Bill,
I have read the previous posts and am delighted that you started
this board.
I agree that the idea (and much of the evidence) that many Y2K
stocks have been bid up to unsustainable levels, by hype and misinformation or misunderstanding, is compelling. In fact I
think its one of the most compelling investment themes I've seen
in a long time. Thank you for reminding me to spend more time on
it.
However, I think you do yourself and your idea a tremendous
disservice by the degree to which you argue that the Y2K is
a big hoax. David Eddy's comments strike me as objective,
rationale and quite patient.
I cant believe that any informed reader wouldn't agree with
Mr. Eddy's observation that Y2K hype and Y2K stock hype or
two different things.
Certainly the Y2K problem has been hyped in many cases.
But is it possible that there are many companies and countries
where the issue has not yet been given sufficient attention ?
Perhaps a little hyping does less damage than to underestimate
the problem ? (just want to mention this has a possibly valid
observation).
I dont mean to suggest that one shouldn't be concerned by
Y2K hype. We should all hope that companies and governments
approach the problem rationally and calmly and get their fixes
done on time. Too much hype could just cause companies and
banks to panic and worry about liquidity and daylight
overdrafts and the next thing you know they've created a
bigger mess than was ever necessary.
But Y2K should not be minimized to the extent you minimize it.
I think I'm in good (informed and plentiful) company in saying
that Y2K fixes will be massive undertakings that many companies
(and possibly most government organizations) may fail to
complete adequately or on time. What will be the result ?
Is it possible that there will be a huge mess that will take
many months to sort through. Is there risk ? It would seem so.
No one really knows what will happen if too many payments come
in late, transactions don't settle, or a lot of mission
critical systems in different places have to be taken down at
the same time during the day. Sure, as you pointed out in one
of your notes, these things happen all the time and get worked through. But is it possible that the simultaneous occurrence
and interaction of so many such events makes the Y2K problem
somehow different in the risk/uncertainty it poses ?
BTW, I am a former programmer. I programmed in COBOL and other languages for a large bank. 10 years ago I was coding 2-digit
COBOL dates all over the place (we were still being told to do
so in order to save space....and besides, "thats just the way
its done"). I worked on or reviewed software modules from many
major systems and I distinctly recall that 2 digit years were
used almost exclusively. As a programmer, like you, I have a
sense for the liklihood of completing large programming projects
on time and under budget. I'm sure it has happened. I just
never witnessed it.
So...
Is the Y2K problem a hoax ? No (I feel quite comfortable).
Will it be a big problem ? Probably.
How big ? I don't know and I'm not sure you do either.
Stick with the stock theme.
To quote Nadine, in another board, who quoted Oliver Cromwell:
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible you
MAY be mistaken" |
