OT: An apology (of sorts)

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Recently, I have become embroiled in heated exchanges with some forum posters. After a long ton of personal attacks, I lapsed. Of course, this is no excuse. Personal attacks are inappropriate and a waste of time. This apology is not meant for those who matched me swing for swing... but for those who had to endure the churlish displays. Perhaps my fellow mudslingers will join me at the podium... well, maybe not.

Oh, for those that care, the market bouncing upward on the rate hike announcement is worth a full quarter point movement towards the pessimist's end of the scale.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999


decker attacks decker looses his cool decker slings mud

-- double (decker@king.debunker), June 30, 1999.

deckster me thinks thou doth apologize too much. let the peasants storm the bloody bastille. its you and me you cuddly bunny. we will make them eat unleavened cake, the silly ingrates.

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), June 30, 1999.

Decker I accept your apology, you insidious troll.

Now...please elaborate on your comment about the rate increase, and if you watched the PBS show Crash last night, please give us your impression of that as well. Note that Soros

-- a (a@a.a), June 30, 1999.

(continued) Note that George Soros, the most succesful financier in the world, when asked if the worst was over and what will happen if the U.S. stock market bubble bursts, had this to say:

"If that were to happen before the rest of the world has recovered [from the Asian currency crisis/IMF extortion/depressed real economy], then you would have a worldwide depression similar to what happened in the 1930s."

-- a (a@a.a), June 30, 1999.

Sorry, Will, read my original post. When the moderators change the forum ground rules to "members only" I'll depart. Brian, I am not the only person to make the connection between the current end of the millennium hysterias and Biblical prophecies. Obviously, Gary North thinks there is a strong religious connection. On the whole, though, I use the word much like the phrase "end of the world." I don't think most pessimists think of Y2K in terms of the Book of Revelation. I do think there is an element of millennial hysteria around Y2K. But, hey, we can disagree.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999.

decker wants to redefine forum in his own image here what an ego

-- decker (tries@todeck.forum), June 30, 1999.

How rare! A poster who utilizes introspection as a tool for monitoring his/her actions! Congratulations for recognizing your slip into the pit of petty mud-slinging, and then taking responsibility for your actions. Bravo! Thank you Ken. Apology accepted.

It takes a person who is strong of character to admit a transgression publicly. Notice the obscenely high ratio of bad behavior to apologies here at TB2000? Sickening! A playground filled with second- graders would rate higher in my book than the totality of ill- mannered "regulars" on this forum.

Folks, every minute of every day is a new opportunity to evaluate our thoughts, words & deeds. I beseech each of you to take time out from your busy days to look deep within.

Could each of us act with more kindness? Yes.

Just requires a bit more self-control, or empathy, as fits each of our personalities.

Best Wishes,

-- Bingo1 (howe9@pop.shentel.net), June 30, 1999.

Seems you're not fooling anyone other than Brian.

Please take your SHILL-ass elsewhere, that would be the best form of apology trollman.

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 30, 1999.

I'm curious as to who Mr. Decker would like to see as moderators.

-- Unc D (unkeed@yahoo.com), June 30, 1999.

I think Dave Walden would make an excellent host. In fact, I'd try to find a balance of optimists and pessimists. The folks who earn my vote would swear off censorship and promote good manners. Perhaps you'd consider the job, Unc?


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999.

good manners decker promotes new moderators self next? like he has a say? so noble.

-- decker (tries@tostack.deck), June 30, 1999.

Well, I see there is still plenty of room on the podium. Anyone?

Unc D asked me a straight question and I gave him a straight answer. I could name a half dozen folks who I think would do a fine job wearing the big hats. In my opinion, the forum needs moderators who are willing to gently confront the mindless personal attacks by BOTH sides. When moderators join in the fracas, it is leadership by bad example.

[For the record, I have no particular issue with Chuck (Nomex Man.) My interactions with him have been polite and respectful.]


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999.

