|
SCO Numbers |
|
Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:15 PM EST
|
Here are the numbers from SCO's press release. According to the conference call, they have $7 million in cash left to operate SCO after this quarter. They spent $4.3M in legal fees this quarter. They project $3M per quarter going forward. But take a look at their accounts payable. It seems to have taken quite a jump. Why? Not paying bills? The press release says they have placed $5M in escrow, in connection with their litigation. I remember from Dion Cornett's 11/8 OSWS that $5M in escrow is for the lawyers, travel expenses, witness fees, etc. Reuters: "Revenue declined to $10.08 million from $24.3 million." TheStreet.com's Ronna Abramson says SCO's 4Q loss "tripled on a sharp drop in sales": "Lindon, Utah-based SCO reported a loss of $6.5 million, or 37 cents a share, in the fourth quarter. That compared with a loss of $1.6 million, or 12 cents a share, in the same period a year earlier.
"The loss includes a $2.7 million restructuring charge.
"Revenue fell more than 50% to $10.1 million from $24.3 million a year earlier. . . . "Legal news has been the primary driver of the stock, which has fallen about 77% from a 52-week high of 19.31. The company has drawn its share of investors betting against it, with the short interest at 53% as of Nov. 8. Shares of SCO Group fell 33 cents, or 6.8%, to close Tuesday at $4.51." All in all, this isn't the moon.
*****************************
The SCO Group Announces Fourth Quarter and Fiscal 2004 Results
LINDON, Utah, Dec 21, 2004 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX), owner of the UNIX operating system and a leading provider of UNIX-based solutions, today reported results for its fiscal fourth quarter and year ended October 31, 2004. Revenue for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2004 was $10,075,000 as compared to $24,290,000 from the comparable quarter of the prior year. The decrease in revenue in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2004 from the comparable quarter of the prior year was primarily due to a decrease in SCOsource licensing revenue to $120,000 from $10,316,000 and from continued competitive pressures on the Company's UNIX products and services. The net loss attributable to common stockholders for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2004 was $6,516,000, or ($0.37) per diluted common share, as compared to a net loss attributable to common stockholders of $1,568,000, or ($0.12) per diluted common share for the comparable quarter of the prior year. Included in the net loss attributable to common stockholders for the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2004 were charges related to a restructuring of continuing operations, reductions in force and dispositions of long-lived assets totaling $2,702,000. "Fourth Quarter achievements demonstrate continued progress at SCO," said Darl McBride, president and CEO, The SCO Group. "The management team has maintained its commitment to operate our core UNIX business profitably. With the benefit of additional efficiency improvements now in place, we expect the UNIX business will generate cash during fiscal year 2005. During the fourth quarter we also completed an agreement to cap the legal fees relating to the pending contract and intellectual property litigation. The combination of these two positive actions positions us well to pursue our strategy to protect our contractual and intellectual property rights on behalf of our customers, employees and shareholders." For fiscal year 2004, revenue was $42,809,000 compared to revenue for fiscal year 2003 of $79,254,000. For fiscal year 2004, the net loss attributable to common stockholders was $16,227,000, or ($1.07) per diluted common share, compared to net income attributable to common stockholders of $5,304,000, or $0.34 per diluted common share. Cash and available-for-sale securities were $31,449,000 at October 31, 2004. In addition, $5,000,000 was placed in an escrow account and is classified as a component of restricted cash as of October 31, 2004. This cash will be used to pay for certain expenses associated with our intellectual property litigation. UNIX Business Highlights The fourth quarter of fiscal year 2004 marked the third consecutive quarter of stable revenue for the UNIX business. The Company's management team continued to make operating improvements in this business to help it generate positive cash flow in fiscal year 2005. Additionally, the Company anticipates releasing the next version of its OpenServer product, code-named Legend, during the first half of 2005. This product will mark the culmination of a significant product development effort and reinforces the Company's investment in its ongoing UNIX business. During the fourth quarter, the Company launched a new version to its collaboration product, SCOoffice Server 4.1, which has been gaining acceptance in various markets throughout the world. In addition, the