Revenue recognition
Having done this in a previous life for US listed company based in the UK sob having to use US GAAP I would side with autonomy. The U.S. Rules, a fun read for insomniacs, on revenue from long term contracts and services including software were highly prescriptive and based on previous issues found, once bitten twice shy etc.
As a former accountant I'm surprised that the due diligence did not take into account some level of restatement for different accountImg rules, after all once it goes through you are going to be adding their results to yours and will have to provide prior period comparatives so you want to understand this.
Let's assume that there was no audit fraud, after all the SFO would have been very interested in that, then the failure is due diligence and caveat emptor kicks in.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
