You're probably right. As an investor I know that DT is well aware of the hit pieces and has gone the extra mile to increase their testing to ensure that there is no validity. The added incentive was that the reference to the 2009 revenues is so extreme and tied to the already audited stmts that it makes it more difficult for them to try to distance themselves from the risk which is good for shareholders. Now we can be even more confident that if they issue an unqualified opinion it means that they have vetted each and every material claim of fraud and dismissed them. It also means that if they dismiss the audit, they likely did find something and are leaving because of that, not the issue of incremental risk.
So my personal confidence while already high will go up to completlevel upon a clean opinion. But that's me and not the general market so if CCME wants to quell the noise and discredit MW and Citron going to this type of extreme may make sense. By that I don't mean posting bank statements on line or things like that. I'm not a believer of those types of actions. I do think a special review of the bus count, the statement that 1/2 the screens are playing DVD's, etc could be a relatively effective limited review strategy and would likely be more effective if a separate high end audit firm were used.
I personally though would prefer the double listing in HK. It's been shown to unlock value in intl companies and by using the right banker to do it would add enormous credibility. They don't need the cash so I would also prefer they did it with say the 2010 earnout shares with a minor amount, say 500k of company shares. Unfortunately no one will want to see at a price of less than say $15-20 so might take some arm twisting to get there.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