To Ken's being a "DD"

He has posted pretty much the same message on the DeBunker Board. This is big time courage to be posting on the two forums.  I trust he is going to be backing off. Thanks for the comments Ken.

Debunking Y2k webboard - On personal attacks


In my opinion your attacts can be over the top, and not really representitive of all the folks that post here. Sometimes you should take a chill pill :o)

And as to assuming you know how I think??? I will never till you what you think and you never tell me what I think .


A US person telling a Canadian what they think BWWWAAAAHHHHHAAAA!!!!!!!! Being south of 60 is bad enough, south of 49? I will always be a northern Canadian at heart. You have no idea how I think.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 30, 1999.

On personal attacks
Wednesday, 30-Jun-1999 19:41:37 writes:

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb237006&MyNum= 930786097&P=No&TL=930786097

On BFI, there were several occasions where I suggested both sides in the debate had become shrill. On TB 2000, I found myself moving deep into "shrill" country.

For the record, I do not approve of the current policies as set forth by the TB 2000 forum moderators. Nor do I hold any great affection for many of the serious pessimists over there. I do think there are reasonable people trying to make sense of Y2K EVEN at TB 2000. I also think the routine shouting matches make it difficult for the average person read to sort through all of this.

On BFI, my policy was to generally avoid this kind of personal confrontation. And I still think the issue is Y2K, not the individuals involved. Of course, I think Gary North, Ed Yourdon and other "public" figures on the Y2K scene warrant greater scrutiny than the average Joe or Jane. I think people who are selling Y2K should be taken somewhat differently than those trying to report objectively on the subject.

This said, most of the "pissing matches" are a waste of time. CPR commented on an earlier thread that the optimists have a different style. I think it goes deeper than just style.

I don't expect this little essay to reform anyone's behavior... in fact, I'll probably rant again. But for the time being, I'll try not to engage in so many pointless battles.


Mr. Decker

-- decker (doesbetter@home.bunker), June 30, 1999.

Mr. Decker,

Thank you for your contributions to this forum. It's a generous soul who can apologize to his attackers. You asked some hard questions on the thread in question and were personally attacked for doing so. It's no wonder you sparred back.

The mindset of your attackers is so viciously narrow that they persist in needling you even in the face of an apology, as our special friend Andy does here. Perhaps Hardliner will apologize for a recent spate of personal attacks behind your back on threads that had nothing whatsoever to do with you. To your credit, you refrained from responding to those attacks. Would Andy or Hardliner have the magnanimity to ask pardon? I doubt it. This alone speaks volumes.

Since you have jointed the forum, your have borne nearly unceasing blows. Your crime? Posing hard questions, patiently illustrating why Y2K will not be the end of the world as we know it, and asking readers to think. It's astonishing you have not lost your temper sooner. Your resilience is impressive, and in January 2000, your defiance will appear superb. The assured, uncompromising tone of your posts will strike us in retrospect as triumphantly right, and your rational optimism will have been vindicated.

-- Celia Thaxter (celiathater@yahoo.com), June 30, 1999.

Lets look at Decker's post a tad closer:

On BFI [Gary North is a Big Fat Idiot website], my policy was to generally avoid this kind of personal confrontation. And I still think the issue is Y2K, not the individuals involved. Of course, I think Gary North, Ed Yourdon and other "public" figures on the Y2K scene warrant greater scrutiny than the average Joe or Jane.

So, Decker says he posted on a forum, whose very title is a personal insult, but be generally avoids this kind of personal insult. Ok.

Then he goes on to say Ed Yourdon warrants greater scrutiny, and he praises CPR's "style", so I guess he means CPR should fork over his EY files to the FBI.

What a moronic troll we have here guys.

-- a (a@a.a), June 30, 1999.

Celia, do you like to mudwrestle?

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), June 30, 1999.

Well well. A thread that separates the adults from the children as distinctly and conclusively as anyone could pray for.

Mr Decker, I heartily congratulate you on your ability to see what was happening to you, and your willingness to admit it -- characteristics which are obviously *both* utter strangers to many here (and in this thread, they stand out like boils).

