|
SCO Reports Net Loss of $4.58 Million - Updated |
|
Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:17 PM EST
|
The media already are reporting that the SCO Group
"reported a net loss of $4.58 million or $0.23 per share for the first quarter, compared to a net loss of $2.96 million or $0.17 per share in the year ago quarter." Revenues declined as well, to
$7.34 million from $8.86 million in the prior-year quarter. "Despite our decrease in revenue and our increase in net loss incurred
during the first quarter, the UNIX business continued to generate positive
cash flow," said Darl McBride, president and CEO of The SCO Group. The conference call is still in progress. Call is over. Steven J. Vaughn-Nichols has the details, such as they are. And for the historians, there is a 13G/A filed with the SEC by Canopy Group on February 15, that I just now noticed, memorializing that Canopy Group owned no SCO stock on December 31, 2005. The filing has zeroes from top to bottom. It's signed by Lewena Noorda, Chairman, Canopy Group. UPDATE: Ashlee Vance in The Register, "SCO spends $4m to make $30k in Q1": Say what you will about the SCO Group. The company is a model of consistency.
During its first quarter, SCO turned in lower Unix revenue, fading SCOsource revenues and a statement reminding everyone that it's waiting for the IBM lawsuit to pay out. This ritual of disappointment occurs every three months with little variation on the major themes.... The SCOsource licensing program has proved as unattractive as ever. The company sold just $30,000 worth of IP insurance - down from $70,000 last year.
I have a question: who gave them $30,000 for SCOsource? Anyone know where that comes from?
Here's SCO's press release with the financial details:
**************************************
The SCO Group to Release First Quarter Financial Results and Host Conference Call After Close of Market on March 8, 2006
The SCO Group, Inc.
(Nasdaq: SCOX), a leading provider of UNIX(R) software technology for
distributed, embedded and network-based systems, today reported results for
its fiscal first quarter ended January 31, 2006.
Revenue for the first quarter of fiscal year 2006 was $7,343,000 as
compared to $8,865,000 for the comparable quarter of the prior year. The
decrease in revenue was primarily due to continued competitive pressures on
the Company's UNIX products and services.
The net loss for the first quarter of fiscal year 2006 was $(4,581,000),
or $(0.23) per diluted common share, as compared to a net loss of
$(2,961,000), or $(0.17) per diluted common share, for the comparable quarter
of the prior year. Included in the net loss for the first quarter of fiscal
year 2006 was $401,000 of stock-based compensation expense, which represented
the fair value of equity awards issued by the Company as required upon
adopting SFAS No. 123(R). Included in the net loss for the first quarter of
fiscal year 2005 was $15,000 of stock-based compensation expense.
"Despite our decrease in revenue and our increase in net loss incurred
during the first quarter, the UNIX business continued to generate positive
cash flow," said Darl McBride, president and CEO of The SCO Group. "We are
pleased with the recently announced general availability of our EdgeClick
digital services and believe that with the $10 million in gross proceeds
raised in our private placement in November, we can pursue our business
operations and see our lawsuit with IBM through to its conclusion."
Cash and cash equivalents and available-for-sale marketable securities
were $19,214,000 as of January 31, 2006. In addition, $1,758,000 of cash is
held in an escrow account and is classified as a component of restricted cash
as of January 31, 2006.
The Company's Business
During the first quarter of fiscal year 2006, the Company completed much
of the work leading to the general release of SCO's EdgeClick digital
services, which the Company announced was publicly available last week. The
Company now has several customers that are actively using the digital services
technology.
During the first quarter of fiscal year 2006, the Company completed work
with MySQL AB to allow the popular open source database platform to become
certified on SCO OpenServer 6. The completion of this certification is an
important step in permitting MySQL database customers to select SCO OpenServer
as a platform on which to run their MySQL database applications. This opens
up new markets for SCO.
Resellers and customers continue to implement OpenServer and UnixWare
solutions, and in some cases, customers are replacing competitive operating
systems with SCO OpenServer because of the significant performance and
reliability advantages SCO OpenServer offers.
Conference Call
As previously announced, The SCO Group will host a conference call at
5:00 p.m. EDT today, March 8, 2006, to discuss the fiscal first quarter
results. To participate in the teleconference, please call toll free
1-800-474-8920 or use the toll number 1-719-457-2727; confirmation code:
6227847, approximately five minutes prior to the time stated above. A
listen-only Web cast of the call will be broadcast live with a replay
available the following day. The Web cast and replay may be accessed from
http://ir.sco.com/events.cfm.
Forward-Looking Statements
The statements contained in this press release regarding the adequacy of
our cash to fund our business operations and our litigation with IBM that are
not historical facts are forward-looking statements and are made under the
safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995. These statements are based on management's current expectations and are
subject to risks and uncertainties. We wish to advise readers that a number
of important factors could cause actual results to differ materially from
historical results or those anticipated in such forward-looking statements.
These factors include, but are not limited to, continued competitive pressure
on our operating system products which could impact the profitability of the
UNIX business, unforeseen legal costs related to our litigation, our inability
to develop new products and services, and our inability to enhance our UNIX
operating systems and maintain our UNIX business. These and other factors
that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated
are discussed in more detail in the Company's periodic and current filings
with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including the Company's Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2005. These forward-looking statements
speak only as of the date on which such statements are made, and The SCO Group
undertakes no obligation to update such statements to reflect events or
circumstances arising after such date.
About The SCO Group
The SCO Group, Inc. (SCO) (Nasdaq: SCOX) is a leading provider of UNIX
software technology for distributed, embedded and network-based systems,
offering SCO OpenServer for small to medium business and UnixWare for
enterprise applications and digital network services. SCO's highly innovative
and reliable solutions help millions of customers to grow their businesses
every day, from SCO OpenServer on main street to UnixWare on Wall Street, and
beyond. SCO owns the core UNIX operating system originally developed by
AT&T/Bell Labs and is the exclusive licensor to UNIX-based system software
providers.
Headquartered in Lindon, Utah, SCO has a worldwide network of thousands of
resellers and developers. SCO Global Services provides reliable localized
support and services to partners and customers. For more information on SCO
products and services, visit http://www.sco.com.
SCO and the associated SCO logo are trademarks or registered trademarks of
The SCO Group, Inc. in the U.S. and other countries. UNIX and UnixWare are
registered trademarks of The Open Group. MySQL is a registered trademark of
MySQL AB in the USA and other countries. All other brand or product names are
or may be trademarks of, and are used to identify products or services of,
their respective owners.
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets Data
(unaudited, in thousands)
January 31, October 31,
2006 2005
Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents $12,018 $4,272
Restricted cash 2,670 5,690
Available-for-sale marketable securities 7,196 6,165
Accounts receivable, net 4,917 6,343
Other current assets 2,151 2,454
Total current assets 28,952 24,924
Property and equipment, net 563 578
Intangibles, net 2,030 2,707
Other assets 731 739
Total assets $32,276 $28,948
Liabilities:
Accounts payable $2,241 $2,197
Accrued payroll and other expenses 5,202 5,774
Deferred revenue 3,637 3,841
Other current liabilities 2,461 4,443
Total current liabilities 13,541 16,255
Long-term liabilities 335 338
Common stock subject to rescission -- 1,018
Stockholders' equity 18,400 11,337
Total liabilities and stockholders' equity $32,276 $28,948
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations Data
(unaudited, in thousands, except per share data)
Three Months Ended
January 31,
2006 2005
Products revenue $6,000 $7,304
SCOsource licensing revenue 30 70
Services revenue 1,313 1,491
Total revenue 7,343 8,865
Cost of products revenue 584 644
Cost of SCOsource licensing revenue 4,010 3,493
Cost of services revenue 637 749
Total cost of revenue 5,231 4,886
Gross margin 2,112 3,979
Operating expenses:
Sales and marketing 2,688 2,944
Research and development 1,871 2,088
General and administrative 1,592 1,763
Amortization of intangibles 592 593
Total operating expenses 6,743 7,388
Loss from operations (4,631) (3,409)
Equity in income (loss) of affiliate (8) 53
Other income, net 145 509
Loss before income taxes (4,494) (2,847)
Provision for income taxes (87) (114)
Net loss $(4,581) $(2,961)
