Click Here to Go Directly to the Story

 
 


U.S. EDITION
Full Table of Contents
Cover Story
Up Front
Readers Report
Corrections & Clarifications
Books
Technology & You
Economic Viewpoint
Business Outlook
In Business This Week
Washington Outlook



International Business
International Outlook
Information Technology
Finance
Social Issues
The Corporation
Management
Industries
BusinessWeek Investor
Dividends
The Barker Portfolio
Inside Wall Street
Figures of the Week
Editorials


INTERNATIONAL EDITIONS
International -- Asian Cover Story
International -- Special Report -- Asia Tech
International -- FashionWeek Supplement
International -- To Our Readers
International -- Readers Report
International -- European Business
International -- Finance
International -- Sports Business
International -- Int'l Figures of the Week




APRIL 14, 2003

MANAGEMENT

Why Deloitte Didn't Divide
Debt concerns blocked a spin-off of its consulting unit

 
  STORY TOOLS
Printer-Friendly Version
E-Mail This Story

Related Items

MANAGEMENT

Too Good to Be True

Why Deloitte Didn't Divide

On Mar. 31, accounting giant Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu abruptly abandoned plans to split off its consulting business. In remaining a combined firm, Deloitte stands alone. All of its rivals have split up -- either by selling consulting units or spinning them off as independent public companies -- and although it's not illegal for the two to remain joined, the Securities & Exchange Commission generally forbids accounting firms to do consulting for audit clients. Deloitte says it will abide by that rule. It has little choice. Pushed reluctantly toward splitting, it waited too long and lost its chance.


Chairman James E. Copeland Jr. had long argued that audits were improved, not tarnished, by association with consultants. So it wasn't until early 2002 that Deloitte decided to do a management-led leveraged buyout of its consulting practice, which at least left the consulting partners in charge of their business.

That's when the problems started. As Copeland describes it, the first sign of trouble came when Deloitte asked its lenders what terms they wanted if the firm gave up its consulting revenue. Although Deloitte is private, it has a strong balance sheet and borrows at terms comparable to -- or better than -- an A-rated company. Copeland expected the lenders would ask for slightly higher interest, maybe a paydown of debt. But by this time, Andersen had dissolved, so the banks and insurance companies Deloitte borrows from insisted on much more onerous terms, including collateral to secure their loans.

Still they moved forward -- until last month's final blow. Declining revenue at the consulting firm, including the departure of most of its work for audit clients, meant it was not going to be able to cover debt payments adequately. "We were sort of chasing the economy and the credit market down a curve, and we never got far enough ahead of it to do the deal," says Copeland.



By Nanette Byrnes in New York



Get BusinessWeek directly on your desktop with our RSS feeds.XML

Add BusinessWeek news to your Web site with our headline feed.

Click to buy an e-print or reprint of a BusinessWeek or BusinessWeek Online story or video.

To subscribe online to BusinessWeek magazine, please click here.

Learn more, go to the BusinessWeekOnline home page

Back to Top

APRIL
TODAY'S MOST POPULAR STORIES

  1. News Corp.'s Talks with Microsoft: A Flawed Deal?
  2. Apple's Schiller Defends iPhone App Approval Process
  3. Why the Cadbury Deal Matters
  4. Developers Look Past Apple's Jammed iPhone App Store
  5. Social Media Will Change Your Business

Get Free RSS Feed >>
  MARKET INFO
DJIA 10450.95 0.00
S&P 500 1106.24 0.00
Nasdaq 2176.01 0.00

Portfolio Service Update

Stock Lookup

Enter name or ticker



Media Kit | Special Sections | MarketPlace | Knowledge Centers
McGraw-Hill Cos.