Live from Vancouver, Canada, it's theCUBE. Covering OpenStack Summit North America 2018, brought to you by Red Hat, the OpenStack Foundation, and its ecosystem partners. Welcome to theCUBE's coverage of OpenStack Summit 2018 here in Vancouver. I'm Stu Miniman with my co-host, John Troyer, and happy to welcome back to the program, fresh off the keynote stage Mark Collier, who's the Chief Operating Officer of the OpenStack Foundation. Thank you, Mark. Thanks for having me back. Thank you for having us back, and thank you again for doing the show in Vancouver. So... Oh man, such an amazing place, like this convention center. I don't think it's fair to call it a convention center because it's like a work of art, you know, for us and everything. And it's my second time here for this show, and I think, you know, kudos to your team because you have good enough content that people aren't just wandering around, taking pictures of the mountains. My wife's off, seeing the well-watching right now, but everybody else here, they're engaged, and that's what you want in the community. Yeah, definitely, I guess you have to make sure you don't lose their attention to the whales and the sea planes, but so far, everyone seems to be getting down to business. Yeah, I think it would be fair to say that there's some transitions going on in the marketplace in general. And at this show, I noticed when I got the invitation, it's like the OpenStack slash open infrastructure summit. Got a big track on edge computing, got another one on containers. We've been talking about containers for a few years at this show, which, you know, really interesting to talk about.  What is the OpenStack summit these days, Mark? Yeah, I mean, I think that it's evolving to reflect, you know, what people are doing with open source when it comes to infrastructure. And so, you know, we call it open infrastructure, but basically it's just a world of possibilities that have been opened up by, of course, OpenStack, but also many, many other components, you know, some of which came before, like Lennox and things like that, and some of which, you know, started after, like Kubernetes and there's many other examples, TensorFlow for AI machine learning. So there's kind of this like embarrassment of riches these days, if you want to automate your infrastructure in a cloud-like fashion, you can do so many more things with it. And OpenStack, you know, solves a very specific, very important layer, which is that kind of traditional infrastructure as a service layer, compute storage and networking, but once you automate that, it's proven, it's reliable, you can run millions of cores with it, like some of our users are doing, you want to do more, and that means layering other things on top or sort of connecting them in different ways. And so, just trying to help users get something more out of the technology is really what we're about, and OpenStack becomes like an enabler rather than kind of like the whole conversation. Yeah, one of the things I always say in this industry, sometimes we just don't have the right expectations going into these environments. You know, when I think back 15 years ago as to what we thought Lennox was going to do, oh, it's going to crush Microsoft, it's like, well, Microsoft's still doing quite well, and Lennox has done phenomenal. We wouldn't have companies like Google if it wasn't for the likes of Lennox. And in open source, you've got a lot of tools out there, so while there are the CERNs and wall monitors of the world that take a full OpenStack distribution and put out tons of cores, I've run into software companies where when I dig into their IP, oh, what do you know? There's a project from OpenStack in there that enables what they're doing, so I've seen it a lot of shows, they're like, there's companies that are like, yes, I want it, and then there's like, oh no, there's this piece of it I want, there's that piece of what I want, and that's kind of the wonder of OpenStack that I can do all of those things. Yeah, exactly, I mean, I think we've talked before about calling it composable, open infrastructure, and making OpenStack's always been architecturally designed in terms of the goals around it to be pluggable, so from the beginning you could plug multiple hypervisors kind of underneath, and you could plug different back ends for storage and networking. So that sort of concept of being something, an integration engine that plugs things in is part of the OpenStack kind of philosophy, but now you see that the OpenStack services themselves are sort of, you can think of them as microservices, and like if you just need block storage, you can use sender, and that may make sense for some specific environments, and are you running OpenStack? Well, you are, but it gets a little bit fuzzy in terms of like, well, you're running all of it, or part of it, and the reality is the things are not as simple as a binary yes or no, it's just that the options are much greater now. Well, Mark, that has been some of the discussion in the community over the last few years, the core versus the big 10, and now, of course, with all this interoperability, conversations with both OpenStack participating in other communities and other communities here today, this week, I mean, what's the current state of that conversation about what is OpenStack and how does it interrelate? I think you kind of touched on it with this composable idea. Yeah, I mean, I think that basically it's kind of like, OpenStack is as OpenStack does, so what are people doing with it? And that tells you kind of what it is, and what people are doing with it, there are a lot of different patterns. There's no one specific deployment pattern that everyone uses, but probably by and large, by far, the most common pattern is OpenStack plus Kubernetes, and so when you talk about the interop piece, this is a really good example where OpenStack has evolved to become a better citizen, I guess, of open infrastructure by