And nobody has any way of knowing if this is actually true do they? There is no independent third-party verification of your assertions is there? So why not commission such an audit then. Why not make actual verification your distinguishing characteristic then?

I am also very curious how support and operations troubleshoot client issues in the absence of any logging.

An audit only proves the claims were valid at the time the auditor was present. I see them as the health inspections at the local greasy spoon.

No, health inspections are instaneous spots checks. Audits are far more extensive and look at historicals. This is how nearly all audits work - financial audits, tax audits, compliance audits etc. They are not the same at all.

Furthermore an independent audit is still far more credible than believing something is true simply "because the CEO said so."