Company launched its SCO Marketplace initiative targeted to third-party developers who wish to participate with the Company in development projects that will benefit and enhance future SCO products. Litigation Agreement On November 4, 2004 the Company filed a Form 8-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission indicating it had finalized an amended engagement agreement with the law firms representing the Company in its current litigation. The revised engagement agreement limits the Company's attorneys fees after September 1, 2004 associated with its intellectual property litigation to approximately $31 million (other than contingency fees) and will enable the Company to finance the litigation through to its conclusion, including any necessary appeals. The revised engagement agreement will also lower the Company's ongoing quarterly costs associated with its intellectual property litigation. . . . Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
(in thousands)
October 31, October 31,
2004 2003
Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents $19,693 $64,428
Restricted cash 8,283 2,025
Available-for-sale securities 11,756 4,095
Accounts receivable, net 6,638 9,282
Other current assets 1,870 2,450
Total current assets 48,240 82,280
Property and equipment, net 649 1,148
Goodwill and intangibles, net 5,413 10,452
Other assets 1,098 1,072
Total assets $55,400 $94,952
Liabilities:
Accounts payable $7,854 $1,978
Accrued payroll and accrued expenses 7,224 8,506
Accrued compensation to law firms 7,956 10,556
Deferred revenue 4,877 5,501
Derivative related to Series A
convertible preferred stock -- 15,224
Other current liabilities 4,916 3,347
Total current liabilities 32,827 45,112
Long-term liabilities 343 508
Minority interest -- 145
Convertible preferred stock -- 29,671
Stockholders' equity 22,230 19,516
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity $55,400 $94,952
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
(in thousands, except per share data)
Three Months Ended Year Ended
October 31, October 31,
2004 2003 2004 2003
Products revenue $8,296 $12,012 $35,352 $45,028
Services revenue 1,659 1,962 6,628 8,380
SCOsource licensing revenue 120 10,316 829 25,846
Total revenue 10,075 24,290 42,809 79,254
Cost of products revenue 857 729 3,221 4,405
Cost of services revenue 861 1,346 4,134 6,354
Cost of SCOsource licensing
revenue 4,257 5,288 19,743 9,163
Total cost of revenue 5,975 7,363 27,098 19,922
Gross margin 4,100 16,927 15,711 59,332
Operating expenses:
Sales and marketing 3,086 5,971 17,038 24,392
Research and development 2,445 2,870 10,612 11,012
General and administrative 1,833 1,705 8,308 6,230
Compensation to law firms -- 8,956 -- 8,956
Restructuring and other 2,486 -- 2,486 498
Amortization of intangibles 593 895 2,566 3,190
Write-down of investment -- 250 -- 250
Loss on impairment of
long-lived assets 216 164 2,355 164
Stock-based compensation 51 277 919 1,204
Total operating expenses 10,710 21,088 44,284 55,896
Income (loss) from
operations (6,610) (4,161) (28,573) 3,436
Equity in income (loss)
of affiliates (4) 109 111 (62)
Other income, net 223 2,886 6,507 2,827
Income (loss) before
income taxes (6,391) (1,166) (21,955) 6,201
Provision for income taxes (125) (279) (1,395) (774)
Net income (loss) (6,516) (1,445) (23,350) 5,427
Dividends on convertible
preferred stock -- (123) 7,123 (123)
Net income (loss)
applicable to common
stockholders $(6,516) $(1,568) $(16,227) $5,304
Basic net income (loss)
per common share $(0.37) $(0.12) $(1.07) $0.43
Diluted net income (loss)
per common share $(0.37) $(0.12) $(1.07) $0.34
Weighted average basic
common shares outstanding 17,436 13,371 15,155 12,261
Weighted average diluted
common shares outstanding 17,436 13,371 15,155 15,679
|
|
Authored by: nattt on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:38 PM EST |
Darl said they're ammending the claim to add copyright infringement over
SCO code in AIX on PowerPC. I'm looking forwards to seeing how they think
they're going to make that fly!
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:38 PM EST |
They basically said nothing that was not in the current and historical press
releases.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:40 PM EST |
They finally admitted paying royalties to Novell though....
Wonder why if they own UNIX?
*cough* ;)[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- SCO Numbers - Authored by: frk3 on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:49 PM EST
- SCO Numbers - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:52 PM EST
- Yah, well - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:14 PM EST
- SCO Numbers - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:35 PM EST
|
Authored by: LarryVance on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:40 PM EST |
I listened to the conference call and there were no references to the golden
parachutes or the dismissal of Yarro from Canopy. Maybe there is still more to
come.