Your proper audience is those willing and able to listen and think. It's simply a waste of good energy directing your efforts to those neither able nor willing to do either one. Every rant against you is a neon sign proclaiming "Look what Decker wrote!" And you shine all the brighter by comparison, at least to those toward whom your questions and observations are directed.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 30, 1999.

I agree O Canada. Randy Andy can be so cranky. i think he's missed some serious jammy time over the years.

nite o Ran.

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), June 30, 1999.


That's really not called for. You should concentrate more on the subject matter of the post, and less on belittling those who are perfectly capable of doing so all by themselves.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 30, 1999.

Hello Mr. Decker,

I think that was a definate show of your real character. I will remember that about you. I do read your posts. I second the request that you would elaborate on the stock market part.

-- Moore Dinty moore (not@thistime.com), June 30, 1999.

King of Spain: I must find some mudwrestling women soon!

-- guess who? (hee@hee.hee), June 30, 1999.

Hey Flint Vicious: lighten up for gods sake. This isn't a damn intervention.

BTW Flint...I hear Ken's not married... :)

-- a (a@a.a), June 30, 1999.

"Well well. A thread that separates the adults from the children as distinctly and conclusively as anyone could pray for".

Totally agree Flint! I've never seen another thread on this forum that has so clearly shown the true nature of those who contributed.

-- CD (not@here.com), June 30, 1999.

I thought "BFI" was an homage to the Al Franken book of similar title. According to Franken, his title was chosen as as commentary on what he felt Rush Limbaugh does, i.e. ad hominem attacks like "Feminazis." I don't think posting on a forum is tacit agreement with the host (or the host's comic or literary tastes.) I post here and did not agree with Ed Yourdon on many subjects nor do I think Y2K is a "time bomb."

Ed Yourdon wrote a book that sold 200,000+ copies. He chose to step into the spotlight on Y2K. As a public expert, I think people have the right to scrutinize him. And please read my post again carefully, "a." How can you possibly interpret my post criticizing personal attacks as praise of CPR's style?

As for you good Flint, I look forward to having the chance to break bread with you. Thanks.

Oh, and the market. Today's news shows a frightening detachment from economic reality. In real terms, increased interest rates will decrease consumer spending. Consumers and businesses will pay more to service existing debt. Corporate profits are already weak and there is no way gains in productivity can support current valuations. Hell, we could see a Dow drop of 2000 points and still be overvalued.

One problem is the wealth effect. People feel more wealthy because of their paper profits. They make financial decisions as if those paper profits were real. In a few hard days, however, all of those paper profits can vanish... but they still have the lifestyle. Corporations undergo a similar phenomena. We've seen a lot of M&A activity because companies are using their overvalued stock as currency to buy smaller companies. Like some individuals, some corporations are living beyond their means. When we have a downturn in the economy, it will be ugly... having a market that looks like it's crack-induced doesn't help.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999.

Yes you're quire right Decker. It's what me, Andy, Ray, Milne and others have been crowing about for a year now. And it gets much, much worse from here on out. Welcome to GI land. You would find that we "insane doomer" folks are much more hospitable when you look at things realistically like this, instead of through your overly optimistic pseudo-econometric glasses. Its called seeing the big picture.

Yourdon swapping email with North. North writing the forward to. Bennetts Senate Report book. Bennett blaming media from not covering y2k. CBS preparing expose on government coverup. All this stuff is ready to come crashing down. And all of your cocksure happy talk about market forces won't amount to a stack of lentils. That's why people get so enraged at you and Flint. Not because you don't accept that you may be wrong. Because you are slow to realize it when you are wrong.

I'll bury the hatchet with you Mr. Decker. If you agree to let us focus our efforts on preparation and dealing with the aftermath. Because time is short.

-- a (a@a.a), July 01, 1999.

