CH05 (banking/finance) questions from authorgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
Two fundamental questions: has anyone received, seen, or heard about a "positive" Y2K compliance statement from a bank? Is there any bank, anywhere, that says, "Yes, we're Y2K-compliant!"?
Second question: if you're concerned that your bank might NOT be Y2K-compliant -- or worse, that the entire banking system might suffer a serious disruption -- then what should you do with your savings, investments, and retirement funds? How is this affected by the restrictions and constraints on IRA/Keogh and other retirement funds? And if you think that some rearrangement or restructuring of funds is necessary, what's the latest safe date for doing it?
-- Ed Yourdon (email@example.com), December 24, 1997
According to John Train in his book Preserving Your Capital and Making It Grow, in any crisis there's nothing that beats gold -- "the one imperishable, portable, easily hidden value that has always been accepted by mankind" -- recent opinions to the contrary notwithstanding.
You kinda hate to publicly recommend that people pull their money out of banks, and contribute to a bank run. But I imagine people will think of it anyway.
Whether or not you're willing to pull money out of an IRA has to be a personal decision -- are you more worried about the penalty, or the risk (however large you believe that risk to be) of losing it all?
-- Dennis Peterson (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 26, 1997.
Is it permissable to answer a question with yet a deeper question? If so, here 'tis! If a financial institution says it Y2K compliant, who's to know or say differently? ie: How does one prove (at least to it's customers, that it's compliant/certified? Taken to another layer, if you're working on a Y2K project at a financial institution, how do you go from the testing phase to the compliancy/certification phase and produce whatever document/thing that will be acceptable to your customers? Has anyone seen that part surfacing yet? Is this going to be up to an independent body (the annual auditors?) to do that?
-- Ed Barkley (email@example.com), December 26, 1997.
As an investment advisor who is extremely concerned about the effects of y2k on portfolio investments, I have researched the issue of holding "potentially safe harbor" precious metals bullion within self-directed retirement accounts. This is not only possible but entirely legal. There presently are a handful of U.S.-based trust companies which provide the traditional range of fee-based custodial services for retirement accounts holding precious metals bullion. These trust companies are not well advertised at the moment but may become better known to the public as we get closer to zero hour.
In general, I strongly suspect that during 1999 the U.S. President will create a slew of emergency laws and measures to deal with y2k similar to the national banking holiday imposed during the Great Depression and the official rationing measures imposed during WWII. In this vein, be prepared for severe limitations on currency withdrawals from banks beginning sometime in 1999 as a means to thwart a serious run on the banks. Those who are planning ahead should stockpile currency in a bank safe deposit box during 1998 and early 1999...and plan to withdraw it from their bank's custody in mid-to-late 1999... in anticipation of the "next" national banking holiday which likely will coincide with banks being required to shut their doors in late 1999 until they have passed a battery of Federally-imposed y2k compliancy exams.
-- Randy L Flink (CFA100@msn.com), December 26, 1997.
I agree that holding gold is sound, but I question trusting anyone else holding it for you. If the system is going to break down, so will they. Also, keeping anything in a bank safe deposit box is chancey right now. I would hold my own gold and silver. You can use pipes and containers to bury it in a place known only to you. Also recommended is that you strew nails around in a wide area around your hoard of metals and/or ammo.
-- Agnes Devine (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 30, 1997.
Since awareness by the general public is still a bit down the road, fear has not hit wall street....have transferred stock account and IRA to the Prudent Bear Fund (no load) minimum invest. $1,000 for IRA & $2,000 for non-ira. Fund has increased in share value from $7.74 to $8.47 during the same period over past 3 weeks that the Dow has dropped over 300 points. This may be relatively low-risk and very profitable. Plan to cash in "all" in latter part of '98.
-- Steve Alley (email@example.com), December 27, 1997.
My objective was to maintain my IRA but put those funds in a vehicle that would allow me to purchase gold bullion and coins. A Smith Barney rollover IRA account was the answer for me.
-- Richard L. Shields (firstname.lastname@example.org), December 27, 1997.
Getting your gold poses the same risk as getting your money out of the bank and/or getting your money (cash,check)?? out of your IRA or your 401K?! You are still letting someone else hold your stuff!!
-- Agnes Devine (email@example.com), December 30, 1997.
