yeah it wont change. but somehow you cant really trust kpmg's findings. they have been surrounded by several financial scandals around the world. and this so called damning findings, i hope serba sues the company to the ground once the truth prevails

so youre saying just because they are one of the big 4 which follow all standard auditing protocols. they never make mistake? they never get caught for manipulation?

grow up read more about their financial scandals. they were fined millions dollar for altering past audit works. invovled in corruption scandal in South Africa. cheating scandal in califronia.

now you saying no need independent auditor to assess their findings? just accept it as what it is?
what a clown

Don’t expect KPMG will say okay only because EY said no finding. KPMG needs to obtain the evidence and test themselves, it is required by auditing standard for them to perform independent test, that means they cannot simply rely on third party.

They have technical team who will be the reference for audit team... I believe KPMG have already discussed internally whether it affect the overall true & fair view before they brought it to SC... Getting interesting when EY appointed as independence reviewer on KPMG concerns...

So far KPMG dun hv any evidence about fake transactions, only about audit confirmation not sign back.....tat audit confirmation always my client used to bungkus nasi lemak, never want to reply but fully settled the bill...Then like tis sue the customer for not reply the audit confimation ke????

why u say drag kpower n scib? when Karim's effect bringing up the price of both them to rocket skyhigh, why u guys never doubt it? And those contracts awarded is related to Serbadk, leave no man behind, die also tgt la confirm~

thats why lah. sometimes i think they lack professionalism lah. even when client revert back, they dont response. they extract wrong address then come out with their finidngs. problematic lah the ppl there from kpmg. hope ey comes out with proper accurate findings

Many people talking craps; want to take high risk then continue to hold the Serba shares or even average down but don’t need to attack KPMG... less people are qualified to say big 4 have low standard even U r an auditor or fund manager... funny indeed ...

I worked there before so I know the quality there. Anyhow, I think its better for me not to reveal too much info but what I can say is never underestimate big4 influence and wish those still holding their share good luck as you are truly a gambler not investor ^^||

keep saying director buy back share, so the company is safe. But never think of it's actually their tactic to build public confidence to lure more water fish go in.

Those who scold big4 staff must be those accounting staff or FM who has done the same things over and over again for 5yrs 10yrs and scold those fresh graduates. But after a year or more these fresh auditors will become much experienced because they see different companies in a short time.

Normally they can only spend 1-2 weeks for a company, so they don’t have time to dig any transaction too deep, unless there is fishy transaction that warrant more time.

And, out of thousand staff, there must be a few not so bright staff….

Petronas project usually won't be fraud la. Can do audit immediately in person. But the projects in middle East, no one knows the reliability of it. Like 1MDB everything in middle East, sumatec also middle East, any project in with middle East have higher potential to come with potential fraud.

One possible scenario is that there is no such record/project at Petronas, outstanding receivables can tally, but the total transaction amount may not (sales under SB cannot tally with purchase/contract at Petronas).

Lets say petronas award RM100mil contract to SB and they did not make any payment, so in their book, there will be RM100mil purchases and outstanding payable RM100mil.

SB’s book can also have outstanding Receivable from Petronas amounting to RM100mil, but if the actual contract value recorded in SB is more than RM100mil, lets say RM150mil, RM50mil have been paid (so-called received from “Petronas”) then the receivable and payable balances will tally. But the transaction amount is RM100mil vs RM150mil, this one wont tally.

I remember seeing some confirmation whereby they will also ask counterpart to confirm the transaction amount.

Another scenario is that SB gotten some contract from third party, and perhaps these third party gotten contract from Petronas (and it may be real they do gotten the contract from petronas), but the contract is inflated when pass to SB.

The appointment of their independent directors which has same trend as our govt’s u-turn SOP (appointed independent then became chairman, chairman become independent) and all new three directors are connected, just made things worse. Is better the company stay calm and let the professionals do their works, stop creating lousy steps. Wonder who is their advisors….

See….I said is better they stop creating lousy step, now they dig a big black hole (suing auditor) and jump into it together with KPMG, this moment, EY will stay away far far away from the shit, their EY Risk Management (and all other Big 4) may not approve acceptance of this job.