Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cheeky Kid who wrote (9631)	1/1/2000 2:10:00 PM
From: marcos	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9818

Apocalypse Not, it would seem. Cheeky, you were right. Now if Classic makes it through to y3k, i'll be tickled. I've wanted a generator for years, our power gets taken out by windthrown trees every winter, and they're so useful for construction. Should be able to get a nice cheap one now -g-

To: Cheeky Kid who wrote (9631)	1/2/2000 7:07:00 PM
From: Cheeky Kid	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9818

I wasn't going to post here again, but I felt the need to post this: The great anti-climax By Mitch Ratcliffe, ZDY2K December 30, 1999 zdnet.com I have been exchanging e-mails with Mitch Ratcliffe today, about my concern that there could have been more too Y2K than meets the eye, basically in my opinion it appears to be a major money making racket. This is what he said: E-Mail posted with his permission: >> I think that some consultants billed far too much, and there was certainly no lack of opportunistic publishing. However, there was a very real problem and many consultants and conference producers were serving a valuable and important role. All in all, my experience tells me that there was no more exploitation of Y2K than usual among technology consultants. Of course, there is a lot of exploitation of fears of obsolescence all the time. See my last piece, published Thursday, on ZDY2K. Mitch <<