Royal Bank of Canada Cashes Out of SCO; SCO Begins Layoffs 585
jbell99999 is the first one to submit news that the Royal Bank of Canada is divesting itself of SCO stock. They're selling part of their preferred stock to Baystar, which has already indicated that they want to redeem their shares, and converting the rest to regular stock, which they can presumably sell on the open market. In other SCO news, Versicherung writes "The Santa Cruz Sentinel is reporting, SCO is laying off 10 percent of its worldwide workforce. The cuts come less than a month after the company brought on a new chief financial officer and just before the company ended its second fiscal quarter April 30." See also stories at Eweek and Linuxinsider.com.
Intellectual Property Claims? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm sorry, which intellectual property claims were those?
Does Baystar believe their claims of their source code in Linux are meritable?
stock price (Score:5, Interesting)
Today it was 64,035. That's about the equivalent of 2 day-traders flipping the stock back and forth.
What does that mean? Nobody is interested in buying or selling this thing.
SCO and IP property rights (DMCA?) (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Bre-X (Score:5, Interesting)
Although it starts amongst joyous meadows and cheerful flowers, truly great evil this path leads to. Evil bearing names like Abu Gharib and My Lai.
So just note that it was Royal Bank who against all common sense invested in SCO in the first place. They are just now growing cold feet and preparing to run for the door.
Good, but sad (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Thank "The Doors.".. (Score:1, Interesting)
And he walked on down the hall...
Workforce? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Bert Young (Score:2, Interesting)
I will miss the entertainment though, sniff sniff.
Re:Stupid RBC (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I again refer you to my post dt. July 02 (Score:4, Interesting)
Litiguous bastards:
1. Don't need customers, just people to sue.
2. Don't need to keep good customer relations, just to maintain enough paperwork to sue (former) customers.
3. Don't need to support a product.
4. Don't need to develop a product.
5. Don't need extensive infrastructure. Or an office for that matter, just a desk in a law firm. (Or, take the Simpson's Approach: "Hey, you, get out of my office!" - Lionel Hutts to Homer Simpson, lying in a tipped-over phone booth)
6. Don't need a lot of capital, just enough to keep the lawyers going until the 'big payoff' comes in the form of a win/settlement.
Basically, it flies in the face of almost every rule in the business book. You get to make money without doing anything productive towards the economy (no job creation, no product in use, no VALUE). And, of course, this is why litigious bastards MUST fail. We can't get people believing that the world can run off of bullshit and hot air. If you make money, you should make money by DOING something, at least in the bigger picture.
Even other companies that make money from 'IP' (say, music or software) puts out something for people to use/consume/enjoy/work on. Litiguous bastards don't contribute to the economic equation, they try to rob it, try to leech it dry.
SCO must be ground into the dust, same as RAMBUS.
Re:Yesssss (Score:3, Interesting)
As one investor is changing non-voting for voting stocks, and the other (Baystar is related to MS) proclaiming that SCO is not experienced to deal these legal situations (and buying first ones stocks).
In my opinion Baystar;)MS is aiming to prolong this situation as long as possible, and thus buying shares from RBC.
There might be the change, but probably only about who is leading this fiasco.
But to be truthfull, I really don't understand why they prolong this. There was no benefit and Linux is still gaining in the same measure as it was (there was some research that showed that)
Re:stock price (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh, I'll bet lots of people are interested in selling it, but they can't get their price for it...
Investment advice please (Score:3, Interesting)
If RBC places an order sell these freaking shares at any price, as fast as you can!!! for a volume of 740,740 shares...
would this potentially affect the stock price?
in what way might the price be affected?
what effect, if any, might this have on the long term outlook of the company?
are there any other concerns a wise investor should have?
Any good investing tips appreciated. (Especially when they are from an internet site! rather than from someone qualified to give investment advice.)
Thanks!
Obligatory TMBG Quote (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:good (Score:3, Interesting)
What if....... (Score:5, Interesting)
My impression of SCO was it was the product you bought 10 years ago because that power accounting and database software was written for it, dated but does the job and has never rarely failed. Near as I'm aware, they had a somewhat stable customer base, and while they didn't inovate, they started to incorperate much in the way of OSS in order to keep up with the pack, and perhaps actually get some new customers. Selling them old old and true power apps, but save them lots of money by giving them Samba.
I am curious about one thing. What if SCO never fired the first shot in this IP war? Would they still need to downsize? Would they still be considered a dying company? Would it be possible for SCO to continue to exist supplying to main stream folk or would they have simply continued to fade away? After all a successful company isn't always the one with the most money, but one which has found a balance between supply and demand, much easier with a software company then one which produces a physical product.