I recently acquired a Citibank Platinum Credit card with an expiration date of 01/31/00. I've used it in two places and it worked ok! Based on that experience and the documentation that came with the card, I called to enquire about Checking, Savings, Loans & PC Banking 1-800-446-5331. I talked with a young person named, Shaun, who asserted that his information was that Citibank used 4 digits for the year and that there was no department was named specifically to address y2k problems. When I asked him about how Citibank would handle incorrect dates coming from outside, he didn't have any information. I intend to chase this further and will report any new information.
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), January 06, 1998.
Some further comments on my Citibank credit card exp 01/31/00. It has worked a 3rd time. Conversation with Mrs. Williams, Citibank Customer Service, 800-950-5114, "Citi has been working 7 months with credit cards expiring 00 to help small merchants comply. Conversation with Eric, Citi PC banking, 800-374-9700, "Citi Direct Access 6.1 is y2k compliant." His supervisor adds Citi is mandated to be y2k compliant by 1998.
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), January 08, 1998.
Further comments on my Citibank credit card. Tried it in a remote location - no problem. Discussion with the owner of wine & spirits stoere, "Seen lots of 00 credit cards, no problem. Discussion with owner of hardware store, "We had lots of problems until we installed new software. My tentative conclusion - this is a local merchant problem and probably will be overcome by 1/1/2000.
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), January 12, 1998.
Poughkeepsie, NY 12603 January 12, 1998
Mr. Charles Cockburn, Pres. & CEO Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union 159 Barnegat Road Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Dear Mr. Cockburn,
As a customer of Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union I am very concerned about the upcoming Year 2000 (century rollover) computer problem and possible effects on client records and accounts. I would like to know what steps your company is undertaking to assure me that your computer software and hardware is Year 2000 compliant and customer-related information will not be at risk.
I have several accounts in the credit union and take advantage of PC banking, transfers, automatic deposit from external organizations and bill paying to external entities. I am particularly anxious that the government mandated direct deposit will be a safe, convenient and more reliable way to receive funds.
To give me assurance that the system will work after January 1, 2000 I need answers to the following kinds of questions: How large is the portfolio of computer systems? How many hardware systems? How many software applications? What is the primary computer language(s)? What end-user programs have been identified? How many programmers are working on the problem? How much has already been converted to y2k-compliant? Whats the plan to complete and test the conversion? What are the plans for non-compliant systems providing bad input data? What are the plans for providing output data to non-compliant systems?
Assuming that there is not enough time and/or resources to convert all programs: What kind of triage of computers has been carried out? Which systems have been judged mission-critical? non-critical? What impact will loss of non-critical systems have on the business?
If you dont have answers to such questions, I assume HVFCU will fail shortly after January 1, 2000. I trust you will also answer such questions at the 1998 Annual Meeting on Mar 25th.
Arthur E. Scott, IBM Ret.
Cc: TimeBomb 2000 discussion group IBM Planner Retiree Kaffee Klatch CLS Seminar participants
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), January 12, 1998.
I'm currently reading TB2000 and in the chapter regarding banking and financing. Out of curiosity I cold called my local credit union where I have my checking and savings account. I asked the human phone receptionist to speak to an executive or manager in charge of their data processing who could tell me about their status in solving the Y2K problem.
I was forwarded to some extension and encouraged to leave a message at the tone. With little expectation I did so, but was surprised when an hour later someone called me back. He said he was the LAN manager and the CU Y2K project chairperson. I asked him pointedly about the Y2K problem and what they were doing. His response was very open and nonevasive. He said the CU technology committee reformed the last six months into a Y2K focused team and inventoried all their systems. Their financial software is provided by a 3rd party firm named UltraData. UltraData plans on shipping their final Y2K release end of 1998. They plan on doing extensive testing of inhouse and inter-system testing in 1999. He said further their main concern is whether their PBX (phone) system would be upgraded in time.
He closed by saying that this CU and all the other CUs in the country are members of CUNI (Credit Union National? Institute?) which requires all members to report Y2K readiness quarterly starting 4Q97. I suggested they do a little PR in their monthly member newsletter regarding their Y2K efforts; they had already planned to do so.
I was left feeling they knew what they were doing, had a plan, and were following it. No evasion of my pointed questions. I was satisifed.
Now on to the other banks and financial institutions I deal with...
Dan O'Brien (firstname.lastname@example.org)
-- Daniel M O'Brien (email@example.com), January 16, 1998.
(The following is a transcript of an all-caps letter.)
January 8, 1998
Thank you for your recent inquiry regarding Fleet Financial Groups Year 2000 readiness plans.
