????彭博（Bloomberg）的杜恩?勞倫斯和貝琳達(dá)?曹撰寫了一篇十分有意思的文章，就渾水（Muddy Water）對(duì)網(wǎng)秦（NQ Mobile）的攻擊進(jìn)行了探討,。文章得出了一個(gè)與會(huì)計(jì)有關(guān)的模棱兩可的結(jié)論,。

????彭博采訪的多位專家表示，每日銷售回款（DSO）高居不下是一個(gè)危險(xiǎn)的信號(hào),。較高的DSO通常不是件好事,，但是跟渾水所宣稱的相比，這種刻意而為的造假也只能是相形見絀,。渾水稱,，網(wǎng)秦超過90%的業(yè)務(wù)都是假的，公司不能憑借緩慢推高DSO達(dá)到瞞天過海的目的,。

????第二個(gè)焦點(diǎn)在于是否存在現(xiàn)金,。我認(rèn)為這是檢驗(yàn)公司是否是空殼的一面照妖鏡。如果有現(xiàn)金存在的話,，我覺得任何騙局都不可能達(dá)到渾水所宣稱的規(guī)模,。網(wǎng)秦正在采取一些特別措施，以解決這一問題,。1級(jí)/2級(jí)的爭論是毫無意義的,。

????資金的動(dòng)向更有意思。渾水稱,，網(wǎng)秦不可能在不違反中國法律的情況下將股票發(fā)售所得的收益轉(zhuǎn)移至可變利益實(shí)體（VIE）,。然而有幾位專家對(duì)此存有異議。

????會(huì)計(jì)德魯?彭斯滕表示,，有強(qiáng)大關(guān)系網(wǎng)的人可以繞開規(guī)定,。卡森?布洛克說,，（網(wǎng)秦公司）這些人沒有這個(gè)權(quán)力,。我跟布洛克的觀點(diǎn)一致。我很難相信,，這家公司竟能夠說服中國的銀行置法律而不顧,，允許他們將美元兌換成人民幣，然后將資金轉(zhuǎn)移至一家私營公司,。

????身為律師的洛基?李給出了另外一種解釋,。網(wǎng)秦將資金存放在一個(gè)離岸中國銀行,，作為給VIE所有人提供在岸貸款的擔(dān)保，而VIE所有者則將資金轉(zhuǎn)化為資本,。從財(cái)務(wù)報(bào)表來看,，事情并不是這樣。首先,，這種交易會(huì)要求實(shí)質(zhì)性披露,，而公司并未披露此類信息,。第二,，這家公司和VIE的資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表都表明，此類事情沒有發(fā)生過,。

????VIE稱總債務(wù)為1.61761億美元,。網(wǎng)秦稱總債務(wù)為3436.9萬美元，其中1687.1萬美元據(jù)稱是VIE的債務(wù),。因此,，為什么會(huì)存在1.4489億美元的差額？我認(rèn)為,，唯一合理的解釋就是,，差額是網(wǎng)秦外商獨(dú)資企業(yè)應(yīng)從VIE得到的公司間應(yīng)收賬款，而這筆賬款在合并后被取消了,。但這意味著VIE欠網(wǎng)秦1.45億美元,。如果這筆資金是按照李律師的所說的方式轉(zhuǎn)化成了資本，那么VIE是不應(yīng)該有債務(wù)的,。如果銀行向VIE貸了款,，那么合并之后貸款應(yīng)依然存在。