Basic and diluted net loss per common share $(0.23) $(0.17)
Weighted average basic and diluted common
shares outstanding 20,062 17,751
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:24 PM EST |
Should any ever be needed. --- --Bill P, not a lawyer. Question the
answers, especially if I give some. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- How many media? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:30 PM EST
- How many media? - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:33 PM EST
- How many mediums? - Authored by: Ted Powell on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:51 PM EST
- Ummm, mummble mumble, pointless rant (me, not you) - Authored by: Crocodile_Dundee on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 10:57 PM EST
- Ummm, mummble mumble, pointless rant (me, not you) - Authored by: Wol on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 03:48 AM EST
- Ummm, mummble mumble, pointless rant (me, not you) - Authored by: Crocodile_Dundee on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 04:14 AM EST
- Ummm, mummble mumble, pointless rant (me, not you) - Authored by: JOff on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 05:03 AM EST
- Ummm, mummble mumble, pointless rant (me, not you) - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 09:43 AM EST
- Ummm, mummble mumble, pointless rant (me, not you) - Authored by: mpellatt on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 04:49 AM EST
- Ummm, mummble mumble, pointless rant (me, not you) - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 05:43 AM EST
- Ummm, mummble mumble, pointless rant (me, not you) - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 01:33 PM EST
- Ummm, mummble mumble, pointless rant (me, not you) - Authored by: rcsteiner on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 02:14 PM EST
- How many media? - Authored by: DaveJakeman on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 05:09 AM EST
- How many media? - Authored by: fxbushman on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 08:11 PM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:26 PM EST |
And remember to follow the instructions in red to make links clickable (or the
licks clinkable, if that's your preference).
---
--Bill P, not a lawyer. Question the answers, especially if I give some.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- One Snowball, Death Valley, Place Your Bets - Authored by: TheBlueSkyRanger on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 07:30 PM EST
- A Windoze smartphone story starring IBM, 3Com, USrobotics, Palm, Intel, Cisco and Microsoft - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 08:05 PM EST
- Palm - 1997 - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 08:53 PM EST
- Microsoft - 1997 - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 08:59 PM EST
- A Windoze smartphone story starring IBM, 3Com, USrobotics, Palm, Intel, Cisco and Microsoft - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 09:09 PM EST
- A Windoze smartphone story starring IBM, 3Com, USrobotics, Palm, Intel, Cisco and Microsoft - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 09:37 PM EST
- A Windoze smartphone story starring IBM, 3Com, USrobotics, Palm, Intel, Cisco and Microsoft - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 10:09 PM EST
- A Windoze smartphone story starring IBM, 3Com, USrobotics, Palm, Intel, Cisco and Microsoft - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 10:11 PM EST
- A Windoze smartphone story starring IBM, 3Com, USrobotics, Palm, Intel, Cisco and Microsoft - Authored by: ralevin on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 12:39 PM EST
- PATENTS: MS will take profits of his FAT technology - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 09:52 PM EST
- TSG will Answer IBM's Motion to Limit Claims - Authored by: Steve Martin on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 10:21 PM EST
- business days? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 10:41 AM EST
- Newegg selling Xandros - Authored by: kozmcrae on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 12:33 AM EST
- Eye Candy Supreme - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 06:51 AM EST
- Witnesses and contempt of court - enjoy - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 09:47 AM EST
- ROFL - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 10:00 AM EST
- IBM ditches Windows ... not yet - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 10:04 AM EST
- Link - Authored by: JSGasse on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 10:54 AM EST
- Who is the RBC that was the first to start complaining about GOOGLE (how dumb is this RBC)? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 10:54 AM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:30 PM EST |
Hmm ... 2 & 1/5 million more shares outstanding this year than last. The
bag^W stock holders are getting poorer rapidly. You never want to see such large
scale dilution.