having more reliable APIs, kind of being a target that tools that build on top can rely on and not sort of have to worry about the snowflakes of different clouds, and there's still more work to be done in that area, but we talked about OpenLab, which is an initiative this morning that puts together OpenStack, Kubernetes, and other pieces like Terraform and things like that, and it does constant end-to-end testing on it, and that's really how you make sure that you know kind of what combinations work well together, and sometimes you just find bugs, and it turns out a couple of changes need to be made upstream in Kubernetes or in OpenStack or in Go for Cloud or in Terraform, and just if you don't know, then the user kind of with the sum assembly required model finds out, and they're like, I don't know, it doesn't work, it's broken, well, is it OpenStack's fault or Kubernetes' fault, and they don't, they just want it to work, so if we can identify that upstream, we can fix it. You're saying OpenStack has become more of a stable layer that other folks can build on them. Yes, exactly, yes, it has become a much more stable layer. Which means there wasn't a whole lot of flashy storage networking compute up on stage, actually. A lot of the talk has been about it. Yeah, that's a really good point. I think it's just, it's really proven in that way, and one of the things that was highlighted was like virtual GPUs, right? So if OpenStack's like designed to be pluggable, what do people want to have as an option now? And in terms of compute storage and networking on the compute side is they want GPUs, because that gives them AI machine learning much faster.  And it was really interesting is that the PTL was like the technical leader of the NOVA project. You know, Gaik got up and talked about virtual GPUs. I was back in the green room and like three of the other keynote speakers were like, oh man, we are so excited about this VGPU support. Like our customers are asking for it. One of the, the guy, Mohammed from Vexos who's the CEO of Vexos, he said, our customers are demanding this Queens release, which is the latest OpenStack. And we were kind of surprised, like they just really want this Queens release. So we asked them why and they're like, well, they want VGPU. So, you know, that's kind of an example of evolution in OpenStack itself, but it's an extension enabler for things like GPUs. And that's kind of an exciting area as well. Yeah, it's interesting, cause in previous years, it was the major release was one of the main things we talked about, Queens. As you mentioned, other than the VGPUs and that little discussion, spent a lot more time outside, talked to a lot of the users. You talked about, you know, the new tracks that were there. And something I heard a lot this year that I hadn't heard for a few years was, you know, get involved, we're looking to build. And I was trying to think of the sports analogy and maybe it was like, you know, okay, we're actually building more of a leak here and we're looking to recruit as opposed to or is it rebuilding, you know, what exactly kind of OpenStack 2.0 is in the future? Yeah, that's a really interesting point. You're absolutely right. And I, you know, can imagine or can remember sort of talking to some of the speakers as they're working on their content. And I don't think I've totally picked up that that was a big trend, but you're absolutely right. That was a major call to action from so many different people. I think it's because, you know, when we think about what we are as a community, you know, I talked about how we're a community of people who build and operate open infrastructure. And you know, it's really about solving problems. And if you want to, if you're as open community collaboration, you want to solve problems, you can't be afraid to stand up and say, we have problems. And sometimes maybe that feels awkward. It's like you're, the tech 101 is like, get up and say you solved all the problems and you should buy it today. You know, it's online or downloaded or whatever. And I think that we just realized like the magic of our community is solving problems. There's always going to be more problems to solve. Now you're putting more pieces together, which means the pieces themselves have to evolve and the testing integration points have to evolve. Like just a new set of challenges and sort of saying, here's what we're trying to solve. It's not done, help us actually is more, I think, true to kind of what the community is all about. I'm wondering, do we know how many people are at the show this year? I don't have the exact count. I think it's around 2600, something like that. Yeah, it's so fair to say it might be a little bit less than, you know, last year's North America show. Yeah, it is a little bit less. And what are you hearing from the users? What are the main things they come for? You've got the new tracks, you've got the Open Dev conference co-located. What kind of key themes can you get from the users? Yeah, I mean, I think one of the things that we found is that we have twice as many cloud architects this year than a year ago. So I think, you know, there's always this period of time where conferences or attendance is driven by curiosity. Like I've heard about this thing, what is it? You know, it's the cool factor. It's hype curves and all that stuff. I want to learn about it. And at this point, like people know what OpenStack is. You know, we've got tons of ways you can learn about it. There's local meetups. There's OpenStack days all over the world. There's content of videos online. Like there's, it's just not like a mystery anymore. Like the mystery draws in kind of the people that are just poking around to learn. Now we're at that point of like, okay, I know what it is. I know what it's for. I want to architect a solution around it. So seeing twice as many cloud architects, I think is an interesting data point to think about how we're shifting more towards people