International Banking Test

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

In memory of "Norm."

WARNING: THIS POST MAY BE EDITED FOR CONTENT OR LANGUAGE

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/headlines/tc/story.html?s=v/nm/19990614/tc/yk_banks_3.html

Banks Worldwide Beat Y2K Bug -- Virtually By Paul Carrel

FRANKFURT (Reuters) - Banks around the world successfully made a two-day leap forward to the millennium at the weekend to test their computer systems will continue to function as 2000 dawns.

At the Paris-based Euro Banking Association (EBA), which operates a pan-European euro clearing system, virtual business was concluded Sunday without problems.

``From our side it was very successful,'' said George Georgakopoulos, millennium expert at the EBA. ``No problems were observed by the users or by ourselves. We have had a very smooth operation for two days.''

The global exercise, involving at least 500 banks in 19 countries, was intended to test whether the backbone of international payment systems worldwide will function normally as the world's clocks tick past midnight on December 31, 1999.

In the simulated environment, Saturday became Monday, January 3, 2000 and Sunday became Tuesday, January 4.

In the United States, the New York Clearing House, which initiated the test, reported that payment settlements were processed without any problems.

``We have three large U.S. banks that have a vast global presence and they have all reported exceptional results yesterday and today,'' said New York Clearing House Director of Information Systems George Thomas.

The New York Clearing House, which is connected to 82 U.S. and international banks, successfully made the ``international handshake'' -- the connection to other financial institutions around the world.

Saturday, 48,000 dollar test payments were cleared by the House, Thomas said.

The German central bank, the Bundesbank, said German banks, which used its settlement facilities, also completed the exercise successfully.

German banks alone are estimated to have invested over 10 billion marks ($5.36 billion) in solving the Y2K problem -- the inability of older computers and software to recognize the difference between 2000 and 1900.

The test was designed to see whether computer upgrades are ''understood'' by the computers operated by banks on the opposite ends of global transactions.

``Here everything is optimal and has run without any problems,'' said Deutsche Bank vice-president and millennium expert Gerhard Singer.

Deutsche Bank, Commerzbank and Dresdner Bank each estimate their compliance costs at 400 million to 700 million marks.

``Everything ran completely satisfactorily,'' said Commerzbank millennium expert Detlev Kirchner. ``We can look forward to 2000 in a relaxed way.''

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 14, 1999

Answers

"WARNING: THIS POST MAY BE EDITED FOR CONTENT OR LANGUAGE"

Entirely unnecessary and provocative.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), June 14, 1999.


I agree Big Dog, what else would one expect from an apologist fiat shill like DD...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 14, 1999.

Link here

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000wxg

explains why this "test" is bure bullshit, well worth a read if you are interested in how the banking system will hose at rollover.......

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 14, 1999.


I'll fill ya'll in on the end-game outcome. The world's banking system (note: singular, not plural) is about to suffer a fatal nose bleed...slow, but sure!

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 14, 1999.

This tells us two facts. One the banks are not compliant(they have not announced compliance) and two they are now capable of zapping corrupt data worldwide to make matters worse. I really am surprised that such bad news is posted by Mr Decker. Even Norm would not shoot himself in the foot like this.

-- Mike Lang (webflier@erols.com), June 14, 1999.


What concerns me the most is whether or not organizations that have taken out bank loans are compliant. The main issue for banks could be liquidity.

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), June 14, 1999.

I think that Decker has found his true calling -- as NORM's understudy. Go ahead, dummy, take the mantle of the NORM machine -- just post, don't think, don't comment (ESPECIALLY don't comment! -- your "My grandfather would have done..." bullshit is really too much), just find what seems to support good news on Y2K and plunk it out there so it can be seriously discussed.

(Anyone know what seems to be wrong with the NORM machine? Maybe it was done in by that new computer virus, "Worm.Explore.Zip"?)

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), June 14, 1999.

Old news; This has already been more thoroughly discussed in this thread:

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000wkf

Nothing much more to add from the press release above. Except that the numbers of the banks keeps changing. Wish they'd get their facts straight.

I'll be impressed when they report 48,000 banks are tested, rather than when one transaction of 48,000 dollars is tested, or when they report 190 countries are tested, rather than 190 banks in 19 countries. This is not good news; it is merely information that could have been if we had heard it in Nov 1998.

Hearing it now (in mid-June, from the industry considered the furthest advanced) means they are whefully behind schedule in other (less advanced) industries.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 14, 1999.


In response,

"This tells us two facts. One the banks are not compliant(they have not announced compliance) and two they are now capable of zapping corrupt data worldwide to make matters worse. I really am surprised that such bad news is posted by Mr Decker. Even Norm would not shoot himself in the foot like this."

If I do not announce that I am honest, I must be a liar? Bad logic, Mike. And a successful test of at least 500 banks is not bad news. The mantra of the Y2K pessimists has been that testing is required to prove remediation. Here's some testing and a bag of chips.

"What concerns me the most is whether or not organizations that have taken out bank loans are compliant. The main issue for banks could be liquidity."

Link, not a bad observation. Most commercial loans have a Y2K clause therein. And don't you mean solvency, not liquidity?

"King," I have no plans to become the next "Norm," I just thought I would dedicate a bit of good news in his memory. Were you planning on ever contributing anything to this forum... aside from your usual mindless attacks? Of course, in the fine traditional of European royalty you do strike me as the resulting of inbreeding.

"I'll be impressed when they report 48,000 banks are tested, rather than when one transaction of 48,000 dollars is tested, or when they report 190 countries are tested, rather than 190 banks in 19 countries."

Read carefully... it was 48,000 transactions... not one transaction of $48,000 dollars. In international banking, $48,000 is pocket change.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 14, 1999.


I'll grant you a confusing term there: defintely more than two payment, but what size and how many is not made clear by the reporter's phrase: " 48,000 dollar test payments ". I agree with you, it is possible that 48,000 1.00 dollar transactions were made, not one 48,000.00 transaction. But if 48,000 identical transcations were made, how could you track any single one of them. (And dollar only - no other currencies? No Euro transactions? )

Better, by far, to have 48,000 unique transactions - each a different amount; 1/4 to one acount from many accounts at many banks at many countries (to check consistency and "totals") - and 1/4 from one account to many accounts, and 1/4 many - to - many, and 1/4 from one account to many accounts, but each a different "kind" of transaction to different sub-ordinate accounts in the bank.

Two days simulation is only marginal - it doesn't cover two 24 hours of internal operations of daily currency changes.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), June 14, 1999.



"``Everything ran completely satisfactorily,'' said Commerzbank millennium expert Detlev Kirchner."

"Satisfactory"? When I went to school that was the word they used to describe your progress when you receive a grade of "C".

"Millenium expert"? How many milleniums has this guy been through that qualifies him as an "expert"?

This whole "test" is a publicity sham engineered by the New York Clearing House who also happen to control the media. They can send the world into a depression overnight if they want, which is exactly what they did back in 1929. We are being set up big time for a very big fall.

-- @ (@@@.@), June 14, 1999.


"Y2K Liquidity Contingency Planning"

http://www.frbsf.org/fiservices/cdc.local/cash/contingency.html

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), June 14, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