I still want a couple of shares - with certificates - to hang on my office wall
as trophies after tSCOg dies.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- SCO Reports Net Loss of $4.58 Million - Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:34 PM EST
- Mounting it - Authored by: overshoot on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:48 PM EST
- SCO Reports Net Loss of $4.58 Million - Authored by: tredman on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:57 PM EST
- SCO Reports Net Loss of $4.58 Million - Authored by: Carlo Graziani on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:00 PM EST
- Careful PJ! - Authored by: johan on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:11 PM EST
- you do realize that you just doubled the demand for SCO stock? ;-) n/t - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 07:37 PM EST
- SCO penny stock and beyond... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 10:56 PM EST
- Congrats PJ, underpants gnome step 2 revealed! - Authored by: Crocodile_Dundee on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 11:04 PM EST
- SCO Reports Net Loss of $4.58 Million - Authored by: ralevin on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 01:20 PM EST
- SCO Reports Net Loss of $4.58 Million - Authored by: geoff lane on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 03:14 PM EST
- SCO Reports Net Loss of $4.58 Million - Authored by: capt.Hij on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:39 PM EST
- Dilution - Authored by: pogson on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:02 PM EST
- SCO Reports Net Loss of $4.58 Million - Authored by: Yossarian on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 08:09 PM EST
- Shares vs Certificates - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 03:14 PM EST
- Shares vs Certificates - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 03:36 PM EST
- Shares vs Certificates - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 03:38 PM EST
- SCO Reports Net Loss of $4.58 Million - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 11:17 PM EST
|
Authored by: Nick_UK on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:36 PM EST |
"Despite our decrease in revenue and our increase in net
loss incurred during the first quarter, the UNIX business
continued to generate positive cash flow," said Darl
McBride, president and CEO of The SCO Group."
What really happened; Darl won the in-house sweep stake
to see who got the nearest 'loss' estimate.
Nick [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Really? - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 11:28 PM EST
- Really? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 08:51 AM EST
|
Authored by: tiger99 on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:37 PM EST |
I have posted some very brief observations under OT in the previous article.
Nothing new, as far as I could see.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:37 PM EST |
SCOsource licensing revenue: $30,000
Cost of SCOsource licensing revenue: $4,010,000
I think that says pretty much it - without this attack on Linux, they'd be down
much less than 1 million this quarter.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:42 PM EST |
How can a business that is losing money "generate positive cash
flow"?
Is this just creative accounting? Is it a true statement, but irrelevant,
because if you're losing money, the cash flow isn't going to help you? Or is it
both a true statement and a meaningful one? If so, what does it mean?
Thanks in advance,
MSS2[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Someone explain this to me, please - Authored by: sjvn on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:47 PM EST
- Someone explain this to me, please - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:55 PM EST
- It's possibly true but at the same time misleading... - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:04 PM EST
- Someone explain this to me, please - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:10 PM EST
- Cash flow positive - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:46 PM EST
- Someone explain this to me, please - Authored by: ChrisP on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:50 PM EST
- Not that unusual - Authored by: snorpus on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 07:27 PM EST
- Not that unusual - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 03:08 AM EST
- Cash flow positive - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 08:03 PM EST
- Taking on water.. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 10:05 PM EST
- Read the income statement - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 02:58 AM EST
- Someone explain this to me, please - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 05:59 AM EST
- one word: VOLUME - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 10:37 AM EST
- Darl states the truth in a misleading way - Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, March 11 2006 @ 07:09 PM EST
|
Authored by: seeks2know on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 05:45 PM EST |
SCOX is reporting product revenue for the quarter is $6,000K. I always get
suspicious when numbers like this are *perfect*.
