Aims to contribute to the understanding of the Australian standard‐setting due process. Analyses submissions made on Exposure Draft 49 Accounting for Identifiable Intangible Assets (ED49) as a case study of the strategies employed by lobbyists in their attempt to influence the accounting standard setters. Previous studies on respondents′ submissions have ignored the possibility that, in responding to exposure drafts, lobbyists are provided with a means of persuasion in excess of casting votes. Employs a form of content analysis to study the political process of standard setting. The results suggest that respondents on ED49 attempted to weight their lobby positions with the use of supporting arguments that utilized conceptual and/or economic consequences rationale and presented positions of differing strengths.