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 : TAVA Technologies (TAVA-NASDAQ) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Howell who wrote (21471)	7/31/1998 3:21:00 PM
From: Ken Salaets	Respond to of 31646

Well I'll be damned, John, for once we agree. I would add, however, that it's dem damn opportunistic lawsuits that have the most to do with it, but we're working on that. K

To: John Howell who wrote (21471)	7/31/1998 3:35:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 31646

Are you beginning to show your true colors, John??.... It would seem your agenda is to protect the Big Cap companies who are hiding behind their legal mumbo-jumbo, while obfuscating the risks of Y2K on their operations. We need a little more than "the costs to fix Y2K are not deemed material" or talking to their PR folks and hearing "we're on top of the issue". What's wrong with a little disclosure, John?? If they have their systems fixed, GREAT!! Let them put it in writing and appraise their shareholders of the REAL RISKS to operations, rather than hiding behind the same old BS. It is not the cost of fixing Y2K that is material... it is the cost of NOT FIXING IT in time. And I want to know what those risks and what they are doing to mitigate it. One thing that money cannot buy you is more time or sufficient resources. And yes the US government has the legal right to demand this disclosure, just like they have the legal right to offer a moratorium on litigation pertaining to Y2K, so long as companies share information with each other to fix the problem. I support both proposals. One thing I have become suspicious of is the way the street analysts are denigrating the risks of Y2K and trashing the Y2K stock sector as unviable. They do this while at the same playing up the value of Big Cap companies with earnings already being impacted by Asian woes, thus driving up valuations and P/E ratios. Please don't prove me correct by denying shareholders some comforting disclosure on Y2K. The longer disclosure is avoided, the greater will be the ultimate panic. Like Tony Keyes has stated... better to panic now and come to grips with the issue than later when you are suddenly blindsided. No one can maintain a panic mentality for 17 months straight... Eventually we all calm down and face the problem in a rational and diligent manner. Regards, Ron

To: John Howell who wrote (21471)	7/31/1998 4:33:00 PM
From: C.K. Houston	Respond to of 31646

<Neither Sen. Dodd nor the U.S. Government has any legal right to demand this information.> Well ... whether he has a "legal" right or not ... When the implied "threat" was made last week (to make company names public) at the medical device hearing ... of 233 medical device companies (out of 2700) who had not responded to requests for info on Y2K compliance from FDA (since early last summer) ... 134 all of a sudden started responding. 99 still haven't. You might be confused about what's being referred to here. In the case of medical devices, requests went out last summer to medical device manufacturers asking for information about Y2K compliance on specific medical devices. Are they compliant? If not, what has to be done to fix them? Do a "work around"? Provide a patch? Trash and replace with new advice? In the case of telecoms, while many would like as much detailed information as possible ... the point being made here was that NO information whatsoever has been forthcoming from certain telecoms ... not a "confirming receipt of your request - will get back to you" response ... NOTHING. That's the list he wanted, and those are the names that would be made public if there was continued silence. As I recall 20 of each of the MAJOR telecoms have responded with reassurances. But, several hundred letters were sent out to various carriers, and response rate has been mixed and not encouraging. There were all kinds of carriers which were discussed today: wires, wireless, satellites, ISP's, etc. *ONE THING THAT EVERYONE* AGREED UPON: Across the board ... VERY gloomy picture globally. <As is typical of elected officials and government beauracrats, no consideration has been given to those companies that have already dealt with their y2k issues and hold a competitive advantage against those who haven't. Forced disclosure of these business strategies removes much of the advantage.> Actually this very issue was discussed today. Surprisingly each of the industry leaders (in individual prepared & broadcasted testimony) asked that legislation be passed to allow sharing of information. "Good Samaritan", "Anti-Trust" kinda stuff. As I recall, two of the witnesses were from AT&T and GTE. I can't remember the name of the satellite system ... but it's the largest in US (if not the world). Same thing with him. These guys aren't worried about "competitive advantage". They're worried about "survival". None of these companies operates in isolation. Everything is integrated. Lots of dependencies. Guys further down the food chain can knock them out. Everyone's hands are tied because no one is getting adequate information. Lots of meaningless paper trails being created. Actually there IS a bill that the administration has proposed, which will be refined and (according to Bennett) come up for vote in September. He stressed, this has to resolved by then ... or we run out of time. [While Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) heads Senate Banking Committee, he also chairs a bi-partisan committee which has been created in the past 2 months: "Y2K Computer Problem". He's the chair and Senator Dodd (D-Conn) is Vice-Chair. This is the committee which had the hearing today.] Both sides are finally working together. I wish I could remember the guy's name in charge of the Y2K "Good Samaritan" bill and what committee he's with ... but Senator Bennett made an interesting comment. He said something to the effect that "It's good that Senator X? is heading the committee (with the bill) which is under the jurisdiction of XXXX(?) ... and they can** pass legislation which becomes law, whereas we can't. Maybe Ken Salaets knows the specifics on this ... he's in DC, and is involved with this stuff. *OOOOOH - Here is one thing that I definitely* remember.** Senator Bennett asked the FCC Director, how much authority the FCC has to enforce recommendations that they make. After some hemming and hawing, answer basically was "none". We can only make strong recommendations. HOWEVER, Bennett then asked the FCC "Defense" Chairman/Director, What is a "Defense" Chairman/Director"? "What authority do you have?" Besides the regular mumbo jumbo about what he does ... He said "If the president calls a state-of-emergency, I don't need to interact with other members of the FCC. I can take action as needed without votes. VERY INTERESTING. He came on board in May '98. Cheryl P.S. You don't really know me cause you've come on board because you saw TAVA as a "short" opportunity. I always saw "shorting" as "un-American" and never considered doing it. Being pragmatic, and anticipating a market crash next year. I will be shorting on industries which are behind the 8-ball on Y2K fixes and/or strong global dependencies. (Not TAVA.) Y2K problems will show up soon and have negative impact on operations and earnings. SEC & government will force disclosure. Who knows when? Might not be in enough time to get this stuff fixed. But, IMHO will eventually happen.

To: John Howell who wrote (21471)	7/31/1998 4:43:00 PM
From: James Strauss	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 31646

Getting Our Priorities Straight... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ John: Normally I would agree that the Gov't has no business poking around in business... But... If the country faces a possible major catastrophe, it has the right and obligation to marshal all the forces necessary to try to avert or minimize the effects of that catastrophe... In WW II the Gov't set up rationing and worked with manufacturers to shift from peace time to military production... Y2k presents a big Black Hole of what could go wrong... Millions of lives (maybe yours or mine) might be put into jeopardy as a result of Food shortages, Power shortages, Medical equipment malfunctioning, Military defense systems malfunctioning, etc., etc... I have no problem with American industry working together for the benefit of the country... If it takes the Gov't to give them a push, so be it... Jim