Fleet Bank fully recognizes the challenges associated with the advent of the new millenium (sic). In response, Fleet has assigned overall responsibility for Year 2000 issues to an executive management committee that will oversee the project and report on a regular basis directly to the Board of Directors of Fleet Financial Group.
We are completing now a comprehensive inventory of the impacts of the Year 2000 issue on all Fleet Bank data processing applications. A plan to correct or replace all non-compliant applications is also being developed for implementation. The Fleet plan calls for all customer-related applications to be either corrected or replaced by December 31, 1998 - a full year in advance of the Year 2000.
All external service and data processing equipment providers are also being surveyed by Fleet. Their individual responses to Year 2000 issues will be factored in to an overall plan. Where outside vendors are responsible for critical non-compliant business processes, appropriated contingency plans are being put in place to ensure continued customer service.
Plans are currently being completed for testing of all Fleet applications with regard to Year 2000 issues. Where appropriate, the testing will include direct customer tests of Fleet applications in a future date environment.
Fleet has also elected to use additional outside service providers for code correction, staffed by technology specialists using state-of-the-art automated tools for code correction and testing. Code correction was started in the first quarter of 1997, and a number of applications have already completed the correction and certification cycle and are now back in production. Fleet expects to complete programming changes and testing for mission-critical and all other systems substantially before the Year 2000.
Thank you for your inquiry and your continues interest in Fleet Financial Group.
Sincerely, s/ Mary-Jude Dean, Vice President
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), January 16, 1998.
re Y2000 Financial Planning Decision Table
Disclaimer: I graduated as an engineer; most of my experience is as an engineer. I have no special training in financial planning, economics, etc. I qualify as ole' but can't evaluate the intelligent part. My personal financial planning philosophy is diversity. I don't think it's prudent to place trust in one person or one company. I think it's prudent to own stocks in several different companies, mutual funds in several different areas in several different companies, some US Treasuries (hmmm, not so diverse), cash in several different banks, credit unions. Granted, this makes for small accounts, probably miss some opportunities, hopefully not lose it all.
In all my reading, I haven't a clue whether it will be severe inflation/deflation, so I'm looking for a strategy where I won't get killed for not knowing. The conventional wisdom at the moment seems to be it will be deflationary. I suspect it may very well depend upon what action the government takes at the time. Past experience hasn't been enlightning. Weren't the tough measures the IMF and US government is taking with Asia, the cause of the US Depression in 1930's? Who will have the wisdom to know what will work in this extremely different y2k issue?
I think there is a significant difference between "my bank" failing and all banks failing. Perhaps I think this way because I plan to spread my cash over several banks, with a year's expenses in paper, gold and silver coins. Re timing, I dollar averaged into my position, I'll dollar average out again. Plan to start now, be done by end '98. As the year progresses I can speed up or slow down, depending. My ongoing evaluation of risk will determine what percentage I take out and hide as cash, bullion, etc and how many and which banks, mutual funds, etc I maintain.
Still I think it's worth while setting up the categories and thinking thru the possible actions; probablly will turn up some that might not have been thought of otherwise. (I liked your Eisenhower quote about plans vs planning.)
Since I don't have a clue about in/deflation, I melded the actions plans for Case 5 and 9, then eliminated the common actions. I should have known the differences would be the differing opinions on what to hold, esp. cash. Further thinking I hope would show more common valuable actions.
This is a good exercise for me, both for personal action and for the seminar I am planning for the senior cits. I have been toying with the idea of getting the participants to build a database of the plans and actions that the local banks, credit unions, utilities, brokers, etc. are willing to disclose. I plan to assign letter writing and querries to utilities, auto service departments, supermarkets, etc to the participants. If we can find a meaningful way to enter the data, perhaps we will have the basis on which to decide probablility of success/failure.
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), January 16, 1998.
It's a start:
*** Bank holiday may take the edge off Year 2000 headache
Banking officials grappling with the Year 2000 computer glitch are considering declaring a holiday Dec. 31, 1999, to pave a smoother road into the new millennium. While federal employees already have the day off, setting it aside as a bank holiday would effectively close the marketplace. Since it falls on a Friday, the down time would allow firms to complete the majority of their year-end work before such transactions became susceptible to Year 2000 computer failure. Experts have warned failure to address the Year 2000 computer bug could result in widespread computer chaos heading into the new millennium. See http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=6985441-80b
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), January 19, 1998.