---
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE YOUR INFLUENCE!
Larry Vance[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jim Reiter on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:42 PM EST |
Corrections here [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: eggplant37 on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:42 PM EST |
I just finished listening to the SCO call. I haven't heard anything that funny
in a *long* time. The rookie who called in and started to analyze the sheet was
hilarious, props buddy. Then Al Petrofsky, bringing out the details of the
legal fee agreements? Booful.
I'm in stitches here. If they make it through the next quarter, I'll be
terribly surprised.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jim Reiter on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:43 PM EST |
Off topic comments here [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:46 PM EST |
wait a second... Darl claimed that DC and SCO stipulated to a dismissal without
prejudice on SCO's license-related claims. I thought I read here on Groklaw
that DC stipulated to NO SUCH THING. Am I confused? Did I misunderstand Darl?
Also - notice how they quickly ended the call where they had to talk about
royalty payments to NOvell...
jeff[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:47 PM EST |
I'm sure they used the phrase:
"dismissed without prefudice so we can go ahead and refile after
appeals"
anything on pacer guys?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- SCO Numbers - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:48 PM EST
- SCO Numbers - Authored by: marbux on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:26 PM EST
|
Authored by: jim Reiter on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:50 PM EST |
SURPRISE!!!!! [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: LarryVance on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:51 PM EST |
How would you like to be a CEO that could reduce a company to half of it's net
worth in a year and have an earnings of -1.05 a share and still get paid a
million dollars?
---
NEVER UNDERESTIMATE YOUR INFLUENCE!
Larry Vance[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: cadfael on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:51 PM EST |
Ah, refreshingly honest response by the market. They are down $0.46 after market
today....[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- SCO Numbers - Authored by: tiger99 on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:33 PM EST
- SCO Numbers - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:49 PM EST
- SCO Numbers - Authored by: jim Reiter on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:32 PM EST
- SCO Numbers - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 01:17 AM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:52 PM EST |
It makes me wonder about the DCC case. There is speculation that they may drop
the lateness issue to speed the process of appealing the judges decision. Yet it
does not look like they have enough money to last to see the appeal through to
completion.
Then there are the other cases.
SCO desparately needs funding. They would seem to be very tempted to unethically
acquire funding. How can we help SCO to resist entering some ill-advised
funding fiasco?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: XORisOK on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:53 PM EST |
$7M in cash, with a burn rate of $3M per quarter.... That would leave a smoking
hole in Lindon around June:^)
---
I can't help it if you insist on using logic![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 05:59 PM EST |
Does anybody think Spitzer could be interested enough in this company?
I am sure after good discovery they can find piles of wrongdoing by the
management. Some easy convictions here, IMO.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: bstone on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:04 PM EST |
During the call, they mentioned selling rights to some product to another
company (probably a Canopy company, since the name of the company has changed
since they sold it), and collecting half a million in revenue for it. Anyone
know anything more on this?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: blacklight on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:12 PM EST |
"Fourth Quarter achievements demonstrate continued progress at SCO,"
said Darl McBride, president and CEO, The SCO Group"
If mere movement was an indicator progress, then falling off a clear should
qualify as spectacular progress. So the cash reserve goes down by $6.5 mil by
Darl the Snarl's own reporting while I expect SCOG's stock to shoot up on the
bad news. Who said life isn't a comedy?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:13 PM EST |
"the Company launched a new version to its collaboration product, SCOoffice
Server 4.1, which has been gaining acceptance in various markets throughout the
world."
Oh yeah, its been "gaining acceptance in markets around the world"
alright ... most IT professionals now accept that car boot sales, garage sales
and discount store closeouts are now recognized as the prime hunting ground for
purchasers of this product :))[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Pop69 on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:16 PM EST |
Be interesting to see what securities they're holding that pad out their current
assets.
I'd be wanting a long hard look at their goodwill and intangibles as well with a
view to an impairment review.
Overall it's not that bad a balance sheet, I've seen a lot worse. Unfortunately
I'd have serious doubts about whether or not they were a going concern looking
at the revenue statements.
