To be sure, Arthur Andersen and Andersen Worldwide get to split about $1.2 billion among their 1,900 partners in escrowed payments and they get the use of the name Andersen Consulting.

But AC chief Forehand was facing down a possible $14 billion payout, plus the payments in escrow that went as high as 15 percent of profits annually. AC had offered billions in a buyout before the fracas went public in 1997. "We had offered to settle for billions," Forehand said. "They turned it down."

In fact, Arthur Andersen could have settled weeks ago and gotten a better deal, Forehand said. Perhaps it was no conincidence that within hours of the decision Arthur Andersen chief executive Jim Wadia moved to resign.

Forehand called relinquishing the Andersen name "a small price to pay for our independence." But, in fact, there were no "small" prices in this decades-old family squabble. Both firms are phenomonally successful, but one can't help wonder how much they could have accomplished if they hadn't had this dispute to distract them.

The International Chamber of Commerce arbitrator found that their parent, Andersen Worldwide, failed in its contractual obligation to assure cooperation, coordination and compatibility. Andersen Consulting's attorney called it a "dysfunctional" relationship. The relations had been so bad that Forehand could say, "I don't know that we've had a referral from them for a number of years."

Forehand will be unveiling the firm's next moves at the worldwide partners conference in October. Choosing and promoting a new name could cost $100 million. And the firm will push the boundaries of the very definition of a so-called consulting firm. They are evolving into a new breed of investment banker, a mercantilist strategy that fits the 21st Century with outlays of capital, technology, manpower and know-how. Andersen Consulting will particpate in eight initial public offerings this year. "Consulting hardly describes what we do anymore," Forehand said.

Andersen Worldwide has said it objects to the decision, but there is no clear path to appeal. The fate of the firms may be sealed. Maybe it was sealed as far back as 1989 when the accountants let the consultants spin off. At the time, it was a pioneering, revloutionary initiative. But they built a time-bomb. The consultants were never allowed to take full charge of their fate and their wealth. The accountants always insisted on a measure of control.

The lesson of the Andersen family feud is one that every professional services firms, indeed every business, is facing today -- encouraging innovation and enterprise, while assuring fair and flexible compensation. In the end, it's about the money.

What does the Andersen breakup say about the tax and accounting profession? Write information@smartpros.com