SCO Second Quarter Results/Conference Call Today 5:00 pm Eastern |
|
Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 01:17 PM EDT
|
Just a reminder that today is the SCO conference call regarding second quarter results at 5:00 pm Eastern. Audio link.
If anybody does attend, here are my questions, which I came up with after discussing the latest SEC filings with Groklaw reader, David Sherman, who is an accountant and has been trying to help me to understand.
Even after putting our heads together, we still have the following questions that I would ask if I thought they'd ever call on me:
1. Restricted Cash and Payable to Novell, Inc.: This is a question that Sherman raised.
SCO shows that they owe the money to Novell but does not indicate when it will
be paid. The auditors, Tanner, haven't made a note of this. Some of
the Novell payable is over a year old, so is it proper for it to be included
in current liabilities?
Does SCO intend to pay Novell? When? Would failure to disclose when Novell will be paid violate
the following:
In accordance with Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion 22,
management is required to describe all significant accounting policies
of the reporting entity that were used in preparing their financial
statements, including policies on the recognition of revenues and
expenses and on the valuation principles applied to various classes of
assets and liabilities. Management is not required to perform an
evaluation of the entity’s ability to continue for the foreseeable
future, nor is it required to state that the financial statements were
prepared under the assumption that the company will continue in
business. Under current GAAP and GAAS, these initial evaluations and
the need for disclosure are determined by the auditors, not by
management.
2.
Sherman noticed that Tanner doesn't seem to address the "going concern" of SCO.
Cf: here and here. When you look at the Net
income and a category of Stockholders Equity, and notice how much those two
accounts have decreased, one has to ask: is SCO a profitable company? Is it a going concern? Isn't the auditor supposed to address this?
3. Have any law firms working for or with SCO been compensated with stock since 2002? If so, which firm or firms? We have the second quarter results now. Despite continuing to bleed money, SCO remains committed to its business strategy: "Despite our revenue decline and net loss, we remain committed to and optimistic about our business strategy," said Darl McBride, president and CEO of The SCO Group. Is that rational? They have had to "replenish" the escrow account for experts: On June 5, 2006, the Company agreed to replenish the $5,000,000 escrow account to cover future expert, consulting and other expenses as was anticipated when the escrow account was established. They don't say by how much they replenished. I guess we have to do the math ourselves. But I'm thinking probably they have to hire experts for the Novell litigation, if they can find anyone willing to stand up for them. Update: I just noticed on the page with the audio link to the teleconference that SCO describes itself like this: About The SCO Group, Inc. (NasdaqSC:SCOX)
The SCO Group, Inc. provides UNIX-based products and services. Its products include OpenServer and UnixWare. The company’s OpenServer supports multiuser, transaction and business applications, communications gateways, and mail and messaging servers in both host and client/server environments. Its UnixWare is a deployment platform for industry standard Intel processor systems. The company’s other services include software development and programming, migration tools and services, and assisting customers with modernizing and integrating legacy applications with Web services. It assists end-user customers and solution providers in planning, creating, implementing, and deploying business application solutions. The SCO Group sells its UNIX software products to small-to-medium sized businesses and franchisees or branch offices of Fortune 1000 businesses; and original equipment manufacturers. The company’s products are sold through distributors and independent solution providers. The SCO Group was co-founded by Doug Michels and Larry Michels in 1979. It was formerly known as Caldera International, Inc. and changed its name to The SCO Group, Inc. in 2003. The company is headquartered in Lindon, Utah. That's just blatantly false. So, what else is new? Here is the complete SCO press release, with a table at the end that we have done for you as an aid, because they had all the numbers jumbled into one long sentence, so to speak, and it was hard to read:
************************************
The SCO Group Announces Second Quarter Fiscal 2006 Results
LINDON, Utah, June 8 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The SCO Group, Inc., a leading provider of UNIX(R) software technology for distributed, embedded and network-based systems, today reported results for its fiscal second quarter ended April 30, 2006.
