Confirmed Y2K glitch in small business

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

I work in Advertising, and I was callnig on a company regarding a balance due. I was told by my client that they could not cut any checks because their accounting software could not process a check in the year 2000.

I am not sure how much they owe out to other companies, but I do know that my accounts receivable is now over 120 days.

The ironic thing is they utilize the same software package as my company, and a patch has been available since 02/1999. We have not had a problem since we loaded the patch in April and have been Y2K compliant since May of 1999.

Fix on failure?? Just plain stupidity in my book. Take it for what it is worth.

-- futureshock (gray@matter.com), February 05, 2000

Answers

Interesting, thanks for the info. Tell them to get with it and install that patch!

Bizzes have 90 days to "overcome" Y2K ... but prevailing attitudes and market forces will see their competitiveness seriously eroded if they didn't hit 2000 up and running.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), February 05, 2000.


BTW This glitch also affects order entry, accounting reports, and other serach functions. Stupid.

-- futureshock (gray@matter.think), February 05, 2000.

Futureshock:

Businesses use all sorts of excuses not to pay bills. You don't think the fact that they're already 120 days behind indicates they may be having financial problems beyond any computer system? And they can't cut a hand check? I think you're being a little naive here. Y2K sounds like a convenient excuse.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), February 05, 2000.


FWIW - My business runs on Macintosh. We're on the second version of a Y2k upgrade for our accounting package that we installed in January 1999, and again in mid-1999 when secondary problems began to appear. We've had numerous errors. Our A/P is corrupted. Our checks don't print right any more. Our W2 totals were off. We may have to reconstruct our G/L. I have a peer business that uses the exact same system. They bought the exact same patch. They've had only a couple of the same problems we've had, and a different one. Everything looked fine with the numbers in 1999 on the P&Ls, but we got our first glitch after we installed the first patch, and we got our second glitch after we installed the second patch. You may accurately attribute the problem to stupidity, but it may not be your customer's. We're certainly not out of the woods. We haven't even closed 1999 books yet, because we've just been playing catch up with the daily operations - payroll, A/P checks, etc. Any new manual work around throws off the whole schedule of normally routine events, and then things get missed. One thought I have for you in A/R is to ask for a manual check, once a week, for a smaller amount but something. Fax your customer a copy of your own printouts for their account. They'll really appreciate it. It will be a bit extra for you, but you'll get paid, and they'll keep selling your stuff, if they're going to stay in business. This is where relationship is everything - I've got vendors working with me right now, and we're going to get through this together. There's nothing that gives a small struggling business more encouragement and energy to succeed than a supplier who's rooting for them. Good luck.

-- Cynthia Beal (cabeal@efn.org), February 05, 2000.

Futureshock and Cynthia Beal - Those are exactly the kind of stories we'll never read in the newspaper and is one of the main reasons I frequent this site. They're real eye openers, thanks for taking the time to post.

Futureshock - Your company doesn't need customers like that. I don't know how much the balance is but its time to go to small claims court and get a judgment. If they don't manage to find a way to pay after being served then they simply don't have any money. If they go bankrupt hopefully your judgment will put your company near the front of the line.

-- Guy Daley (guydaley@bwn.net), February 05, 2000.



Two similar problems with SME's in my small town in northwestern Oregon, 11,000 pop. The office/stationery store computers crashed ca. Feb. 1, and although they are "back-up" the staff there reports losign all their "order" data for new stock to be purchased from their wholesalers. Had to re-enter that by hand, evidently. The computers are now "up, but I have been in 2-3 times this week for various small purchases: when I offerd to pay somethign down on my account, the clerk took a little memo-pad and wrote my a receipt by hand. Thus accounts receivables are clearly still ucked-fup.

Story is the same at the hardware story. Everything seems to be normal undtil you want to pay the bill. They write out a little memo- recept by hand, and take the money into the office to be processed into receivable at the central offices.

-- Squirrel Hunter (nuts@upina.cellrelaytower), February 05, 2000.


One of my customers got $18,000 behind in paying in September, October, November, and December. They installed a new accounting system and had some problems. Each month they owed more on the account than they were paying.

It wasn't that they weren't paying, they were. The invoices are due net-30 and for years they had reliably paid within 2 or 3 days of the due date.

During the fall, they would go Net-60, then pay one invoice, go another 30 days and pay two invoices. There wasn't any pattern.

I wasn't worried as another customer paid ahead in October and November. I'd hand deliver an invoice on Monday and I'd have a check by Wednesday, also hand delivered.

The first customer didn't tell me what the problems were and has paid up to date as of mid January. I expect a payment of $4500 in the next week.

I believe the first customer would have had a Y2K problem and was rushing to implement the new system.

-- aaa (xxx@yyy.zzz), February 05, 2000.


* * * 20000205 Saturday

Cynthia Beal: Hello, friend of yore.

Does anyone remember the thrashing in prose that I took from some on this forum for predicting that MacIntosh/Apple programs ported ("translated"/moved) from IBM PC-based platforms could/would--and, indeed, NOW DO--exhibit serious Y2K computational errors if 2-digit years were the "inherited" application trait?

Those folks didn't think I knew what I was talking about. Four (MAJOR) Y2K projects experience on top of 30+ years in the IT field opens ones eyes to the reality and consequences of failures to fix the "broken" code ... regardless of the platform and the glowing claims/assurances from obviously negligent vendors.

Well, I feel somewhat vindicated. I don't feel any "better" about the consequences for the beguiled and gullible, however. The rate of business bankruptcies should be v-e-r-r-r-y interesting--and revealing--come June-August 2000!

This is not stupidity. It is, unequivocally, (vendor) malfeasance and (user) misfeasance on the part of the recalcitrant parties. They knew what was RIGHT TO DO, and neither [had/have/will never] DO[NE] the RIGHT THING re Y2K! We're ALL the losers in the fallout. We-- the consumers--in the end, pay for EVERYTHING. One way or the other!

Condolences, Cynthia!! Hang in there! I wish you well!

Regards, Bob Mangus

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus1@yahoo.com), February 05, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