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 : SEEC, Inc. (SEEC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maven1 who wrote (270)	5/15/1998 9:27:00 PM
From: R. M. Rosenthal	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1031

Assuming you're totally correct, where do you see SEEC going based on anticipated/est. revs.? I own it at 18 (plus assorted doses of MIFGY, SPNSF, TAVA, ACLY, CRYSF & COGIF which all add up to a substantial Y2K bite). It's been my view that discretion and denial are giving way exponentially to broader awareness and that when it reaches a certain level, the cream of the sector will rise rapidly. But to where...and at what pace?

To: Maven1 who wrote (270)	5/16/1998 10:49:00 AM
From: P. Ramamoorthy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1031

Zeke - Testing may be done in two steps: (1) by the vendor, after the remediating the code and before delivering the code back to the customer, to make sure the job is accomplished, (2) by the clients to make sure everything will work in year 2000. Third party testimonials will not be good enough for many conservative, blue chip, institutions that want to see successful testing done under actual environment and claim y2k compliance with SEC and share holders. Clients will test the code in the actual operating environment. Some may be satisfied with off-site testing. That is their decision. If the corrected code does not perform, the vendor takes it back and eat the costs of rework. Plenty of room for law suits in any one of the above steps. The short deadline does not give time to anyone for long, court cases. No CIO, no CFO, it's the CEO that is stopping the buck in many large companies. If mistakes are made in pension plans, finances, etc. there will be law suits. Just my opinion. MERQ and CRYSF have testing tools, I hear. Ram