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 : INFORMATION ANALYSIS (IAIC) - YEAR 2000 Date Remediation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ThirdEye who wrote (1685)	6/12/1998 3:22:00 PM
From: _scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2011

re- why sell. I needed the money TODAY.

To: ThirdEye who wrote (1685)	6/13/1998 4:01:00 PM
From: cage	Respond to of 2011

Each to his/her own, but if the price goes any lower I think I will buy some more in anticipation of the prosperous Q coming up. Just read an article in the papers concerning airports and flights and what the fear is. They are now saying that they are not sure that there will be any flights on Jan1, 2000 for fear of non y2k compliance and computer failure. I myself am quite amazed that the y2k problem can infect the flight patterns of planes, but I am not a tech person. I do know that statements like that coming from such a large industry only serve to show the seriousness of the coming millenium. I am unsure of what the y2k sector will do for the next 2-3 months, though I would think it is ready to take off in certain instances-IAIC being one of them(of course I could be wrong). I do expect IAIC to move up sometime this week at least to 13-14 on very positive news coming out, but that remains to be seen. I am a long time holder and will not be devastated if it doesn't react that way. I will say that come Nov. -Dec. of 98 and Jan of 99 the y2k sector will be the main focus of the market(if not sooner). Also, as of September 98, the banking industry (from what I have read) will have to report to the gov't what state they are in as far as y2k compliance and what they are doing about it if they are not yet compliant. As a result of that many banks are also investigating companies that they deal with and are checking out their level of y2k compliance. Certain investment houses have already stated that past a certain date(which is not to far off-sometime in 98) they will not invest in companies that do not have solid plans to address the y2k problem if in fact they have any or if they are already compliant. I believe as a result the reluctance of most companies to allow their names to be used in press releases of y2k companies at this time, will change to a desire to have their names being used to show that they are doing something about it and will be compliant by the necessary time. It is almost redundant in some cases since the govt and the banking industry as well as the investment industry will start pointing to the compliant and the non compliant and to the level of compliancy of most companies. I have held on for quite a while and figure it will pay off very nicely by years end. To tell the truth though I don't think I will sell much before later into 99 since it IMHO the price per LOC will ramp up as much as ten fold by some time in 99 from what it is today, as companies start panicing because of "not enough time left- fear" and the tremendous amount of competition they will be facing in getting viable y2k companies to handle their company's problems "first". Since IAIC is a very viable company and it is aligned with CA and CACI as well as others and it will be getting through those contacts-gov't as well as private corporation contracts which will total huge amounts before it is over, I am quite secure in seeing IAIC's price ramp up quite a bit in due time. The latest pieces of news on y2k is centering on the almost virtual non-existance of smaller to medium size companies from doing anything to address the on-coming problem. Many feel that since they have limited numbers of LOC to "fix" that they will not be worth working with-that is very misleading since the larger corporations with huge #'s of LOC in fact get a discount per LOC. The smaller companies will pay a premium because they present such small #'s of LOC. In effect they will be quite profitable to y2k companies when not one but a hundred small companies use a y2k company to "fix" their problem. As a follow-up-IAIC is at the same time busy getting aligned with major corporations for work not related to y2k compliance but since IAIC will be doing y2k work for those corporations and getting in good with them it will bode well for them to continue in other spheres of technology such as remediation. I do not expect remediation to be the only other tech area that IAIC is involved in post y2k it is just one that they are very experienced with and it will help form a very stable and large revenue base. As was mentioned in former reports, IAIC is in talks with Oracle and Hewlet P for post y2k work. For all we know more companies may have been added to the negotiation list with IAIC. Add the companies that IAIC is doing the y2k compliance work for and it could be very big. What seems to be forgotten in all the fuss about y2k companies being non solvent past y2k is that all technologies change on a regular basis. That is the nature of the beast, yet for some reason the y2k sector is the only one that has been stamped as being dead after that huge revenue source starts to dry up sometime after 2002 to 2005. All successful technology companies are ones that have been able to change as the technology needed has changed. What makes Y2K any different in that area? Sorry if I rambled, but I got on a binge and just went with it. To all of you, have a good day.