IANAL but IAAA[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Steve Martin on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:20 PM EST |
Anyone besides me having problems reading the site with the Groklaw or Groklaw
Blue theme selected? Comments seem to be in reversed video here in both.
Woodlands is fine. (Using Mozilla on WinXP, at work, have no choice, have pity
on me...)
---
"When I say something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffee, "Sports
Night"[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:20 PM EST |
First minute:
Good day everyone, and welcome to the SCO group's fiscal fourth quarter and
year-end 2004 earnings conference call. At this time everone is in listen only
mode. Later a Q&A session will be opened. During the call, the company
will only be providing a general update on the status of our pending litigation
and cannot address evidence, rulings, strategies or other specific details.
Today's call is being recorded. Participating on the call today are Darl
McBride, President and CEO, and Bert Young, CFO. Each of you should have a copy
of the press release issued this afternoon containing our results which we will
be discussing further in this call. I wish to point out to the participants on
today's conference call that the information provided during this call will
include forward-looking statements within the meaning of the private securities
litigation reform act of 1995. These forward-looking statements are made only
as of the date of this conference call, and we undertake no obligation to update
or to revise the forward-looking information whether as a result of new
information, future developments, or otherwise.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Transcript of call - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:27 PM EST
- Transcript of call - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:31 PM EST
- Transcript of call - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:37 PM EST
- Transcript of call - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:42 PM EST
- Transcript of call - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:48 PM EST
- Transcript of call - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:58 PM EST
- Transcript of call - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:08 PM EST
- Transcript of call - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:15 PM EST
- Transcript of call - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:24 PM EST
- Transcript of call - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:27 PM EST
- Q&A - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:31 PM EST
- Q&A - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:44 PM EST
- Q&A - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:50 PM EST
- Q&A - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 08:15 PM EST
- Q&A - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 08:19 PM EST
- Q&A - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 08:26 PM EST
- Q&A - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 08:35 PM EST
- Q&A - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 10:18 PM EST
- Parent has mention of $3M quarterly payment to Novell (eom) - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 09:30 PM EST
- Parent has "dismissal without prejudice" of DCC case reference - Authored by: Dent on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:30 PM EST
- Transcript of call - Authored by: PJ on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:28 PM EST
- Parent has $500k ventella (scintella?) reference - Authored by: Dent on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:33 PM EST
- A request to the transcriber - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:07 PM EST
- Un-nested transcript of call up to first Q&A - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:47 PM EST
- The COMPLETE (rough) transcript - Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 08:37 PM EST
|
Authored by: senectus on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:28 PM EST |
"Fourth Quarter achievements demonstrate continued progress at SCO,"
said Darl McBride, president and CEO, The SCO Group. "The management team has
maintained its commitment to operate our core UNIX business profitably. With the
benefit of additional efficiency improvements now in place, we expect the UNIX
business will generate cash during fiscal year 2005
What
planet does this guy come from.. how on earth does he think they're going to
make money?!
At a guess I'd have to say that the staff at SCO headquaters
would have a pretty low moral right now... and low moral means low production
and low quality production.
Amazing [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:30 PM EST |
after all who would do by from a vendor predisposed to sue them. Now the real
business will take out the lawsuits as it consumes the remaining cash...
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:34 PM EST |
... were down by about 50 percent. Gee, somehow I'm not surprised except that
I would have expected it to be down even more.
Of course, I'm poking fun at
that figure even though I'm not exactly sure what it represents. Any financial
or corporate report afficianados care to explain what the heck that line item
represents? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: RedBarchetta on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:38 PM EST |
Bert Young from today's news
conference call (OGG
sound file):
"As we have previously indicated our attorney
fees have now been capped. We've signed and completed an agreement with Boies
Schiller & Flexner that caps our legal fees and ensures we have their
representation through the conclusion of the IBM litigation, including the
appeals process."
Preparing for an appeal are
we?
Tsk, tsk, tsk. I suppose they finally cured their myopic vision,
and are able to read the writing on the wall. Just from the tone of their
voices I can tell they don't find this "fun" anymore.
For another
reality check, he's my rewrite on that Bert's "forward looking"
statement:
"We are ensured legal representation [from
BS&F] all the way through the "burning hole in the ground" stage. We
anticipate that happening very soon. With the new vesting agreement, Yarro /
Raimondi double-bounce, and Freudian slip about an appeal, we acknowledge that
the end is near. So to our [few] supporters I say...
