From a voracious reader of Stephen Chipman’s blog:
GT just announced the admission of 22 new partners/principles notably 5 from NY, 5 from Alexandria and 3 from NC – 9 from audit 3 from tax and 3 from advisory
Yes, we realize the numbers don’t work but we’ve confirmed the details we’ve got. We hear there’s an email floating around out there so if you’ve got it handy, fire it our way.
UPDATE – July 14, 2010: We received a copy of Stephen Chipman’s email which we’ve presented here for your reading pleasure.
Internal distribution only
One of the highest and most visible forms of demonstrations of stewardship within a partnership come thorough admitting new partners and principals. This represents a critical underpinning for our continued vitality and success. It is within this context that we are pleased to announce the following individuals will be admitted to the Firm as partners or principals, effective August 1, 2010.
Having outstanding partners and principals is an important differentiator for our Firm in our ability to serve our clients with distinction. Each of these professionals has demonstrated their dedication to making a difference – to our clients, to our profession, to our communities in which we live and work, and to our Firm. Their commitment is reflective of personal responsibility, sacrifice, and accountability which we now pause to recognize.
Please join us in congratulating them on this significant recognition of their contribution and in wishing them continued success as partners and principals of Grant Thornton.
And here’s a further breakdown of the promotions by service line:
Global Public Sector – 5
Transaction Advisory Services – 2
Corporate Tax – 2
Audit – 9
Corporate Advisory and Restructuring – 2
Corp. Strategic Federal Tax Services
(can some demystify this acronym?) – 1
State and Local Tax – 1
And by city:
Alexandria – 5
NYC – 4
McLean – 1
Kansas City – 1
Cleveland – 1
NY – Melville – 1
Charlotte – 2
L.A. – 1
Raleigh – 1
San Diego – 1
Denver – 1
Atlanta – 1
Wisconsin (Milwaukee?) – 1
Chicago – 1
Congrats to all the new partners and principals at Grant Thornton!
Because “early July” becomes “mid-July” in about two days and some people would like to get this over with:
“Just as an update to GT’s “early july” announcement about raises. It hasn’t come yet, but some have been told that they’ll be getting promoted (I’m guessing seniors and managers) and were told that National is still trying to figure out what they’ll be.”
So you can take that as “Chipman and Co. are stuck in an epic game of Risk and can’t be bothered at the moment” or something else entirely if you like. If your anxiety level is at double-Lexapro levels or if you’ve heard something other than the earlier rumors, discuss below.
From the depths of 666 Third Ave:
In New York:
Associates look to come in at almost $10k less than they did in 2007
Senior 3’s are looking to make almost $10k less than Senior 3’s in 2007
New Managers are looking to make almost $15k less than New Managers in 2007
Senior Managers are looking to make almost $15-20k less than Senior Managers in 2007
Raises (without promotion) are looking to be:
3% for employees rated under a 4
6% for employees rated a 4 or 5
Our source indicates that these are all rumors at this point but based on the last Communique de Chipman, the official numbers should be known soon (“early July”).
In the previous thread lots of numbers were getting thrown so who knows; maybe GT is pulling a PwC and promising low, delivering high? Discuss.
Yesterday we briefly picked up the Overstock beat as Sam Antar pointed out that everyone’s favorite Salt Lake City resident got a little confused about when they knew about their gain contingency existed that resulted in some contradictory disclosures.
As you may misremember, this arose from the company for recoveries from underbilled fulfillment partners by improperly claiming that a ‘gain contingency’ existed under accounting rules.”
Now Sam has pointed us to some correspondence between the SEC and Overstock that indicates that PwC wasn’t concerned about the issue until the Commission pointed it out and succeeding auditor Grant Thornton was unmoved until Overstock brought it up:
Please tell us if, and the extent of, your auditors’ national accounting office involvement in these issues during audit of your 2008 financial statements or the reviews of your fiscal 2009 quarterly filings.
PwC served as our auditor during the audit of our 2008 financial statements. PwC has informed us that it did not consult with its national accounting office regarding the above issues when they were identified in Q4 2008 or Q1 2009. However, in connection with this response to your letter dated November 3, 2009, PwC has consulted with its national office in regard to both the fulfillment partner under billing and partner overpayment issues and based on context of this being an area that is a highly facts and circumstances based issue that requires significant judgment where reasonable parties have different views, PwC continues to concur with our accounting and disclosure consistent with its reflection of the underlying economics and our past practices of not billing or collecting for our billing errors, rather negotiating for future price concessions that were contingent on future sales.
Grant Thornton (“GT”) reviewed our Q1 and Q2 2009 quarterly filings. To our knowledge the GT local engagement team did not review these issues with its national accounting office at the time of our Q1 and Q2 2009 quarterly filings. In early October, as we prepared our response to your October 1 letter, we asked GT for its national office’s opinion. It was our understanding at the time that GT’s national office concurred that we had used an appropriate (if not preferred) accounting treatment. Only after we received your November 3 letter, did we become aware that GT’s previous “national office” opinion had in fact been an “informal request” only, and not a “formal request.”
In the case of PwC, it’s entirely possible that they just trusted that OSTK knew what they were doing and went along with it. Obviously a huge mistake. When the SEC came calling however, they moseyed through it again and rang up the accounting wonks at 300 Mad.
But the Grant Thornton engagement team, who came in after all this went down was seemingly on board with it without consulting with its own national accounting gurus even though the SEC was already on this like stink on a monkey. GT making an “informal request” of its national office on an SEC inquiry seems a little tepid.
HOWEVER! You have to remember that this is all in the words of Overstock which hasn’t always been forthcoming/reliable/truthful in its filings. Then again, maybe there’s something to this whole auditor “Yes men” thing.
Well! You might have thought that Koss would just handle this Sue Sachdeva situation like gentlemen headphonesmiths but you would have thought wrong!
Koss is suing S-squared and Grant Thornton for their respective roles in the alleged embezzlement of $31 million from the Brew Town company.