are not asking if it's proven. They're like, it's been proven for whatever, two, three years, however, you know, the perception is. But like the technology is just very, very solid. It's running infrastructure all over the world, the largest banks and so on. So I think that's kind of how things are shifting to what else can we do and put on top of it now that it's a solid foundation. Yeah, I wonder, you know, sometimes there's that buzz as to what's going on out there. There was a certain large analyst firm that wrote a report a couple of months ago that wasn't all that favorable about OpenStack. There's others that, you know, watching on Twitter during the keynote and they're like, they're spending all their time talking about containers. You know, why isn't this just part of the, you know, cloud native con, KubeCon show? What's the foundation's feedback on? You know, what are you hearing?  Sure, I mean, I think that what we're hearing generally from users and seeing in our data as well as from, you know, analysts like 451 and IDC, those are a couple of different reports coming out like right now or just came out that Jonathan mentioned this morning, I think is adoption just continues to grow. And so, you know, I think people are not looking at just one technology stack and maybe they never were but I think there was this kind of temptation to just think of it, is it containers versus VMs or is it Kubernetes versus open stack? And it's like, no one who really runs infrastructure thinks like that because they might have thought it until they tried it and they realized these things go together. So I think the future of this conference is really just becoming more and more centered around what are the use cases? What are the technical challenges we're trying to solve? And if we, to the extent we're getting patterns and tools that are emerging like the lamp stack of the cloud, so to speak, how can people adopt them? So you think about cloud just taking all kinds of new forms, edge computing, those are the kinds of things I think will become a bigger part of the conference in the future. I do like the open infrastructure angle on this. I mean, as infrastructure folks, right? You know that that storage compute network doesn't manage itself, doesn't configure itself. Doesn't provision itself. And so a lot of the app layer things should rely on this lower layer. And I thought last year in Boston there was this kind of curious open stack or containers conversation which seemed odd at the time and that's clarified I think at a number of levels from a number of camps and vendors. Yeah, I agree. I think we have done our best from our point of view from the foundation, myself and others that are involved in our community to try to dispel those myths or tamper down that kind of sense of a rivalry, but it takes time and I do feel like there is kind of a sea change now. There are just so many people running in production with various container tools, predominantly Kubernetes and an open stack that I think that sort of myth that one's replacing the other is like it's hard for that cognitive dissonance to last forever when you give them like the hundredth example of like somebody running in production at scale. Like they must be doing it for a reason and then people start to go, well, why is that? And I did like the comments you did make about cloud is not consolidating and simplifying, right? Even at the Dell Technologies World Show, Michael Dell got up and talked about the distributed core, which is a little bit of oxymoron, but the fact is compute is everywhere, right? And it's not only, it's on the edge, it's on telephone poles, it's in little boxes in our, you know, they're going to be on our walls, in our walls, right? And this open infrastructure idea can play everywhere. It's not just about an on-prem data center anymore. Yeah, I think that's a big part of why we started to say open infrastructure instead of cloud, just because, I mean, you know, I guess we spent 10 years arguing over the definition of cloud, now we can argue over open infrastructure, but to me it's a little more descriptive and a little less kind of, I don't know, a little less baggage than the term cloud, so. Yeah, definitely differentiates as to where you sit in the marketplace and one thing I definitely want to give the foundation great kudos on, the diversity of this show is excellent. Not just that there was, you know, a welcome happy hour and there's a lunch, but look at all the PTLs, the project leads that are there, a lot of diversity, up on stage. It's just evident and it's just something kind of built into the community, so, you know, great job there. Thank you, I'm very proud of the fact that we had just some excellent keynote speakers this morning and, you know, that's always something that we strive for, but I feel like we got closer to the goal than ever in terms of just getting broad representation up on the stage, so, and some amazing leaders. It's always nice from our standpoint, because we always say, give us your keynote speakers and give us some of the main people making things happen and it just naturally flows that we have a nice diversity, not from gender, from geography. Yeah, absolutely. From, you know, various backgrounds, so that's good. All right, want to give you the final word, you know, takeaways that you want people after the show or maybe some things that people might not know if they, you know, didn't make it here for the show. Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, the number one takeaway is it's all about the people and we want to make it about the headlines or the technology and even the technology is about the people, you know, but certainly the operators are not, like I said, you know, logos don't operate clouds or infrastructure people do, so, getting to meet the people, seeing what they're doing, you know, like Adobe I mentioned, their marketing cloud, they have 100,000 cores of compute and four people operating it, so, if you got the right four people and the right playbook, you can do that too, but you got to meet those people and find out how they're doing it, get their recipe, get their playbook and they're happy to share it and then you can run at that kind of scale too without a big team and you can, you know, change the way you operate. Yeah, I know I said it in my last question, but the last thing, I know there's been a big emphasis to not just do the two big shows a year, but the OpenStack days and other events globally, give people, how do they get involved and, you know, where can they come find out more? Yeah, that's a great question. I'm glad you asked because, you know, there are so many ways to get involved and of course it's online, it's IRC, it's mailing lists, you know, 24 seven, but there's no substitute when it's about the people from meeting in person. So we have the two summits a year, we're also having an event which is called the PTG, which is really for the developers and some of the operators will be coming this fall as well where we're having it in Denver, but the summits are the big shows twice a year, but the OpenStack days are really important, those are annual, typically one to two day events in, you know, 15 plus countries around the world. One in particular that is going to be really exciting this year is in Beijing. We've had that for the last couple of years, huge event, but of course, others throughout Europe and Asia, Tokyo is always an awesome OpenStack day and then there are quite a few in Europe as well, so that's another way you can get involved, not necessarily have to fly around the world, but if you do have to fly around the world, being in Vancouver is not a bad spot, so. Yeah, absolutely, and boy, we know that there's a lot of OpenStack happening in China, so Mark Collier, thanks again to the foundation for allowing theCUBE to cover this and thanks so much for joining us. For John Troyer, I'm Stu Miniman, back here with lots more of three days wall-to-wall coverage here from OpenStack Summit 2018. Thanks for watching theCUBE.


In this presentation, we will take a look at situations where there is a departure from a standard unqualified report, a standard unqualified opinion, recalling that the standard unqualified opinion is going to be the most common opinion. That's kind of like the highest level opinion. That's what we would typically expect because we'll recall within the audit engagement. First, a word from our sponsor. Well, actually, these are just items that we picked from the YouTube shopping affiliate program, but that's actually good for you because these aren't things that we're just given to us from some large corporation, which we don't even use in exchange for us selling them to you. These are things that we actually researched, purchased and use ourselves. Acer 27 inch monitor. I've been using an Acer monitor as my primary monitor for a few years now. This is the first Acer monitor that I have used after having used a series of different brands of monitors in the past. The Acer monitor has been performing well, and I'm trusting the Acer brand more and more as I use the monitor. I have a 27 inch monitor, which I think is ideal for what I do, which is, of course, the screen recording and the editing. If you would like a commercial free experience, consider subscribing to our website at accounting instruction.com or accounting instruction.thinkific.com, where we have many different courses. You can purchase one at a time or have a subscription model, giving you access to all the courses, courses which are well organized, have other resources like Excel files and PDF files to download and no commercials. Management is basically saying the financial statements are put together in accordance with some type of standards such as generally accepted accounting principles. Our goal is to gather evidence and give an opinion on whether that is indeed the case. We would expect that hopefully management is correct that that is indeed the case. Usually it should be and therefore we would give the standard or unqualified opinion, meaning there's no qualifications to the fact that the standards, the reports do appear to us to be reported in all material respects in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards. Now, if there's a departure, that basically means that there's going to be a problem. There's some type of problem. We're departing from the unqualified report and we're going to issue something other than an unqualified report. Now remember, if this happens, then that's kind of not good. There's something that's going to be fairly significant, a fairly significant issue here requiring us to depart from what we would expect to be the normal standard unqualified report. As we consider the types of qualifications, then we're still going to think about that standard report. So you still basically just want to have that standard report kind of memorized or at least have the outline of it in your mind and then think about, okay, what would happen to it if we had an unqualified report or some of these departures to it? How do we modify that report? That's kind of how you want to think about these types of reports. And also remember, if you're going to memorize any report, you almost want to memorize at least some of the wording for the standard unqualified report. And then, of course, you want to memorize or think about those areas where there could be departures from it. You don't need to memorize every kind of report that has a departure from it. But if you know the structure of the standard report, you can kind of then think about those types of areas that would be modified to it and what type of modifications would need to be in place given these circumstances. So when might these departures happen? We could have a departure from the standard unqualified report if, and we're going to list these out here and then we'll go into more detail on them