make things awkward?” then avoid the behavior. If that doesn’t clear things up then ask Emily Post.

If we’re way off base here or anything crucial is missing, let us know in the comments.

In-Demand Accountant Wants to Know If He Can Ask His Prospective Big 4 Firm for More Money

In today’s edition of “I’d like advice from a bunch of strange accountants,” an experienced accounting associate is interviewing with the Big 4 and wonders if makes sense to waltz in, slam their fist on the table and demand more money.

Need some advice on your next career move? Want some pointers on how to win that coveted item at your local IRS auction? Having trouble with the law and wonder if you should share it with someone your firm? Email us at advice@goingconcern.com and we’ll get you on the road to sobriety in no time.

Back to our prospective Big 4 associate with dollar signs in their eyes:

I will be going on a job interview with one of the Big 4 firms (currently employed with a large national firm), and they are interviewing for experienced associate/senior associate position. I have experience in an industry their office has a large need for, but not all the candidates to fill it. Even though I am a senior associate at a smaller firm, and may come in as a experienced associate, does it make sense to ask for a pay increase from what I am currently making? I will be relocating to another market, but I would assume the markets are comparable. Just wondering if anyone may have some thoughts on the salary I should be requesting.


Always about the money, isn’t it? Very well, then.

You’re with a large national firm which means you’re near the high end of the accounting salary range already. This doesn’t exactly help your negotiation for a higher salary with a Big 4 firm. To take that a step further, the Big 4 aren’t exactly the negotiating type. The range of salary at the Associate/Senior Associate level isn’t a huge and if you come in at a higher salary than your peers, you’re likely to be on the short-end of merit increases come merit increase time (as this is SOP). Plus, it’s unlikely that your work experience to date will impress the firm you’re interviewing to the extent that they’re A) begging you to join the firm and B) they’ll throw thousands of extra dollars your way (not that it makes that much of a difference).

All right, now that we’ve mercilessly shot you down, you’re ready to hear some good things – if the firm you’re interviewing with really has a need for your experience, it is likely that they are willing to pay you more. If you can demonstrate in your interviews with the partners and managers your knowledge and accomplishments, they will let HR know that want your hot auditing (or whatever) ass ASAP. And that’s the key – what do you offer that the clowns that started with the firm don’t? Run-of-the-mill statements like, “good work ethic, do what it takes” blah blah blah won’t do anything for you. Have you already reviewed other’s work, supervised staff, etc, etc? Differentiate yourself in substantive ways. Make that firm want you for what you bring to the table.

Bottom line: you probably won’t get to “request” your salary, you’ll simply be made an offer. But if you can present your coveted experience in a way that will make your interviewers crave you like Kardashians crave cameras in their faces, coupled with a jump to the higher pay scale of the Big 4, you’re likely to be happy with the salary they offer you.

Accounting News Roundup: Political Nonprofits Pushing the Limits with Ads; Familiar “Outrage” Over Big 4 Audit Industry Dominance; Obama Attacks GOP Tax Policy in Weekly Address | 10.18.10

Groups Push Legal Limits in Advertising [NYT]
“The basic rule of thumb for nonprofit groups organized under Section 501(c) of the tax code is that more than 50 percent of their annual activities cannot be political. Although it is a matter of debate how spending on traditional issue ads would be categorized by the Internal Revenue Service, it is indisputable that spending on express advocacy would be classified as political.”

Lords to hear top six firms on audit reform [Accountancy Age]
“A showdown has been planned for the UK’s top six acevidence is heard at a House of Lord’s inquiry into audit reform.

The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee will take evidence from the heads of the Big Four – PwC, Deloitte, KPMG and Ernst & Young – followed by their mid-tier rivals – BDO and Grant Thornton – during its inquiry into audit competition.”

Accounting industry sees ray of light on the horizon [Crain’s]
“Demand for accountants is forcing large CPA firms to bump salaries by as much as 3.8% next year, the steepest jump since 2008. U.S. companies with more than 20 employees plan to increase hiring of full-time accountants and finance personnel this quarter for the first time since early 2009, says Michael Shapow, a senior vice-president at Menlo Park, Calif.-based staffing firm Robert Half International Inc.

During the dot-com era, bachelor’s degrees in accounting fell from 53,000 in the mid-1990s to 35,000 in 2002, according to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants in Washington, D.C. The figure has boom-eranged, rising to 49,000 in 2008, creating a new problem: not enough professors.”

Systemic Risk! Dominance! Momentum! Auditors In Crisis. Again. [Re: The Auditors]
The “outrage” and “risk” over the dominance by the Big 4 in the audit industry is so played.

