Looks as if both US and UK might be using same spin doctors. . . [FTSE = UK Fortune 500]

http://www.year2000.co.uk/leader.htm

Updated 11 February 1999

Dr David S Walton Bio

FTSE 500 Statistics

the continuing story

This story has developed since the beginning of February as I have sought to get to the bottom of Action 2000 claims concerning its FTSE 500 survey data.

I am pleased to report that, in response to the questions raised by myself and others, Action 2000 have now agreed to place the survey data in the hands of Computer Weekly - that is what I have been campaigning for. It should now be possible for everyone to test whether the data support the reports and headlines.

In December Action 2000 reported that 'A review of large companies, including three out of four FTSE-500 businesses, has found nine in ten are beyond the impact and assessment stage and are on course to complete their work'. I do not believe the data will support this conclusion - watch this space.

You can read how this has been reported bySilicon News and BBC News Online. See also the Computer Weekly article, 'Action 2000 vows to back up Y2K figures' and 'Can we believe rosy year 2000 picture?' by Bill Goodwin, also in CW, who gives an overview of the whole story.

I have recorded an interview for silicon.com which should be broadcast from their web site early next week.

The Opening Chapters from 31/01/1999

Action 2000 have been consistently claiming that 90% of FTSE-500 companies are well on their way to achieving a state of readiness for the year 2000. I have pointed out before that this leaves 10% who aren't - but it is worse than that. The data from the survey carried out by Action 2000 in October simply do not support the conclusion.

This is what Robin Guenier of Taskforce2000 had to say in his speech on 29 January,

Last week (Action 2000) announced that "research, based on questionnaires completed by 75% of the FTSE 500, . . . established that . . .. 90% of large firms are on course . . ." But the findings of their research in no way support that conclusion. For example, 20% of FTSE 500 respondents had not yet completed an inventory - in other words, they had hardly started. And 45% had done their inventory but seemed to have made little further progress (I say "seemed" because the questionnaire was insufficiently rigorous).

These results are, if anything, worse than those from Business Strategies - a survey conducted for Taskforce 2000. So, what's going on? Why would a Government body deliberately mislead us? If hundreds of big businesses are lagging, that fact surely needs maximum publicity? To misrepresent what is happening is contrary to common sense - and to Tony Blair's own injunction at a year 2000 event earlier this week "to be straight with the public about the state of progress".

There seem to be two possibilities. Either they don't understand the issues - in which case, they urgently need better advice. Or they believe that openness could lead to public panic. There is some evidence of the latter explanation. For example, in December, Action 2000's Managing Director referred to the possibility that it might be sensible for people to anticipate possible problems by, for example, "having a judicious amount of surplus food in their kitchen cupboards". Instead of using this as a basis for informed debate, she was quickly gagged by the Cabinet Office - and we have heard little from her since. The reality is that, if we were in the last Quarter of 1999, fear of panic might be justified. But now the priority has to be to get people to recognise that not enough is being done - and to get them to work on fixing the problem. "

Here are the data from Action 2000, so you can see for yourself the distortions in the interpretation.

These are the questions form the survey questionnaire;

Which of the following statements most closely describes your current readiness for Year 2000 changes? Please tick one:

a) All systems are fully Year 2000 ready b) Enough Year 2000 work has been completed to enable the business to function into the next century, Though not all systems are ready today c) A Year 2000 programme has been set up and an inventory of computer and electronic systems has been compiled and their status reviewed d) A programme has been scheduled and staff and financial resources committed e) We are aware that the Year 2000 will have some impact on our business and have taken some steps towards Year 2000 readiness but have no formal project or programme f) We are aware of the Year 2000 problem but have not taken any action thus far

The following table is the summary of results for FTSE 500 companies;

All systems are fully ready 6% Enough work has been completed to function in year 200 but not all systems fully ready 29% Programme established, inventory and impact assessment completed 45% Programme scheduled and resources committed 15% Aware, taken some steps but no formal programme 6% Aware no action 0%

You can read the Action 2000 report here.

Here is Robin Guenier again,

'........... 20% of FTSE 500* respondents had not yet completed an inventory - in other words, they had hardly started. And 45% had done their inventory but seemed to have made little further progress (I say "seemed" because the questionnaire was insufficiently rigorous). These results are, if anything, worse than those from Business Strategies.'

So what we have is an incompetently designed survey questionnaire and data which does not support the spin. It is time for the facts. This happy talk is anaesthetising business people and the public to the very real risks of date related failures.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), March 08, 1999

Answers

Old Git; Good post on Action 2000. Thanks,

-- Watchful (seethesea@msn.com), March 08, 1999.

...yes yes. We know. Everything any govenment says about Y2K is a lie. They are all part of the NWO conspiracy. The world is going to hell in a hand-cart and the experts are liars. The guv'ment are liars. The educated are liars.

Remember, one can only trust someone if they: 1.)Live in a trailer park 2.) Have less than a grade ten education 3.) are white Christians 4.) Luv guns, hate commies, liberuls and men who are light in their loafers.

-- Y2Krackpot Killer (y2@krackpot.com), March 08, 1999.

...yes yes. We know. Everything any govenment says about Y2K is a lie. They are all part of the NWO conspiracy. The world is going to hell in a hand-cart and the experts are liars. The guv'ment are liars. The educated are liars.

The evidence suggests yes, the conspiracy seems to be plausible based on their own (UN's, etc.) information., most definitely although Y2K is but a piece in the puzzle, definitely, and depends on who. Respectively. ;-)

OddOne, who thinks a NWO won't be able to hold itself together enough to succeed...

-- OddOne (mocklamer@geocities.com), March 08, 1999.

Y2Krackpot Killer,

Other than anouncing your proclivities (BTW, is the killing a past feat or something you want to do in the futuyre) do you have a point?

-- Greybear (greybear|@home.com), March 08, 1999.

Greybeard:

Did I strike a little too close to home for you?

-- Y2Krackpot Killer (y2@krackpot.com), March 08, 1999.

Y2Krackpot Killer (?) ,,, GreyBear is right (whats your point ???). Why don"t you drop the " Y2 and Killer " from your identification, and talk about your liberal, Clinton suck-up past history ?? ... Eagle

-- Harold Walker (e999eagle@freewwweb.com), March 08, 1999.

"Feds Plan Y2K Spin Control"

http://www.wired.com/news/print_version/politics/story/17527.html?wnpg =all

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), March 08, 1999.

y2k killer,

"Remember, one can only trust someone if they: 1.)Live in a trailer park 2.) Have less than a grade ten education 3.) are white Christians 4.) Luv guns, hate commies, liberuls and men who are light in their loafers."

You are generalizing,,, Some of forum members appear to be quite educated. And what if some arent? Does that make them lesser persons? I doubt many of us live in trailer parks,,,,but what if some do? Does that make them bumbs? I dont know many people in this country that like communism. But is is possible that some here do. As far as gay people, how can you tell if people on this forum are or arent gay? If you can, am impressed! LOL You make me laugh.

-- me (me@me.com), March 08, 1999.