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 : PSFT - Fiscal 1998 - Discussion for the next year -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (2090)	9/3/1998 1:43:00 PM
From: Melissa McAuliffe	Respond to of 4509

Mindmeld, I think that at this point most of the Fortune 500's that were licensing ERP software because of y2k have already done so. I would venture to say that there are very few sales at this point that are a result of y2k compliance. It just takes too long to implement and this is just cutting it too close, IMHO. Not to say there are none but far more the exception than the rule. Melissa

To: RetiredNow who wrote (2090)	9/3/1998 5:36:00 PM
From: Lutz Moeller	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 4509

mindmeld, to become Y2k compliant is a sales argument for SAP. So why not for the other ERP vendors as well? Lutz

To: RetiredNow who wrote (2090)	9/3/1998 6:37:00 PM
From: growthvalue	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 4509

I agree with Melissa. Most of the Y2K related implementations have proabably already begun. Here's the Y2K slowdown argument. I think it is correct, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise. Any company who is not compliant no longer can do so by implementing new systems. Therefore, companies need to fix their legacy applications. Also, many many companies are cutting it close and are way behind where they should be right now. So, you have a decline in the number of companies who are buying PSFT licenses to become Y2K compliant. And companies who are NOT compliant are both too busy fixing their legacy applications to consider new purchases. They are also not in the market to replace their in-house human resource, financial, etc, ERP applications, since they are fixing the ones they have. The final piece is that even if you are compliant, you don't know exactly what is going to happen once you get to the date and don't want to be in the middle of a huge implementation when the date hits. It's not an argument against the long-term health of PSFT or the ERP industry, just that Y2K could cause a speedbump. There are some statistics to support this as well. According to InformationWeek's Year 2000 issue, something 2/3 of companies over $1 billion in revenue are fixing legacy applications rather than replacing them. (This % would obviously increase as the date nears). Also, an estimated 25% of IT budgets are expected to be consumed by Y2K remediation. It indicates further that companies who are farther along in the process of remediation are finding that the problem is more costly and time-consuming to fix than anticipated. Finally 78% of organizations surveyed said that Y2K is having a "moderate" or "high" impact on other IT projects. This is in a bunch of different articles which you can all find from this link: informationweek.com Again, I love the company and its long-term prospects. In particular, I found it extremely promising how PSFT has rapidly gained market share versus SAP. But I'm very worried about Y2K and I'm not convinced by PSFT's answer in the conference call - I think they glossed over it and didn't address the concerns I just described. (The call is still going on - I'm typing as I listen). GV