Ed & others:
Curious for your reactions to this idea: in 1999, roll your IRA/Keogh money into a bank savings account/CD. Fro the same financial institution, take out a mortage or second mortage, on either your existing dwelling or "fallback" dwelling. If possible, the amount of the mortgage should roughly equal the amount of the IRA/Keogh...
The idea is to "match maturities", as the bankers like to say. Match your illiquid funds against your illiquid debt -- in the same financial institution.
If that institution has some problems on 1/1/00, and wants to collect on your mortgage, tell them to take the IRA/Keogh they have on account...
If there are no problems on 1/1/00, you've paid an interest rate spread of about 2-3 percent to the bank, for the service of having them store your cash in a secure place.
-- Fred Reynolds (firstname.lastname@example.org), January 19, 1998.
Would it be possible just to borrow the funds from your IRA putting it up for collateral rather than mortgaging your property? You can do this with a CD and pay 2% above your earnings.
-- Joe Stout (email@example.com), January 19, 1998.
It would be best to check with a CFA or CFP or accountant, but... according to Quicken.com,
"For the 1997 tax year, you cant take a loan from an IRA, nor can you use your IRA as collateral for a loan."
-- Fred Reynolds (firstname.lastname@example.org), January 20, 1998.
<< Two fundamental questions: has anyone received, seen, or heard about a "positive" Y2K compliance statement from a bank? Is there any bank, anywhere, that says, "Yes, we're Y2K-compliant!"? >>
"Compliancy" is undefined, although it probably means either a) satisfying the demands of federal regulators, or (preferably) b) satisfying that the business risks arising from Y2K have been fully eliminated.
If you agree with either of these definitions, there can be no bank able to state that they are "compliant" because satisfaction of both a) and b) require on-going monitoring and constant adjustment to an overall Year 2000 program. Monitoring of supply-chain dependencies such as vendors and loan recipients is on-going and constant.
If by compliance you mean that the mission-critical systems on which a bank relies are Y2K-ready, there are many banks already compliant. Up to 1/3 of the 11,000 or so financial institutions in this country have no software of their own whatsoever (the smaller banks and CU's). There are many vendors with Y2K-ready products. However, as a Y2K solution provider for banks, we NEVER even bother with the technical correction of software -- that problem is well understood and the banks never even ask us for help there. In our approach to Y2K for banks, we identify 13 discrete sources of risk to a bank, only 1 of which is actually fixing the software/systems.
-- Joseph E. McIsaac (email@example.com), January 25, 1998.
For banks that run a Year 2000 program, there should be tons of documentation that spins off of and tracks their every action. In the banks that we assist, there is always a tangle result of one or more bound books that demonstrate complete due diligence.
While I believe that thanks to federal regulators every bank in the US has good awareness on Y2K, a good test of your own bank is to call and ask for information on the Year 2000 program at the bank. Up to 3rd quarter of 97, I wouldn't think that many small banks would know what you're talking about, but now I believe that most will route you routinely to the owner of program within the bank.
While banks are the most susceptible to being disrupted and causing disruption, the good news is that:
1) Every institution is being examined one-by-one for Y2K readiness. 2) Awareness is probably at 100% throughout the industry. 3) Banks showing lack of progress will be "dealt with" by 1Q 1999. Three have already been issued a cease-and-desist order based on Y2K readiness.
The above are true for the domestic banks -- now we have to get the global banks going!
-- Joseph E. McIsaac (firstname.lastname@example.org), January 25, 1998.
As near as I can tell the Fed is saying, "Don't wait until 12/31/99 to test for Y2 compliance." Anyone read it differently?
06:02 PM ET 01/28/98
Fed says banks do not need Dec. 31, 1999 holiday
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Federal Reserve Board said Wednesday that banks do not need a special holiday on Dec. 31, 1999, despite the threat of computer disruptions. ``Bank resources would be better spent preparing for the year 2000 changeover rather than addressing the operating, financial, legal and other consequences that would flow from a date-change holiday,'' the Central Bank said in a statement. Last week, the Securities Industry Association, a powerful trade group, backed a proposal by some banking officials to declare Dec. 31, 1999, a trading holiday to help firms prepare for the change. The SIA has called upon the financial services industry to establish a unified position on the holiday. The problem, often called the ``Millennium Bug,'' arises because many computer programs record dates using only the last two digits of the year. The programs could treat the year 2000 as 1900, causing miscalculations, unexpected errors or system crashes. As part of its year 2000 preparation, the Fed plans a comprehensive program for banks to test computers used for Fed wire transfers, automated clearing house transactions, and other central bank services for compliance with date changes. A schedule will be issued shortly with actual testing beginning at mid-year and continuing through 1999, the Fed said. This will permit banks to send test transactions across a variety of dates pertaining to the century date change. Testing for banks will be coordinated through their district Federal Reserve Banks, it said. ^REUTERS@
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), January 29, 1998.