To be, or
not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to
suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms
against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to
sleep;"
--- Collaborative efforts
synergise. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:05 PM EST |
But take a look at their accounts payable. It seems to have taken quite a jump.
Why? Not paying bills? The press release says they have placed $5M in escrow, in
connection with their litigation. Which case? Why?
Sure signs of trouble.
1.First you blow sunshine up the suppliers butt and the stockholders butt.
2.Then your payables go unpaid, and you fail to return suppliers phone calls or
stockholders phone calls
Everybody knows the end is near. [but they play along anyway]
Questions
Why the $5 mil set aside, surley not for lawyers fees they've already been
capped at $31 mil.
Is it related to the executives stock deal
Are Yarrow and the boys starting to bail, (the smart one's always get out first
with their money intact.)
Is this related to IBM's request for more info regarding
the Canopy Group's relationship to TSG[sco]
AKA:Gunillablue
PS:Daryl McBride could make the TiTanic seen like a sucess.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:06 PM EST |
So,
We see more false statements, more spin, no mention of Mommy and Daddy getting a
divorce (Canopy / Yarro, et al) or the new golden play toys, and the "ooops
we let it slip that we don't own Unix" fiaSCO.
Sounds like a typical day in thier alternate reality.
I know those of us here in the real world are frustrated, incensed, laughing
till we cry, etc. and are dying to see these people board their trans
dimentional reality proof space ship and go home. Or do jail time, depends on
what plane of reality you live on.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: spuluka on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:06 PM EST |
Quote from Conference Call: "we're continuing to classify the legal and
professional fees and other costs and expenses that relate directly to the
enforcement of our IP rights as cost of revenue."
This seems to me a debatable classification at best. I'm not an accountant, but
I do recall that cost of sales had to be pretty directly tied to tangible
revenue in the near term. I don't know if you can really classify the law suits
this way.
Any CPAs out there that can explain this?
---
Steve Puluka
Pittsburgh, PA[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: rao on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:10 PM EST |
Around the 28 minute mark, the guy who did not seem to know anything about
SCO before today asked the question:
So how much was your cash
down from the last quarter?
And part of SCO's answer
was:
Well, from the last quarter, if you don't include
restricted cash to Baystar, we're down just over 6
million.
Does anyone know what this "restricted cash to
Baystar" is about?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:15 PM EST |
They have no good will [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 07:41 PM EST |
I have a question about the money payable to Novell. Did SCO not disclose that
they owed money to Novell in previous financial statements and/or not report
that there were disputed amounts claimed by Novell, and then suddenly throw a
multi million dollar Novell payable into the latest quarterly statement?
----------------------
Steve Stites
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Brian S. on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 08:07 PM EST |
And leave SCOG to suffer their inevitable failure. SCOG form a small part of
Canopy's investments and they may feel it is better to just write this one off.
Canopy and its associated companies must have suffered through all this, even if
it's just bad PR. Everyone else has. Baystar, the banks, the ordinary long term
investors. Even M$ reputation has been publicly questioned.
Are Real
World events about to overtake the Courts and will anyone chase after the
instigators of this whole scam?
It's been a good end to the year, first with
the EU stalemate on software patents and now this. I wonder if much more will
happen before Christmas or whether we will just have to wait for the New
Year?
Merry Christmas Brian S. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 09:57 PM EST |
In SCO's case against Daimler Chrysler, earlier this year
the michigan state court dismissed SCO's claim that
Daimler had failed to adequately to certify its compliance
with its unix source-code lincence. But let stand SCO's
claim that Daimlers certification was not made timely.
After the court dismissed the certification claim, we
determined that it would be a wise use of resources to
pursue the timeliness claim alone. Therefore we moved to
stay that claim pending further clarification of the
issues on the IBM case.
The court in michigan denied our motion to stay, but based
on a stipulation of the parties, the court enterd an order
of dismissal without predjudise that permits us to refile
our claim later if necessary.
