2026-01-17 17:25:48

It's interesting how some projects navigate the accounting firm selection process. Remember when certain platforms faced pushback from major audit firms and had to pivot toward more flexible partners willing to work within the Web3 space? These kinds of behind-the-scenes decisions often tell us something about project governance and operational reality. Worth watching how these choices play out across different projects in this cycle.

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

20 Likes

Reward
20
5
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

GateUser-e87b21ee

· 01-20 12:31

That audit stuff, to put it simply, is about checking whether the project has real capability... When it gets rejected by a major audit firm, it's time to be alert.

View OriginalReply0

QuietlyStaking

· 01-20 04:09

Damn, that's why I never trust projects endorsed by those big auditing firms, it's all nonsense.

View OriginalReply0

FUD_Vaccinated

· 01-17 17:52

Choosing an auditing firm... to put it simply, it's about who is willing to vouch for you. When you can't find big-name firms, you have to turn to smaller ones. This tactic is even more obvious in a bear market.

View OriginalReply0

SatoshiNotNakamoto

· 01-17 17:46

Choosing an auditing firm is essentially a truth detector. Big firms are reluctant to get involved, so they have to turn to smaller ones. Would the project team have no doubts if they weren't guilty?

View OriginalReply0

All-InQueen

· 01-17 17:40

Basically, it means being disliked by big audit firms and having to turn to small workshops willing to play Web3... Doesn't this just reflect that the project team itself is unsure?

View OriginalReply0