OT sort of...One thing I like is the "Mr." in Decker. I grew up where this was common, and sometimes dislike the shallow American habit of instant pseudo familiarity. (Don't blow flaming dragon breath,...my ancestors homesteaded on one side, I qualify for Daughters of the Revolution on the other,... I love America, and I even have a child born on the 4th of July) As a child, I would not have dreamed addressing an adult by their first name only. When I instruct my children to use traditional titles of respect, adults reply almost in amused consternation..."Oh no, just call me "first name"!" Some say it makes them feel "too old". Makes you want to grab a mirror, let them gaze, and astonish them to see that they are...old! Perhaps we could insult with civility? Oscar Wilde was a master.

Got maturity?

-- Mumsie (Lotsakids@home.com), July 01, 1999.

"Because time is short."

And there are MANY diversions, eh DD? Hope you're pieces of silver are worth it...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 01, 1999.

Sir, This thread is interesting. I have not taken part in any of the vitriolic threads lately, I haven't had the time with the outside responsibilities. This looks MUCh more like the K. Decker I would expect. At some point I would LOVE to have time to sit for an eyeball QSO but i haven't a clue as to when it might be.

And you are the first person who has hit the nail on the head as to the market "response" to the uqarter point hike. GAACK!

Chuck rienzo rienzoo@en.com

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), July 01, 1999.

Keep it up, gang! We're all in this boat together, for a few more months anyway. Civility could make it bearable (and shorten a lot of time-wasting threads.) Lots of people lurk here and read all of our words -- we have a responsibility to process y2k intel here more intelligently.

-- jor-el (jor-el@krypton.uni), July 01, 1999.

"Whoa, cowboy. Aren't you going to buy me a drink first"

Sorry to disappoint you, "a," but it's long walk from a serious recession to the "five miles within a 7-11" universe. A very long walk. I do not have an inherent bias against the central bank or fractional reserve banking. I do not think the world is run by a secret organization nor do I think the U.N. has plans for an occupation of the U.S. using the cryptic blue road signs. I think the U.S. government is often clumsy and rarely gets away with its ham- handed attempts to cover up its mistakes. I think Ruby Ridge and Waco were horrible fiascos... but not part of a secret master plan to eliminate certain groups. I do not believe aliens landed at Roswell.

You see, "a," I completely fail the exam.

I think we have some structural problems in the current economy, including money flowing into the market on "autopilot." I think the current market will return the mean... and it will be painful for some folks. I also feel Y2K problems will contribute to the economic downturn. One issue I have with Mssrs. Milne, Andy, Ray and you--you all see Y2K as another ingredient in a soup you have been stirring for some time. Because we may find some agreement on Y2K doesn't mean I want the whole kettle of "GI" stew. So, hold off on making me a t-shirt. Oh, and you given some thought to apologizing to the forum members? Just curious.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), July 01, 1999.

Mr. Decker I have always had the utmost respect for your posts and I applaud your sense of urgency for the task at hand. Constant bickering and personal attacks among the posters has no place. We don't know what is going to happen in five plus months, and a united discussion among ALL concerned, rather than a battle amongst children, is the way to go. I warmly accept your apology, and if any other has the cajones to do the same, we can move on, and have a productive debate/discussion.

I personally think the market is an auto-pilot accident waiting to happen. All it will take is a little loss of confidence in the e- trade sector and "look out below"... IMHO, I can see a drop of 50% rather than 20%. Remember the market was around DJIA 6000 before this drastic runup. P/E ratios may not be "valid" in the "new" marketplace, but I still think they are a bellweather regarding market health.

Any takers for Mr. Decker's podium? I think he just trumped your proverbial ace.

Regards Mr. Decker, I look forward to your future posts with anticipation...

waggin' my tail vigorously,

The Dog

-- Dog (Desert Dog@-sand.com), July 01, 1999.

Decker, on the one hand you apologize for your behavior, then you begin slinging references to black helicopters and try to link me to blue road signs. Just because I think that UFOs are unexplained is no reason to place me at the Roswell reunion with a bunch of fruitcakes. It simply means that I have an open mind.

As I suspected, you are obviously not sincere in your desire to elevate our discussions to a higher level.

