RE: Hit Them Where It COUNTS... Of course, if this is all out of the 2008 credit debacle, then I would suggest these guys are missing the mark, and by a good margin. Auditors rely on expert valuations, opinions, reports, etc. because, while they are experts in auditing, they are not experts on everything. Hence, they rely on reputable geologists reports on mines, after checking out the reputations of the geologists signing the report, getting them to confirm the copy is the original, as issued, and not changed, etc. For credit paper the generally recognized experts are Moody's, Standard & Poor and Fitch's. It is this group that rated deemed all the credit and derivatives as good quality when it was not. How were the auditors to determine any different? How does it make any sense to hold the auditors primarily accountable in those circumstances? The rating agencies failed the marketplace (big time), and have never had to pay for it. Their industry works the same way still; the issuers brow beat them and withhold fees and business until the agencies relent and rate the crappy stuff as good, and then the agencies go ahead and do it on a wing and a prayer hoping for the best. That's what's got the whole world in this mess. Not the auditors not noting that the rating agencies were not doing their jobs properly.