Revenue for the second quarter of fiscal year 2006 was $7,126,000 as compared to $9,258,000 for the comparable quarter of the prior year. The net loss for the second quarter of fiscal year 2006 was $(4,694,000), or $(0.22) per diluted common share, as compared to a net loss of $(1,962,000), or $(0.11) per diluted common share, for the comparable quarter of the prior year. Included in the net loss for the second quarter of fiscal year 2006 was $432,000 of stock-based compensation expense, which represented the fair value of equity awards issued by the Company to employees as required by SFAS No. 123(R). Included in the net loss for the second quarter of fiscal year 2005 was $7,000 of stock-based compensation expense. The increase in the net loss was attributable to continued competitive pressures on the Company's UNIX products and services which adversely impacted revenue and from legal expenses incurred in connection with the Company's litigation with IBM.
"Despite our revenue decline and net loss, we remain committed to and optimistic about our business strategy," said Darl McBride, president and CEO of The SCO Group. "We are encouraged by the progress we are making in the development and deployment of our EdgeClick mobile development platform and Me Inc. mobile services. Unlocking the value of our core UNIX business will be difficult until we resolve the issues raised by our intellectual property litigation."
Revenue for the six months ended April 30, 2006 was $14,469,000 as compared to $18,123,000 for the six months ended April 30, 2005. The net loss for the six months ended April 30, 2006 was $(9,275,000), or $(0.45) per diluted common share, as compared to a net loss of $(4,923,000), or $(0.28) per diluted common share, for the six months ended April 30, 2005.
Cash and cash equivalents and available-for-sale marketable securities were $18,624,000 as of April 30, 2006.
The Company's Business
During the second quarter of fiscal year 2006, the Company introduced a number of new products to the market from both its UNIX and mobile businesses. The Company completed its work with MySQL AB to certify the commercial version of the popular MySQL 5 database platform on SCO OpenServer 6. The Company also began shipping an Online Data Manager and Mirroring product for SCO OpenServer 6. In addition, the Company provided updated maintenance packs for SCO OpenServer 6, UnixWare 7.1.4 and SCOoffice 4.1.
The Company introduced its EdgeClick mobile development platform as well as Me Inc. mobile services during the second quarter of fiscal year 2006. This entry into the mobile services market has required a multi-year development effort using Web services and other development tools. The result has been the introduction of the Company's EdgeClick mobile development platform that allows SCO solution partners to create and customize mobile services for their customers. The EdgeBuilder SDK which will provide the tools necessary for developers to mobilize existing applications and develop new mobile applications is expected to be released during the third quarter of fiscal year 2006.
In addition to creating the EdgeClick mobile development platform, the Company has introduced new mobile services of its own known as Me Inc. mobile services. Me Inc. mobile services allow users to communicate and collaborate using Me Inc. Shout and Vote services. The Company plans to introduce additional Me Inc. mobile services throughout the year on a variety of smart handheld devices. These services can also be extended to PC users. These new Me Inc. services have begun generating monthly recurring revenue.
The Company plans to show these and many other mobile services at various corporate events throughout the year and its SCO Forum 2006 annual conference taking place August 6-9 in Las Vegas.
Litigation Update
Legal and other expenses incurred in connection with the Company's litigation with IBM were $3,762,000 for the second quarter of fiscal year 2006. Because of the unique and unpredictable nature of this litigation, the occurrence and timing of certain expenses is difficult to predict, and will be difficult to predict for the upcoming quarters.
On June 5, 2006, the Company agreed to replenish the $5,000,000 escrow account to cover future expert, consulting and other expenses as was anticipated when the escrow account was established.
Conference Call
As previously announced, The SCO Group will host a conference call at 5:00 p.m. EDT today, June 8, 2006, to discuss the fiscal second quarter results. To participate in the teleconference, please call toll free 1-800- 210-9006 or use the toll number 1-719-457-2621; confirmation code: 9624972, 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 Webcast and replay may be accessed from http://ir.sco.com/events.cfm.
