Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for March, 2012

Some of the guys in my Intermediate Accounting class decided we should have a bracket contest. There is no prize, but I may bring pizza as we celebrate the winner.

I’m proud that all have done such a great job.  Everyone, including Nate (score of 800) is above average with percentile scores of at least 63.

Ian is in second, Andy in third, Brandon in fourth and Andrew in fifth.  It is likely that Ian will win.

It takes superior accounting talent to do so well in prediction contests.  Go J-Hawks!

Debit and credit – – David Albrecht

Read Full Post »

On Wednesday, March 14, 2012 (10th year anniversary of audit firm Arthur Andersen’s felony charges), the Chicago Tribune published an editorial titled, “Andersen Died in Vain.”  As is the way with all editorials, what followed is the editor’s opinion.

Take heed, the Chicago Tribune and its editor are wrong on this. The Arthur Andersen audit firm didn’t die to accomplish a great purpose, or to make the world a better place.  It died because it couldn’t survive its punishment.  And if anyone or anything has ever deserved punishment, it was Andersen.

Arthur Andersen’s death was not intended to prevent defrauded investors from being  victimized in the future.  The death was intended to prevent Andersen from doing it again.  And in that Andersen’s punishment has been successful.  Its death was not in vain.

In the editorial, the  Chicago Tribune does a fairly decent job of summarizing the history surrounding Andersen’s demise:

In the beginning, Andersen was a watchdog. Founder Arthur Andersen made the firm’s name stand for something nearly a century ago, when he refused a client’s demand to approve a ledger that falsely inflated profits. For decades thereafter, an auditing opinion from Andersen was the gold standard for corporate books and records. If Andersen said the numbers were solid, then investors, bankers, regulators and the public at large could count on it.

Over time, greed corrupted Andersen. Its leaders became more devoted to collecting hefty fees than keeping books straight. Clients paid a fortune for Andersen’s consulting services, making its basic function of auditing into little more than an afterthought. The firm’s most experienced accounting technicians, the sticklers who maintained its principles, saw their status plunge in the partnership’s hierarchy. As Enron ran wild, Andersen’s Professional Standards Group proved too weak to intervene. Money had trumped honest services.

Enron’s executives were able to lie about their business performance and prospects because Andersen went along. When the lies caught up with its client, instead of admitting its failure to safeguard the public trust, Andersen engaged in a cover-up. Its employees shredded not just a few Enron-related documents, but box after box, day after day, for a period of weeks.

The Enron debacle followed a series of debacles at Andersen, which had bungled audits atWaste Management Inc.and Colonial Realty Co., to name but two prior scandals that cost investors dearly. Prosecutors who previously had stopped short of bringing charges against Andersen came to believe that its leaders considered civil penalties and promises of reform to be mere speed bumps on the road to ever-greater profits.

A decade ago this month, Andersen’s brass arrived in Washington for Enron-related settlement talks — myopic, arrogant and devoid of remorse. Justice Department officials concluded that the repeat offenders across the table would offend again if they weren’t stopped.

If anything, the Tribune is underplaying the wrongdoing.  Andersen was dirty, very dirty.  Charged with protecting the public interest, Andersen instead unzipped its pants and metaphorically peed all over it.  There ought to be a law.  Shouldn’t justice prevail in the end?  In this case it did.

The Tribune goes on to say,

Did Andersen’s demise serve the public interest? No.

There were thousands of innocent victims, the out-of-work employees.  … [The resulting] Sarbanes-Oxley legislation … has proven to create problems, substantially raising compliance costs for law-abiding public companies, which pay more now in audit fees to Andersen’s onetime competitors.

The greatest tragedy of Andersen’s fall? It fell for nothing. What a loss for Chicago, and what a disservice to all those like Arthur Andersen himself who never would sell their integrity, at any price.

The world is worse off because Arthur Andersen and the other largest audit firms forsook their duty to investors and the American public.  If Arthur Andersen had been doing the right thing in the decades preceding its death, perhaps I wouldn’t have lost much of my life’s savings in 2001-2002.

Andersen deserved its punishment.  I shed no tears for it.  Its death was not a tragedy.  Its forsaking the public trust was the tragedy.  There ought to be a special place for those who violate the public trust.

Andersen’s death means only that it was not allowed to continue making the world a worse place.  A positive from its death is that there have been no Andersen audit failures since 2002.