later, but the departures, if there's a scope limitation, if there's a departure from GAP generally accepted accounting principles, and if there's a lack of auditory independence, these could be issues that would require us to deviate from the unqualified opinion. And of course, remember, that means that we're assuming, of course, that the financial statements have been put together in accordance in this case with generally accepted accounting principles. If there's a significant deviation or some type of departure from it, that would be an issue because that's what our opinion is based on. So what do we do if that happens? What are the type of reports that we can issue? Well, we have the standard unqualified report. That's going to be the standard type of report. If there aren't any problems, we have the unqualified, that's the highest standard report. Then we can go to a qualified report. And the qualified report is going to be a step down from the standard report. So when you're thinking of the hierarchy of reports, I get note that the unqualified to me sounds like a funny kind of word for the highest type of report, because it sounds like to me something like someone was unqualified or something like you didn't qualify for the race or something like that. But it means you want to think of unqualified as meaning that it doesn't have any qualifications to the opinion that the financial statements are indeed in accordance with whatever standard generally accepted accounting principles as they should be. So there's no qualifications. This would be the highest report. Then we're going to say, well, there's a qualification. That's going to be the next step down. So we're going to say, we still issue a report. It's still not a terrible report here, although we would totally, we would normally expect an unqualified report. That's going to be the standard report. So a qualified report is a significant step down from an unqualified report. However, it's not completely terrible report. We're going to basically list out what that means in a bit more detail, but we'll basically say, hey, this is the qualification or the deviation for whatever reason. And that's our qualification from the standard. Then we have a disclaimer type of report, which we're going to disclaim from the opinion. And then we have the adverse report. Now, these two down here are going to be things that are not good, because if we, if we disclaim from the opinion, or we have an adverse opinion, these two types of opinions are typically not good. They're not typically going to be helpful to the company. Now we have to go where the, where the audit evident lies, of course. And if we need to issue a disclaimer or adverse opinion, that's what needs to happen. But hopefully we avoid this kind of situation at the front end, at the planning stage by taking on clients with integrity and taking on engagements that we know that we can complete. And that will hopefully limit the amount of times that we might have to a situation of disclaimer or adverse opinion, which of course is not good for anybody because typically that audit report is going to be something that's not useful for the company. And it took, it's going to take a lot of time to basically put that together on our basis in terms of the audit, on the audit information. So again, normally we want to avoid that, how we make on the front end, we make sure that we're picking up clients that are good, that have integrity within the clients and that we have the ability to complete the full service of the, of the engagement process. So a disclaimer would basically mean that we're not going to give an opinion. So we're going to disclaim from given the opinion, we basically are saying, hey, we were engaged to give an opinion, but there's some problem, possibly a scope type of limitation, which means that we can't complete. And then we have a disclaimer of the audit. That means a lot of work went into it for a disclaimer type of opinion where no opinion basically is going to be given. And then an adverse opinion is basically saying the financial statements are not in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. So that would be saying that that would be a bad opinion, of course, because the idea here, the audit is we're giving an opinion as to whether the financial statements are in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Is there not, we have an adverse opinion basically saying that we don't believe with all material conditions and all material respects that the financial statements are in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Again, if we have an adverse opinion, that's not going to be something that's going to be useful to the company. So oftentimes, if something's going down the road of being an adverse opinion, the engagement may end before that time. And it might be terminated at some point in time. And if that's the case, then again, there's a lot of work on both sides of things, a lot of time being spent that is basically could be wasted in that kind of situation. So the bottom line is these two types of opinions are something that we would have to issue if the conditions arise, but in practice, they're not going to be the most common types of opinion. We would expect unqualified to be the most common type of opinion followed by some type of qualification where we would say, Hey, there's this one thing that's not in conformity for whatever reason, but possibly the company want things that should be reported in this way, even though it's not generally accepted accounting principles or something like that or some other type of qualification, which we can state and say, Hey, this piece we're not, we don't think is in a conformity or something like that, but the rest of it is good as a whole. That can happen to some degree. This disclaimer might end in a disclaimer type of opinion or basically terminating the engagement and adverse opinion. Typically, again, doesn't always get