<< As near as I can tell the Fed is saying, "Don't wait until 12/31/99 to test for Y2 compliance." Anyone read it differently? >>
I think it has more to do with getting out the message that banks will be ready and don't need a holiday.
-- Joseph E. McIsaac (email@example.com), February 05, 1998.
*** FDIC behind schedule in Year 2000 work
U.S. bank regulators came under the fire of lawmakers Tuesday who fear they have started too late and are taking too long to fix computer troubles expected at the turn of the century. "You need to do more and you need to do it faster," said Bob Bennett, a Utah Republican who chairs the financial services subcommittee of the Senate Banking Committee. Bennett's concerns came after the General Accounting Office found the FDIC has made some progress but is behind schedule, with only 689 days left to complete its job before the year 2000. See http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2552836744-f58
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), February 12, 1998.
Hope this is more than hype: *** Fed to begin testing Year 2000 Bug patches in July
The Federal Reserve, carrying the flag on a crusade to exterminate the Millennium Bug from the U.S. banking system's computers, will begin testing corrections made to its key applications to banks in early July, Fed officials said. "We have a requirement that all of our critical applications that interact with financial institutions be fully repaired and tested so we may begin testing with customers at the beginning of July 1998," Carl Gambs, the Federal Reserve System's Century Date Change project leader, said. The Fed expects testing to be concluded by late 1998, which would leave the central bank and the rest of the industry with another year to flush out the problems that will emerge after the redesigned software is put to work. See http://www.infobeat.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=2552856938-5cb
Strongly recommend you read the whole story.
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), February 13, 1998.
Follow-up on my previous post re Fed testing in July: I think the following details are important. Does anyone have any ideas from a customers point of view, are these the important items to test? "The Fed applications to be tested as of July include: - The Fed Wire: a network used for final settlements of large transactions between major financial institutions. The network handles volumes averaging $1.0 trillion a day; - The Automated Clearing House (ACH): a nationwide electronic fund transfer system developed jointly by the private sector and the Fed in the early 1970's; - Federal Reserve accounting; - Cash management; and - Check processing."
Also: "While the big banks appear to be coping well with the problem, the sticking point is what to do with the small banks, which depend on third-party service providers to conduct their daily operations." Seems to be that's a strong argument to move your money from a small bank to one that's "too large to fail" (in Ed's vernacular).
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), February 14, 1998.
<< are these the important items to test? [FedWire and ACH] >>
The news from the Fed that they will be ready to test these infrastructural elements of the banking system is good news. We have been getting specific inquiries for more information on this topic.
<< Also: "While the big banks appear to be coping well with the problem, the sticking point is what to do with the small banks, which depend on third-party service providers to conduct their daily operations." Seems to be that's a strong argument to move your money from a small bank to one that's "too large to fail" (in Ed's vernacular).>>
First, The first sentence of quoted material is conjecture on the part of the author, not a quote from Mr. Gambs of the Fed. Small banks are having a tough time getting their vendors to disclose their exact status vis-a-vis Y2K preparedness. This is due to the liability that such disclosure brings on the vendor. In regards to what type of bank is better prepared, it's an interesting topic. On the one hand, big banks are better funded and are very sophisticated on the Year 2000 problem. Small banks, while more diverse in their individual awareness and status, face a far simpler problem surrounding the Year 2000 than do the big banks. Most small banks don't have software to repair.
-- Joseph E. McIsaac (firstname.lastname@example.org), February 16, 1998.
Here's the perfunctory (dismissive? don't worry little man, we'll take care of you? cya?) answer I received from my credit union in response to my detailed set of questions. Not one question was answered. "January 16, 1998
Thank you for your inquiry regarding Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union's plans to ensure a smooth transition from 1999 to the year 2000.
As your credit union, HVFCU is well aware of the critical nature of solving Year 2000 related issues. Our Year 2000 Team has developed and is implementing a plan to ensure compliance of all systems, applications, interfaces and hardware well in advance of the end of the century. Currently, We are working closely with our vendors to assess the compliance status of their products and services as well as perform testing. We are confident HVFCU will continue to provide you with premier service through and beyond the millenium.(sic)
Thank you for supporting your credit union. If you have questions, please contact me at ext 232.