Forward-Looking Statements
The statements contained in this press release regarding (i) the Company's commitment to its business strategy, (ii) the anticipated release of EdgeBuilder SDK, and its benefit to developers, (iii) the introduction of additional Me Inc. mobile services, (iv) the monthly revenue attributable to Me Inc. services, and (v) the Company's plan to show its services at various events throughout the year, 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 Company's results of operations, increased or unforeseen legal costs related to our litigation, and the inability to devote sufficient resources to the development and marketing of Me Inc. or other UNIX products. 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, and its subsequent Form 10-Q. 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 is a leading provider of UNIX software technology for distributed, embedded and network-based systems, offering SCO OpenServer for small to medium business, UnixWare for enterprise applications, and Me Inc. and EdgeClick for mobile services. SCO's highly innovative and reliable solutions help millions of customers grow their businesses everyday, 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, SCO OpenServer, Me Inc., EdgeClick, 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. 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) April 30, October 31, 2006 2005 Assets:
Cash and cash equivalents $9,524 $4,272 Restricted cash 3,340 5,690 Available-for-sale marketable securities 9,100 6,165 Accounts receivable, net 5,109 6,343 Other 1,728 2,454 Total current assets 28,801 24,924 Property and equipment, net 575 578 Intangibles, net 1,353 2,707 Other 732 739 Total assets $31,461 $28,948 Liabilities: Accounts payable $3,669 $2,197 Accrued payroll and other expenses 5,280 5,774 Deferred revenue 3,383 3,841 Other 4,776 4,443 Total current liabilities 17,108 16,255 Long-term liabilities 265 338 Common stock subject to rescission -- 1,018 Stockholders' equity 14,088 11,337 Total liabilities and stockholders' equity $31,461 $28,948 Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations Data (unaudited, in thousands, except per share data) Three Months Ended Six Months Ended April 30, April 30, 2006 2005 2006 2005
Products revenue $5,703 $7,838 $11,703 $15,142 SCOsource licensing revenue 34 30 64 100 Services revenue 1,389 1,390 2,702 2,881 Total revenue 7,126 9,258 14,469 18,123 Cost of products revenue 497 563 1,081 1,207 Cost of SCOsource licensing revenue 3,762 2,889 7,772 6,382 Cost of services revenue 709 746 1,346 1,495 Total cost of revenue 4,968 4,198 10,199 9,08 Gross margin 2,158 5,060 4,270 9,039 Operating expenses: Sales and marketing 2,857 2,970 5,545 5,914 Research and development 1,886 2,117 3,757 4,205 General and administrative 1,718 2,036 3,310 3,799 Amortization of intangibles 593 593 1,185 1,186 Total operating expenses 7,054 7,716 13,797 15,104 Loss from operations (4,896) (2,656) (9,527) (6,065) Equity in income (loss) of affiliate -- 17 (8) 70 Other income, net 316 800 461 1,309 Loss before provision for income taxes (4,580) (1,839) (9,074) (4,686) Provision for income taxes (114) (123) (201) (237) Net loss $(4,694) $(1,962) $(9,275) $(4,923) Basic and diluted net loss per common share $(0.22) $(0.11) $(0.45) $(0.28) Weighted average basic and diluted common shares outstanding 20,994 17,913 20,520 17,831
The SCO Group
Here's Groklaw's table of the above. If you see any errors, please let me know.
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets Data (unaudited, in thousands) April 30, October 31, | 2006 | 2005 |
Assets: |
| Cash and cash equivalents | $9,524 | $4,272 |
| Restricted cash | 3,340 | 5,690 |
| Available-for-sale marketable securities | 9,100 | 6,165 |
| Accounts receivable, net | 5,109 | 6,343 |
| Other | 1,728 | 2,454 |
| Total current assets | 28,801 | 24,924 |
| Property and equipment, net | 575 | 578 |
| Intangibles, net | 1,353 | 2,707 |
| Other | 732 | 739 |
| Total assets | $31,461 | $28,948 |
Liabilities: |
| Accounts payable | $3,669 | $2,197 |
| Accrued payroll and other expenses | 5,280 | 5,774 |
| Deferred revenue | 3,383 | 3,841 |
| Other | 4,776 | 4,443 |
| Total current liabilities | 17,108 | 16,255 |
| Long-term liabilities | 265 | 338 |
| Common stock subject to rescission | -- | 1,018 |
| Stockholders' equity | 14,088 | 11,337 |
| Total liabilities and stockholders' equity | $31,461 | $28,948 |
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations Data (unaudited, in thousands, except per share data)
Three Months Ended Six Months Ended April 30, April 30, | 2006 | 2005 | 2006 | 2005 |
|
| Products revenue | $5,703 | $7,838 | $11,703 | $15,142 |
