5 ms·

>Mazars is not lower tier. I don't know much about European accounting firms. But the rest of your comment seems to contradict your initial claim -- i.e. they

>Mazars is not lower tier. I don't know much about European accounting firms. But the rest of your comment seems to contradict your initial claim -- i.e. they are not Big Four and they have had a recent scandal.

jacquesm 4y ago
They are in the top 10 in my country and in many others, and they have been cautioned, which is regulator speech for 'improve your act or we'll go after you'. That means that they are on thin ice with respect to any future mistakes (specifically in their crypto division) and that their reputation (for the whole company) is at risk. The effect is that they will go through their customer portfolio and decide which ones they feel are negatively affecting their risk profile and apparently this is one risk that they are not willing to take. If this was a canary in the coalmine it just started wheezing strangely and it looks a little dizzy.
- leereeves 4y ago
  I may have misunderstood. The first paragraph of your comment seems reassuring (like it's just risk aversion at Mazars) but then: > If this was a canary in the coalmine it just started wheezing strangely and it looks a little dizzy. sounds like a reason to leave the mine (i.e. there's something really wrong and this is a warning sign).
  - jacquesm 4y ago
    If it sounded reassuring to you then I should work on my writing skills, it certainly wasn't meant that way. > sounds like a reason to leave the mine. Absolutely, if you have funds in this - and any other unaudited - exchange GTFO or you may lose everything. Either their claim that they have the funds is real and you get your money and later you can re-deposit it or you'll be at least not one of the ones left holding the bag.
    - kurthr 4y ago
      I read it as a mid-tier accounting firm selling their seal of approval to raise income on sketchy accounts. That's not really news (or effective) unless the accounting firm has some respectability (like Aurthur Anderson ;^).
      - jacquesm 4y ago
        I've been in the financial services world since 2007 and have come across Mazars about as often as I've seen work from the big 4, they're simply a bit lower on the totem pole image wise but their non-crypto departments deliver pretty solid work. The big differentiators are the price point and their ability to create an army of consultants on a moments notice where required. The big four clearly have an edge in those cases - at a price. If Mazars is heading out the door you should try to beat them to the curb.
  - ip26 4y ago
    In this analogy, the canary is Mazars and the mine is crypto. Nothing about the comment is reassuring for crypto.
Closi 4y ago
> the rest of your comment seems to contradict your initial claim -- i.e. they are not Big Four and they have had a recent scandal. It doesn't contradict it IMO: 1) In terms of the criticism from the FRC (which I believe is the 'scandal' you are talking about) KPMG were also criticised by the FRC so also would fall foul of this. 2) Just because a company isn't one of the 'big four' doesn't mean that they are lower tier.
hef19898 4y ago
EY was the Wirecard's auditor, and PwC did an ad-hoc audit of the same before everything fell apart.

jacquesm 4y ago

They are in the top 10 in my country and in many others, and they have been cautioned, which is regulator speech for 'improve your act or we'll go after you'. That means that they are on thin ice with respect to any future mistakes (specifically in their crypto division) and that their reputation (for the whole company) is at risk. The effect is that they will go through their customer portfolio and decide which ones they feel are negatively affecting their risk profile and apparently this is one risk that they are not willing to take. If this was a canary in the coalmine it just started wheezing strangely and it looks a little dizzy.

leereeves 4y ago
I may have misunderstood. The first paragraph of your comment seems reassuring (like it's just risk aversion at Mazars) but then: > If this was a canary in the coalmine it just started wheezing strangely and it looks a little dizzy. sounds like a reason to leave the mine (i.e. there's something really wrong and this is a warning sign).
- jacquesm 4y ago
  If it sounded reassuring to you then I should work on my writing skills, it certainly wasn't meant that way. > sounds like a reason to leave the mine. Absolutely, if you have funds in this - and any other unaudited - exchange GTFO or you may lose everything. Either their claim that they have the funds is real and you get your money and later you can re-deposit it or you'll be at least not one of the ones left holding the bag.
  - kurthr 4y ago
    I read it as a mid-tier accounting firm selling their seal of approval to raise income on sketchy accounts. That's not really news (or effective) unless the accounting firm has some respectability (like Aurthur Anderson ;^).
    - jacquesm 4y ago
      I've been in the financial services world since 2007 and have come across Mazars about as often as I've seen work from the big 4, they're simply a bit lower on the totem pole image wise but their non-crypto departments deliver pretty solid work. The big differentiators are the price point and their ability to create an army of consultants on a moments notice where required. The big four clearly have an edge in those cases - at a price. If Mazars is heading out the door you should try to beat them to the curb.
- ip26 4y ago
  In this analogy, the canary is Mazars and the mine is crypto. Nothing about the comment is reassuring for crypto.

Closi 4y ago

> the rest of your comment seems to contradict your initial claim -- i.e. they are not Big Four and they have had a recent scandal. It doesn't contradict it IMO: 1) In terms of the criticism from the FRC (which I believe is the 'scandal' you are talking about) KPMG were also criticised by the FRC so also would fall foul of this. 2) Just because a company isn't one of the 'big four' doesn't mean that they are lower tier.

hef19898 4y ago

EY was the Wirecard's auditor, and PwC did an ad-hoc audit of the same before everything fell apart.