Large firms too optimistic on y2k progressgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread
"The study conducted by research firm Triaxsys looked at how much companies had spent through the end of last year on the Year 2000 technology problem, as disclosed in their quarterly financial reports submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The findings led Triaxsys analyst and author of the study Steve Hock to conclude that although many companies have made major progress in their Y2K efforts, many are not spending enough to complete the projects by January 1, 2000.
"There are a significant number of companies that have a tremendous amount of work to do and they might not make it," said Hock.
From formal reports filed with the SEC between January and April 1999, Triaxsys obtained data on 647 Fortune 1000 companies' total Year 2000 project budgets and the percentage of those budgets that had already been spent.
Among the companies showing the least progress, as measured by percentage of total budget spent, are the computer networking giant 3Com, which spent just 7 percent of its budget; Tele-Communications Corporation, with just 10 percent spent; Sun Microsystems, which spent 14 percent; chemical manufacturer Union Carbide, at 20 percent; and food company ConAgra, which spent 26 percent, according to the study.
The average Fortune 1000 company is about 56 percent done with Y2K work, compared to 43 percent at the end of the third quarter of 1998, and 27 percent at the end of the first quarter of 1998, the study found. The estimated total project budgets grew on average about 11 percent since the end of the third quarter, compared to 15 percent between the first and third quarters. "
-- Arlin H. Adams (firstname.lastname@example.org), May 07, 1999
This has been discussed in a couple of other threads. The guy is using amount of money spent to determine progress, and that's not a valid metric.
Any reasonable person would wonder why he comes up with figures that are drastically different from (and worse than) those released by other sources.
He uses 3Com as an example. 3Com has stated publicly that they're READY. They didn't spend the projected amount because they didn't have to.
-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (email@example.com), May 09, 1999.