The Chicago Tribune errs in labeling Andersen employees as victims.  The employees were part of a seedy culture, and it was the culture that supported the actions which merited the punishment.  The employees could have left.  If anything, Andersen principals should have been banned from ever serving American capital markets as corporate officers or auditors.

The death of the Arthur Andersen audit firm marks the end of a sad chapter in American history.

Debit and credit –  – David Albrecht


Want more of The Summa? Sign up to receive email notification of posts.  And please follow me on Twitter (@profalbrecht).

Read Full Post »

Just read an interesting piece at the Chronicle of Higher Education, “Aging Professors Create a Faculty Bottleneck,” by Audrey Williams June.   It is combined with two other stories, “Exploding the Myth of the Aging, Unproductive Professor,” by Josh Fischman, and “In Search of a Professor’s Legacy,” and David D. Perlmutter, to provide a healthy portion of food for thought.  A subscription is required to read these articles. Reasonably priced day passes are available.

I’m a baby boomer, and some of my readers are also.

Are we unproductive paper weights or still pulling our weight (gets more difficult as pounds accumulate)?  Can we still lead the way, or are we in the way?

Professors are not constrained by a mandatory retirement age.  But then, neither is an accounting professional who has become an independent consultant.

I feel fortunate to be at my stage in life–alive.  Growing and flowering, not withering.   I’m invigorated by the challenge of teaching new students.  And, writing for the profession has given new meaning to my professional existence.

Lurking in the shadows is my need to work.  Like many accounting professors, I didn’t get started until my late 30s.  My savings aren’t where they need to be to provide a desirable retirement lifestyle.  Professors who share my circumstances often joke about dying in the saddle.

There are no words of wisdom from me.  If you have thoughts on the issue, please comment below.

Debit and credit – – David Albrecht

Read Full Post »

I’m an accountant, and this is my weekend.  I opted for the busy spring semester of academe instead of  busy season.  But on this weekend we can all take a break.  It’s the opening weekend of seven post-season D1 basketball tournaments.

There are many dozens of basketball games, with four tournaments for men’s teams (N-68, NIT, CBI, CIT) and three for women (N-64, WNIT, and WBI.

There are games to score, statistics to tally, and bracket contests to administer.   You do bracket contests, right?  Print out a blank tournament bracket and pencil in your predictions for every tournament game, 67 for the N-68 and 63 for the N-64.

Bracketology takes on a second meaning for an accountant–how to score the brackets for your contest.  I prefer weighting the first weekend heaviest, say 32 points for the 1st round (1 pts each game), then 32 (2), 24 (3), 16 (4), 10 (5), 6 (6).

This year I filled in brackets for the N-68 (men) and N-64 (women).  I did not fill out brackets for either of the NIT tournaments (men or women), although I have done so in past years.

I like bracket contests that are free.  After all, pride trumps any amount of money.

I teach an evening section of Intermediate Accounting for guys who can’t make it to the day section.  We decided to have a bracket contest scored by ESPN.  There are 320 pts each round, with points per victory depending on the round:  10-20-40-80-160-320.  I went with non-trendy pick Kansas.  So far, my crystal ball seems to be cracked. I’m standing at 20/32 and 10/16 for the first two rounds.

On the women’s side, I’m 25/32 in predicting 1st round winner.  I predict Baylor to win.

Remember, if you have money bet on your bracket and win,  then you must report it on your 1040.  Ask your contest administrator for a 1099.

Debit and credit – – David Albrecht

Read Full Post »

Lobbyists - because it's hard for politicians to decide stuff on their own.

Reuters broke a story on Friday, March 9, that I find to be very, very troubling.  In “Exclusive: Ernst & Young tightropes between audit, advocacy,” reporters Dena Aubin, David Ingram and Sarah N. Lynch say that,

Corporate audit giant Ernst & Young operates a lobbying firm in Washington, D.C., that has been hired in recent years by several corporations that were at the same time E&Y audit clients, prompting two senior lawmakers to demand closer regulatory scrutiny.

As identified in the story, the lobbying arm is Washington Council Ernst & Young.  I’ve heard of it before.

All of the Big 4 claim to partner with their clients.  I’ve argued for years that such a relationship seduces audit firms sometimes to approve questionable financial statements.

Surely lobbying for a corporate client is way over the line.  I doubt that any audit firm that in Washington advocates for clients would fail to do the same when considering an opinion on financial statements.

Aubin, Ingram and Lynch report that E&Y spokesman Charles Perkins disagrees:

Ernst & Young said Washington Council’s work complied with independence rules. It was pre-approved by clients’ audit committees and it was limited to tax-related issues, E&Y spokesman Charles Perkins said in an e-mailed statement.