Barbara Todd Year 2000 Team Chair
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), February 25, 1998.
Am I they only pest writing such letters? Or the only one putting them on this discussion list? Or is what I'm doing inappropriate?
March 2, 1998
Ms. Barbara Todd, Year 2000 Team Chair Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union 159 Barnegat Road Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Dear Ms. Todd,
For some strange reason your letter of January 16, 1998 didnt arrive until late February. Thank you for you reply.
On a personal level your perfunctory response confirms me in my plan to withdraw a significant part of my assets from the credit union and put them in a bank that is more willing to disclose their position and progress on the y2k problem. You answered none of the dozen of so questions I posed to Mr. Cockburn.
On a professional level be advised that I am putting together a seminar entitled, January 1, 2000, the day the computers phreak out for the Center for Lifetime Studies of Marist College. The audience is primarily literate senior citizens. This seminar, about the personal consequences of the impending year 2000 problem, is intended to be useful for 'ordinary folks' who are not necessarily computer literate and who may be unaware of the pervasive influence of computers in every aspect of their lives. In the section on Banking and Finance, scheduled for April 15th, I will publish the responses Ive received from you and other more forthcoming institutions. You are welcome to sit in on the seminar to monitor what I say and, if you chose, to spend 10 minutes updating, refuting, etc my presentation of the facts.
Art Scott, IBM ret.
Cc: Mr. Charles Cockburn TimeBomb 2000 discussion group IBM Planner Retiree Kaffee Klatch
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), March 02, 1998.
The following article from the New York Times on 2/27/98 seems to be in conflict with the assertion that Citicorp always kept 4 digit years. Does anyone know how much $600 million is for a bank the size of Citicorp? Some of my colleagues says it's not much. The stock price has hardly moved in the last few days.
BigBill for CornputerBug
Citicorp said yesterday that it expected to spend a total of $600 million to inoculate its computers against the year 2000 problem. In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Citicorp, the New York banking giant, said it spent $150 million on the problem in 1997 and would spend another $450 million this year and next.
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), March 06, 1998.
It's a little old but I just found the Gartner Group Research Director's testimony to Congress on Nov 4, 1997 at: http://www.house.gov/banking/11497lm.htm Among the more interesting items:
"Panic withdrawals may occur
38% of IT professionals surveyed state they may withdraw personal assets from Banks and investment companies just prior to 2000."
Do the professionals know something? Perhaps you don't want to wait until late 1999.
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), March 11, 1998.
Can Savings Bonds Save the Day By Jim Lord at: http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/Tip/Lord/lord9808.htm has some excellent comments about why not to buy.
-- Art Scott (Art.Scott@marist.edu), March 11, 1998.
I read the Web version of Timebomb 2000 some time back, and don't remember if the following was covered: It's all well and good to talk about converting part of one's assets to paper, silver, gold etc., in advance of a bank run. But what of us who live from paycheck to paycheck? If there is a bank run/the bank declares a bank holiday, does this mean that the check I write on my account to pay, say, a utiliity bill on my account at bank X WON'T BE HONORED? Can anyone answer this? And does this mean the bank will refuse to accept the paycheck my employer tries to deposit? I am going to start saving a sliver of cash each 2 weeks from now till THE DAY, but I know it won't be enough. I've got to be able to write checks to pay bills, or I can't function. Information please!
-- Roland Teigen (email@example.com), March 13, 1998.
I recently discussed the Y2K problem with my broker. He works at Dean Witter, which was recently bought by Morgan Stanley. He checked with people who should know (I am a large account), and was going to talk with the chairman if he didn't get satifactory answers.
What he got back, however, was quite encouraging. Morgan Stanly is scheduled to finish work in two months, then they are planning on starting full scale testing, including interoperation with vendors and other banks.
The biggest problem is likely to be in Europe. The Italian subsidaray in particular, is well behind in schedule (possibly due to the Euro Conversion).
- David Anderson
-- David Lee Anderson (firstname.lastname@example.org), March 29, 1998.
Mr. Anderson, Why don't you ask them if they will put it all in writing? At this point I would not trust any organization who says they are on schedule. I just read that the federal government is 75 days behind schedule and slipping. This puts them at the middle of November of 1999! ...........Gail
-- Gail (email@example.com), March 29, 1998.