| SCOsource licensing revenue | 34 | 30 | 64 | 100 |
| Services revenue | 1,389 | 1,390 | 2,702 | 2,881 |
| Total revenue | 7,126 | 9,258 | 14,469 | 18,123 |
| Cost of products revenue | 497 | 563 | 1,081 | 1,207 |
| Cost of SCOsource licensing revenue | 3,762 | 2,889 | 7,772 | 6,382 |
| Cost of services revenue | 709 | 746 | 1,346 | 1,495 |
| Total cost of revenue | 4,968 | 4,198 | 10,199 | 9,084 |
| Gross margin | 2,158 | 5,060 | 4,270 | 9,039 |
Operating expenses: |
| Sales and marketing | 2,857 | 2,970 | 5,545 | 5,914 |
| Research and development | 1,886 | 2,117 | 3,757 | 4,205 |
| General and administrative | 1,718 | 2,036 | 3,310 | 3,799 |
| Amortization of intangibles | 593 | 593 | 1,185 | 1,186 |
| Total operating expenses | 7,054 | 7,716 | 13,797 | 15,104 |
| Loss from operations | (4,896) | (2,656) | (9,527) | (6,065) |
| Equity in income (loss) of affiliate | -- | 17 | (8) | 70 |
| Other income, net | 316 | 800 | 461 | 1,309 |
| Loss before provision for income taxes | (4,580) | (1,839) | (9,074) | (4,686) |
| Provision for income taxes | (114) | (123) | (201) | (237) |
| Net loss | $(4,694) | $(1,962) | $(9,275) | $(4,923) |
| Basic and diluted net loss per common share | $(0.22) | $(0.11) | $(0.45) | $(0.28) |
| Weighted average basic and diluted common shares outstanding | 20,994 | 17,913 | 20,520 | 17,831 |
|
|
Authored by: MathFox on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 01:23 PM EDT |
In case of the slim possibility that Pamela made a typo.
---
If an axiomatic system can be proven to be consistent and complete from within
itself, then it is inconsistent.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: MadScientist on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 01:25 PM EDT |
Links are done like this
<a href="www.groklaw.net"> link </a>
Dont forget to use the HTML mode also.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- OT materials here please - Authored by: red floyd on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 02:09 PM EDT
- Analysis of Apple "Aperture" decision - Authored by: JScarry on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 06:16 PM EDT
- Windows Genuine Advantage - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 07:56 PM EDT
- No Tolls on The Internet - Authored by: RFD on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 07:57 PM EDT
- Administrative Witness Tampering? - Authored by: SpaceLifeForm on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 08:43 PM EDT
- oh please - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 11:06 PM EDT
- Time Zones - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 09:25 PM EDT
- SCO invents new allegations - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 11:11 PM EDT
- May 11- "This week, for the first time ever, Microsoft released a patch for a third-party app - Authored by: Brian S. on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 11:18 PM EDT
|
Authored by: MadScientist on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 01:37 PM EDT |
I suspect Tanner's silence on the 'going concern' issue is something they have
discussed with thier own lawyers. As many posters have pointed out here
predicting the outcome of a case is a risky proposition at best. SCO has cases
in Utah, Delaware, Arizona, India and now in Switzerland. Im not sure how much
is at stake in India so its importance is unclear.
The cases in Switzerland and Utah are 'must win' ones for SCO: the others are -
relatively speaking - mere side shows.
If by some miracle SCO were to win both cases they would be worth considerably
more than they presently are estimated to be. If they lose either or both they
are worthless.
Asking an auditor to form a judgement on law suits of such importance for the
company even before discovery is complete (Novell has yet to get there) is a
very tall order.
The auditors first duty is to outsiders - the tax people, the SEC, the
shareholders etc. Giving an opinion that could well end up coming back to haunt
the auditor is something most firms would prefer to avoid.
FWIW I think the auditor is sensible to avoid doing this here unless they are
compelled to do so. Any sensible person considering investing in SCO would see
the absense of a comment concerning a going concern as a warning sign and read
further before buying.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: stats_for_all on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 01:59 PM EDT |
The reported "payable to Novell liability"
Q1 2003 ..... 1250
Q2
2003 ..... 1779
Q3 2003 ..... 1428
Q4 2003 ..... 2025
Q1
2004 ...... 550
Q2 2004 ..... 3203
Q3 2004 ...... 506 **
Q4
2004 ..... 3283
Q1 2005 ...... 604
Q2 2005 ..... 4007
Q3
2005 ...... 425
Q4 2005 ..... 2815
Q1 2006 .....
945?