all the way to the end of the engagement and in a situation where you're going to end up with an adverse type of opinion. But if it does, you have that, but that's probably the most rare type of actual report that would be completed conditions required report other than unqualified. So a scope limitation, you'll recall it's one of those types of conditions that may cause us to issue a report other than an unqualified standard report results from not being able to obtain sufficient appropriate evidence about some component of the financial statements. So there's a scope limitation. We can get the information on some significant component. For example, let's say they have some part of their organization that's in another country and we can't, we don't have the resources in order to audit that. Possibly we can't get to it. Possibly we can't have another firm do it. Maybe there's regulatory limitations. That's a scope limitation. We weren't able to complete the job in that specific area. And that's going to cause us if it's significant area, if it's material to the financial statements to have some kind of qualification possibly within the reporting of the financial statements. Not in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles happens when financial statements are materially affected by a departure from gap generally accepted accounting principles. Now of course, the main what we're doing here is giving an opinion as to whether the financial statements are in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. If there's a significant departure from them in what from what other area, then that could result in us issuing some type of qualification or some type of report other than a standard unqualified report. Auditor not independent happens when order has some form of prohibited relationship with the entity. So independence is going to be a key component when we're thinking about putting this this items together the audit together. And it needs to be independent specifically in terms of the relationship of the auditor and the client. In other words, independence isn't just something typically that will be independence in the way we conduct the audit. We also want to have appearance of independent because remember that the audit is is geared towards an independent third party. So if someone has some relation with someone in the in the organization that's significant, even if they even if they conducted the audit in an independent fashion, that the appearance is not independent. So that could cause some type of difference or some types of qualification independence is kind of a is a big deal within the auditing process. So then what would we do about it? What would happen if there was a scope limitation? Well, if there's a scope limitation, we'd have a qualified opinion or some a disclaimer of opinion, right? If it was a scope limitation, we could say, Hey, there's just one piece that we couldn't audit. And therefore we're going to have this qualification that we couldn't audit that one piece and tell the reader that. However, if it's a large piece of it's very significant, then we're just going to have to say, Hey, we couldn't we couldn't complete the audit to our satisfaction. Therefore we have to issue a disclaimer opinion given the scope limitation, not in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, we would have a qualified opinion or an adverse opinion. So again, it depends on on the degree here. If there's one thing that wasn't in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, and we could say, Hey, management recorded it this way possibly, and maybe they have some reason for doing that. Although we believe it's a deviation from generally accepted accounting principles, we may say, Hey, this component is a deviation from generally accepted accounting principles, we believe and the rest of the financial statements according to our testing is in conformity with financial accounting principles, we might have something like that. Or if there's a if there's a significant deviation, of course, we can't give an opinion that the financial statements and in like that's pervasive through the through the through the financial statements, we can't give an opinion that the financial statements are in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles when they are not, and therefore would have to issue an adverse opinion, which is basically like the worst type of opinion, auditor not independent. If the auditor is not independent, then we'd have to have a disclaimer of opinion, because the auditor can't basically give an opinion if they don't have that independence factor. So here's an example just just an example of how the terminology would look on the disclaimer. Remember what you want is basically to memorize the qualified audit report. And then you can kind of think through what would happen in some of these other types of deviations from that. In place of an opinion section, the auditor's report includes the section titles disclaimer of opinion on the financial statements followed by the name of the companies who financial statements the auditor was engaged to audit and a statement identifying each financial statement that the auditor was engaged to audit. This is often followed by a basis for disclaimer of opinion section in place of a basis for opinion section. So an example might be something like this disclaimer of opinion on the financial statements, we were engaged to audit the accompanying balance sheet of the company as of the date and related statements of income and cash flows as described in the following paragraph because the company did not take physical inventory and were not able to apply other auditing procedures to satisfy ourselves as to inventory quantities and the cost of property and equipment. We were not able to obtain sufficient appropriate audit evidence to provide a basis for an audit opinion on the financial statements and we do not express an opinion on these