Similarities between ENron and Satyam
1) Both fudged accounts and the auditors turned a blind eye
2) Markets did not know about them till a long time. Satyam fudged for 7 years.
Dissimilarties
1) Satyam directors and related parties did not sell it shares in order to make profits as was the case with ENron where a lot of shares were sold.
2)
Most of the articles discuss as to what went wrong with satyam but none discuss what was it that promopted Raju to take such steps. The points that come to my mind for the decison are as follows
1) Satyam was the first indian IT company to be listed on the New york stock exchange and followed by analysts. Not performing upto there levels would have been bad for the indian markets
2)
A lot has been seen and heard about satyam in the past 2 months since jan 7 2008. So what all can be done to prevent from another satyam from happening
The auditors of an organization listed in the nifty or the sensex should be carried out by bigger auditors, the biggest scams are pulled off in lack of regulatory oversight and that is what happenedin the case of madoff ponzi scheme also. He got the accounts audited from a firm that had just three memebers. Morover the auditing firms should be rated, PwC had done a bad audit for the global trust bank and so has been the case with satyam. there has been no decision regardin the ill practices followed in case of GTb on the company. WHY?
Keeping the advisory and the auditing business of the auditing firms seperate. Most of the firms like PwC, KPMG have both the divisions and the companies usually use the consulting services so there emerges a conflict of interest and the results might not be a true statement of the accounts
The independent directors should not be given any stock options as they are not a part of the business, they are there to protect the minority interest of the companies. So they have no right over the pays link with the profits. An independent director of satyam, a harvard professor krishna pelupu was given Rs 3 cr per annum for his services.
There should be rating by ICAI of the charted accountants, based on the professional capacity and the accounts audited the members charter should not be for life but for a limited duration which has to be validated every year, it should be like the CFA. Where you have to get your charter renewed by paying a subscription fee.
In 2008, KPMG reported that the corporate frauds have increased 5 fold to 1 billion pound are can rise even more. So given the kind of backdrop, the regulator must try to have these measures in place in order to make it difficult for one more of Satyam to happen