Re:A bad thing? (Score:3, Interesting)
And this might explain why BayStar wants Darl out and for it to essentially (if not actually) drop it's Unix products and "concentrate" on the supposed IP holdings and litigation.
One of the cheif gripes of the Linux community (other than the initial claims that SCO owns Linux) is that both SCO Linux and Unix products used Open Source software, Apache for instance (as well as a host of other things). So if SCO has no product then your contention may be on spot, as far as not being in a position to fend off counter claims regarding what's in SCO Linux/Unix. If you don't have a product and just have a lot of IP patents then you may be correct.
However, BayStar may have ulterior motives behind their request for a refund - such as we've just mentioned. But it may be in a position to milk SCO for all it's worth and then bail out. The Bank of Canada is essentially clearing a path to bail out as well IMHO. Bottom line, considering the recent layoffs as well, is that SCO is most likely scrounging for cash. What like lawyers are cheap? They aren't getting any revenue from the license/extortion scheme, they aren't selling a product, they have been black listed by almost (if not all) developers (save those that may still work there - do they still employ any devs?)and essentially have not other revenue channels.
Let's face it. SCO could potentially drag this out for years. But they need money and aren't making any at the moment. They did get a reprieve via Baystar/PIPE/BOC but that appears to be teneous at best. I think that in 6 months SCO well start to exhibit Cheyne-Stokes breathing - aka the death rattle. The stock was down to around $6/share yesterday and dropping (check that, I just checked again and it's at $5.99/share and falling). Any takers on how long before SCO stock is hovering around the price it was before they started they fiasco? I thought not.
This should be a wake up call for F/OSS. Watch the code base and keep it clean (though most are already painfully aware of this). The big question is what the hell do we do about the USPTO. They are out of touch and really not geared for handling the wave of technology advancements to date and unable to keep up with the breakneck speed of development and changes. I mean for crying out loud they gave M$ a patent on an Apple - not as in MAC but as in fruit to eat. They claim it was a mistake but it begs the question - what else "don't" they get? And I wonder if SCO and friends are banking on the Judges and Juries in the same manner - hoping they don't "get it" in order to "educate" them the SCO way.
But of course they appear to be doing with the IP litigation what they did with their software business - that is to run it into the ground with a flaming wake of burned bridges behind them.
Not HaHa! - This may be a very bad thing. (Score:5, Interesting)
Then we have Baystar (the Microsoft puppet) effectively inheriting all of the IP claims (by proxy, but the result is the same), which they think are meritorious. This could result in a whole new round of litigation run by someone who's not a complete jackass.
The new litigation may (will)also be a complete pile of bullshit, but it still ties things up in the courts for years. Be afraid, very afraid.
Re:I know some of these people ... (Score:3, Interesting)
All the claimed job growth is smoke and mirrors.. the globalists are manipulating the survey results.
It fairly easy to make up fake claims of hiring, especially since they are the one's filling out the DOL questionnaires!!
Now for a dose of the truth ! [google.com]
Collected SS receipts.. (You know that little old flat tax on Salaries and wages, no deductibles or exemptions allowed)
Has not been keeping up with inflation.. (And that's assuming zero job growth in the intervening year !!!)
That truth link also covers half of April's supposed growth,
since the DOL survey uses 2nd week of each month as the benchmark.
(a double whammy..)
In summary.. you've been conned!!
Just more job losses and cut backs, buried under a pile of bogus statistics !
Re:I know some of these people ... (Score:2, Interesting)
Anyone with an MBA should be dealt with suspiciously - they don't think like us. Let them prove themselves but don't go rushing in believing them right away, and no matter what they tell you they are *not* your friend.
I feel for these people also because Santa Cruz doesn't look like it is an enviable place to live right now if you're looking for a tech job. Now with all these Unix geeks hitting the street at once I'll know to avoid it for a couple years more.
I should hope NOT (Score:4, Interesting)
It shouldn't be difficult to counter the spin when the facts are on your side.
Re:Not a Good Stock to Own (Score:1, Interesting)
It's hardly ever an issue, but 50% short interest is pretty much unheard of.
Hmmm,
NFLX [yahoo.com] is even more shorted and their prospects are much better than SCOX's.
Re:Where have you been? (Score:3, Interesting)
Geeks should be praying for this SCO thing to go away quietly, not for them to be flogged in the town square.