-- a (a@a.a), July 01, 1999.

I don't get it, Mr. decker. So apparently you and I agree on the economic "fragility" of the current stock market due to the influx of "automatic" money from IRA/401/insurance/retirement accounts, on the likelihood of a recession (How deep? How long? How widespread? Which industries?) next year, on the probable significant impact of year 2000 troubles on international business and commerce, and on the "overeager/nonsensical/day-trading flip-flops" of the current market.

We also appear to agree on the fundemental "glazing" (coverup) of dishonest and misleading reporting and degree of compliancy by the government. On the fact that year 2000 failures will stop certain processes, will cause physical and mental disruption (perhaps agony in some cases.)

Let us leave the off-topic distractions aside (roadway signs, black helicopters, aliens, etc.) aside; except as they may influence current political decisions that are affecting year 2000 remediation; or as they may affect events and recovery from year 2000 troubles. (For example, if Taiwain is threatened with invasion post-2000 because US forces and Japanese forces are threatened or have lost resources, that becomes a plausible construct. If Panamanian control of the canal is given to China psot 2000, that is a economic force affecting all other countries who trade overseas. (Everybody.)

So am I a polly, or you a doomer?

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 01, 1999.

My response to Mr. Decker...

Lets Discuss CENSORSHIP And Apologies... Mr. Decker

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 0011hn


-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), July 01, 1999.


To disagree with your ideas is not a personal attack. Some very bright people believe in communism. The fact that I do not think communism is a viable economic system does not mean I think communists are "bad people."

To call someone an "insidious troll" is a personal attack. To disagree with one's position on fractional reserve banking is not.

Perhaps you can provide a detailed view of what you think will happen after the rollover. This will help me understand the differences between your position and Ray's, Andy's, etc. If you think fractional reserve banking, etc. is nifty, I apologize. My point is this. There are people like Gary North who have thought "the end is coming" for years. Y2K is just the latest threat. I think some pessimists will be doomers after Y2K... just for different reasons.

But, again, perhaps if you explain your position, we can all have a better understanding of what you think. Oh, and please provide links to your source data, when possible.



-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), July 01, 1999.

Mr. Cook,

Here's a way we can find out where we both stand. Ed Yardeni has predicted a 70% of recession and a 5% chance of depression. Let's add a category... complete meltdown. I have become more pessimistic in recent days about the economy. For the purposes of this exchange, I think I'll go with the Yardeni numbers. Complete meltdown is a subset of depression. This is a just guess, but I'd put the risk at less than one percent. Now, if your numbers are the same, I guess we have to determine whether these odds makes a "polly" or a "doomer." If you want to pony up with your guesses, we can sort this out.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), July 01, 1999.

Definitely: I said before that the probability of a "complete meltdown" (to say 1870's, even 1920's) is perhaps 0.25% to 0.50%.

Probability of nothing happening (Koskinian's "bump in the road" - no recession, no economic disruption at all, less than 3 day disruption of services to the US at large) is also 0.25% to 0.50%.

This, of course, leaves a 99.50% to 99.00% probability of my usual litany of " irregular and unpredictable failures occurring over irregular and unpredictable areas of the country and world affecting irregular and unpredictable services causing irregular and unpredictable problems in secondary and tertiary processes that will most likely have irregular and unpredictable economic disruptions causing irregular and unpredictable social and moral effects.

The problem remains, and always has been, trying to figure out what is most likely to fail, where the failure will occur, and what happens after it fails. How long will what fail? Why? What else can be done? What is the secondary affect of the primary failure? How will people respond the initial, the secondary, and the third tier of failures - if they occur?

Now probability of "local" complete meltdowns of control and safety is (riots, martial law, looting, etc.) will depend entirely on the answers to the above.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 01, 1999.

Mr. Cook,

I am afraid your statistics were not entirely helpful. Again, let's try just economic impacts... recession, depression and meltdown. I am asking nicely.


-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), July 01, 1999.