Notes: 04Q3 value uncertain (two values reported, in different
reports). and
06Q1 value obtained by subtraction of restricted cash-- the Legal
Escrow
account and the Novell Escrow are combined in the Balance sheet
statement.
Restricted Cash is carried as an asset and increases as the
licensees pay in..
The licensees are reported by Bert Young in the CC 12/2005
as mostly
"Japanese telcos".
"Payable to Novell" is a current liability
should increase by an offseting
amount. The license payments as a cash stream
do not occur anywhere on
the revenue statement under any category, since they
are not SCOX revenue.
The magnitude of this cash stream can only be
inferred from the fluctuation
in the Payable liability at the quarterly
snapshot. In 2005, the backward delta
fluctuation (Q4-Q3 + Q2-Q1) was
$5,700K (forward was $5,400). Booked
Unixware revenue was $8,979K.
2004 delta fluctuation was $5,400, with
book Unixware revenue at
$11,032.
SCOX may register license payments and forward cash to Novell
inter-
quarter, so the money stream may exceed the
fluctuation.
Superficially, the Novell license money is of the same order
of magnitude as
the SCO Unixware revenue, and may not be dropping as
drastically as SCOX-
controlled Unixware.
Novell court filings imply they
have not had an audited account of these
revenues despite requests. They were
to be paid monthly, but reporting
indicates they may occur over a 6 month
cycle.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 01:59 PM EDT |
I like question #3 the best. For some stupid reason, that one has never hit me
before. Hmmmm, makes you think, doesn't it? Why does that stock keep rising?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Fruny on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 02:22 PM EDT |
It has most probably been discussed before, but I am wondering. How do the term
of the SCOsource license jive with their current version of the "methods
and concepts" arguments.
The license is only for the "intellectual property" that allegedly is
in the binaries, but SCO has been arguing that a lot of the methods and concepts
that were supposedly contributed are not actually in the source code itself.
If they're not in the source code, they're not in the binary either. Thus they
cannot be covered by the license.
What do you think? Am I making a mountain of a molehill? Could this cause them
trouble in the litigation? Could it cause trouble to those foolish enough to
actually have paid for a license?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Filter on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 02:32 PM EDT |
Why not call in and ask? It is a legitimate question, you are a legitimate
journalist. I would love to see their faces. Someone record it if it happens.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 04:36 PM EDT |
http://money.cnn.com/services/tickerheadlines/prn/200606081611PR_NEWS_USPR_____L
ATH086.htm
Revenue for the second quarter of fiscal year 2006 was $7,126,000 as compared
to $9,258,000 for the comparable quarter of the prior year. The net loss for the
second quarter of fiscal year 2006 was $(4,694,000), or $(0.22) per diluted
common share, as compared to a net loss of $(1,962,000), or $(0.11) per diluted
common share, for the comparable quarter of the prior year.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 04:41 PM EDT |
"Revenue for the second quarter of fiscal year 2006 was $7,126,000 as
compared to $9,258,000 for the comparable quarter of the prior year. The net
loss for the second quarter of fiscal year 2006 was $(4,694,000), or
$(0.22) per diluted common share, as compared to a net loss of
$(1,962,000), or $(0.11) per diluted common share, for the comparable
quarter of the prior year."
SCO
--------------------
Steve Stites
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 05:12 PM EDT |
Since I'm sure Darl, etc read this -- so they already know what questions PJ has
-- wouldn't it be nice if they just read the questions on the
call.
Listening to the call right now and eagerly awaiting Darl saying
"and before the phone calls, we'd like to answer a couple questions PJ asked
through the legal research site GroKlaw" [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 05:42 PM EDT |
In the April 2005 conference call
'President Darl McBride hinted
darkly that Groklaw founder Pamela Jones "isn't who she says she is," but
declined to say exactly who she is, saying that would be released "at a certain
point in time."'
[1]
and
McBride said,
"...all is not as appeared as it is in Groklaw land .... we're digging into who
Pam Jones is, and we're close to the bottom."
[2]
Since
these were such important issues in that they merited discussion in a previous
call. With all that emphasis on this project a year ago I'm dissapointed that
he didn't have any further updates on this
plan.
[1]http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=239
[2]http://www.eweek.
com/article2/0,1759,1785710,00.asp
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 06:57 PM EDT |
Sorry for posting anonymously..
I was once a jr accountant..