Obama Attacks Republicans on Tax Policy [TaxProf Blog]


AICPA to SEC: Companies Will Need as Much as Five Years to Ready for IFRS Adoption [JofA]
“In the portion of its letter regarding the impact of IFRS conversion on contractual arrangements, the AICPA voices support for a requirement for companies adopting IFRS to file one year of comparative financial statements rather than two. ‘Our research indicates that companies will need five years preparation time to adopt IFRS if the SEC requires two years of historical comparative financial statements. If only one year of comparative financial statements is required, a four-year transition period would be needed to adopt IFRS.’ The SEC has not said what the requirement would be.”

Big 4 Manager Would Like Staff to Get Some Perspective Re: Raises

Now that compensation season has passed for the major firms and most of the belly aching has died down, we’ll present some thoughts from a friend of GC and a Big 4 senior manager who shared the following with us earlier in the summer.

Hey Caleb,

A few of us were talking today at lunch about compensation and how we like reading how much everyone bitches about what % raise they got and what they feel they should have been entitled too. An A1 thinks they deserve a $10,000 raise, and that would make them happy, c’mon give us a break?

It is easy to understand this is a prime area to feel you have been cheated in, however, we thought it might be interesting for some net dollar coeffect, for those complainers who feel they were cheated with their raise %.


Interesting idea, we thought. Our muse suggested the following assumptions: 1) 40% tax rate – federal and state combined 2) 24 annual paychecks.

Our friend/source continues:

Would be interesting to see and shed a different light on a cash pay basis what the real difference is in pay for those who think they got cheated from a 8% raise and only got 6% or something, does the $35 per paycheck really require a personal vendetta or hours of frustrated Facebook status updates? Probably not.

My guess is that on an after-tax, per paycheck basis, some of these raises are equivalent to cutting out the morning Starbucks run, or latest iTunes download.

So we decided to dust off the Excel skills and crunch a few numbers to see if our Senior Manager friend was onto something.

We took a humdrum salary of $70k and applied the 8%, 6% comparison and tabled it:

Salary $70,000 $70,000
% Raise 8% 6%
$ Raise (Annual) $5,600 $4,200
Taxes withheld 40% 40%
Net Raise $3,360 $2,520
Bi-monthly # of paychecks 24 24
Net $/paycheck $140 $105

BFD you say? You got a 6% raise while some clown who couldn’t audit their way out of a paper bag got 14%? Fine, we’ll take a look at that too:

Salary $70,000 $70,000
% Raise 14% 6%
$ Raise (Annual) $9,800 $4,200
Taxes withheld 40% 40%
Net Raise $5,880 $2,520
Bi-monthly # of paychecks 24 24
Net $/paycheck $245 $105

So let’s say you’re the average shmo with the 6% raise and your friend/sworn enemy is getting the 14%. Are you really spitfire pissed that you’re missing out on $280 a month? We’re not talking life-changing sums here. If you’re consistently average over your career, maybe this will add up but hopefully your better sense will grab ahold and you’ll either A) step up your game B) move on with your life C) eliminate the competition (not condoning violence here, just pointing out that it’s a variable in the equation and maybe that it’s an option).

Rebuttal? Agree? Let it rip.

Accounting News Roundup: PwC Rakes in Fees on Lehman; Grant Thornton: Opening the Audit Market Wouldn’t Hurt Big 4; One in Three IRS Employees Are Eligible for Retirement | 10.15.10

Bernanke Signals Intent to Further Spur Economy [NYT]
“The Federal Reserve chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, indicated on Friday that the central bank was poised to take additional steps to try to fight persistently low inflation and high unemployment.

‘Given the committee’s objectives, there would appear — all else being equal — to be a case for further action,’ he said in a detailed speech at a gathering of top economists [in Boston].

Mr. Bernanke noted that ‘unconventional policies have costs and limitations that must be taken into account in judging whether and how aggressively they should be used.” But he suggested that the Fed was prepared to manage the riske most powerful tool remaining in the Fed’s arsenal of weapons to stimulate the economy: vast new purchases of government debt to lower long-term interest rates.’ “

Lehman Brothers’s U.K. Administrators Billed $420 Million Since Collapse [Bloomberg]
“Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.’s European administrators have billed 262 million pounds ($420 million) for work since the bank sought bankruptcy protection in September 2008.

The administrators have recovered 11.9 billion pounds in cash in the 24 months since the bank’s collapse and more than 350 trading counterparties have settled what they owed according to a report today on the PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP website.

