patrick_byrne.jpgThere’s really nothing better than an eccentric CEO throwing caution to the wind, consequences be damned.
Insert Patrick Byrne, CEO of Overstock.com (“OSTK”). He issued a letter via press release yesterday that has many people’s attention.
Byrne opens the letter by quoting Nietzsche:
“All things are subject to interpretation; whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.”


Tragic enough but then Byrne really amps it up, droning on for eleven points about his company’s dire situation. Here’s the gist*:
• The difficult accounting treatment of an overpayment received by OSTK from a “partner”.
• Putting the audit out to bid after “eight years of fine service” from P. Dubs, and hiring GT because “my belief that changing auditors every decade or so might be healthy.”
• SEC inquiries into the accounting treatment of the overpayment.
• GT changing their minds on the accounting treament after said inquiries.
• We’re filing an unreviewed 10-Q, P. Dubs is on board for our treatment, GT is fired, anyone (and I mean anyone) want to audit us?
Byrne spends no less than six paragraphs/points explaining GT’s wishy-washy, bending-over-for-the-SEC ways. The man is nothing if not thorough.
Spineless auditors notwithstanding, Byrne will press on, the company will overcome, and he will remain committed to you, Overstock.com shareholder:

I will hold a conference call to further explain and answer questions regarding this matter on Wednesday afternoon at 5:00 p.m. EST (details below). Until then, I remain,
Your humble servant,
Patrick M. Byrne

10-Q [SEC.gov]
8-K: Dismissal of Grant Thornton [SEC.gov]
Press Release [SEC.gov]
*If you want to debate the particulars, be my guest but this isn’t the Journal of Accountancy, feel me?


View Comments

This is the same guy who claims naked short-sellers are destroying his company.

Best. Press. Release. Ever!

Who cares what a previously retained auditing firm says?

How could anyone think a naked person selling their shorts online could ruin a company?

I wonder if PWC did a double take once it read the firm’s name mentioned so directly in a press release… Almost sounds like the common situation of new evidence becoming available and the auditor having to further investigate/change positions… then client getting pissed off. Who knows? who cares? hope it all goes up in flames.

This guy sounds like a lunatic. And I’m sure P-dubs is real happy about him documenting their willingness to agree, even though they’re no longer his auditors.

Let the opinion shopping begin!

this is the biggest flaw in the system…. you pick your regulator, just like the banks did.
our jobs our useless.

blog comments powered by Disqus