- Test - lists.nanog.org

Fwd: WorldCom Investor News: WorldCom Announces Intention to Restate 2001 and First Quarter 2002 Financial Statements
by blitz 26 Jun '02

26 Jun '02

From their own press report: >WorldCom Announces Intention to Restate 2001 and First Quarter 2002 >Financial Statements > >CLINTON, Miss., June 25, 2002 - WorldCom, Inc. (Nasdaq: WCOM, MCIT) today >announced it intends to restate its financial statements for 2001 and the >first quarter of 2002. As a result of an internal audit of the company's >capital expenditure accounting, it was determined that certain transfers >from line cost expenses to capital accounts during this period were not >made in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). >The amount of these transfers was $3.055 billion for 2001 and $797 million >for first quarter 2002. Without these transfers, the company's reported >EBITDA would be reduced to $6.339 billion for 2001 and $1.368 billion for >first quarter 2002, and the company would have reported a net loss for >2001 and for the first quarter of 2002. > >The company promptly notified its recently engaged external auditors, KPMG >LLP, and has asked KPMG to undertake a comprehensive audit of the >company's financial statements for 2001 and 2002. The company also >notified Andersen LLP, which had audited the company's financial >statements for 2001 and reviewed such statements for first quarter 2002, >promptly upon discovering these transfers. On June 24, 2002, Andersen >advised WorldCom that in light of the inappropriate transfers of line >costs, Andersen's audit report on the company's financial statements for >2001 and Andersen's review of the company's financial statements for the >first quarter of 2002 could not be relied upon. > >The company will issue unaudited financial statements for 2001 and for the >first quarter of 2002 as soon as practicable. When an audit is completed, >the company will provide new audited financial statements for all required >periods. Also, WorldCom is reviewing its financial guidance. > >The company has terminated Scott Sullivan as chief financial officer and >secretary. The company has accepted the resignation of David Myers as >senior vice president and controller. > >WorldCom has notified the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of >these events. The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors has retained >William R. McLucas, of the law firm of Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering, former >Chief of the Enforcement Division of the SEC, to conduct an independent >investigation of the matter. This evening, WorldCom also notified its lead >bank lenders of these events. > >The expected restatement of operating results for 2001 and 2002 is not >expected to have an impact on the Company's cash position and will not >affect WorldCom's customers or services. WorldCom has no debt maturing >during the next two quarters. > >"Our senior management team is shocked by these discoveries," said John >Sidgmore, appointed WorldCom CEO on April 29, 2002. "We are committed to >operating WorldCom in accordance with the highest ethical standards." > >"I want to assure our customers and employees that the company remains >viable and committed to a long-term future. Our services are in no way >affected by this matter, and our dedication to meeting customer needs >remains unwavering," added Sidgmore. "I have made a commitment to driving >fundamental change at WorldCom, and this matter will not deter the new >management team from fulfilling our plans." > >Actions to Improve Liquidity and Operational Performance > >As Sidgmore previously announced, WorldCom will continue its efforts to >restructure the company to better position itself for future growth. These >efforts include: > >Cutting capital expenditures significantly in 2002. We intend 2003 capital >expenditures will be $2.1 billion on an annual basis. > >Downsizing our workforce by 17,000, beginning this Friday, which is >expected to save $900 million on an annual basis. This downsizing is >primarily composed of discontinued operations, operations & technology >functions, attrition and contractor terminations. > >Selling a series of non-core businesses, including exiting the wireless >resale business, which alone will save $700 million annually. The company >is also exploring the sale of other wireless assets and certain South >American assets. These sales will reduce losses associated with these >operations and allow the company to focus on its core businesses. > >Paying Series D, E and F preferred stock dividends in common stock rather >than cash, deferring dividends on MCI QUIPS, and discontinuing the MCI >tracker dividend, saving approximately $375 million annually. > >Continuing discussions with our bank lenders. > >Creating a new position of Chief Service and Quality Officer to keep an >eye focused on our customer services during this restructuring. > >"We intend to create $2 billion a year in cash savings in addition to any >cash generated from our business operations," said Sidgmore. "By focusing >on these steps, I am convinced WorldCom will emerge a stronger, more >competitive player." > >About WorldCom, Inc. >WorldCom, Inc. (NASDAQ: WCOM, MCIT) is a pre-eminent global communications >provider for the digital generation, operating in more than 65 countries. >With one of the most expansive, wholly-owned IP networks in the world, >WorldCom provides innovative data and Internet services for businesses to >communicate in today's market. In April 2002, WorldCom launched The >Neighborhood built by MCI - the industry's first truly any-distance, >all-inclusive local and long-distance offering to consumers for one fixed >monthly price. Effective as of the close of regular trading on July 12, >2002, WorldCom will eliminate its tracking stock structure and have one >class of common stock with the NASDAQ ticker symbol WCOM. For more >information, go to http://www.worldcom.com. > >Forward-Looking Statements >This document includes certain "forward-looking statements" within the >meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These >statements are based on management's current expectations and are subject >to uncertainty and changes in circumstances. Actual results may differ >materially from these expectations due to economic uncertainty; the >effects of vigorous competition; the impact of technological change on our >business, alternative technologies, and dependence on availability of >transmission facilities; risks of international business; regulatory risks >in the United States and internationally; contingent liabilities; >uncertainties regarding the collectibility of receivables; risks >associated with debt service requirements and; our financial leverage; >uncertainties associated with the success of acquisitions; and the ongoing >war on terrorism. More detailed information about those factors is >contained in WorldCom's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commi! >ssion.