‘We have achieved exceptional progress in the administration, dealing with some 29 billion pounds of securities and cash, having now returned almost 12 billion pounds of this to clients,’ Tony Lomas, the PwC partner on the Lehman administration, said in a statement. ‘Whilst there are still numerous major challenges to address, our actions to date have generated significant realizations for creditors which will be paid to them in due course.’ “

Y U Luv Texts, H8 Calls [WSJ]
“For anyone who doubts that the texting revolution is upon us, consider this: The average 13- to 17-year-old sends and receives 3,339 texts a month—more than 100 per day, according to the Nielsen Co., the media research firm. Adults are catching up. People from ages 45 to 54 sent and received 323 texts a month in the second quarter of 2010, up 75% from a year ago, Nielsen says.”

Big Four can take losing a chunk of the audit market [Accountancy Age]
“Opening up a fifth of the FTSE-250 audit market would only hit the revenues of the Big Four by an average of £6m, according to Grant Thornton.

Welcoming the EC’s green paper on audit reform, which has made a raft of radical measures including mandatory rotation of audits, the firm said opening up the audit market would not hurt the Big Four.”

Mozilo and SEC in Deal Discussions [WSJ]
“Confidential talks begun in recent weeks appear to be moving toward a settlement in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s high-profile civil fraud case against former Countrywide Financial Corp. Chief Executive Angelo Mozilo and two other former executives, people familiar with the matter said.

Late Thursday, a status conference on the case was ordered for Friday, a move that could signal a new development in the suit. If no agreement is reached, a jury trial is scheduled to begin Tuesday in federal court here before Judge John Walter.

It is also possible, people familiar with the matter said, that only one or two of the defendants would reach a settlement before the trial. Attorneys for both sides are preparing for trial in the event it goes forward, said people familiar with the matter.”


33% of IRS’s 106,000 Employees Are Eligible for Retirement [TaxProf Blog]
Do they simply love their jobs that much?

A little perspective on those 18,000 XBRL errors [CPA Success]
“It’s not that bad.”

Michel Barnier: The Big 4 Audit Model Is a Failure

Okay, those weren’t the EU financial services commissioner’s exact words but you get the sincere impression that he’s had it up to his silver coif with how things are going.

“The crisis highlighted failings in the audit sector,” Barnier said today. “These need to be explored and we need to see what improvements can be made. I believe it is important to approach this discussion in a frank and open manner. No subject should be taboo.”

Right! No subject is off limits. So what will be discussed? Well, for starters this Big 4 thing has to stop. The Telegraph reports, “If one of the Big Four – PricewaterHouseCoopers, KPMG, Deloitte and Ernst & Young – were to collapse the Paper suggests it could create systemic risk for the financial markets.”

Secondly, the notion of independence and “putting shareholders” first is a sham. ‘Berg reports:

Restrictions on auditor choice may reduce “distortion within the system” caused by auditing firms acting in the interests of their clients rather than shareholders when compiling reports on a companies’ financial health, the commission said in a report outlining possible measures.

[…]

The commission said it’s also considering rules that would force companies to change their auditing firms after a fixed period of time.

Forcing companies to rotate their auditors would “enhance the independence of auditors” and “operate as a catalyst to introduce more dynamism and capacity into the audit market,” the commission said.

Lastly, can a Frenchman get some choice up in this mofo?

The top four accounting firms have a market share of about 90 percent in the majority of EU member states, according to the commission’s report.

“The market appears to be too concentrated in certain segments and deny clients sufficient choice when deciding on their auditors,” the commission said.

Barnier isn’t asking for a full-blown cafeteria but for crissakes, the choices right now are chicken, chicken, and….chicken. Sure, they might have slightly different recipes (e.g. KPMG a little spicy/sweet, PwC is in a cream sauce) but it’s all chicken. And Barnier HATES chicken.

Companies May Lose Right to Pick Auditing Firms Under European Union Plans [Bloomberg]
EU markets chief Barnier plans radical overhaul of audit industry [Telegraph]

Need Help Choosing Between a Career in Audit and Advisory at a Big 4 Firm?

Since we’ve already checked out for three-day weekend and a reader needs advice ASAP, we’ll dispense with another edition of “Accounting Career Couch.” An aspiring accountant is trying to decide between joining the advisory and audit practice of a Big 4 firm but – surprise! – can’t decide since she likes both. Sigh.

Have a question about your next career move? Worried that you’re not doing enough for your clients? Need help casting a satirical political ad? Email us at advice@. Like donuts, there’s nothing we can’t do.

Back to our indecisive co-ed:

Hi Caleb:

I feel as if I am facing a small dilemma at a pivotal point in my young accounting career. I am interviewing with one of the Big 4 tomorrow and have been asked which service area I would prefer to go into: Audit or Advisory.