Of course, when SCOX is involved, I am always suspicious.
---
There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it
steadily."
-- George Washington
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: seeks2know on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:04 PM EST |
"Despite our decrease in revenue and our increase in net loss
incurred during the first quarter, the UNIX business continued to generate
positive cash flow," said Darl McBride.
I'm sure Darl has
some hocus pocus new-age business math that yields positive cash flow; but a
simple analysis of the Income Statement shows that SCOX is still losing money on
their core operations.
If you back out the ScoSource revenue and the
ScoSource costs, you still get a loss, as shown below.
Total
Revenue.................7343
Less ScoSource Revenue.....30
Operating
Revenue..........7313
Total Cost of Rev.............5231
Less
ScoSource Cost........4010
Operating
COR................1221
Operating Gross Margin....6092
Total
Operating Expense...6743
Net Loss..........................(743)
So while
Darl may not be lying, he sure is miscontruing the reality that, even without
the ScoSource baggage, the ship is still sinking. --- There is but one
straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily."
-- George Washington
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: ewe2 on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:34 PM EST |
Surely that's not going to get them very far; what use could SCO make of lack of
funds?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:37 PM EST |
Advertising is advertising, good or bad. As long as it is in the public eye and
is spread around by - well - anyone.
I am not (definitely) any form of legal eagle. The process is taking so long in
the fight between IBM and SCO - is it even remotely conceivable that IBM is
pulling SCO's strings to create this "advertising"?
- Paul K.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: thorpie on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:45 PM EST |
When do directors become liable for trading whilst insolvent?
---
The memories of a man in his old age are the deeds of a man in his prime -
Floyd, Pink[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: ThatBobGuy on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:46 PM EST |
One of the callers asked about the 500K less in employee expenses (it was ~400
btw). Seems in relocated people from Cali to Utah (?), 400K worth of people did
not move. Darl said that most of the jobs would be replaced though.
(not sure on the Utah part).[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Alan(UK) on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:49 PM EST |
Does SCO not have a potential liability concerning disputed UNIX licence fees to
be paid to Novell?
Is it not misleading to make the statement in the title without a corresponding
disclaimer in: "a number of important factors could cause actual results to
differ materially from historical results or those anticipated in such
forward-looking statements". It only seems to be covered by the catch-all,
"not limited to".
Can SCO explain what particular shade of black, red is?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 06:57 PM EST |
... it would a tragedy of Shakesperean proportions if the company was wound up
in any other way but the Nazgul driving a stake through it's heart![ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 07:17 PM EST |
Before I listen to the SCO call I want to make sure that having seen SCO’s
accounting and public relations methods will not taint me.
As I understand, it most accounting standards are developed by the Financial
Accounting Standards Board. Just want to make sure that Sco has no claims of
ownership on any of those standards which they can/will use to sue me in the
future when create a balance sheet or income statement or write a press
release.
Dave
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Waterman on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 07:44 PM EST |
Anyone catch the fact that they expect to make it thru the IBM lawsuit without
saying the same about Novell? "We are pleased with the recently
announced general availability of our EdgeClick digital services and believe
that with the $10 million in gross proceeds raised in our private placement
in November, we can pursue our business operations and see our lawsuit with IBM
through to its conclusion." Maybe they don't expect to be
around after IBM gets through with them. :-) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 07:55 PM EST |
Cash is way up ($12,018 vs $4,272) and liabilities way down ($13541 vs $16255)
which makes Stockholders' equity way up (
$18,400 vs $11,337).
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't this look pretty good for the company?
Where's all that cash coming from?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: grouch on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 09:22 PM EST |
It's terrible when people just pay you off and run away. (Tell your friends,
"Just say, Don't SCO Me!")
Accounts Receivable, net
4,917 January 31,
2006
6,343 October 31, 2005
I wonder why people don't want to owe SCO. A
thriving business should have a pretty consistent AR as customers rack up new
charges while paying off old ones.
