The following is a real email thread that has been going on over the last couple of days. In the spirit of keeping myself employed and out of court I have altered the identities of the participants. Note that the altered text is [blue]. I have also presented it to read from top to bottom - which is not the way the thread originally appeared.
From: [Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC]
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:16:07 -0700
To: [Harbinger of Doom]
Subject: I received 3 reject samples from [the accountant that does your SOX compliance]
[Harbinger of Doom],
I received some reject samples from [the accountant that does your SOX compliance]. There is a [the other vendor - who actually makes the crap that passes QC] sticker with the samples. What is the purpose of these samples?
[Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC]
From: [Harbinger of Doom]
To: [Harbinger's ineffectual boss];[Sarcastic Brit]
Cc: [Fearful COO]; [CEO aka Swiper the Fox]
Sent: Tue Aug 18 18:14:11 2009
Subject: FW: I received 3 reject samples from [the accountant that does the SOX compliance]
[Ineffectual Boss],
I have five questions:
- Why is [the accountant that does the SOX compliance] working on chip QC with [Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC]?
- Who gave [the accountant that does the SOX compliance] the samples?
- What are the samples?
- Why was I not told that this was happening?
- Who gets to tell [Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC] that we are so disorganized that we gave him samples from a competing vendor, and that the engineering team had no idea that it was happening?
I appreciated your telling [Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC] that I was the point of contact, but it seems to be untrue.
Cheers,
[Harbinger of Doom]
From: [CEO aka Swiper the Fox]
Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 10:03 PM
To: [Habinger of Doom]; [Harbinger's ineffectual boss]; [Sarcastic Brit]
Cc: [Fearful COO]
Subject: Re: I received 3 reject samples from [the accountant that does the SOX compliance]
What is going on?
[CEO aka Swiper the Fox]
From: [Harbinger's ineffectual boss]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 9:36 AM
To: [CEO aka Swiper the Fox]; [Harbinger of Doom]; [Sarcastic Brit]
Cc: [Fearful COO]
Subject: RE: I received 3 reject samples from [the accountant that does the SOX compliance]
I have no idea what [the accountant that does the SOX compliance] is giving to, nor communicating to, [Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC]. What are the goals of his trip?
I am not aware of any engineering discussions that he needs to be involved with.
-[Harbinger's ineffectual boss]
From: [Harbinger's ineffectual boss]
Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2009 11:13 AM
To: [the accountant that does the SOX compliance]; [CEO aka Swiper the Fox]; [Harbinger of Doom]; [Sarcastic Brit]
Cc: [Fearful COO]; [Investor who wants a refund]
Subject: RE: I received 3 reject samples from [the accountant that does the SOX compliance]
[the accountant that does the SOX compliance] ,
What is the source of these chips, and why are you having technical discussions with [Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC]? From what I heard, you gave [Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC] labeled reject chips from [the other vendor - who actually makes the crap that passes QC], our primary chip vendor. If that is the case, it is obviously bad business practice to expose the identity of the competing vendor, as well as give their samples to the second source. [Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC] is already well aware of the specifications and the quality improvements that they need to demonstrate.
Please do not free-lance on technical issues. In this case, [Harbinger of Doom] is the POC with [Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC] and will handle all technical communications.
-[Harbinger's ineffectual boss]
From:[the accountant that does the SOX compliance]
| Sent: | Wednesday, August 19, 2009 4:48 PM |
| To: | |
| Cc: | [Fearful COO]; [Investor who wants a refund] |
I never have any technical issue with the china chip, and never talk to him about china, I brought the [Part Supplier whose stuff doesn't pass QC] chip , so they can see what was wrong with the chip that was rejected by [the former head of Engineering that was sacked for being too honest and competent], that was all
One final note on this topic, the accountant that does the Sorbanes Oxley compliance doesn't actually do any of the work. The accounting is done by a consultant and the filings were done by the receptionist. Until she got sacked for being unable to answer the phone. What does the accountant who is supposed to be doing the SOX compliance do? Good question. He spends a lot of time lurking in dark rooms talking on his cell phone in spanish. It has become a common game to enter the room he's in, turn on the lights and count the number of seconds it takes him to scuttle away like a cockroach.
But... more on that later.
looks better
ReplyDelete