It may just be an uncanny coincidence but laws of probability aside, the frequency with which companies and their auditors part ways over fee disagreements raises serious questions over corporate reporting.
It may be that a company sought the assistance of a Big Four firm to give it kudos during its listing, only to face financial reality months down the line. The difference in fees between a Big Four firm and a smaller one can be vast.
Yet a perusal of company announcements during one of the toughest times in Growth Enterprise Market history - the Sars period - seems to suggest they weathered the storm without flicking auditors on a mass scale. Instead, changes of auditor are quite evenly spread across the past 18 months.
In the majority of cases, the company switches from a Big Four accountancy firm to a smaller player, conveying the sense that post-Enron, the behemoths are getting nervous.
This is particularly acute in a city where up to 90 per cent of new listing candidates are based across the border, where firms display a penchant for non-transparency and auditors face geographical difficulties in pinning down information.
It may be that the auditor believes further work has to be done on the account but cannot find the information needed. For the client to save face and avoid a qualified audit, the auditor steps down.