Bill, thanks for the input. I don't doubt what you are saying. Tom specifically told me he would not exercise those options unless it was a tax free exchange. OTH, I must agree with you; if he only has 6 months to make a decision or lose the options, tax problem or not, we both know the decision. Let me just ask: Since Tom basically is ACLY, could they amend the terms for exercising the options until end 98 or 99, etc? I plan to talk to Tom again next week but can't do it until mid-week as he is at the Chicago conference.
With regard to your point 7 regarding migration, Model T's and Viper's, I don't necessarily agree. Firstly, there are a lot of stand alone applications that are running just fine with all the horse power they need to do the job - signature verfication, FOREX and electronic funds transfer are the 3 I am familiar with at the one international bank I am thinking of. But running under VMS requires support and users trained in that interface. In addition, if there is excess capacity, then to switch from one OS to another requires basically re-ipling the system. If a company wishes to standardise on say, NT, then it behoves them to have everything under NT for the very reasons one decides to standardise. In many cases, it may not be economical to trash the existing software (and possibly hardware) to upgrade. With a migration tool you can perserve your investment in the software and if nothing else buy some breathing room while you decide how to upgrade. Of course, you will pay a performance penalty for having the interpreter running between VMS and NT but that may be liveable. Again, in the one environment I am thinking of this would be a very do-able solution.
Again thanks for your input. I posted Tom's number. If you can, give him a call. Maybe I am not asking all the right questions. I would be interested in your conclusions.
Marshall |