Anybody have any other guess about why
there was a 1,426 (K) drop in AR for 1 quarter? Am I completely lost in the
woods, here?
--- -- grouch
http://edge-op.org/links1.html
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 09:36 PM EST |
I've never seen a company so 'pleased' with making losses, or is it just Darl
who remains in a perpetually 'pleased' state?
Recognising there is a problem is the first step towards fixing it. At this
point, everybody except Darl and his gang acknowleges that SCO is tanking. At
least Darl would earn some respect if he came out and said, "You know what?
Losing 4 million bucks is lousy. It really stinks. We are doing something
terribly wrong to be losing so much money so consistently. So we are going to
change."
On the other hand, resisting change is a good way to get steamrollered by
evolution, and I have no problem with SCO et al ending up as pancakes.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: The Mad Hatter r on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 09:40 PM EST |
You know if it wasn't for the lawsuit, they wouldn't have the enormous legal
fees, I suspect that they wouldn't be losing customers, and therefore would be
profitable (if barely).
Instead they commit corporate suicide. Shareholder lawsuit anyone?
---
Wayne
http://urbanterrorist.blogspot.com/
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 09:49 PM EST |
I see a lot of info on the financial part of the conference call, but not much
on the rest of the (very short) call.
Apparently one of the companies they sold SCO OpenServer to went from taking 16
hours for processing w/W2k3 to something like 10 minutes w/ OpenServer. They
also claim that from having talked to customers, this is the norm, and they
will
be promoting their reliability in the future.
There were only two questions during Q&A.
The first one was about $1.75 million that they have in escrow. The answer was
that it covers all the expenses for the lawyers and experts (costs such as
travel); the final payment for the cap has been made, and that's not what the
escrow is for.
The other question was about sales predictions for Me Inc.
They mentioned it was still too early in the sales cycle to predict what was
going to happen. Apparently there is significant demand in the market (they
didn't mention their product by name, just that demand is significant).
Finally, Darl mentioned that in the next few days Blake will be putting out a
press release about an award either Me Inc or the Edgeclick tech won (I'm not
exactly clear which one it is for).
I'm pretty sure I heard all of this correctly, but don't make any important
decisions on it.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 11:00 PM EST |
Yah, there's a wonderful business: LOSSES, already major, increase a whopping
55%. Even AFTER the pipe fairy or dubious "investor" pumps $10
million of life support into the dying pig with lipstick.
Take away the $10 million and the implications are STAGGERING - they wouldn't
even last one more quarter. Customers are running away, A/R is way down, legal
losses are mounting and even dumping a large number of employees overboard in CA
can't stop the flow of red ink. Those wunderkinds at SCOG are sure sharp
business folks aren't they?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 11:04 PM EST |
"At the end of the quarter, SCO had cash and cash equivalents and
available-for-sale marketable securities of over $19 million."
How clever the wording! "Available for sale marketable securities"?
Now they're selling DILUTION as an ASSET?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Plain bizarre - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 11:05 PM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 11:21 PM EST |
Hmm, seems like IBM is sharing the knowledge from their legal proceedings, just
in a different way.
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/power/library/pa-spec13/?
ca=dgr-lnxw07UnixStandard [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: mobrien_12 on Wednesday, March 08 2006 @ 11:23 PM EST |
SCOG has been losing money consistently. So why do they give Darl bonuses? [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: elronxenu on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 01:01 AM EST |
That $30k revenue from SCOsource ... is it possible that
it is from the
deal which tSCOg did with EV1Servers?
