1 Sign This Investment May Be Riskier Than You Think

If your business made nearly $6 million in billings from a client in one year, you'd need a pretty good reason to walk away from that client, right?

This is why I'm alarmed by Las Vegas Sands' (NYSE: LVS  ) announcement that its accounting firm is resigning.

The announcement
Las Vegas Sands' 2013 proxy indicates that PricewaterhouseCoopers, or PwC, "declined to stand for reelection as the Company's independent registered public accounting firm" and said that its audit committee was "currently in the process of selecting an independent registered public accounting firm to replace PricewaterhouseCoopers."

The proxy points out that PwC's reports for fiscal 2011 and 2012 "contained no adverse opinion or disclaimer of opinion and were not qualified or modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accounting principles." It also claims that as of the date of the proxy's release, there hadn't been any "disagreements with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP on any matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedure." It clarified that if there had been any unresolved disagreements, the accounting firm would have mentioned them in its reports on Las Vegas Sands' consolidated financial statements for the years in question.

Why I'm concerned
But the question remains, why would PwC stop working for a client that accounted for $5.9 million of its revenues in 2012?

Some speculate that the accounting firm's decision was motivated by a desire to avoid the risks associated with Las Vegas Sands' large reliance on Macau, which brings a different set of regulatory risks than those associated with U.S.-based business and accounted for about 52% of the company's operating profit in 2012. Las Vegas Sands also faces upcoming risks related to a possible violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, and allegations that the company was involved in money laundering.

If PwC walked away from millions of dollars in possible client billings because of regulatory risks, then that strikes me as a pretty good reason to fear those risks as an investor.

Industry risks
The risks associated with exposure to Macau aren't unique to Las Vegas Sands. In 2012, all of Melco Crown Entertainment's (NASDAQ: MPEL  ) profit came from its Macau properties. MGM Resorts (NYSE: MGM  ) and Wynn Resorts (NASDAQ: WYNN  ) also relied heavily on their Macau properties. Macau accounted for about 27% of MGM's operating companies' income and about 74% of Wynn's operating profit. These companies all employ either Deloitte & Touche or Ernst & Young as their auditors.

The Foolish bottom line
Despite Las Vegas Sands' recent success in increasing revenues and earnings per share, I believe the cautious investor should note the risks of doing business in Macau. I also think investors should heed the possible warning signs associated with having an auditing firm abandon such a major account with no suggestion as to why it's doing so -- especially given the threat of increased scrutiny surrounding the casino's alleged money laundering and possible FCPA violation.

More advice from The Motley Fool
For many companies, successfully capitalizing on a booming Chinese economy is like winning the jackpot. That's indeed the case for Las Vegas Sands, which made a big bet on Macau gaming about a decade ago that's paid off in spades. The company is now looking to spread its empire further, but will it be able to replicate its prior successes? Learn about all these opportunities, and the risks they pose, in our premium report on Las Vegas Sands. Be sure to claim your copy today by clicking here.


Read/Post Comments (2) | Recommend This Article (1)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On May 07, 2013, at 9:53 PM, BenKeel wrote:

    PWC could have been fired and offered a chance to resign. It is widely speculated that LVS will spin-off their REIT holdings which would require a whole new accounting process.

    One that PWC possibly doesn't specialize in.

    Motley Fool is run by a bunch of inexperienced, just out of college grads who think they're all market specialists. I advise everyone to be very careful of these guys who also LOVED US Steel at $40 two years ago.

  • Report this Comment On May 08, 2013, at 12:21 AM, Dschnei1 wrote:

    I'm surprised this article was published also. Pwc resigning has nothing to do with Las Vegas sands risks in Macau. That is just plain wrong. I agree with the first commentor that pwc was probably offered to resign or there was a pay dispute for services. Lvs will most likely continue to prosper because of Macau. Take a trip to china a see the action first hand.

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 2415984, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 8/20/2014 7:00:49 PM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement