If your curious about what KPMG had to say about ENZON's 'material weakness" in the 2012 10K it's on page 46 of that document. I of course didn't pick anything up on this having cursed that document several times, but then the slap on the hand is so veiled you'd have to be an accountant or lawyer to know what it really says. Sound like they found something either professionally lacking, or more likely imo, shady, but they still waved the financials on through. Be interesting to get an opinion from someone in the business but not connected to either. (I might be able to do this for us from one of the fraud law firms I still have an open channel too. I'll email them tomorrow and alert them of the 8K and the 10K statements see what they can tell us if anything.)
As for EisnerAmper, I notice they hava a Cayman Island operation too. It just so happens that Alex Denner's brand new (along with Mulligan) hedge fund Sarissa has a Cayman Island operation as well. Maybe nothing too the connection, but then again why did Denner right out of the chute needed to setup a Cayman Island operations? Tells me he's got some shady financing operations planned. Never hurts to have partners with shady operations too.
gee, the plot thickens. To me, I'm not so much intrigued by the content of the filing, as by the tone and length of the filing. They seem to be trying to cover their bases, trying to be sure to 'appear' legit in the face of (what I hope to be) mounting scrutiny from the sec or other entities.
Q: What exactly was KPMG concerned about? The filings seem vague on this, and they are dense and hard to follow.
Seems strange to me. Fits into the theory that they're trying to get de-listed. However, most of it is nothing new-- it's all spelled out on page 20 on the annual report (Mar 18 10-k). The dismissal is new-- got to wonder why now.