SITEK INC
8-K/A, EX-16.1, 2000-06-12
BLANK CHECKS
Previous: SITEK INC, 8-K/A, 2000-06-12
Next: SITEK INC, 8-K, 2000-06-12



May 31, 2000

Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, DC 20549

We were previously the independent accountants for Prodeo Technologies, Inc. and
Subsidiaries  (Prodeo  or the  Registrant).  We  reported  on  the  Registrant's
financial statements as of and for the period ended March 31, 1999. We commenced
the audit of the financial  statements as of and fthe year ended March 31, 2000.
While in the  process of the 2000  audit,  on May 2, 2000 we were  notified  the
Registrant had dismissed us as independent accountants of Prodeo.

On May 11, 2000 we obtained  and read a copy of the Form 8-K of Prodeo dated May
3, 2000. We have read such  statements  included  under Item 4 and we agree with
such statements, insofar as they relate to McGladrey & Pullen, LLP as follows:

     *    Paragraph two refers to the fiscal year ending  December 31, 1999. The
          fiscal period which we audited was March 31, 1999.

As explained further below, we do not agree with the Registrant's  comments that
there were no disagreements as noted in the 4th paragraph of the Form 8-K.

The following  disagreement on the Company's  accounting  policies and practices
was uat the date of our  dismissal,  which  if not  ultimately  resolved  to our
satisfaction  would  have  caused us to make  reference  in our report as to the
subject of such disagreement if still unresolved at issuance of our report:

     *    We had been provided  information and an agreement about a transaction
          which  occurred in the quarter ended March 31, 2000.  The  transaction
          involved  the  exchange of Prodeo  inventory  for  inventory  owned by
          another  party.  The current  Prodeo  Chief  Financial  Officer  (CFO)
          indicated  the  Registrant's   desire  to  recognize  revenue  on  the
          exchange.  We indicated  our belief that revenue  recognition  was not
          appropriate. We provided the CFO and the former CFO with the generally
          accepted  accounting  principles we believed were  appropriate for the
          transaction  as well as the recent SEC Staff  Accounting  Bulletin  on
          revenue  recognition prior to our dismissal.  As of the dismissal date
          we had not met with the Cto  discuss  the  accounting  literature  and
          Staff Accounting Bulletin and its application to the transaction.

/s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP

McGLADREY & PULLEN, LLP


© 2022 IncJournal is not affiliated with or endorsed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission