Jump to content

Hindenburg group accuses Adani group of fraud


gattaca

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

 

May not be correct = they are criminals in your world. In audit world it's called qualification. That's how auditors write. It's called qualified report. Most audit reports are qualified to varying degrees. 

This was an accounting report. Give me half a dozen forensic accountants I will have a criminal report ready too.

 

Fact that they don't want to be associated with Adanis summarizes this report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Khota said:

This was an accounting report. Give me half a dozen forensic accountants I will have a criminal report ready too.

 

Fact that they don't want to be associated with Adanis summarizes this report.

 

Except that there is nothing like Accountant report in Indian companies act. This is a statutory  audit report which includes checking of systems, processes, fraudulent numbers, dubious activities etc. What this report says is that they did not find any irregularities but they cannot be 100% sure. 

 

Now Deloitte have dissociated with Adani because each big 4 has risk management that does risk assessment on their clients. Goal of risk management is to protect the audit firm at any cost. Risk management wanted Adani to take due course of audit on specific Hindenburg accusations while Adani lawyers believe SEBI clearance ( to be confirmed in two weeks ) should be enough. 

 

Not sure if you work in corporate world. No large company would allow an audit unless it's a statutory requirement. Under Companies act, statutory auditor can be changed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

 

Except that there is nothing like Accountant report in Indian companies act. This is a statutory  audit report which includes checking of systems, processes, fraudulent numbers, dubious activities etc. What this report says is that they did not find any irregularities but they cannot be 100% sure. 

 

Now Deloitte have dissociated with Adani because each big 4 has risk management that does risk assessment on their clients. Goal of risk management is to protect the audit firm at any cost. Risk management wanted Adani to take due course of audit on specific Hindenburg accusations while Adani lawyers believe SEBI clearance ( to be confirmed in two weeks ) should be enough. 

 

Not sure if you work in corporate world. No large company would allow an audit unless it's a statutory requirement. Under Companies act, statutory auditor can be changed. 

They never said that. They said based on the information provided, which they cannot substantiate. A big IF all over the report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, ravishingravi said:

 

 

State speciifc criminal activity mentioned in the report. Page and quote.

 

Genius this is not a criminal report. If someone in GOI is honest they will have someone independent looking at this. That will never happen as he gives plane rides to decision makers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Khota said:

Genius this is not a criminal report. If someone in GOI is honest they will have someone independent looking at this. That will never happen as he gives plane rides to decision makers.

 

It's probably the first time you have read an audit report. Something to be proud of. 

 

But that's not how it works. If Deloitte found something suspicious that they can substantiate, they have issue an "adverse" report. Otherwise there is no difference between licensed auditor and layman who doesn't read up. They will be personally liable. 

Edited by ravishingravi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ravishingravi said:

 

It's probably the first time you have read an audit report. Something to be proud of. 

 

But that's not how it works. If Deloitte found something suspicious that they can substantiate, they have issue an "adverse" report. Otherwise there is no difference between licensed auditor and layman who doesn't read up. They will be personally liable. 

Deloitte has filled the report with CYA's so that if it lands in court they have an out.

 

With so many disclaimers Deloitte is not liable. Every sentence has an out.

 

Fact: They don't want to associate with Ambanis.

 

Fact: No one wants to associate with dubious stuff.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Under_Score said:

Adani didn't go after Hindenburg bcoz he probably is afraid of getting exposed & facing further embarrassment since he will have to show proof that he isn't a shady character also more importantly, there are no corrupt babu type Judges in the US to favor him, so much for all the talk about Adani will do this, will do that when Hindenburg destroyed a big chunk of his manipulated wealth.....:phehe:

You cannot discuss anything with these bots. Hindenberg if wrong would have to shell out billions of dollars but they knew Ambanis were crook.

 

If Ambanis were so honest they could have sued. They are scared of western courts and discovery process. Judges over in west know people like them all day long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Khota said:

You cannot discuss anything with these bots. Hindenberg if wrong would have to shell out billions of dollars but they knew Ambanis were crook.

 

If Ambanis were so honest they could have sued. They are scared of western courts and discovery process. Judges over in west know people like them all day long.

You do know Hindenburg is not an audit firm right? They make money out of short selling. 
 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-08-06/how-much-did-hindenburg-make-from-shorting-adani-dorsey-icahn?in_source=embedded-checkout-banner
 

Short Seller Hindenburg Nabs Tiny Gains Off $173 Billion Carnage

Nate Anderson has wiped out as much as $99 billion from three billionaires' wealth this year

Gautam Adani, Jack Dorsey, Carl Icahn. Nate Anderson has picked them off one by one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

You do know Hindenburg is not an audit firm right? They make money out of short selling. 
 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2023-08-06/how-much-did-hindenburg-make-from-shorting-adani-dorsey-icahn?in_source=embedded-checkout-banner
 

Short Seller Hindenburg Nabs Tiny Gains Off $173 Billion Carnage

Nate Anderson has wiped out as much as $99 billion from three billionaires' wealth this year

Gautam Adani, Jack Dorsey, Carl Icahn. Nate Anderson has picked them off one by one.

Hindenberg is pointing to wrong doing. Nothing less, nothing more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, coffee_rules said:

They shorted the stock with their story and made a killing. They have a track record of doing it to others. You should seriously doubt their credibility 

Kettle meet Mr. Pot.

 

If they are doing so many wrong things, why don't Adanis come and sue them as they promised.

 

Either sue and get the truth or shut the heck up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Khota said:

Kettle meet Mr. Pot.

 

If they are doing so many wrong things, why don't Adanis come and sue them as they promised.

 

Either sue and get the truth or shut the heck up.

Not all have sued them, even though they have been shafted by Hindenburg. Certainly no multi-billion dollar company has been investigated by SEC based on biased on research of HR. They know its credibility 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Not all have sued them, even though they have been shafted by Hindenburg. Certainly no multi-billion dollar company has been investigated by SEC based on biased on research of HR. They know its credibility 

Credibility is there. The companies not having being investigated were because they did not manipulate stock.

 

As they say, put money where your mouth is. Sue or shut up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Khota said:

Credibility is there. The companies not having being investigated were because they did not manipulate stock.

 

As they say, put money where your mouth is. Sue or shut up.

 

The fact is they all  shut up despite losing. Did they all manipulate stock? How come SEC didn’t investigate them if they were fraud? Just because they didn’t sue HR doesn’t mean they are automatically fraud. SEC can investigate Adani if they choose to. Why are they not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

The fact is they all  shut up despite losing. Did they all manipulate stock? How come SEC didn’t investigate them if they were fraud? Just because they didn’t sue HR doesn’t mean they are automatically fraud. SEC can investigate Adani if they choose to. Why are they not?

 

 

There are days I think you act very stupid on purpose because no one checks it. Smart as you are don't write dumbsheet on this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...