We may now pursue an appeal on the courts certification
ruling.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Brian S. on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 10:39 PM EST |
SCO reports deeper loss, shrinking revenue
......... The
company reported a loss of $6.5 million, or 37 cents per share, for the
quarter ended Oct. 31, compared with a year-earlier loss of $1.6 million or
12 cents per share. The Lindon, Utah, company's revenue dropped from $24.3
million to $10.1 million over the same period.
SCO blamed the revenue
decrease on competitive pressures and a major drop in the company's effort to
license its Unix intellectual property. No analysts surveyed by First Call had
financial projections for the company.
SCO also will have to reckon with the
fallout from a major shake-up at the Canopy Group, the investor that owns a
majority stake in SCO. Canopy Chief Executive Ralph Yarro, who also is SCO's
chair, has been replaced at Canopy by Bill Mustard, a Canopy representative
said. The executive shake-up was reported Tuesday by The Salt Lake Tribune,
which also said Chief Financial Officer Darcy Mott lost his job.
Yarro and
Mott remain on SCO's board, SCO spokesman Blake Stowell said. Yarro and Mustard
did not immediately respond to requests for comment................
ZDnet
SCO's
'Linux Licenses' Flop, IBM Asks For An Extension From Maureen
O'Gara
Top Management Of The Canopy Group Terminated. Canopy Owns 31.4%
Of SCO
........In a move potentially complicating things for SCO, the top
management of the Canopy Group, the venture capital arm of former Novell CEO Ray
Noorda and SCO's largest stockholder, was terminated last Friday by Noorda's son
and daughter. Noorda, encumbered by age, hasn't been active for
years...........
......Noorda's children, who may just want their own boy
running the place now that daddy's incapacitated, have installed a new financial
manager at Canopy by the name of Bill Mustard, reportedly from New York. Canopy
employees, said to number two or three dozen, were reportedly told their
continued tenure would be sorted out in the next 30 days...........
Maureen comments at
LinuxBusinessWeek
Loss Widens at SCO Group
..........Only
one sell-side analyst, Dion Cornett with Decatur Jones, covers
SCO.........
Not a lot from The Street Brian S. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jim Reiter on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 12:02 AM EST |
The most interesting "SCO" number would be to know the number of
Resume's from TSG employees that are on the street.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: jim Reiter on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 12:07 AM EST |
The most interesting "SCO" number would be to know the number of
Resume's from TSG employees that are on the street.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 12:27 AM EST |
Since Yarro and Mott presumably got their positions on SCOG's board to watch out
for Canopy's interests, how long until Canopy moves to have them replaced? This
could could get interesting, since without the votes from the Canopy block the
current board may not have the votes to maintain the status quo. And if Canopy
were to attempt to take full control by acquiring control over more than 50% of
the stock, would the poison-pill defenses be negated because Canopy's position
was already in place before the defenses were enacted?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Gothic`Knight on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 01:49 AM EST |
"SCO's 4Q loss "tripled on a sharp drop in sales."
This is such good news as SCOX is obviously doing well particularly with those
SCO source licences *cough**choke*
Perhaps I should have bought one because soon they are going to be a collectors
item.
There's a right wing joke in Oz:
Q. How do you start a small business.
A. Buy a large one and let the Unions help you.
now theres a spin to that one.
Q. How do you start a small business.
A. Buy a large one and hire Darl mcBride[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 03:03 AM EST |
It occurs to me that we should watch very closely what happens once the `capped'
legal fees run out. As PJ said, lawyers do not lawyer for free. If BSF do indeed
continue to fight for SCO even once the capped fees are exhausted as Darl seems
to believe they will, then I'd be wondering who was paying them to do it. Any
third party interested in prolonging the litigation need not funnel money
directly to SCO. They need only funnel money to BSF to ensure that BSF continues
to fight on SCOs behalf. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 07:07 PM EST |
I think SCO's lawsuits may go down as one of the most insane management strategy
decisions in IT.
Linux is doing well so do I:
a) Plow on with my proprietary Unix software.
b) Build a Linux distribution with the help of my Unix skilled staff.
c) Sue IBM and somewhat annoy the OS community (who also happen to be sysadmins
who recommend the purchase of our product)
Any sane person can see that (a) or (b) are both actually going to keep me going
for a fair old while. Still, there is always the joy of destruction in trying
(c).
The really interesting thing to see here is that the Open Source community can
REALLY affect those little red numbers.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|