Re:Thank "The Doors.".. (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure it was scary to do when the economy sucked and jobs were few and far between. Sure I was worried about how I was going to pay bills (I took a class in bartending just in case). Sure I was freaked out about moving halfway across the country for a new and mostly unknown job. But I did all of those things and so can others.
Quite simply, there was absolutely no way in hell that I was going to stay in that job. Life is simply too short to spend 8 or more hours a day being miserable. If I worked for SCO before their lawsuit, I'd have been one of the first out the door, with or without a replacement job in hand. There's simply no salary large enough to compensate for your self-respect.
Regards,
Ross
Job switch (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Guess it depends on who you are... (Score:3, Interesting)
I've had companies tell me to my face that they aren't looking from someone with such "Senior" qualifications as mine. Read that they found a kid out of school who doesn't have a family to support and will work for circus peanuts and a pat on the head.
Keep in mind, I'm 29, and if that qualifies me for being an old-timer in industry I can't imagine what a 45 year old must be going through. I know of more than one former Engineer who is driving a bus right now to make ends meet. Of the 45 year old variety, mind you.
Re:Thank "The Doors.".. (Score:3, Interesting)
Please state your sources every time you claim a fact!!!!
According to the RBoC stock coversion [yahoo.com], SCO has a business presence in 82 countries with a network of 11,000 resellers and 4,000 developers. While the 11,000 resellers are solution providers, and their developers when dubbed developer network [sco.com] is listed as 8,000 in number, I haven't seen any actual "employees" numbers anywhere.
You use nothing more but a vague "good" to describe a well-performing economy. That's just pathetic.
Consumer debt load is at record high [usatoday.com], including mortgage debt. According to the same source (USATODAY), "household debt levels rose nearly 11% in 2003" alone!!! This does not tell good things about household balance sheets [federalreserve.gov]. In fact, consumer debt levels reveal what the balance sheets wouldn't. In this case, they tell you how sh*t-fscked the Americans got, living today on money they will earn tomorrow for years now and it can't get better.
And when was the last time you checked the 2003 record-high $380 billion dollar deficit [usatoday.com].
I am not opposing the fact that the economy doesn't suck. But you have not shown it and made close to zero effot (only concrete unemployment numbers)!! You have to know your facts and know what makes a good economy first.
I will conclude my point by reiterating the fundamentals. I said it once, I'll say it fscking again: State your sources!!!
Excellent, they're losing a fortune on the deal (Score:5, Interesting)
As for Baystar trying to get blood out of the stone they helped forge, same story, let's hope they never recoup their cash. Maybe it'll be a lesson to the next bunch of greedy S.O.B.s who think about funding the next group of crooks to come along.
Re:You're perceptive, however (Score:3, Interesting)
Bzzzzzzt! Thank you for playing.
Once Baystar controls SCO, they can have SCO sell their IP "assets" or interests or whatever to another company (let's call it BaySCO). The amount could even be something as ridiculous as CN$1 (a loony for a bunch of loonies). The incoming legal fire from IBM et al turns SCO into a smoking crater, but then BaySCO is free to start the whole process all over again. At this point, IBM & friends can essentially try to get a court to declare (without naming a specific defendant) that there is no infringement, breach of contract, etc., but even the threats down the road are really limited only by BaySCO (and their successors') imagination - keep in mind that the SCO complaints against IBM over the last year or so have changed so much as to not even resemble the original suit filed.
People without kids talking smack. (Score:2, Interesting)
Try that with kids and a spouse who also has to work. Are you going to insist that your spouse also dump his/her job and move 1500 miles away? And hopefully find another job there? What if he/she loves his/her job?
Try that as a single parent when you live close to family members who help you with day care.
Try that with a sick family member whose medical condition will suddenly become "pre-existing" and not eligible for coverage when you change HMOs.
In other words, try that when you're not a healthy young 20-something with no strings. Try that when you're like most of the population.
Hey, I know the feeling of quitting a job that sucked and I was glad I was in a position once to do that once upon a time. It's great! But it's a luxury, and some things are worth sticking with the most soul crushing job in the world.
SCOX support level at 6? (Score:4, Interesting)
SCOX closed at 6.01 on Thursday and 5.99 on Friday. That does look like an effort to maintain the price.
This only works until SCO runs out of cash, of course.
Wait till Monday (Score:4, Interesting)
My friend (the evil capitalist) has said that this has always been a race between winning the legal cases, and the stock hitting the magic $4.50 share price when the market figired out the scam. At $4.50, there would likely be a removal of The Darl and his cronies and a cancellation of all court cases and a demand for a new CEO to turn SCO around by INNOVATING instead of LITIGATING. I am watching to see if he's right. See you Monday!