It occurred to me that SCO may be
recognising the revenue
from EV1Servers over several accounting periods. Here
are
their quarterly results announcements:
http://ir.sco.com/Re
leaseDetail.cfm?ReleaseID=129977
http://ir.sco.com/Re
leaseDetail.cfm?releaseid=136872
http://ir.sco.com/Re
leaseDetail.cfm?releaseid=142404
http://ir.sco.com/Re
leaseDetail.cfm?releaseid=150915
http://ir.sco.com/Re
leaseDetail.cfm?releaseid=160161
http://ir.sco.com/Re
leaseDetail.cfm?releaseid=164950
http://ir.sco.com/Re
leaseDetail.cfm?releaseid=172453
http://ir.sco.com/Re
leaseDetail.cfm?releaseid=182501
http://ir.sco.com/Re
leaseDetail.cfm?releaseid=189829
After decoding all that, their
SCOsource revenue by the
quarter is:
2003-01-31 0k
2003-04-30
8,250k
2003-07-31 7,280k
2003-10-31 10,316k
2004-01-31 20k
2004-04-30
11k
2004-07-31 678k
2004-10-31 120k
2005-01-31 70k
2005-04-30
30k
2005-07-31 32k
2005-10-31 34k
2006-01-31 30k
Sorry
about the formatting, it seems impossible to
prevent Groklaw from adding its
own line breaks every few
lines.
If the money from EV1Servers is being
recognised over a
number of quarters then that amount may be $30k/quarter.
However there is enough variability in the reported
numbers to indicate that
SCO have suckered
in more than a handful of SCOsource
marks customers.
So $30k is interesting only insofar
as it may indicate
that there still exist people who believe SCO's claims of
some rights over unix. What's more interesting is where
the $678k came
from in the quarter ended 2004-07-31 and
the $120k in the quarter ended
2004-10-31. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 01:37 AM EST |
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: ChasF on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 02:17 AM EST |
I've just read Steven Vaughan-Nichols report on the conference call and the
following paragraph caught my attention:
The company's
SCOSource division, which is meant to realize revenue from licensing Unix code,
continues to do badly. It grossed only $30 thousand dollars while costing
just over $4 million dollars. Young said that as SCO's legal intellectual
property claims are upheld, the company expects this revenue to increase,
while the costs will decrease since SCO has now paid off its legal
debts.
Discovery has just closed in the IBM case and
IBM has provided an immense volume of documentation which SCO requested. If I
remember correctly from postings made by PJ, Marbux, etc.:
- The
analysis of at least some of this discovery will have to be performed by outside
experts (especially the parts relating to IBM source code.
- BSF's time
spent analysing this probably isn't covered by the cap on legal fees - it will
be charged as expenses.
So how can the legal expenses
decrease?
(Yes, I know there's a cynical answer to that question.) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 02:57 AM EST |
I wonder how much of that income is fees (royalties?) that they should
(according to Novell) be holding in escrow for Novell ?
In it's counterclaim, wasn't Novell claiming that 95% of SCO's unix license
income aas due to them according to the original sale agreement.
I really cannot see how this company can remain solvent and trading? Given that
you cannot book potential outcomes of litigation as future earnings - this
company has to be trading while insolvent - it has debts and liabilities well in
excess of bank funds and shareholder capital and no likelihood of being able to
meet liabilities.
Could Novell end this whole game/fiasco by asking for an order requiring the
unix royalties be placed in escrow - effectively emptying SCO's cash bucket and
sending them to the wall?
charles from Oz.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 04:34 AM EST |
After all there are still people who part that easily with their money? It
boggles the mind. Even if it's only $30k.
Perhaps some people are buying SCOsource licences in hope to make a fortune
selling them on eBay after SCO is gone for good?
"SCOsource IP license - RARE - OWN A PIECE OF IT HISTORY"?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: DaveJakeman on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 05:05 AM EST |
McBride said that it was premature to give meaningful guidance for SCO's
EdgeClick business. That said, "digital services on handheld devices is a big
market and it opens up a new chapter for the company. We're bullish on it on
an excitement level, but it's too early to talk about numbers until we see how
it plays out."
Sounds rather conservative to me. And full of
bullish.
--- SCO: hunting for snarks in an ocean of sharks
---
Should one hear an accusation, first look to see how it might be levelled at the
accuser. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Darl quote - Authored by: scott_R on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 07:48 AM EST
- Darl's always bullish - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 08:58 AM EST
- Darl quote - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 10:17 AM EST
|
Authored by: Steve Martin on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 06:39 AM EST |
I have a question: who gave them $30,000 for SCOsource?
