Pollies Staggered by Latest Spending Figures: Y2K Pro tells cornerman, "Cut me, Lou! Cut me!"

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

hotlink

-- Puddintame (achillesg@hotmail.com), August 09, 1999

Answers

Ummmm.......you have to make some assumptions to get the "doomer twist". The article says, in part:

"The resurgence of strong contract activity in 2Q counters the skeptics who had forecast a severe downturn in spending on new outsourcing projects due to Y2K issues"

The more pessimistic will assume that the increased spending is due to firms doing Y2K remediation. ("And it's pretty late in the game to be still doing remediation.")

The more optimistic types will assume that firms are confident enough in their Y2K projects that they have removed their development freezes.

Not being in the IT biz, I can't really say which is the case. However, my guess is that the latter assumption is likely to be correct. Any IT pros out there want to chip in with their 2c?

-- Johnny Canuck (j_canuck@hotmail.com), August 09, 1999.


Johnny, you're right. Significantly more info. is needed to interpret this as y2k status evidence. But I just can't pass up the opportunity to use that fight metaphor!

-- Puddintame (achillesg@hotmail.com), August 09, 1999.

Johnny:

"We found that the earlier a company started its remediation work, the less optimistic they were of completing on time." - Cap Gemini, fall 1998

-- a (a@a.a), August 09, 1999.


"a"

What does your Cap Gemini quotation have to do with the article in question?

-- Johnny Canuck (j_canuck@hotmail.com), August 09, 1999.


Yeah, we all thought that we wouldn't be doing this after June. Think again. Thanks to all you doomers out there we're still at it. The additional funds goes for contingency planning (yes people will remain on site during the rollover) and independent verification.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), August 10, 1999.


Monday August 9, 3:13 pm Eastern Time

Company Press Release

2Q Spending on IT Outsourcing Booms, Y2K Skeptics In Disarray

VIENNA, Va.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 9, 1999--At more than $51.4 billion, IT outsourcing contract activity in 2Q 1999 rose more than three times above the 1Q level of $15.2 billion, and more than four times the 2Q 1998 total of $12.3 billion, according to a study released by INPUT (http://www.input.com) today.

In the study entitled ``IT Services Contract Activity Summary - Second Quarter 1999,'' INPUT identified 183 significant contracts whose total value reverses 1Q's dip, based primarily on 55 contracts awarded in the federal sector with an estimated value of $27.3 billion.

However, even when IDIQ federal contracts with indefinite values are excluded (GSA's Millenia project), total commercial sector contract activity of $24 billion rose 162% over 1Q and 232% over 4Q 1998's total value of $7.3 billion.

More importantly, these figures include as well the cancellation of the EDS award from the State of Connecticut, which had been valued at over $1 billion. Tech Data was the top vendor in 2Q with a 12% market share based on a huge contract win from GE Capital IT Solutions

The new report is part of a series of quarterly reports that track the comparative performance of leading IT outsourcing vendors, and monitor their relative success in winning new business, adjusting to changes in market demand, and moving their business mix towards higher, value-added markets and contracts.

Excluding the large federal Millenia project, Tech Data took a 34% share of 2Q total contract values, Nortel, 28%, followed by EDS with 25% and CSC with 13%. Tech Data took the top rank in the business process management segment, and IBM Global in the electronic markets and insurance segments. Nortel took the top spot in network management, EDS in manufacturing, Getronics Wang in banking, UNISYS in the state and local government segment and the Sabre Group in transportation. Geographically, North America dominated 2Q contracts (97%) compared with Europe's 3%, down from 11% in 1Q 1999.

According to Albert Nekimken, Senior Analyst at INPUT, ``The resurgence of strong contract activity in 2Q counters the skeptics who had forecast a severe downturn in spending on new outsourcing projects due to Y2K issues. While there has been rotation among industry segments and contract types, overall spending remains robust. Also, EDS, CSC, IBM Global and other top vendors report huge pipelines of business yet to be finalized.'' Even if San Diego County were to back down from awarding an expected $1 billion outsourcing contract in September, the trend toward increased spending shows every sign of continuing. The State of Connecticut intends to spend large amounts, albeit in smaller contracts to a wider range of IT vendors.

With offices in Mountain View, CA and Washington, D.C. as well as affiliates in Europe and Asia, INPUT has been serving clients globally since 1974 and is an industry leader in providing intelligence and consulting services to the IT software & services sector. For more information about this report and/or INPUT's Operational Services program, contact Raj Barua at 1881 Landings Dirve; Mountain View, CA 94043; tel: 650/961-3300; fax: 650/961-3966; e-mail: rbarua@input.com.

NOTE TO EDITORS: Further details of research findings are available on request. For more information please contact Raj Barua at rbarua@input.com or call 650/528-6341.

Contact:

INPUT Raj Barua, 650/528-634

-- mabel (mabel_louise@yahoo.com), August 10, 1999.


"Thanks to all you doomers out there we're still at it."

BBWWAAHHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHA. Polly blames Doomers for computer problems. Hahahahahaha! Yes, it's all our fault for noticing the facts. If we had just kept our concerns quiet, the code would magically have fixed itself! The elves would not have been disturbed and could have worked in harmony with the Tooth Fairy to erase all the defects.

It's all the Doomers' fault! They disturbed the clockwork of fairy land and now humans are left with their own mistakes. Shoot the Doomers!

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), August 10, 1999.


