The Overstock-Grant Thornton dispute was publicly aired via disclosure statements filed with the SEC. What impact do you believe those disclosures had on the investing public's confidence in the financial reporting domain and the independent audit function? Were the interactions between Overstock and Grant Thornton unprofessional or otherwise inappropriate? Explain.

In light of research of Overstock's money related accomplishment, clearly these exposures influenced Overstock's trading cost. Theorists and customers of the spending reports despite everything have restrictive necessities that the self-governing reviewers ensure that financial reports are truly addressed. This has influenced audit and the board obligations and puts more weight on associates and authorities to appropriately address their financial rundowns. I think Grant Thornton acted inappropriately in light of their clashing use of the $785,000 A/R/Gain Contingency. Grant Thornton didn't from the outset prescribe making an altering section in this way Overstock gave their 10-k with the $785000 as expansion plausibility.