PWC appears to have been conservative in at least disclosing that liquidity problems could arise. THE POINT IS THAT IT WAS NOT SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO WARRANT THE ADVERSE OPINION. I cannot blame the auditor for at least raising the issue with the disclosure. I guess your point is that management obviously did not agree with the disclosure at all.
Equity holders do not need to over react to an auditor change.
1) PWC originally did disclose that management had plans to address the lack of liquidity issues and based on the facts and circumstances, felt that their was not a need not to issue other than an unqualified opinion.
Auditors do not take to issuing an Adverse or Qualification very lightly as it in itself can impact creditor relationships. Accordingly,IMO they elected to disclose the matter which seems to have been the proper action.
2) The matter of a weakness in internal control as of December 31, 2012 was remediated as of December 31, 2013.
Through Nov 30, 2013 I believe they spent $37.4 million / 46.6 million units outstanding is .80 per unit that have been disbursed for capital expenditures. if my math is right, This seems to approximate what they have paid out this year to unit holders.
Unbelievable that any business entity could ever even consider to reinvest HALF of their profits into cap ex. Are you aware their cap ex budget was $93.9 million for 2013? I am surprised they just don't send us an invoice for us to chip in, this is ridiculous. Where or when is a benefit to be realized to the unit holders as a return on this cap ex??? It seems unconscionable. Anybody know what's going on here?