Here is something I was whipping up. A little bit of recent history. I am a big fan of Alan Greenspan. He and Dieter have their own level of language.

"For monetary policy to foster maximum sustainable economic growth, it is useful to preempt forces of imbalance before they threaten economic stability. But this may not always be possible--the future at times can be too opaque to penetrate." "the future at times can be too opaque to penetrate"

Now isn't that an excelent line for Y2K?? Oh and no wonder they call him a financal guru.

I really do disagree with his policy of basing policy on products though but hey he's the boss. If you want to bring this up to the top you are more than welcome to but hedge funds is OT eh!

9-15-98, Statement of George Soros



Committee on Banking and Financial Services

September 15, 1998

This hearing is very timely because the global capitalist system which
has been responsible for the remarkable prosperity of this country in
the last decade is coming apart at the seams.

FRBNY Before the Committee on Banking and Financial Services







OCTOBER 1, 1998

Good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. I am
pleased to appear before you today to describe the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York's role in the events leading up to the recent
private-sector recapitalization of Long-Term Capital Management and
its fund, Long-Term Capital Portfolio.

FRB: Federal Reserve Board Testimony from 05/20/1999

Chairman Alan Greenspan

Efforts to improve the architecture of the international financial system
Before the Committee on Banking and Financial Services, U.S. House of Representatives

For example, in any set of standards there should surely be an enhanced level of in the way domestic finance operates and is supervised. This is essential if investors are to make more knowledgeable commitments and supervisors are to judge the soundness of such commitments by their financial institutions. A better understanding of financial regimes as yet unseasoned in the vicissitudes of our international financial system also will enable counterparties to more appropriately evaluate the credit standing of institutions investing in such financial systems. There should be no mechanism, however, to insulate investors from making foolish decisions, but some of the ill-advised investing of recent years can be avoided in the future if investors, their supervisors, and counterparties, are more appropriately forewarned.

FRB: Federal Reserve Board Testimony from 05/06/1999

I am pleased to appear before this Committee to discuss the President's Working Group on Financial Markets' Report on Hedge Funds, Leverage, and the Lessons of Long-Term Capital Management. Under Secretary Gensler has made a comprehensive presentation of the report's conclusions and recommendations. Chairman Greenspan participated actively in the Working Group's discussions and supports the contents of the report. My remarks this morning will be limited to highlighting a few key conclusions and recommendations.

FRB: Federal Reserve Board Testimony from 06/17/1999

Testimony of Chairman Alan Greenspan
Monetary policy and the economic outlook
Before the Joint Economic Committee, U.S. Congress
June 17, 1999

This all leads to the conclusion that monetary policy is best primarily
focused on stability of the general level of prices of goods and
services as the most credible means to achieve sustainable economic
growth. Should volatile asset prices cause problems, policy is
probably best positioned to address the consequences when the
economy is working from a base of stable product prices.

For monetary policy to foster maximum sustainable economic
growth, it is useful to preempt forces of imbalance before they
threaten economic stability. But this may not always be
possible--the future at times can be too opaque to penetrate. When
we can be preemptive we should be, because modest preemptive
actions can obviate the need of more drastic actions at a later date
that could destabilize the economy.

FRB: Reporting Forms, Financial statements

FR 2064
Report of Changes in Foreign Investments (Made Pursuant to Regulation K)
The FR 2064 collects three types of information on changes in the foreign investments of banking organizations: geographic data to identify the location of the investment and to make an informed assessment of sovereign risks; structure data to identify how the investment is held within the banking organization and to indicate the legal authority of the investment; and cost data to monitor conformance to the general consent provisions of Regulation K and to indicate the financial exposure of the investing organization.