Is it possible that this is just residual System V
license fees from previously existing licensees?
--- "When I say
something, I put my name next to it." -- Isaac Jaffee, "Sports Night" [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Yup... n/t - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 09:48 AM EST
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 08:16 AM EST |
Is there some creative accounting going on here?
Scox is trying to give the impression that without the lawsuit, everything would
be fine. And since the lawsuit is a tempory thing, there are no worries.
But, before the scam, scox was never profitable. And scox was a much more viable
company then. I very much doubt that scox is honestly selling more products or
services now than then.
Also, is it accurate to say that "ScoSource" lost $4M? Strictly
speaking, ScoSource is not the IBM lawsuit. ScoSource is the extortion racket
where you are supposed to pay scox so that scox won't file a nuisance lawsuit
against you.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: turing_test on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 09:05 AM EST |
I have finally come upon an explanation of the wierd behavior of the price of
SCOX stock, and its invulnerability to any bad news. (Please note that this is
only a speculation, and could not be proved by anyone without the right to
subpoena the players involved. I offer this as a hypothesis to make sense of an
otherwise senseless situation.)
While SCOX was at one time a legitimate investment (a poor investment, but
legitimately poor), the stock is now just a sham investment, propped up in a
diaphanously thin market in order to create a cash conduit into the SCO Group.
Therefore, conference calls like this one are merely for show, perpetuate the
illusion that SCOX continues to be a real investment.
SCOX is now quoted at over $4 a share: a laughable overvaluation. This price
could only be sustained by manipulation of a thin market. Why go to the trouble
and expense involved in this? Because if SCOX is a publicly-traded stock at an
essentially fixed valuation, then the SCO Group has the ability to issue as much
new stock as required to cover its losses, as long as a motivated buyer can be
found.
The publicly-traded aspect of SCOX stock is key: it enables the buyer to present
the transaction as merely an ordinary stock investment. The fact is that no
investor in his right mind would buy the stock at the market price, but SCOX and
the investor can point to the stock-market quotation to "prove" that
it's just an arms-length, ordinary, everyday equity investment.
Nothing special to see here, these aren't the conspirators you're looking for,
move along.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: IMANAL on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 09:11 AM EST |
"the Company completed work with MySQL AB to allow the popular open source
database platform to become certified on SCO OpenServer 6"
What?!
"MySQL certified on SCO OpenServer"? Weren't SCO complaining that Oracle
wouldn't certify SCO OpenServer for the Oracle database?! In light of that, the
'certified' label by SCO just looks like empty name dropping and 'sour
grapes'.
--- --------------------------
IM Absolutely Not A Lawyer [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 10:14 AM EST |
In my book, Darl gets full credit for turning a nearly sunk coroporate ship into
a positive experience.
I have to hand it to this guy. He'll be jabbering away good news while carrying
his head in his lap. Sees no evil, hears no evil while he stirs the $hit.
I think this is a "dna" thing which you have to be born with.
P.L.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: wordsofwonder on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 10:58 AM EST |
What struck me about the income statement is how much more each dollar of
SCOsource revenue is costing them now.
In January of 2005, it cost them $49.90 (in SCOsource expense) for each dollar
of revenue SCOsource brought in.
In January of 2006, it cost them $133.66 -- nearly three times as much -- for
each dollar of SCOsource revenue that came in the door.
So, despite all of Darl's FUD, you could argue that their SCOsource strategy --
apart from being idiotic -- is losing them money 267% more quickly now than it
was a year ago. And this is good business and positive cash flow? In what
alternate reality?
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: rsi on Thursday, March 09 2006 @ 11:05 AM EST |
$4.15 @ 10:41AM ET March 9, 2006 No matter how bad the reports are their
stock price still stays up! Hello, SEC??? ;^) [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|