From the FFIEC website: www.ffiec.com/pr080299.htm

***********

Regulators Report That 99% of All Federally Insured Financial Institutions are Prepared for the Year 2000

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Federal bank, thrift, and credit union regulators announced today that 99% of federally insured financial institutions have completed testing of critical systems for Year 2000 readiness. In their announcement, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the National Credit Union Administration, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Office of Thrift Supervision noted that most financial institutions are already using Year 2000 ready systems on a daily basis without problems.

Over the past two years, federally insured financial institutions have been identifying and overhauling systems that were not Year 2000-ready. At the same time, the regulatory agencies have been closely monitoring their efforts. As of June 30, 1999, the regulators had assigned a "Satisfactory" rating, the highest possible rating, to 99% of the federally insured financial institutions. This means the financial institutions are appropriately preparing for the Year 2000. The agencies are confident that, based on their reviews, financial institution customers will be able to conduct business as usual both before and after January 1, 2000.

During each Year 2000 review, regulators look at the overall progress that an institution is making in its Year 2000 efforts, as well as its compliance with federally mandated requirements. Examiners check to see that financial institutions are performing any ongoing system renovation and testing that may be needed, establishing comprehensive contingency plans, mitigating any identified Year 2000-related business risk, and effectively informing their customers of their Year 2000 preparations.

The federal bank, thrift, and credit union regulators are closely supervising the few institutions that are lagging in their Year 2000 preparations. Regulators will increase and intensify their supervision of these institutions during the remaining five months to ensure that needed corrections are made by December 31, 1999.

******* Just some "Good News" for you to ponder.

-- justlurking (Good@news.com), August 04, 1999

Answers

Thanks! 99% is better than 0% or 50%, or any other lower percentage.

but....

oh, so of those 99%, none of the remediators made ANY errors?, and there will be no problems communicating with the 1% that didn't finish? i could take this down in a million ways.

if you think 99% is such a huge number i shouldn't be complaining, ponder this...99% of the water found in nature isn't fit for human or animal consumption... 97% of it is in the ocean, and 2% in polar ice caps

it IS good news, but what use is it? should it ease my concerns? can i feed my kids with it?

-- SuperLurker (Slfsl@yahoo.com), August 04, 1999.

The money, credit, and banking system in this country is fundamentally dishonest. Fiat (funny) money (paper printed by the ton with nothing backing it, but illegal for you to do). Credit created out of thin air by the bankers (but illegal for you to do). Fractional reserves (maybe only 2% cash [funny money] available for the electronic numbers in your "demand" deposits (checking and savings)...

So, EXCU-U-U-U-SE me if I take ANYTHING the government or banking system says with a grain of salt.

Withdraw early and withdraw often.

-- A (A@AisA.com), August 04, 1999.

This could be a simple, hopeful statement. The problem is that it is laced with weasel words that themselves inspire doubt. What the headlines give, the copy body takes away.

"99% of federally insured financial institutions have completed testing of critical systems for Year 2000 readiness" Which are the critical systems, which systems are not critical, and what is this 'readiness' they are being tested for?

"As of June 30, 1999, the regulators had assigned a "Satisfactory" rating, the highest possible rating, to 99% of the federally insured financial institutions. This means the financial institutions are appropriately preparing for the Year 2000. " So the 99% do not actually need to be complete, they only need to be 'appropriately preparing?' What does that mean?

"The agencies are confident that, based on their reviews, financial institution customers will be able to conduct business as usual both before and after January 1, 2000." The agencies don't simply come out and say business will go on as usual-- rather, they say they are 'confident' that it will.

"Examiners check to see that financial institutions are performing any ongoing system renovation and testing that may be needed, establishing comprehensive contingency plans, mitigating any identified Year 2000-related business risk, and effectively informing their customers of their Year 2000 preparations." So basically the examiners check for *activity*, for the existence of a Plan B once the fixes fail, and PR spin. Why not just look for fixed code?

-- Spanky (nosapm@spamfree.net), August 04, 1999.

How could 99% of all banks regardless of size complete all their y2k remediation and testing within the same time period and hit this deadline? Is it just me or does soemthing smell rotten?

-- y2k dave (xsdaa111@hotmail.com), August 04, 1999.

(1) Good news...glad to see it.

(2) Are all of the mission critical systems remediated or just those labeled mission critical because they could be done in time? (Who audited the mission critical definition?)

(3) Are all the business loan customers who owe the banks money also compliant? All the individual loan customers? If not, when they cannot repay their loans, the banks will face an additional liquidity crisis.

(4) Is the contingency planning complete? How well will the banks function without electricity and telecommunications?

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), August 04, 1999.

I guess all of the remaining 1% is in Pennsylvania because my company is still getting requests to do Y2K repairs at the area banks.

-- (rick @can'tsay.com), August 04, 1999.

I wish it was true, but I worked in system project management at one of the worlds largest banks. From my experiance, RUN FOR THE HILLS, do not bank (pun intended)on what they say. If anyone is interested in specifics let me know.

-- (bsager1@msn.com), August 04, 1999.