2000: Y2K Civilized Discussion Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : 2000: Y2K Civilized Discussion

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (81)	8/11/1999 12:07:00 PM
From: flatsville	Read Replies (2) of 662

Ron-- You wrote: >>>"I really sympathize with Ed Yardeni that there just seems to be a lack of reliable data with which to make a realistic analysis."<<< Yes, exactly. But I think we are starting to learn just how "unreliable" the data is now that the "confession" (Cap Gemini) and "fingerpointing" (Canada/Isreal) style articles have started. This kind of analysis is the science of reading entrails at best...And the entrails are not so fresh or true as we've been led to believe. You also wrote: >>>"What do you make of the comment that 75% of all corporations have ALREADY suffered a Y2K related failure?? Now, taken at face value, this disturbs me. However, in light of the apparent claim that problems suffered to date were not "show stoppers", it is difficult to predict exactly what the repercussions are going to be."<<< I think the answer to your question is in the article. Look at the following stats and consider the implications: >>>...While 92 had reported increases in "milestone slippage" both in December and May, only 81 percent are now experiencing an accelerated incidence of missed deadlines...<<< They (and that is the MAJORITY they) are blowing deadlines...at a decreasing rate...but they (still the MAJORITY they) are still blowing deadlines...at this very late stage of the game. >>>...One in five companies (18 percent) expect that 75 percent or less of their critical systems will be "completely tested and compliant" by December 31, 1999...<<< Almost 20% of large U.S. LARGE companies will head into rollover "completely" clueless. Perhaps then then 36% have a clue? (That 36% in the 76-99% completely tested and compliant range?) And then consider this: According to the article "fewer than half of America's largest companies (48 percent) expect all of their critical systems to be prepared for the Year 2000." Good Lord, they have great expectations! At this stage of the game 100%-36%=64% of companies less than 76% completely tested and compliant right? So we're to believe that some how, some way some of these 64% less than 76% completed companies are going to move into a mythical 48% completely tested and compliant category in the next four months as the majority of these companies continue to miss dealines? I think not. Harsh analysis? Maybe, but consider the following admission: >>>...Virtually every respondent (99 percent) anticipates "an increase in systems failures into the remainder of 1999 and beyond..."<<< Well yeah. I guess so. (I hope the respondents are speaking in general rather than specific terms. If not, I believe that means that many of these companies have had numerous "non-critical" failures to lead them to such a pessimistic view of the future?) In my mind the question is not "Will company X experience a 'show stopper failure?' but rather "How many failures can company X sustain (internal and external) before they 'stop the show?'" I think you are right in finding this news disturbing. (Perhaps my reasoning is faulty and my math is bad because the article is poorly written or the survey stats are badly reported. Got me? Part of unreliable data problem.)

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next