3 2

Re: Testing Bandwidth performance
by Joe St Sauver 26 Jun '02

26 Jun '02

Hi Alan, >What are some tools to test bandwidth perfomance? I've used iperf, but = >are there other tools or ways to generate traffic for testing purposes = >to see a links maximum capacity? Especially greater than a 100mb. Iperf can be used to generate OC3+ class TCP flows above if the host configuration is correctly tuned. See, for example, the excellent paper by Stanislav Shalunov at http://www.internet2.edu/~shalunov/gigatcp/ ...and systems have only gotten better since that was written. For example, relative to what folks had available a year or so ago (which still performed quite well), you can now buy a system like the Supermicro SuperServer 6022L-6 2U ( http://www.supermicro.com/PRODUCT/SUPERServer/SuperServer6022L-6.htm ) off the shelf with: -- 2x Xeon 2.4GHz/512K L2 cache (Stas's quoted box was working with only 2x1GHz PIII CPUs) -- PCI buses which have gone from 64 bit/66Mhz to PCI-X 64 bit/133MHz -- DDR with 2 way interleaving is now an inexpensive production memory option (the quoted box had used SDR) -- The previous ServerWorks ServerSet III/HE has now been upgraded and improved in the form of the ServerWorks GC-LE chipset (see: http://www.serverworks.com/products/GCLE.html ) I would also suggest one of the Syskonnect gig cards, rather than the 3Com or Netgear gig cards cards. In some configurations we've seen a 300Mbps increase in throughput over the local area (relative to what an Intel gig card delivered) simply by swapping in a Syskonnect SK-9843. Of course, the real killer is still that the path MTU across most of the world is still abysmally small, typically 1500 octets. If folks really want to routinely go fast, they need to be working toward getting 9K frame sizes supported end to end (but that will be tremendously hard/impossible to make happen across the generic Internet). Regards, Joe St Sauver (joe(a)oregon.uoregon.edu) University of Oregon Computing Center

1 0

RE: Testing Bandwidth performance
by Holmes, Daniel 26 Jun '02

26 Jun '02

We've had pretty good luck using SmartBITS to generate traffic on our 10/100/1000 as well as Frame Relay and OC3 links in our test labs. Dan Holmes -----Original Message----- From: Alan Sato [mailto:asato@altrio.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:03 PM To: nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu Subject: Testing Bandwidth performance What are some tools to test bandwidth perfomance? I've used iperf, but are there other tools or ways to generate traffic for testing purposes to see a links maximum capacity? Especially greater than a 100mb. Alan

1 0

RE: Testing Bandwidth performance
by Daniska Tomas 26 Jun '02

26 Jun '02

ttcp is even included in ios try this hidden command: gw#ttcp transmit or receive [receive]: <etc> enjoy :) -- Tomas Daniska systems engineer Tronet Computer Networks Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199 A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by blowing first. > -----Original Message----- > From: Wojtek Zlobicki [mailto:wojtekz@idirect.com] > Sent: 26. júna 2002 5:30 > To: Alan Sato; nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu > Subject: Re: Testing Bandwidth performance > > > > I've found IPERF to work quite well. TTCP is also great. > For a commercial > solution, > you may want to look for products from companies such as IXIA. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alan Sato" <asato(a)altrio.net> > To: <nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu> > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 11:02 PM > Subject: Testing Bandwidth performance > > > > What are some tools to test bandwidth perfomance? I've used > iperf, but are > there other tools or ways to generate traffic for testing > purposes to see a > links maximum capacity? Especially greater than a 100mb. > > Alan > > > > >