FR 2068
Foreign Banking Organization Confidential Report of Operations
This report is filed in conjunction with form FR Y-7, Annual Report of Foreign Banking Organizations, and form FR Y-7A, Foreign Banking Organization Structure Report on U.S. Banking and Nonbanking Activities. It must be filed by FBOs that have a significant presence in the United States; FBOs with small U.S. banking operations may be exempt from filing. FR 2068 collects information that enables the Federal Reserve to assess the effect of an FBO's worldwide operations on its U.S. banking business. It requires the disclosure of revenue and expense information as collected in accordance with local accounting practices. The report collects confidential information not reported on form FR Y-7 on risk-based capital, loan losses and past due loans, inner reserves and other contra accounts resulting in "hidden reserves," and debt and equity securities; financial statements for unconsolidated subsidiaries; and an organization chart.

FR 2069
Weekly Report of Assets and Liabilities for Large U.S. Branches and Agencies of Foreign Banks
This report collects information on selected balance sheet items, including a breakdown of loans, securities, deposits, and borrowings.

FR 2314a/b/c
Report of Condition for Foreign Subsidiaries of U.S. Banking Organizations
This report consists of a balance sheet with accompanying memorandum items, supporting schedules, and an income statement.

FR 2416
Weekly Report of Assets and Liabilities for Large Banks
This report collects detailed information on assets and liabilities from a sample of large U.S. commercial banks.

FR 2644
Weekly Report of Selected Assets
This report collects weekly data on the outstanding amount of selected loans, securities, other assets, and borrowings from a sample of U.S. commercial banks.

FR 2886b
Consolidated Report of Condition for Edge and Agreement Corporations
This report collects financial data from banking Edge and agreement corporations and from nonbanking Edge and agreement corporations in the form of a balance sheet and accompanying memorandum items, supporting schedules, and income statement.

FR Y-11I
Annual Financial Statements of Nonbank Subsidiaries of Bank Holding Companies
This report collects selected financial information for individual nonbank subsidiaries of a domestic bank holding company. It consists of a balance sheet, income statement, off-balance-sheet items, information on changes in equity capital, and a loan schedule submitted only by respondents engaged in extending credit.

FR Y-11Q
Quarterly Financial Statements of Nonbank Subsidiaries of Bank Holding Companies
This report collects selected financial information for individual nonbank subsidiaries of domestic bank holding companies (BHCs). It consists of a balance sheet, an income statement, information on off-balance- sheet items, information on changes in equity capital, and a memoranda section.

FR Y-20
Financial Statements for a Bank Holding Company Subsidiary Engaged in Bank Ineligible Securities Underwriting and Dealing
This report is filed by a designated domestic bank holding company subsidiary that engages in limited securities underwriting and dealing activities. The FR Y-20 consists of a balance sheet, a statement of income, and supporting schedules for securities owned (including money market obligations) and a statement of changes in stockholders' equity. In addition, there are several memorandum items that collect information on intercompany liabilities and off-balance-sheet items, and information that is needed for the alternative indexed-revenue computation.

FR Y-6
Annual Report of Bank Holding Companies
This report is filed by all top-tier bank holding companies and consists of the requirement to submit Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) form 10-K if the bank holding company is registered with the SEC or an annual report if one is created and sent to shareholders. The FR Y-6 also requires the submission of an organizational chart and includes information on the identity, percentage ownership, and business interests of principal shareholders, directors, and executive officers.

FR Y-7
Annual Report of Foreign Banking Organizations
The FR Y-7 is an annual report of FBOs that have a U.S. banking presence. The report collects financial statements, nonbank subsidiary financial statements, shares and shareholder information, and data on the eligibility to be a qualified FBO as defined in Regulation K.

FR Y-8
Report of Bank Holding Company Intercompany Transactions and Balances
This report collects information on transactions between banks and other entities of domestic bank holding company organization. The report has one section that identifies asset transfers, and another detailing income, credit extension, off-balance-sheet, and tax balances.

FR Y-8f
Report of Intercompany Transactions for Foreign Banking Organizations and Their U.S. Bank Subsidiaries
This report gathers data on the intercompany transactions between members of foreign banking organizations and their U.S. banking subsidiaries in the form of asset transfers, other intercompany transactions and balances, and foreign exchange transactions.

