Actually my point was more directed at the decision making of...

Actually my point was more directed at the decision making of the directors of BLA. My position is that once the deal with EY was done then they should have changed auditors. But BLA is so enamored with their auditor (as in not just the firm but the body heading the audit), they approved at a board level the continuation of the auditor past the recommended 5 year period. Heaven forbid that they let anybody else have a close look at the books.

Further at no point in any of the market updates or annual reports, has there ever been a mention that they are writing a cheque each year to EY of an extra circa 1mil in rent. This is about disclosure and appropriateness not the integrity of EY. Lets not forget that EY were part of the group that were signing off on these half baked valuations and assisting on the DD on some of these terrible investments.

This is a company that is listed in the ASX300 (yeah still are, index funds are still required to hold this in their portfolios). There should have been a much cleaner relationship with the auditors and specific auditor in general. Not sitting around the board room looking at each other and going "Hey Bro, our auditor has been here for 5+ years, legal is telling us we should change, but hey we really want a new person looking at the books?. Nah Bro, lets keep this dude, he likes us and we like him signing off on the reports"