The UK arm of Deloitte, the auditor and consultant, is aiming to capitalise on its role in the London 2012 Olympics after costs associated with sponsoring the event helped to constrain annual profit growth.
The company avoided the reputational damage suffered by G4S over its connection with the Games, and hopes that this operational sure-footedness will lure new clients.
Shame they couldn't avoid reputational damage from Standard Chartered then. Odd that the article missed that. I wonder why?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Hmm… Deloitte and that “reputation thing”
One of Deloitte’s clients recently paid out £217 million to escape investigation into allegations of laundering up to £160 for Iranian “clients” linked to terrorism and the country’s nuclear weapons program. This too could prove only to be a sticking plaster with the U S regulator as SC continue to claim they broke the law “only” on £9 billion of ”payments”.
Meanwhile Deloitte’s largest world-wide client the Royal Bank of Scotland has now been subpoenaed by the US Attorney General demanding evidence on Libor rigging …
To the PSG Deloitte has only one ”reputation thing”. A very bad one.
Maybe the the answer to your question lies in the fact the it was the US firm that was involved in the SC difficulties.
One name
All that matters