Sorry, Leska, too quick on the keyboard. I really think that independent verification is a waste of time and money, totally unnecessary. But with all the doomer talk and the lawyers getting nervous, companies are doing more than necessary to reduce the risk and litigation. No I don't blame the doomers for the problems, you know better than that. Of course, Y2K is a concern. But I DO blame the doomers for blowing this thing out of proportion. Planes falling from the sky and nukes just blasting off make good scare tactics.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), August 10, 1999.

Make sure you look behind you when you backpedal. Otherwise you might hit something.

-- (backpedal@waffle.lies), August 10, 1999.

But it was fun to write ;^)
In a perfect world, if you have conscientiously and painstakingly combed code for every possible glitch and bug, perhaps you would feel "independent verification is a waste of time and money, totally unnecessary." That's understandable.

However, so many .gov .mil .biz .system schmucks are claiming Happy Face Peachy only to be covering up faulty, incomplete, sloppy, or outright un-fixed code.

We've sat in meetings where industry shills have blatantly smugly announced the All Clear, only to have to admit months later that oopsie they need more $$ and time to "Be Ready." And they're not talking about more lawyers, contingency planning, or PR spinners.

We've never been worried about the planes falling out of sky schtick, because we don't believe they'll be allowed to fly. And the "nukes just blasting off make good scare tactics" is right, especially when Russia has PROMISED to nuke us under cover of Y2K "accidents." We fully expect the next two years to bring a nuke attack somewhere. Time Will Tell if it is directly related to an unplanned launch due to Y2K computer errors. That, technically, we doubt; but a because-of-Y2K-chaos or "use it or lose it" opportunity, we say 90% chance yes.

Don't forget the very real possibility and there will be nuclear plant meltdowns because of computer failures. Either way, if you are downwind of contamination, your day will be disturbed.

We just met a big-brain Y2K remediator. Suffice it to say he lied his head off about the caregiving situation he was presenting us with, and showed no remorse or even embarrassment over being caught in Bludgeon-the-Senses discrepencies, manipulations, and blind spots so big it's amazing the guy can function at all.

Doesn't look real promising for his breezy claims of Y2K blow-off success. "We ship all that stuff to India so there's no problem." If the guy can't see facts right in front of his nose, after Drs, nurses, aides, MSWs, caregivers, etc repeatedly TELL him, can he find a Y2K gnat in the haystack?

@}->-- 3~0 3~0 3~0 3~0 3~0 3~0 3~0 @}->-- allaha@earthlink.net), August 10, 1999.



@*#!~+0*X

-- @*#!~+0*X (html@grumble.fix?), August 10, 1999.

Maria - don't forget the huge drug problem Paul Davis says the doomers are causing raising money for their preps :)

"Russia will not be affected by y2k" - Clown Maria

"y2k is now insignificant" - Flint the Forum Jester

"the economic problems associated with y2k are about as concerning as the coming invasion of the pod people" - Decker, the troll posing as a shill, or is it shill posing as a troll?

"FAA is DONE. Banks are DONE. Utilities are DONE. Telecoms are DONE. Y2K IS NO PROBLEM." - Hoff the horse's ass

-- a (a@a.a), August 10, 1999.


Maria,

Just 86 working days left...and given that NOTHING of substance has EVER happened in Dec., it must ALL be finished in 60 work days by Turkey day.

Lets see...some 400 of the Fortune 1000 are not going to make it...30% of UK 1000 companies TOAST...etc., etc., etc. The FDIC's own internal estimate is 15% Bank obligors to go BANKRUPT next year.

Won't be long now.



-- K. Stevens (kstevens@It's ALL going away in January.com), August 10, 1999.


"Sorry, Leska, too quick on the keyboard."

Too quick on the keyboard and slow minded...this could only be Troll Maria! Even without your old "Troll Maria" signature, I can still spot you among a hundred Marias.

"I really think that independent verification is a waste of time and money, totally unnecessary."

It is necessary exactly because there are twits like you doing remediations. But I'm wasting my time, you couldn't grasp what I mean.

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), August 10, 1999.


Ah Chris how many LOC have you remediated?

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), August 10, 1999.


It appears old grudges die slowly - eh catsy.

-- Big Chip (another_vacation@deemed.nec), August 10, 1999.

See folks why I said she couldn't grasp what I meant?

Troll Maria, I'll type slow and clear so maybe you can understand this. There are i n c o m p e t e n t as well as d i s h o n e s t people in every trade and business sectors doing work. Y2K remediation s are i m p o r t a n t, they affect the running of businesses d i r e c t l y, that is their bottom line and p r o d u c t i o n, which in turn affects people's l i v e s directly. That is why it is important to have third party veryfication, especially for critical businesses/companies.

I do not do remediations and you don't need an MIT degree to understand simple basic logic, Troll Maria.

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), August 10, 1999.


Or you can skip the third-party
 v e r i f i c a t i o n 
and just pass a 90-day cooling-off piece of
l e g i s l a t i o 
n 
. Cheaper that way, plus offers the "surprise me" element of spontaeity.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), August 10, 1999.

Nah, no old chip here. I'm just bored today. I keep hoping that perhaps some brain synaps would connect and re-arrange themselves in twit brains like hers if I just try hard enough...but it's hopeless if there's not enough neurons to begin with.

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), August 10, 1999.

Tempers, tempers, now.

Surprised nobody noticed this minor item:

<>

27.3 billion in federal millinium contracts?????? Thought Clinton said they were through on March 30 with everything but the FAA and utilities. Guess there were a "few" inconsequential non-critical systems (50,000 of them sounds right) that still aren't fixed - and aren't being talkied about by anybody.

Hope those 50,000 don't do anything - wonder why we paid for them? Wonder why we need to fix them?

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), August 10, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