????因此,，1.45億美元是怎么轉(zhuǎn)入VIE的呢,？鑒于中國的外匯管制，我認(rèn)為將美元轉(zhuǎn)入VIE也只有一種途徑,。那就是在中國找一個(gè)擁有巨額人民幣,、且希望把人民幣換成美元的人。為此,，你找到一個(gè)手持6.5億人民幣的王先生,。我們姑且不問他的錢是從哪來的。王先生會(huì)去銀行兌換,，每年換5萬美元,。如果他還有2,097位朋友幫他一起換錢的話，即每人換5萬美元,，那么王先生一年就可以把這些錢換出來,?；蛘撸绻淮涡酝瓿傻脑?，你可以向王先生的香港賬戶打入1億美元,，當(dāng)然同時(shí)王先生也得在你的中國賬戶中存入6.5億人民幣。（你還可以藉此拿到不錯(cuò)的匯率）,。這種方法的實(shí)現(xiàn)方式多種多樣（李律師在文章中就提到過上市公司曾使用過的一種方式）,，也有做這種交易的中間人。很多財(cái)富便是通過這種形式離開了中國,，而這都違反了中國的外匯管制規(guī)定,。

????但有可能網(wǎng)秦找到了一種更好的合法途徑。我愿意洗耳恭聽,。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：翔???

????There was an interesting article by Dune Lawrence and Belinda Cao of Bloomberg looking at the status of Muddy Water’s attack on NQ Mobile. The article reaches a mixed conclusion on the accounting.

????Several experts interviewed by Bloomberg said the high days sales outstanding (DSO) was a red flag. High DSO usually is a red flag, but a fraud perpetrated in this way would be quite small compared to what Muddy Water’s alleges. Muddy Water’s says that over 90% of the business is fake, and you can’t cover that up by edging up DSO.

????The second issue is whether the cash is there. I consider that the true test of whether the company is a fraud. If the cash is there, I see no way that any fraud could be of the scale alleged by Muddy Waters. The company is taking some extraordinary steps to clear this issue up. The Level 1/Level 2 controversy is meaningless.

????The movement of funds is more interesting. Muddy Water’s alleged that it was impossible for NQ Mobile to transfer the proceeds of the offering to the VIE without violating Chinese law. A couple of experts disagreed with that.

????Accountant Drew Bernstein said well-connected people can work around the rules. Carson Block says these people don’t have that kind of clout. I side with Block on this. I seriously doubt that the company could have convinced a Chinese bank to simply ignore the law and allow them to exchange dollars into renminbi and then transfer the funds to a privately held company.

????Lawyer Rocky Lee suggests another possibility. NQ deposits the funds with a Chinese bank offshore as security for an onshore loan to the VIE owner, who inserts the funds as capital. It is clear from the financial statements that is not what happened. First, such a transaction would require substantial disclosures that are not present. Second, the balance sheets of the companyand the VIE make it clear that is not what happened.

????The VIE reports total liabilities of US$161,761,000. NQ Mobile reports total liabilities of US$34,369,000 of which $16,871,000 are said to be liabilities of the VIE. So, why the difference of $144,890,000? The only explanation that makes sense to me is that the difference is an intercompany receivable from the VIE to NQ Mobile’s WFOE that is eliminated in consolidation. But that means that the VIE owes NQ Mobile $145 million. If the money had been contributed as capital in the manner suggested by Rocky Lee there would not be debt in the VIE. If the bank had loaned the money to the VIE the loan would not have been eliminated in consolidation.

????So, how did that $145 million get there? Given China’s exchange controls I see only one way to get dollars into a VIE. That is to find someone inside China who has a big pile of RMB and who wants to exchange it for dollars. So, you find Mr. Wang who has 650 million renminbi. We won’t ask how he got it. Mr. Wang could go to the bank and exchange $50,000 per year. If he had 2,097 friends help him, each taking out $50,000, he could get the money out in one year. Or, to do it all at once you could offer to deposit $100 million in Mr. Wang’s Hong Kong account if he will deposit his 650 million renminbi in your China account. (You can get a great exchange rate this way as well). There are a number of variations on this approach (Rocky Lee suggested one in the article that has also been used by public companies). There are middlemen who do these transactions. A lot of wealth has left China in this fashion, all in violations of China’s exchange controls.

????But perhaps NQ Mobile found a better, legal way to do it. I am all ears.