Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

China MediaExpress CFO Keeps Things Vague in Resignation Letter

Jacky Lam’s resignation was effective on Sunday but his letter to the CCME Board was dated Tuesday, making us wonder if he slept on it for 48 hours just be sure he was doing the right thing.

March 15, 2011

The Board of Directors
China MediaExpress Holdings, Inc.
22/F Wuyi Building
33 Dongjie Street
Fuzhou, China

Dear Sirs,

As I informed the Board on Sunday, I have resigned as a Director and as the Chief Financial Officer of China MediaExpress Holding, Inc. (the “Company”), effective as of March 13, 2011. I have resigned because of information that I have learned in the past few days, and because the Chairman and CEO did not respond to these matters in a manner that I believed to be appropriate.

Thank you for your kind attention and I wish the Company success in the future.

Yours sincerely,

Jacky Lam

Of course the “information that I have learned” could have been Roddy Boyd’s post from last Friday or the video of the sleeping staff posted Sunday or something else entirely. As far as the CEO’s inaction – should he have filled one of the broom closets with Red Bull? Maybe kept more of something else that apparently keeps people awake but otherwise uninterested in other humans? We’re not exactly sure on either of these questions but we’d love to hear theories.

As for the “Best. Period. End of Statement.” – they did their part too.

8-K [SEC via ZH]

Apparently ‘The Purpose of Auditors Is Completely, Entirely, and Wholly’ to Look for Fraud and ‘Deloitte is the best. Period. End of Statement.’

Remember China MediaExpress? That’s the company whose CEO – Zheng Cheng – responded to the accusations of fraud by evoking ‘reputable and well-known’ Deloitte to get the haters off their back. Even though the company is still taking heat, Mr Cheng will be happy to know that he’s got someone in his corner: Glen Bradford, CEO of ARM Holdings LLC, a Hedge Fund Advisory Company. The thing is, Mr Bradford seems a little confused about what an auditor’s purpose is (for fun, I added some emphasis):

I have received tons of messages that can be summarized by the belief that auditors do not look for fraud and that all they do is make sure things line up in the reports. I can say that this is not true simply by being practical. If we didn’t have auditors to verify the claims that companies make, then companies could claim whatever they want to. The purpose of auditors is completely, entirely, and wholly to look for indications of fraudulant activity — and to do their best to remove all possible doubt that the company is misrepresenting itself on its financial statements.

You can make of that what you will but then Glen continues:

Then, if things are OK, they sign off on them. Some auditors are better than others. Deloitte is the best. Period. End of Statement.

Well then! I’m sure Deloitte appreciates the ringing endorsement regardless if it comes from someone who is under the impression that “The purpose of auditors is completely, entirely, and wholly to look for indications of fraudulant activity.” At the very least, this is debatable point, so if you have a difference of opinion with anything above, feel free to share below.

China MediaExpress Holdings: All Eyes on Deloitte [Seeking Alpha]