Consolidated Financial Statements for Bank Holding Companies
This report collects basic financial data from a domestic bank holding company on a consolidated basis in the form of a balance sheet, an income statement, and detailed supporting schedules, including a schedule of off-balance-sheet items.

Parent Company Only Financial Statements for Large Bank Holding Companies
This report collects basic financial data from domestic bank holding companies on an unconsolidated, parent-only basis in the form of a balance sheet, an income statement, and supporting schedules relating to investments, cash flow, and certain memoranda items.

Parent Company Only Financial Statements for Small Bank Holding Companies
This report collects basic financial data from small, domestic, one-bank holding companies on an unconsolidated, parent-only basis in the form of a balance sheet, an income statement, and a schedule for certain memoranda items.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), July 02, 1999.

oohhhh not agian

-- Brian (imager@home.com), July 02, 1999.

Mr. Decker,

Just thought you might like to see these scales for describing potential economic and business impacts of Y2K:




IMPACT ON THE ECONOMY (pick one; delete the rest)

0: Irrational exuberance; DJIA breaks 12,000 in 1Q2000

1: Y2K's impact on economy is lost in the noise

2: Some market adjustments (stock indexes down 10%) but recovered within 6 months

3: Stocks down 20% and don't recover until end of 2000; growth flat during 2000

4: Economy contracts 1% over 3 months; unemployment rises to 6%

5: Mild recession (-2.5% over 6 months); unemployment rises to 8%

6: Strong recession (-5% over 18 months); unemployment to 10%

7: Severe recession (-7.5% over 2 years); unemployment to 15%

8: Depression (-21% over 3 years); unemployment to 25%

9: Profound depression (-40% over 5 years); unemployment over 30%

10: Collapse of economic systems (currency, banking, financial mkts)


IMPACT ON BUSINESS (pick one; delete the rest)

0: A lot of money spent, but improved quality and efficiency

1: Some small to medium enterprises (SMEs) have Y2K problems

2: Business are jolted a bit and scramble to recover; a few supply chain issues

3: Business have "Y2K holidays" during January to get things fixed

4: Bankruptcy/acquisition of at least one Fortune 100 company due to Y2K problems (internal, supply chain, foreign impact, legal)

5: Major disruptions in production and processing of raw materials, as well as manufacturing and the supply chain

6: Most businesses suffer Y2K impact; significant die-off in small to medium high-tech firms as funding, markets dry up.

7: Widespread layoffs, cutbacks; one of the Big 3 auto manufacturers is acquired or collapses

8: Major meltdown, with massive consolodations and closings in manufacturing and production industries

9: Radical cutbacks, mergers, or failures of 50% of the Fortune 500 within 3 years; 80% of SMEs fail within 3 years

10: Collapse or radical transformation of most mid- to large-scale enterprises



-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), July 02, 1999.

Those percentages were not clear?

99.00-99.50% chance of a recession ( 0 growth to 4% loss), 70% (+) chance that that recession will last longer than 4 months because of secondary impact. (If only US were affected, then the recession would be likely to to bottom out in April. But other things worldwide are more likely ot be more severely impacted, hence recovery here will be slower.)

Time to recover back to current level(s) of economic activity: 8-10 months. (This is because the current administration will be desperate to get something positive to report before the Nov elections.)

Time to recover back to current level(s) of growth: 2-3 years. This is due to longer term impacts overseas. The tide will eventually sweep back - there is simply too many people, too much pressure in the markets of all things worldwide to pretend recovery will be longer than that.

Your mileage may vary.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), July 02, 1999.

Whoo, Robert, I never realized that you were so optimistic! I think that recovery will be closer to 10 years than 2-5. Hope you're right, though :-)

-- Tricia the Canuck (tricia_canuck@hotmail.com), July 02, 1999.


I hope you are doing your homework on the FRB, hedgefunds and disclosure. There may be a test on monday :o) As you know I have been following this for awhile. It has occured to me that the frontline show just may have been a "timely" show if the major players have "issues" in regards to a proper disclosure of their assets. Ehem, your assets. Ehem, our assets.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), July 02, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