Other liabilities is or has reached material importance level to be broken out
and detailed per Auditing Standards..unless I have missed something in auditing
standards
Or maybe I remember Auditing standards wrong? it has been awhile since I touched
accounting
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Debonair on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 09:36 PM EDT |
IANAA - I am not an accountant, but I noticed the line for payroll was listed as
this:
2006 2005
General and administrative 1,718 2,036
Doesn't Darl pull down a million per year?
If so, his salary is 15% of the total general and administrative costs for the
second quater 2006. Sounds like a pretty expensive CEO to me. No wonder they've
had to thin the herd.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: rgmoore on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 09:47 PM EDT |
Hmm. Let's see. SCO is reporting that they have $14,088K in equity, and
they lost $4,694K in the most recent quarter. Plugging those numbers into
my handy calculator, I find that they'll hit negative equity in just about 3
quarters at their current rate. Since that's actually 3 quarters from 30 April,
that would run to early February 2007, just before the scheduled start of the
trial in the IBM case. Going bankrupt might be a convenient excuse for delaying
the trial, don't you think? --- Behind every sleazy lawyer, there's a
sleazy client. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 10:05 PM EDT |
The not-so-fine art of rubber numbers. Sarbanes-Oxley was supposed to put a
halt to this kind of work.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: kberrien on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 10:26 PM EDT |
>Does SCO intend to pay Novell? When?
SCO owes Novell royalties. And very possibly royalties for Sun & MS
SCOSource licensing (believe thats in the counter suit?). I gather that SCO
doesn't have all those royalties, nor value or earning to make it up.
So if Novell wins, and SCO is short on the royalties, how vulnerable (or at all)
are Darl and other corporate officers and board members, are to suits by Novell
against them, especially if there is a case to be made of complicity by these
officers.
Darl and pals are making out nicely from all this, but is there any chance they
could suffer monetary judgements? Or is it soley the corporation, SCO, that can
be held accountable?[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- Paying Novell - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 11:16 PM EDT
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 11:12 PM EDT |
New on Pacer, from IBM:
"Long after the deadline for disclosing its allegations, SCO seeks by
indirection to change them. In three of its eight expert reports, SCO alleges
the misuse of material nowhere identified in the Final Disclosures, the very
purpose of which was to fix the parties' allegations once and for all last year.
Indeed, with respect to its allegation that Linux infringes SCO's alleged UNIX
copyrights, SCo proffers expert testimony that has no support in the Final
Disclosures and, if allowed, would reinvent the case at the eleventh hour."[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, June 08 2006 @ 11:44 PM EDT |
If your liabilities are close in numbers to your assets, I suppose you have to
file for liquidation or bankrupcy or similair.
How certain, generally, does the liabilities have to be?
Can for example SCO be in trouble for not declaring IBM:s (almost fully certain)
damage counter-claims towards them as liabilities? - in which case they might be
force to enter liquidation/bankrupcy :)
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: darkonc on Friday, June 09 2006 @ 12:16 AM EDT |
in your
article on the escrow letter they answer the question of how much was added
to the escrow account... It appears to have been $5Million (numbered
paragraph #2).
Because the agreement was done just this week, it won't show
up on the books (which are only to the end of April). --- Powerful,
committed communication. Touching the jewel within each person and bringing it
to life.. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- no - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 09 2006 @ 01:39 AM EDT
- Yes - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, June 09 2006 @ 01:59 AM EDT
|
Authored by: mpellatt on Friday, June 09 2006 @ 09:33 AM EDT |
"The Company plans to introduce additional Me Inc. mobile services throughout
the year on a variety of smart handheld devices"
Yet, in a FAQ
created on 8th December 2005 at 10:38 AM and last updated on 19th January 2006
at 05:13 PM, the stunning range of PDAs supported is.... tara.....
the
palmOne Treo 650
and, err
the palmOne Treo 650
as well as, of
course
the palmOne Treo 650
So, so far in 2006, the additional
number of smart handheld devices suported is a very round number.
Seems they
have a big hill to climb in this sector of their business, too.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 10 2006 @ 12:35 PM EDT |
Darl called MySQl "our partners mysql". He also seemed to mention all
customers they ever sold to. Why do folks agree to let Darl speak their names?
Darl also said "we are nearing the end of the discovery phase.
The only questions were PJ's questions from one person! Darl should be happy
that you are giving people questions, otherwise there wouldn't be any.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|