<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sarbanes Oxley</title>
	<atom:link href="http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/2715.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/2715.html</link>
	<description>Some Chicago Boyz know each other from student days at the University of Chicago. Others are Chicago boys in spirit. The blog name is also intended as a good-humored gesture of admiration for distinguished Chicago boys including those pictured above.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 03:04:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: spongeworthy</title>
		<link>http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/2715.html/comment-page-1#comment-8164</link>
		<dc:creator>spongeworthy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:20:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www390.pair.com/chicagob/blog/002715.php#comment-8164</guid>
		<description>It means they didn&#039;t engage PWC Consulting for a SA compliance gig.

I jest, of course.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It means they didn&#8217;t engage PWC Consulting for a SA compliance gig.</p>
<p>I jest, of course.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ralf Goergens</title>
		<link>http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/2715.html/comment-page-1#comment-8163</link>
		<dc:creator>Ralf Goergens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Dec 2004 17:15:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www390.pair.com/chicagob/blog/002715.php#comment-8163</guid>
		<description>&lt;blockquote&gt;the third is that they are unlikely to get a clean opinion&lt;/blockquote&gt;

In which sense? They broke some laws and regulations or did they fail to exercice due dilligence?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><p>the third is that they are unlikely to get a clean opinion</p></blockquote>
<p>In which sense? They broke some laws and regulations or did they fail to exercice due dilligence?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

