SCO Stock In Danger of Delisting, Again 188
hweimer writes "In 2005, SCO got into delisting trouble because they failed to file their annual 10-K report in a timely manner. SCO seems to be headed the same way again for a different reason: the stock price is too low to meet Nasdaq's requirements. Quoting: '[W]hat can a company do to boost its share price? Besides stopping to burn money and come up with a working business model, I mean.'"
boosting share price (Score:5, Interesting)
No longer matters (Score:3, Interesting)
If SCO goes out of buisness. (Score:3, Interesting)
What can IBM do? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:potential source of income (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, they've got another obsolete piece of software that nobody uses anymore. Because, you know, it's impossible to write an independent implementation of a language with merely a several hundred page ISO standard to work from.
"But someone from SCO claimed that they own C++"; is that not so? It's complete rubbish. -- Bjarne Stroustrup's FAQ
Re:You're on the Titanic (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:boosting share price (Score:5, Interesting)
I think you're confusing the issue a little bit.
The reason reverse splits rarely work is that they don't solve the underlying problem that's causing the dropping stock price to begin with. They treat the symptoms, not the disease. Which means there's nothing "suicidal" about the reverse split, it's just that they don't really accomplish anything other than keeping the company on the market for a bit longer.
It's kind of like taking an aspirin for the pain being caused by a brain tumor. You'll eventually die anyway, but it's not because of the aspirin, it's because of the brain tumor. Taking aspirin isn't "suicidal" and in fact has no bearing whatsoever on your health, it just doesn't solve the real problem.
Lots of people think about stock prices as if they're somehow disconnected from company performance. That's a real dot-com era way of thinking, but we should all be back to reality by now. A reverse split *can* work, but only if it's combined with measures to make the company profitable again. But certainly, if I were a company shareholder, I would want any company that I thought had a good plan for a real turnaround to do a reverse split to keep themselves on the market until their plan started to bear fruit.
Of course, this *is* SCO we're talking about, so I can't imagine a reverse split would do anything but delay the inevitable.
why should they fear delisting? (Score:2, Interesting)
If they want to stop it, they only need to buy
their own shares for $10000-$20000 once a month
since the trading volume is totally insignificant.
The shareholders still left are the original
extortionists with Ralph Yarro (34%) at the helm.
Or investors groups that were willing to support
the scheme. They are not trading, and there are
no new investors.
Delisting would do away with the embarrassing
quarterly reports.