Any reports on THIS weekend's Wall Street testing? : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

This is weekend No.3 of the $100 million dollar, 440 firm testing. To recap, during and after the first weekend of testing, the "secret" results were splashed across TV screens and newspapers all over the world. The line was something like, "Everything went pretty well, better than we expected." Last weekend's results have not been leaked as far as I can tell. Likewise I've heard nothing of this weekend's results. Anyone else?

I guess the state of the market the last couple of weeks certainly doesn't augur disaster. But then again, the buyers are day traders and 401K investors. Meanwhile, Goldman is lining up as a seller and AT&T is about to issue the biggest private-sector bond offering in US history. Demand for the AT&T offering is reportedly so high that it may be increased from $8 billion to $12 billion. Chew on that a little while. I wish I could issue a bond. Hey, At least I'm not in the red!

-- Puddintame (, March 21, 1999



I do not like this silence. I searched last week and could find nothing. If the testing were going well, I would think that the exchanges would be issuing press releases. In any case, we will be told whatever..whenever. Not a comfortable feeling and there is a lot at stake.

-- Mike Lang (, March 21, 1999.

The Securities Industry Association (SIA) has issued press releases about the industrywide Y2k testing. (Some of you will remember the SIA as the folks who last year before the very first Wall Street testing weekend said they'd publish all the results on their web site by early Monday morning after the test ... but never did publish anything but a happy-face statement, after a few days' delay, which they probably spent getting over the shock of finding -- according to Cory Hamasaki's report of the rumor -- that the testing exposed a very serious Y2k flaw deep in the bowels of the IBM operating system.)

The reason there's no news about weekend nr. 3 of the current testing is that it will not occur until next weekend, March 27. Testing weekend nr. 2 (which simulated December 30) was March 13, but the third test session (simulating December 31) will be March 27. The fourth testing session (simulating January 3, 2000) will be April 10, followed by continuation of mutual funds testing on April 17 and options testing April 24. See the SIA's Year 2000 page at

-- No Spam Please (, March 22, 1999.

> according to Cory Hamasaki's report of the rumor -- that the > testing exposed a very serious Y2k flaw deep in the bowels of the > IBM operating system.)

The geekvine rumor is that the tests did *not* go well. My geekvine contacts in NY have asked the programmers at several street-firms directly and they are not talking.

The word, and this is second hand, is that they are afraid for their jobs and might be black-balled.

Your analysis, that the SIA promised full disclosure going into the tests and there is a news blackout now, is more significant than what I've been able to get out of the geekvine.

I don't believe and have not heard that there is a problem in the IBM operating system. In fact, I know several firms that operate their time machines across the line on a regular basis.

Street applications are another matter. We'll all have to watch this closely.

On a lighter note, I've finished WRP114 and WRP115 and will upload them later this week.

-- cory (cory@you.know.where), March 22, 1999.

No spam, thanks for those details. I had not seen those previously. I'll bookmark that site. Cory, please notify us if you get any stronger sense of the results.

-- Puddintame (, March 22, 1999.

First, here's the link to the Press Release from weekend number two of the testing:

Weekend 2

There is no "news blackout". The SIA will release a detailed report on the test results on April 29th.

The ability of some to spin any information to be bad continues to amaze me. The press received by the first weekend of testing was met with disdain, that "they" were trying to disinform people by playing up the test results. The same "spin" is already being geared up for the NERC tests; if they publicize them, "they" are just playing up worthless tests.

But if the test results aren't splashed across headlines, then there is a "news blackout", which means things are "really" bad.

-- Hoffmeister (, March 22, 1999.

-- Hoffmeister, if you do not believe that the government, Wall Street and Big Business are not SPINNING their y2k status then I have a bridge in Brooklyn at a very reasonable price.

If there was GOOD news from these tests it would be on page ONE, now.


-- Ray (, March 22, 1999.

Hoff, thanks for that link. Now that you and other posters have pointed out the site I'll be able to check it and maybe not run to the forum for help.

I would like to see two things from Wall Street, openness and consistency. Openness is a delicate issue and reasonable people could differ on the proper balance. Consistency should be elementary. If the plan is to issue general statements several days after each weekend of testing with a detailed analysis at the conclusion, I can live with that. But don't brag on national television one weekend and then clam up the next. You'd have to be brain-dead if that didn't raise suspicions.

Thanks again for that link Hoff, that's what I was looking for.

-- Puddintame (, March 22, 1999.

Actually, they did exactly what I would think.

They are in the middle of a multi-week test. Certainly, I would expect the initiation of the test to be met with certain fanfare. Trumpeting the intermediate results would not be expected, although they are publishing reports. I do expect to see a large amount of press at completion.

No doubt, they will spin the results. This is PR afterall. But that wasn't the point I was trying to make. It was the fact that, no matter what companies and industries do, many find it an indication of "bad things". No press? Must have went really bad. Lots of press? Trumpeting a meaningless test to hide the real problems.

-- Hoffmeister (, March 22, 1999.

Hoff, I appreciate what you're saying. The brokerage firms certainly know a lot more about herding sheeple than I do, and I must let them do their thing.

If you care, I can tell you something about the behaviour of heavy- hitters in the business world. If you're dealing with real money and those who control real money, when you're asked a question about anything that might conceivable involve that money, you better give all the information you have, you better give it promptly and you'd better be honest.

If the entity or person fails to give honest information quickly, then the investor and his money are gone elsewhere, no questions, no argument, no begging and pleading for information.

I am not a Wall Street insider. I can't tell you how the tests went. Any Wall Steet insider of any power will be able to tell you how these tests went.

The only investors who will not be privvy to the test results on demand will be "unsophisticated" investors, a category which includes almost all day traders, 401k investors, mutual fund investors, etc. By the same token, these amateurs will not demand the information, so why give it to them. If they do not understand due diligence, the industry is not going to interfere with their blissful ignorance. This is an enviable position. It is a very very strong seller's market.

None of this is to impugn the y2k status of the securities industry. I have no idea what that status is. Stated another way, I am fully aware that I am totally ignorant of whether the New York Stock Exchange or the NASDAQ National Market will be able to transact business in January 2000. If I were asked to give an opinion on the advisability of making a significant long-term equity investment at this time, I would be unable recommend taking a long position without first obtaining reliable assurance that the exchanges have solved y2k.

-- Puddintame (, March 22, 1999.


My apologies. Upon rechecking my Y2k files, I find that apparently I cross-linked your comments in WRP87 (July 30, 1998) with someone else's comment about a Y2k problem in an IBM operating system. Whatever the cause, I am embarrassed not to have doublechecked my source before attributing a statement to you in a public message.

- - - -

To all: What Cory wrote about the SIA testing in July 1998 did not mention either IBM or an operating system.

- - - -

>Your analysis, that the SIA promised full disclosure going into the tests and there is a news blackout now, is more significant than what I've been able to get out of the geekvine.

(Assuming that's addressed to me) Let me point out that I was referring to SIA's statement before *last year's* (July 1998) testing.

-- No Spam Please (, March 22, 1999.

Other threads on the topic of this year's SIA tests:

Link to TechWeb article - Y2K Tests Put Financial Firms In Hot Seat at

Does anyone have a report on how this past weekend's y2k simulation testing on Wall Steet went? at

"Wall Street passes Y2K test" -- my butt!! at

Does Anyone Have Published Data From This Weekend's Wall Street Y2K Test? at

Today's WSJ- "Y2K Test Is in the Works On Wall Street" at

-- No Spam Please (, March 24, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