2 1

RE: Testing Bandwidth performance
by Daniska Tomas 26 Jun '02

26 Jun '02

a few months ago i was playing with a box from anritsu, they can do several gbps for very interesting price well yes - i could feel on the box they still are an startup - but they seemed very open as far as i know they developed the box by cisco's request and cisco is using it for lab measurements they also can do latency/jitter measurements with two such boxes clocked by gps deejay -- Tomas Daniska systems engineer Tronet Computer Networks Plynarenska 5, 829 75 Bratislava, Slovakia tel: +421 2 58224111, fax: +421 2 58224199 A transistor protected by a fast-acting fuse will protect the fuse by blowing first. > -----Original Message----- > From: measl(a)mfn.org [mailto:measl@mfn.org] > Sent: 26. júna 2002 11:02 > To: Alan Sato > Cc: nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu > Subject: Re: Testing Bandwidth performance > > > > > On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, Alan Sato wrote: > > > What are some tools to test bandwidth perfomance? I've > used iperf, but > > are there other tools or ways to generate traffic for > testing purposes to > > see a links maximum capacity? Especially greater than a 100mb. > > Realistically, you will need commercial hardware/software to do this > properly. Smartbits, Shomiti, are two examples (Shomiti is > less than user > friendly, but the thing can do almost anything) > > > Alan > > -- > Yours, > J.A. Terranson > sysadmin(a)mfn.org > > If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human > beings, they > should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: > Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained > application of > unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed > input on in > the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and > elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire > populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb > electorate... > This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist > United States > as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet > Socialist Republics. > > The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, > associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of > those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the > first place... > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > >

1 0

Re: How low can Worldcom stock go?
by Gordon Cook 26 Jun '02

26 Jun '02

Check out an earlier case of worldcom long distance resale sending out bills they can't collect. http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2002/0610/064.html "Ring of Thieves" by Neil Weinberg, 06.10.02 Ring of Thieves by Neil Weinberg A former MCI billings manager sits in a federal prison, convicted of crimes he said he learned to commit while working for his former employer. this one resulted in 600 million write off in 2000 >I have a $132,000 bill for an $4k/mon oc3 that was installed less than a >year ago. > >I have a $77,000 bill for UUNet bandwidth -- one months billing, according >to them -- for a 9meg ds3. > > > >On Tue, 25 Jun 2002, Bill Woodcock wrote: > >> >> > Remember, this is just the beginning. Do you remember you >>WCOM bills for >> > services that you had canceled years ago? That will come out >>as well... >> >> Heh, just today, I received a bill from WorldCom for $75,097.30, for >> nothing in particular, that I can discern, which they claim to have been >> the unpaid accumulation of some monthly service from May, 1999 through the >> present. Um, yeah, right. :-) >> >> -Bill >> > >-- Alex Rubenstein, AR97, K2AHR, alex(a)nac.net, latency, Al Reuben -- >-- Net Access Corporation, 800-NET-ME-36, http://www.nac.net -- -- ======================================================== The COOK Report on Internet, 431 Greenway Ave, Ewing, NJ 08618 USA (609) 882-2572 (phone & fax) cook(a)cookreport.com Subscription info & prices at http://cookreport.com/subscriptions.shtml Summary of content for 10 years at http://cookreport.com/past_issues.shtml Here Comes Asset Based Telecom A 120 page - Aug Sept issue available at http://cookreport.com/11.05-6.shtml ========================================================

1 0

OT: How low can WorldCom stock go?
by Rowland, Alan D 26 Jun '02

26 Jun '02

I keep waiting for someone to ask the FTC, SEC, etc., exactly what they've been doing with their budgets for the past decade or so. Doesn't seem like anyone has been minding the store except members of congress collecting money from business interests with little, if any, attention to public interest. Enron was the number one contributor in the energy sector. Any bets on WorldCom in the telecom sector? If shareholders ever look up from the short-term bottom line they might notice the horses are long gone from the barns. MBA - Manipulator of Business Assets Waiting for the next 50 or so shoes to drop... Just my 2¢. Al Rowland -----Original Message----- From: Deepak Jain [mailto:deepak@ai.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 5:02 PM To: blitz; ekgermann(a)cctec.com Cc: nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu Subject: RE: How low can Worldcom stock go? I am pretty sure a 5 quarter restatement will reduce its chances of future respectability. DJ -----Original Message----- From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of blitz Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 7:40 PM To: ekgermann(a)cctec.com Cc: nanog(a)trapdoor.merit.edu Subject: Re: How low can Worldcom stock go? Worldcom stands a chance of making money in the future, Adelphia has absolutely NO chance of ever regaining any sort of respectability. After all Wcom owns UUnet...they own the fat pipes.. Adelphia cries when it has to purchase a few T3's cause their cablemodem system is clogged... At 19:03 6/25/02 -0400, you wrote: >Any bets where they will bottom out at? Lets see if they can beat Adelphia >at $0.05 on 6/21/02 > > >---- > > >From WSJ Tech alerts. > >WORLDCOM UNCOVERED what appears to be one of the largest corporate frauds in >history with the discovery of more than $3 billion in expenses that were >improperly booked as capital expenditures. > >For more information, see: > >http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1025044139757626480,00.html > > > > >========================================================================== > Eric Germann CCTec > ekgermann(a)cctec.com Van Wert OH 45801 > http://www.cctec.com Ph: 419 968 2640 > Fax: 603 825 5893 > >"The fact that there are actually ways of knowing and characterizing the >extent of one's ignorance, while still remaining ignorant, may ultimately be >more interesting and useful to people than Yarkovsky" > > -- Jon Giorgini of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory

3 2

Re: Popular IM program?? was: How important is IM?
by Martin Hannigan 26 Jun '02

26 Jun '02

At 03:38 PM 6/25/2002 -0700, Keith Woodworth wrote: >Long time lurker but have a quick question: what is the most popular IM >then with all the discussion of IM software? > >Dont use any myself but just curious is all. Try trillian, www.trillian.org <I believe> does them all, encrypted. -M Regards, -- Martin Hannigan hannigan(a)fugawi.net

3 3

Re: How low can Worldcom stock go?
by Eric Rogers 25 Jun '02

25 Jun '02

Look's like another ENRON scandal. CFO (cooking the books) fired, 3.6 billion dollars in overstated earning's over the past year. Uh, how many hundreds of millions did Ebber's loan(steal) himself? -Eric ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "Eric Germann" <ekgermann(a)cctec.com> Reply-To: <ekgermann(a)cctec.com> Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 19:03:24 -0400 >Any bets where they will bottom out at? Lets see if they can beat Adelphia >at $0.05 on 6/21/02 > > >---- > >>From WSJ Tech alerts. > >WORLDCOM UNCOVERED what appears to be one of the largest corporate frauds in >history with the discovery of more than $3 billion in expenses that were >improperly booked as capital expenditures. > >For more information, see: > >http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB1025044139757626480,00.html

1 0

RE: How important is IM? was RE: How important is the PSTN
by Rishi Singh 25 Jun '02

25 Jun '02

Our NOC uses IM all the time to stay in touch with us regarding emergencies. Our field engineers use IM to stay in touch with us for scheduling and jobs. Engineers working from home use IM to stay in touch with us. A few of our engineers carry cell phones that are IM capable. Trader support techs at different branch offices use IM to convey outage information to us. Pretty important for us. As for people slacking off on IM, we are a project based team with strict deadlines. If you wanna stay on AIM and chat all day, and you miss the deadline, we'll soon find out why. So personal responsibility goes a long way. I'll tell you one thing, it sure helped a lot during Sept 11th. I'd never remove it, just for that reason here. Eventually it might go away due to increased security policies, and then we'll just find something a lot more secure. But it is very handy. I do agree, though, that it isn't the most secure chat product out there. Just so many people use it because of the large installed base. I've even seen AIM IDs on some business cards now. They seem to be more permanent than a cell phone number :-). > -----Original Message----- > From: Christopher J. Wolff [mailto:chris@bblabs.com] > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 3:17 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: How important is IM? was RE: How important is the PSTN > > > > Jane, > > This brings up a good point about IM. IMHO, IM is a > security risk and I am establishing a company standard > where users behind the firewall are prohibited from using > IM, IRC, and peer-to-peer file sharing programs. My > opinion is that these types of programs contribute more > to lack of productivity than to real problem solving. > > So my question for the group is, do chat programs (IM, > IRC, yahoo) serve a substantial network support purpose > or are they more of a distraction, allowing staff to > communicate with friends, relatives, drifters, > interlopers on company time? > > Regards, > Christopher J. Wolff, VP CIO > Broadband Laboratories > http://www.bblabs.com > > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu > [mailto:owner-nanog@merit.edu]On Behalf Of > Pawlukiewicz > Jane > Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 12:06 PM > To: nanog(a)merit.edu > Subject: How important is the PSTN > > > Hi all, > > Thanks so much for all the great answers. (Could everyone > please stop telling me that im = instant messaging). I > knew I should've never gotten out of bed this morning. > > Anyway, 75% of the respondents said the phone is > critical. 25% said some form of IM is critical. > > Just in case anyone was curious. > > Is it me or is it very quiet in here today? > > Jane > > >

1 0