financial statements so notice we're just basically saying you know we were engaged we have this problem that happened we're not able to give an opinion on the financial statements because of it. The company did not make a count of physical inventory in the year stated in the accompanying financial statements at 28 million as of the date further evidence supporting the cost of property and equipment acquired prior to date is no longer available. The company's records do not permit the application of other auditing procedures to inventories or property plant and equipment. Basis for disclaimer of opinion, these financial statements are the responsibility of companies' management. We are a public accounting firm registered with a company accounting oversight board United States PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the company in accordance with the US securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the securities and exchange commission the PCAOB. Here's an example of a type of deviations or type of alterations of the standard unqualified report that may happen if there's a scope limitation so now we have a qualification qualified report as opposed to unqualified again think about the unqualified report and then think about the the deviation that would happen for the qualification. Standard wording for the opinion paragraph accept that a reference to the scope limitation is made example in our opinion except for the effects of such adjustments if any as might have been determined to be necessary had we been able to examine evidence regarding the foreign affiliate and earnings the financial statement present fairly in all material respects and so on and so forth so once again we have in our opinion and then this qualification given the fact that we have a scope limitation we couldn't get to this information and therefore couldn't audit it what we did audit this is my paraphrasing of this by the way what we did audit looks like it's in conformity we believe we have evidence to back up our assumption that it is in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles we weren't able to get the evidence with regards to this item and then a paragraph following the opinion paragraph will describe the basis for departure from the unqualified opinion we were unable to obtain an audited financial statement supporting the company's investments in foreign affiliates stated at 10 million at date or its equity in earnings of that affiliate of 1 million which is included in net income for the years then ended as described in note 7 to the financial statements so obviously we'll refer to the note the note will give more information on this but it's significant enough for us to put it in the audit report here we were also not able to satisfy ourselves as to the carrying value of the investments in the foreign affiliate or the equity in its earnings by other auditing procedures


What's up family? We're filming something super secret in Dallas, Texas right now comment below if you know what it is so much The only way I'm able to talk to people and really share what I'm thinking is through music My page is like a diary and I want when I'm gone for people to be able to listen to my music and know exactly What I was thinking the majority of my process is through my phone I'll be video chatting with other artists with the producer will send keys parts back And forth we'll cut guitar and then I'll cut vocals and we'll switch and so it definitely is a speedy process We're finally headed out the city.  I stay connected to my fans best through my phone The speed just really allows me to share those special moments with them and connect with people across the pond in different countries and continents Having that connection in that phone always in your hand really makes it pretty easy Getting out of the city enhances my process by just being a palette cleanser It allows me to really see things clearly and be as innovative and as creative as I want because nothing else is around you It's a clean slate. I think the Audio that nature Amits is just really really special You myself How could you be so in my face that I can't ignore Yes, it is the things that I faced before Don't know what to do when I'm not with you Like you so what it's uncomfortable Can't turn on my mind and think about somebody Obsessed with love in you. I can't help myself Will you be there in the morning making sure I'm good when I hit you in the I'll fall, I want nothing and tell me in the morning I'm tripping. How could you be so in your head? Oh But tell me how could you be so in your head? I'm standing. I don't think that we could ever be friends. We play each other. That's the way the game goes I think it's got to See ya. No, nobody ever told me Because you know you see I'm finally seeing from the ground looking at it I'm standing I don't that we could ever be friends. We play each other. I think it's got to See if I hurt you more than any then how could we be right for each other See if we talk about a time it's over time. I guess none of us win Yeah Nice that we fighting You know our decursion discussions Bumping that still weak and concussions So why we keep trying?  I think it's got to See if I hurt you more than any other Then I could be right for each other See if we talk about a time it's over time.   Now I'm sipping in me and the Hamptons Baby being bougie with deep paint up in Wisconsin stole the fire and the pants and then I reapplied Now the flame will forever be lit up in Dijon Paris make like I'm to the chains, dimes, all of that's how we do Cuz they're even to get to the hit Drake taught us the meaning of successful Started from the grassy at the world now. He's the mentor now He's living lavish things and did that this September with the of the winner fire and mine She's hanging around his neck.  You leave it like you name it Lucy, baby I This is heaven, this is way way out live so much love to everybody. Hope y'all stay safe