To be honest, with this job market, I would love either and I am 100% sure I would be a good fit for either type of position. I am very actively involved in Beta Alpha Psi and my resume is very “plump” with positive customer service experience. I posses very strong soft skills at quite a young age and have a lot of leadership experience in school and through my role in BAP. The company I am interviewing with is my #1 and I have built two strong relationships, each in each service area. For my high interest in Advisory, I can say, I always gravitate toward the headlines that have become the new hot topics that include, fraud, forensic accounting, and investigation. This is consistent with my very investigative and curious personality. However, on the other hand, understanding and learning the breakdown of a specific client’s company as I am involved in an audit interests me very much. The point is, what are the pros and cons for the two different services: Audit v Advisory. What is the opinion for a positive, fulfilling career in each service area, as public accounting is my interest for a lifetime? Am I hurting myself by letting the company choose where to put me by saying I am interest in BOTH opportunities?

To answer your last question – yes, it’s our feeling that you are marginalizing yourself by saying you’re interested in both practices. If you’re on the fence about which to join, other candidates that are more sure about their preference may have an edge over you. Make a choice for crissakes.

With that in mind, let’s break down a few pros and cons.

Pros

Audit – Your schedule is more predictable; less travel.

Advisory – Money is better; work is sexier; better reputation.

Cons

Audit – If you’re the type of person that is easily bored, then you will eventually get bored with auditing; auditing practices are bureaucratic nightmares – keeping up accounting and auditing rule changes; audit does not enjoy a sterling reputation.

Advisory – Hours can be unpredictable – you might work late nights for weeks (sometimes months) away from your home office or quite the opposite – you might find yourself with nothing to do for weeks at at time; the advisory practice is more susceptible to changes in the economy which means if things get bad, layoffs are more likely in advisory than in audit.

The real question is – what path do you want your career to take? You say that “public accounting is my interest for a lifetime.” Call us cynical but we’ll be shocked – SHOCKED! – if this is true in 3-4 years. If you really, really, really think that it is true, then audit is probably the choice for you. You’ll find a business line you like and if you’re ambitious and active within your firm, you’ll be on the partner track.

On the other hand since you say you’re drawn to fraud, forensics, investigative nature etc., we feel you should go with your instincts and go for advisory. Granted, Sam Antar will also tell you that you need the proverbial ironclad balls but those come in over time.

Anyone else faced with this dilemma? Anyone made the choice and got some input? Fire away.

Deloitte Is Officially The Biggest of the Big 4, Says Deloitte

Figuring that it couldn’t trust any of its direct competitors to call this one, Deloitte announced today that it is officially the biggest of the Big 4.

Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited (DTTL) is proud to announce that its member firms have risen to become the largest private professional services organization in the world for the first time in the organization’s history. With this milestone, Deloitte surpasses all competitors in the private professional services category to become the market leader based on revenue and headcount. As of the fiscal year ended 31 May 2010, Deloitte had aggregate member firm revenues of US$26.578 billion (US$26.6B) and employed approximately 170,000 people worldwide, including nearly 35 percent in priority markets.

Even though it’s against our natural inclination, we decided to fact check this little stat. Jumping over to PwC’s newly official rebranded site we added up the aggregated revenues by region to discover total revenues for P. Dubs of US$26.569 billion. That’s a difference of $9 million and some change. The proverbial photo finish.

As you can imagine, Jim Quigley and crew are pretty amped about the situation, even though this was never their goal:

“When Deloitte Haskins & Sells and Touche Ross & Co. merged in 1989 to form our modern organization, we were the smallest of what was then the Big Eight. Over the years, our goal was never to be the largest—we have always aimed to be the best, to be the standard of excellence,” said DTTL Global CEO Jim Quigley. “Deloitte professionals have pursued that goal by consistently delivering high-quality, world-class client service and demonstrating a strong focus on responsible business practices. Their commitment and dedication to living our values-based culture have transformed Deloitte into the world’s number one private professional services organization. This is a defining moment in our history.”

In other words, “Shucks, guys. We weren’t trying to be numero uno, it just kinda worked out that way. But DAMN, does it feel good or what?”

And this momentous occasion wouldn’t be complete with a little twist of the knife. Apparently Deloitte got so close that they ended up just wanting it more than the rest of the firms out there:

Over the years, Deloitte has consistently closed the gap and widened the lead among its major competitors. In fact, over the last five years, Deloitte was the fastest-growing private professional services organization based on total revenue among the Big Four. During the period from 2005-2009, Deloitte outgrew its peers by 2.7 to 3.3 percentage points annually. The organization has achieved its leadership position through a combination of organic growth, strategic acquisitions, a focus on quality, and bold investments in priority and emerging markets.

Of course it helps that the consulting business is still in-house but hey, no need to mention how the sausage is made, amiright? And who knows, PwC could always bounce back in FY2011 or maybe E&Y and KPMG will start courting each other again to create a super-firm. Okay, that last one is a stretch but we’re hoping for some surprises.

Deloitte ascends to become the largest private professional services organization worldwide [Deloitte]