To: jwk who wrote (15581 ) 4/28/1998 12:30:00 AM From: jwk Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 31646
>> The firm's strategy is first to help its clients achieve legal and technical compliance , then make them aware of problems that could arise from non-compliance on the part of their consultants, vendors or customers. << all the posts about the near term trading price are interesting, but when you have statements like this being published doesn't it make you want to step back and take a bit longer term view? Hey, THE LAWYERS ARE ON TO Y2K!! If the CEO's haven't wanted to listen to the shop floor tech-geeks prattle on about embedded chips and stuff, that's one thing. BUT, when the legal department shouts, "HEY!!! WE GOTTA COVER OUR CORPORATE ASS, AND HERE'S HOW WE'RE GOIN' DO IT........" You think the suits aren't going to sit up and take notice? And, who are they going to call to help them check their chips? >>> While the scope of the problem remains unclear, there is no ambiguity whatsoever about the potential for new legal business on a staggering scale. ..... <<<< If it' going to cost that much for legal protection, what kind of numbers are the CEO's hearing from their legal teams about what lawsuits could cost them if they don't take reasonable and prudent precautions, like checking their chips, at least up to industry standards? >>> The enormous financial potential, from a legal perspective, has become apparent now that client business is building up - a full 20 months before the date changes - and will live on in litigation for many years after the new millennium. ..... <<<< or perhaps the Bill Wexlers of the world are right -- all this is nothing but hype and the lawyers are jumping in on it just 'cause they can, and because it's going to make many of them very rich.