The firm does not solicit votes on legislation for E&Y audit clients, Perkins said.

“We assist clients in monitoring public policy, analyzing legislation and educating Treasury officials, the IRS, legislators, other policy makers and their staffs about the potential consequences of legislation,” Perkins said.

I have always thought that one way to describe lobbying is it educates government officials about a client’s position, and the potential negative consequences to the client of proposed legislation or regulations.

Whether within the letter of the rules or not, E&Y lobbying stinks.  It reminds me of E&Y clean audit opinions on Lehman Brothers financial statements distorted by Repo 105.  E&Y thought that was within the letter of the rules, also.  It didn’t make it any less stinky.

Debit and credit – – David Albrecht


Want more from The Summa? Sign up to receive email notification of posts.  And please follow me on Twitter (@profalbrecht).

Read Full Post »

Rachel Torgerson is an accounting major, and she woiuld like you to vote for her.  I hope you do.

Rachel, 20, from Moorhead, MN, is a student at Concordia College.  She is my student, now taking her second and third courses from me.  She’s a good student with a story to tell.  I’ll relate a bit of that story, and ask that you vote for her in a Maurice’s modeling contest.

Winning the contest is rewarded with a sizeable corporate donation to Rachel’s charity, and it is worthy of your support.

Rachel received an organ transplant when nine months old, and has had several subsequent operations.  Until she asked for my vote, I never knew.  She appears normal in every way.  She told me,

I believe attitude has everything to do with the way you live your life, so I certainly think having a positive attitude makes all the difference.

Rachel is entered into Maurices Main Street Model Search 2012.  Should she receive enough votes, she advances to a second round.  The prizes associated with the contest are (1) modeling for Maurices, and (2) earning a corporate donation for a favorite charity.  In this case, Rachel’s charity is Alexa’s Hope, dedicated to education for the need to support organ transplants.  Alexa’s Hope was founded by a woman whose daughter died while waiting for a transplant.

You can read more and vote for Rachel by clicking on this link, or by clicking on the following image.

Please vote for Rachel, again and again.  It’s for a good cause.

Debit and credit – – David Albrecht


Want more from The Summa? Sign up to receive email notification of posts.  And please follow me on Twitter (@profalbrecht).

Read Full Post »

Sooner or later, every blogger must ponder this question:  To toot or not to toot?

This blog post is about the role of posting credentials for those who professionally engage in social media.  It is not about being (or not being) awesome.

One of the social media world’s top bloggers–Mark Schaefer–wrote about it yesterday in, “Social Proof and Your Battle for Credibility.”

I promote blogging as an essential activity for cpa firms, professors and students. The sharing of ideas (i.e., content) through the written word is a terrific way of reaching clients, providing evidence of expertise, brand building, and initiating dialogue.  These are important ingredients in the building up and exercise of influence.

And blog promotion is an essential part of blogging, because if a blog has no readers, then it matters not if it exists.

In the quest for new readers, whether a blog writer is searching for more readers or the right readers, receiving critical acclaim is an effective means of establishing credibility.  Critical acclaim is widely used in various media outlets to attract readers, viewers or listeners.  Likewise, it can be used as a reason for why potential readers should visit and start reading a blog.

Mark Schaefer says,

When establishing online influence, social proof matters … even more than real achievement.

The Summa attracts readers from at least 150 countries each month.

I agree.  Social proof can be exhibited by posting badges like Klout scores, number of readers/followers and blog awards.  And I toot my own horn in the right margin of The Summa (number of accumulated page reads and a world map from where my readers long on).  Also, I once wrote a blog post about being named to the Accounting Today 2011 list of Top 100 Most Influential People in Accounting.  And The Summa has been mentioned on many Best Accounting Blogs lists.

However, yesterday Schaefer announced that for the time being he is removing his badges.  This decision results mostly from his acknowledgement that his ego finds such badges to be distracting, and contributes to him getting off message.

Good point.

I enjoy having readers and would like more.  But in the final analysis, I hope someday to be known for influencing the accounting world to be a better place.

If you write an accounting blog, I endorse your use of “badges.”  And if you read accounting blogs, I hope you understand that they serve a valid purpose other than ego stroking.

Debit and credit – – David Albrecht


Want more from The Summa? Sign up to receive email notification of posts.  And please follow me on Twitter (@profalbrecht).

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 102 other followers

%d bloggers like this: