Slashdot Mirror
SCO Execs Dumping Stock
luigi6699 writes "According to the Salt Lake Tribune, 'SCO Group executives have sold about 119,000 shares of their company since it filed a lawsuit against IBM in March...' Their CFO started the $1.2 million sell-off just after the lawsuit."
Like we were suprised at this?
"Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." - John Lennon.
And in other news...
SCO Group to Shoot Babies
By Jeff Heard
Lindon, UT - The SCO Group announced the launch of a campaign to shoot 1% of all babies born in the US.
"Statistically, 1% of all people are Linux users. Rather than have these young hoodlums grow up without any respect for our intellectual property, we have chosen to nip it in the bud, as it were," said SCO's CEO, Darl McBride.
In addition, during the campaign announcement, SCO said that individuals could pay $2,499 per child for immunity from execution. "The price goes up to $5,200 dollars after that family's firstborn reaches 18 months, so it is in their advantage to pony up now," McBride continued.
The announcement brought cheers from SCO's chief investors and supporters, including the Gartner Group, and the BSA (Blind and Shortsighted Alliance). The organizations hailed it as "A brave, innovative step in the fight against intellectual piracy."
An RIAA spokesperson that was also present said that they were taking serious looks at SCO's proposal for fighting piracy in the music industry. "I think this will be a great deterrent. It will force parents to talk to their kids about the evils of intellectual piracy. In a free economy, this kind of thing is a must."
SCO, which stands for "Satanic Cultists' Operation," changed its name from Caldera in 2002, when it was acquired by an obscure organization which exclusively employs 1200-year-old undead trial lawyers. They are now embroiled in an ongoing legal battle with IBM, Red Hat, and the Open Source community over alleged copyright infringements embedded inside Linux.
Speculation has been abound about what will happen if SCO wins the lawsuit. Some have suggested that Linux will disappear entirely from the market. Others have speculated that if SCO loses the lawsuit, it will use its connections with the Underworld to assemble a massive Army of the Dead, march on IBM headquarters, and crush it into a smoldering oblivion. When asked about the possibility of an undead Armageddon scenario, a senior IBM spokesperson said, speaking in stereophonic bass-tones, "This will not happen."
When booed during the announcement by a large rotten tomato-wielding crowd, McBride exhorted, "I am disappointed with your reaction to our announcement. I must say that your decision to throw tomatoes does not seem conducive to the long-term survivability of your firstborn children."
I have often regretted my speech, never my silence.
-Xenocrates
Maybe the mainstream media is finally going to get a peek at what we've been talking about for months!
it's a new, but not suprising meaning to "take a wicked dump."
they may be assholes but not stupid.
for the last time people, I am "frodo from middle eaRTH", not "middle eaST".
Insider Trading, anyone?
Nah
Couldn't be.
Looks like she isnt the only one with insider info.
I took a dump yesterday too!
And the contents of my toilet had many similarities to SCO stock!
maybe they are doing this to fund their own lawyers?
One really has to wonder - this is SO blatent, why is the SEC not in this up to their necks?
But this is slashdot. A slashdoter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber!
Makes me wonder if these folks are paying attention to SCO's execs....
Shouldn't this have been from the stating-the-obvious department?
This is a benevolent decision, folks. They want to share the wealth with the rest of the world who buys those shares when their stock price skyrockets. You know, after they prove their claims.
What? It could happen!
against setting company policy solely so you can cash in your stock for a good price and screw the rest of the stockholders who don't know better?
I want to see all their new shareholders (due to them thinking the lawsuit was real and buying more) shit themselves when the price plummets :-)
Slashdot - The one stop shop for procrastination
"Look what I can do" - Stewie from MadTV
they found out that the monopoly money we were all sending to them is not worth anything :)
Well, this should go down as one of the most obivous scams that has happened on wall street since enron and martha..
*sigh*
anime+manga together at last.. in real time.
You would think they know something.
Best Windows Freeware
yeah what did you think? that they really had rights to the code? moneygrubbing execs...
Yahoo 5 day chart: Can you spend a trend?
The SEC should really look into this. The lawsuit is totally bogus. SCO is definetely not acting in the best interests of its shareholders. SCO seems to be acting in the best interests of Microsoft. It is very curious how Microsoft and SCO reached some kind of licensing agreement in the context of this lawsuit. It is also curious how SCO claims that a single company purchased one of their bogus licenses without disclosing the name. There needs to be full disclosure about the relationship between SCO and Microsoft.
For this kind of investor fraud, and for extortion, SCO executives should be charged as criminals. Here is an excellent Advogato article summarizing how and more of why.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
http://www.smartmoney.com/eqsnaps/index.cfm?story= insiders&symbol=SCOX
Uhh yea, its public knowledge. I been spouting off here for a while about that. Also you should see all the gloom and doom in their quarterly report. Nobody can accuse them of anything illegal as they are doing everything in the open...
We know they do not expect to win...
Matthew 6:21
"For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also."
Pass a law making corporate execs unable to sell their shares when their company is taking part in nonsense suits like this! Captain should go down with the ship, RIGHT?!?!?!?!?
Ah yessiree matey, she's going under.
This is an indication of the lack of confidence they have in the longevity of their company.
Once again the actions of these corporate losers will not effect them because they will squirm their way out of it.
Someone buy them out and stop this nonsense.
alot of Spammers were doing this exact tactic (above) via stocks they were touting in their untraceable spams. Not to try and draw a comparison between disgusting tactics used by those bottom feeders and respectable businessmen at SCO or anything.
I went to battle MC Escher, but drew a blank
One minor correction: s/extorted/exhorted
But this is slashdot. A slashdoter who didn't build his own computer is like a Jedi who didn't build his own lightsaber!
"Like rats from a sinking ship, these are the days of our lives
-kgj
"Insider sales picking up is a negative sign," said Richard Campagna
No kidding. It means that four days after filing their lawsuit, SCO execs acted on the belief that they would never win. Hopefully this article will help the SEC sit up and take notice.
Article from July 25th showing how much each SCO exec made as of that date
They're involved in huge legal battles with two (maybe more) computer superpowers. The entire user base that supports them hates them. And there's now a free version available of everything they sell.
I wonder why they're selling their stock?
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
In other words, this suit against IBM and the attempted takedown of linux was the SUIT'S way of making money off their already dying company. *shrug* Only in America could they pull this off...
Anti SCO Group T-Shirt. Each shirt donates $1 to the Open Source Now Fund.
If this insider selling continues as an IBM vs. SCO trial were to draw closer, that would mean that SCOs own top brass don't think they much of a chance. Of course of SCO winds up going under, those same top brass will probably have questions asked of them for why they sold before IBM destroyed them (if it happens that way).
Benifit of the doubt though, insider selling does happen in companies to take profit, and if you look at SCO's 1 year preformance going from 95 cents to 16 dollars at it's recent peak (an increase of nearly 1,700%), you would see why it would seem intelligent to sell.
SecondPageMedia - Wha
Gartner group recommends buying SCO stock...
The SEC will be the driver in this media circus. There is no way that they will accept that type of trading and the time when the law suit was annouced.
Sorry SCO, SEC will rip you guys a new asshole.
1) no evidence
2) asking for payment (extortion)
3) stock prices++
4) stock selling
Even she thinks something fishy is going on.
At least point at the source:
/. we hate BBSpot. It's only on Fark that we love Brian.
SCO Group to Shoot Babies
And haven't you heard? On
tbdean
Is that really a good thing? Concidering most people don't know what Linux is, I doubt being the defendant of a case like this makes a good impression - regardless of whether or not it's innocent.
no comment
I wonder if Martha Stewart will give them advice about insider trading...
+5, Female
Looks like rats leaving a sinking ship to me.
My sig can beat up your sig.
...no. But there should be.
-Looking for a job as a materials chemist or multivariat
Are they still in business ?
Hat to say I told ya so, but I told ya so. This is public (and often free) information you can get from Yahoo and other stock-info sites
Returned Peace Corps IT Volunteer
Stop complaining and put you money where your mouth is.
I am tired of this SCO crap. When are you people going to stop whining and do something about it. If you have contributed to the Linux kernel, sue SCO for damaging your product and under the terms of their claims they owe you for licensing. If you have been given an invoice from SCO, sue them and report them for extortion. If you have bought a license, sue them for false advertising. Whining about it on slash dot will accomplish absolutely 0, bubkiss, dittly. This is the only way to strike back at a company that uses litigation as a business model. Use litigation to counter them. There is not other way to stop SCO. There were allot of people that said fascism, Stalin and Hitler were bad people, but nobody actually did anything about it (until it was too late) so my fellow slashdotters, before you post one more reply to an SCO article, why don't you put you money where your mouth is file suit against SCO, and then comment about that.
Hopefully... they can sell off enough in the way of stock to allow a hostile takeover by some other bozo.
Here's the link for those that want to see the complete rundown of insiders over the past little while at SCO...
Platform independent bug tracking software
Christ, read the article for once! 119,000 shares were sold, out of 13.7 million outstanding shares. My admittedly hasty math puts that at less than 1% of the total shares. The other numbers involved were Robert Bench selling off a total of 17,151 out of his (then total) 245,194 shares. Again, rough math adds it up to less than 10%. Wow.
Any hopes Slashdot ever had of being a reputable news source... wait, they never had those hopes. News for fanatics, stuff that gets you riled up until you read the article and realize it's not what you thought but hey, buy our T-shirts anyways!
Buy IBM shares?
Treehugger? Treehugger... Treehugger!
SCO management knew that their stock was going to rise sharply in value and most of all that, given their righteousness, it would retain its (then) future peak value. Being the friendly people they are, they decided that everyone out there should have an opportunity to make a small profit on the back of that ugly monopolist called IBM. So they decided to increase their karma by throwing some of their undervalued stock onto the market for us all to buy and benefit from.
Linux user since early January 1992.
In fact, I bet that's the main reason the price of shares is falling (oversupply), and not because people are beginning to doubt SCO's FUD. Look on the bright side, having those shares back out in the exchange might mean more people able to open up short positions than previously. Better do it fast, though, before they release their quarterly numbers Thursday.
Chapter 11
...this isn't just insider trading: it's fraud pure and simple, and thus should be punished.
The difference between the two in my eyes is that insider trading charges can target people who have no control over the company's action. Case in point: Martha Stewart, who might have known that the stock was going to drop, but had no control over whether it did or not. Punishing someone for selling because of what they thought seems like an egregious violation of privacy and civil rights AND is incredibly hard to prove; but punishing someone for selling because they engage in the systematic dissemination of disinformation related to the enterprise for the express purpose of increasing their payout at the expense of other stockholders is perfectly justifiable. That, my friends, is fraud.
[ home ]
I suggest we call this tactic "Hump-And-Dump".
.
"A microprocessor... is a terrible thing to waste." --
GeneralEmergency
"The company will comment on the sales when it announces fiscal third-quarter results Thursday, he said."
If the results are bad, wouldn't it be insider trading? If they are good, why sell?
&/or trying to say that va lairIE's pump&dump hedgemonIE is a0k?
I would guess that they are going to need to spend a portion of the income to go to Bush's campaign fund to get themselves out of the coming problems
Microsft
Ken Lay
Anschutz
Nachio
Have all shown that a few millions up front can save you billions and jail time later.
I'm outside his circle of friends, not white, pear shaped OR stinky (my wife would kill me) and I found it rather humorous. It wasn't about shooting babies, but rather compared SCO's current practices to something also pretty tasteless. Now -- I'm not a dad yet but my wife is 5 month pregnant and I'm WAY excited about being a dad so maybe your perspective is different than mine, but I think that I'd even find it somewhat funny after my son is born. Notice: I am not questioning your right to be offended, but just take this in context.
There, I said it. Sure linux marches on and the company will be pounded by big blue--but they, by which I mean the owners, get the cash for the FUD and run off. Legal liability is borne by SCO, which files for bankruptcy protection.
There's a lot of gloating here today, but I think that the SCO execs got what they wanted, the lawyers got rich, and everyone else would have benifited from this never happening in the first place.
gg.
C'mon. SCO executives' compensation includes much non-diversified stock. This is just an ordinary, routine diversification of the exec's stock portfolios. Honest.
Why would I? I only buy Microso--
McBride will join Ebbers, Lay, Skilling, and associates in jail ? Oh wait, they all are still walking around rich and as free as you can be if you have to have private body gaurds protecting you from your victims all the time.
Where you born this fucking month ? Where did you get the idea that the SEC did anything except just enough face saving to keep your grandma dumping her life savings into the stock market ?
From the R'ing The FA department:
David Boies' law firm, Boies, Schiller & Flexner, represents SCO. Boies represented former Vice President Al Gore in the 2000 election recount and tried the U.S. antitrust case against Microsoft.
Wow. Now if that isn't a stellar assortment of huge wins! I'm sure President Gore, who was so helpful in pursuing the now-completed Microsoft breakup, will be happy that his old friend is ensuring that SCO gets what they deserve for their valuable contributions to Linux.
(Although, ironically, SCO may indeed get just what they deserve...)
Stressed? Me? Of course not. Stress is what a rubber band feels before it breaks, silly.
If I go and buy a share or two of SCOX from one of the many rats fleeing their sinking ship, could I claim that my Linux installs would then be non-infringing since I would be a part owner of the company which "owns" the IP my 2.4.x kernel is supposedly copied from?
"The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote."
or they will end up like Martha Stewart.
Ken Lay is still free because he gave a lot of money to Bush's political campaigns. Microsoft came out ahead after it lost the anti trust case because they wrote checks to Bush and Ashcroft.
SCO's board best make sure they are big givers to the GOP or they are SOL.
photosMy Photostream
YOU FAIL IT!
Is it considered insider trading if you know your claims are full of shit, but don't admit it to anybody else?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
Bill Gates Sold 1 Million More Microsoft Common Shares Friday ;-)
I guess he releaiszed MSFT's days are numbered
I must be mistaken, but don't executives and substantial shareholders need to file before they can sell company stock?
Joe
http://www.joegrossberg.com
SCO not exactly "loveable" ???
Check out this additional story about SCO at the Salt Lake Tribune website.
that the company that bought their license yesterday is a little nervous right now.
N/T, read the subject.
What is that Fortune 500 company smoking?
So why is no one reporting on this? Why isn't cnet saying, "SCO doesn't have faith in it's own claims against Linux since they seem to being cashing now, not later" or why isn't the wall street journal reporting on this? FUDing Linux was a feeding frenzy, but we've seen almost complete silence on the stock dumping. The trial will end and a lot of people will have worthless stock and be wondering, "how did that happen?"
SCO's amassing an Army of the Dead? Where's my Boomstick?
Hail to the King, baby!
And all this time I was under the impression that the execs thought they were the Czars of Soviet Russia. I guess I was mistaken.
Specifically, it doesn't mention the time period over which the sales took place. There is a relatively limited window of time during which "insiders" can sell stock. Generally, it's in the middle of financial quarters and definitely closes well before the quarter's beginning or end.
Although the article doesn't flat-out say it, it sort of implies that the execs selling stock have been doing it recently. Given the extraordinarily high level of scrutiny to insider trading abuses in publicly traded companies, I would be very surprised if the SCO insiders were anything other than legally scrupulous in their stock sales, particularly in the midst of litigation.
You may not agree with their position regarding Linux...no, let me rephrase that...you probably think that they are beneath contempt because of their position regarding Linux, but there's nothing unlawful or particularly unethical about realizing that your stock price is outrageously high, you're in an insider trading window and it's almost time for the new model-year Lexus introductions!
I think they deserve our scorn for playing fast and loose with the GPL and the Community in general, but I doubt they've broken any laws in this instance.
-h-
Closed at US$9.72, up $.43 (4.64%) from opening at $9.29. So they're doing a little better today, but still kinda going down.
This sig no verb.
Do you mean that Microsoft was that single company? Why not Sun? Microsoft doesn't sell Linux to customers. Sun does. And since the beginning SCO said that Sun is the only company that should not worry about the lawsuit.
Less is more !
Don't you just love insider trading? I hope these guys get the full-blown federal ass-pounding prison experience. Now, if this could only happen to Billy Boy and his Borg Goons.
They could participate in the "Prison Life" magazine with an editorial written by Martha Stewart with titles such as "Creative Methods for Retrieving Objects from Outside Your Prison Cell", or "How to Shmooze the Parole Board into Letting You Out Earlier Than You Deserve", "Tricks for Getting the Warden to Grant You Special Priviledges", "Lies, Lies, and More Lies for Your Continued Tardiness with Your Parole Officer". Oh my! The titles could go on! But not to worry, there's plenty of TIME for those future articles!
Looks like you are right - SLT also has article from the Wall Street Journal. Can someone confirm that it actually appeared in a printed copy of the WSJ?
SCO SUCKS!! Button, on sale now!
.... climbed over 500% in the last 7 months I would be selling a portion of it off as well.
The only thing that you can read into this article is that the SCO execs do have a modicum of common sense after all.
I think that SCO sucks, too, but do you really think that the whole purpose of the lawsuit was to raise the price to dump the stock? Yeah, if that's the purpose of it, then I guess there's some kind of crime, but this is the same sort of reasoning that goes along with, say, aluminum foil hats and aliens at Area 51.
It's also, to say the least, a very simplistic view. Maybe that would be a good
awwwwwwwww... look! its a cute little SCO troll. that is soooooo cute. *squish*
At least for the SCO share holders who sold out. Most likely, You've get a arrangement between the existing parties (RH and IBM). The lawsuit get's dropped, at SCO change of managment. Reason? The stockprise has get the highest value it would ever reach. This will put a few SCO people unemployed, while the managment walks away with the cash. This will never reach the court. To much FUD.
Short sell their stock so next time, you WILL have the money to do something about it.
paintball
5) profit!
If I recall correctly (no pun intended since I live in California), the SEC nailed several Nvidia employees over insider trading regarding selling their options after Microsoft announced Nvidia had won the contract for the important chips in the Xbox. Considering SCO's behavior is far more blatent (and from the top of the corporate pyramid versus a few peons) than Nvidia's, I would bet money the SEC will throw the book at them [SCO]. I'd also bet on it since so many high tech companies have historically been the allies of the Republican Party (unlike Apple Computer), crucial for getting the Administration to act on anything (or not to act as in Microsoft)... Finally, since the Defense Department seems so gung-ho on Linux for security purposes these days, I don't think Uncle Sam is going to be happy shelling out $699+ per CPU just so SCO can make a profit off someone else's intellectual property especially when the OS is supposed to be free...
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
I find the article's most interesting point being that
Among the many bizarre things about the complaint, though, is that SCO itself used to be a Linux company called Caldera, and as such eagerly distributed free of charge the very same software it now is claiming infringes its copyrights.
A new CEO came up with the business strategy in the fall. But a new plan doesn't immunize the company from the precedents it helped set. It's as if a magician gave away his secrets, then started suing his audience for learning how he did his tricks.
Let's be honest here, at the moment, is this entirely legal? Maybe...
At the moment, SCO's executives are profiting from allegation/conjecture/slander; there is also a clear correlation between the release of "news" and share movement. In the end, if IBM and RH et al. prove their claims, and to a degree the extent of the victory, the SCO executive will have a lot to answer for. This is not simply in the realms of a slap on the wrist or a demotion, but substantial fines and quite possibly time in a federal prison.
It's by no coincidence that soon after the FUD came flying from Utah, did SCO decide to Indemnify its executives for their actions. IBM has, in it's counter claim, made some very serious accusations concerning market manipulation; they would not release such material if they though for one minute that it rebound on them.
This has gone past the point of being a Microsoft vs Linux slagging match, this is serious. People are going to go "away" for it; families will live in the knowledge that their husbands/fathers are the worst lying thieves this country has to offer. So pick up some popcorn and watch, its only going to get better!
-but our shennanigans are cheeky and fun...theirs are cruel and evil
- EVIL SHENNANIGANS
-I swear I'll pistol whip the next guy who says shennanigans!
The cancel button is your friend. Do not hesitate to use it.
I think this may be getting blown out of proportion ... in a previous post, i reported that their insider activity was spread around 5 execs from SCO ... i'm not sure where the 119,000 share number comes from either ... unless you're mis-calculating Form144 & Form4Option into the mix.
... and a Form4 Option is an exercise of options at a pre-determined stock price. These forms are usually, but not always, closely followed by Form4 Sells.
...
... and certainly some execs have made a some money on the over-inflated price ... but this level of paranoia just makes /. look bad.
For the record, a Form144 is not a sell, but simply an insider registration of stock previously unknown to the public float
By my calcs, the execs have cashed out for a total of 75k shares worth <$900k between the 5 of them. Not exactly the criminal mastermind plot the article made it out to be
There is a lot to bash SCO about nowdays
"Glory is fleeting, but obscurity is forever." - Napoleon Bonaparte
Do not past Go, do not collect $200 [Chance Card]
--AB
And the contents of my toilet had many similarities to SCO stock!
You mean you used your SCO stock to wipe, too?
No, the real purpose is an attempt to discredit Linux. The fact that SCO execs are making millions from their FUD-inflated stock is just them getting their reward for helping MS take a shot at Linux.
SCOX Insider & restricted shareholder transactions reported over the last two months
Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
Says it all really. Where is the news here?
I know this is hot-button issue with the crap that SCO is spewing out, but I have a few questions before I jump to the guilty verdict. At what point is this action criminal? 1 share? 10 shares? 10,000 shares? One guy sold 17,151 shares leaving him 228,043 that he still owns. Another sold everything (12,000 shares). There are 13.7 million shares outstanding. Do percentages factor into the determination of criminality? Does anyone have an EDUCATED and FACTUAL opinion to offer? I have to say, this certainly looks suspocious. And, if their actions are criminal, I hope they get the just desserts.
JP
The facts expressed here belong to all, the opinions to me. The distinction between fact and opinion is yours to decide.
a nice modern twist on one of my favorite Thomas Paine writings, mostly because its short with lots of small words.
If you read the article to its end and clicked the right-arrow at the bottom you get this article:
SCO not exactly the lovable little guy
I think it's pretty hilarious that SCO can't even get their local press to show them in a good light.
I'd take a look at the trend in this linear SCOX Chart for better information.
********* sig: If you don't like the law, get filthy stinking rich, and buy a better one.
Yahoo's 2-year chart, and the six-month chart. Cute how the stock goes nowhere until the company starts crying for a buyout, and if you cross-reference with the insider trades page I linked in the other post, you'll note that nothing takes place until after the lawsuit is filed and the stock starts leaping. Curious, that. Expected behaviour, perhaps, but given the exaggerated nature of SCO's anti-Linux campaign and the fact that the company hasn't actually tried to produce anything since Project Monterrey fell through, the rather ambitious automatic sale targets set by the execs sure make me wonder whether the execs can honestly say this is not a pump-and-dump operation. The fact that SCO's stock flirted with penny-stock status for about a year, combined with no output beyond a lawsuit and legal threats, would seem to reinforce that impression.
Based on the noticeable downturn in recent weeks, I'd lay good money that SCO's about to issue another Comical Ali-esque press release.
Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
It's probably just that some executives need a little extra cash to spend on this upcoming winter vacation season. I see nothing nefarious about people wanting to take their money out of the stock market in this down economy. Not only is it proper, it's prudent.
What I don't understand is why all the SCO share holders are not also dumping their stock? Come on, a lot of people here were trying to figure out how they could short the stock to make some free money. Makes you wonder how is it that people on the outside can see the writing on the wall before the owners (stock holders).
Its one thing to blindly trust a CEO and hold onto some stock thinking everything is going to be just fine. But, in light of the fact that the corp execs are dumping their stock, one would think that the shareholders would follow suit.
Are investors really this stupid?
The controversy here is not SCO or Linux; it is IBM. It is IBM and the threat IBM poses to Microsoft. Microsoft is scared of Linux and open source, but the latter only became a threat when IBM began to push them. IBM and Microsoft go a long way back, and the dissolution of their partnership in the beginning of the 1990's was less than amicable according to at least one regretful Steve Ballmer.
Microsoft and SCO go a long way back too. Microsoft originally bought a Unix source code license so they could commission SCO to write PC Xenix for them. Microsoft long regarded SCO as a threat, but this was unrealistic, and it is possible the two companies have now made amends.
For wouldn't it be ironic if Bill Gates were behind the whole SCO debacle? I am not saying it is probable, only that it is possible. Knowing the Halloween Documents, knowing Bill Gates, it is easy to see that Microsoft would not stand still and let IBM with Linux walk all over them as is the case today.
The lawsuit is public information. The SEC only cares when you trade based on non-public information.
From the article: The amount of short interest in the stock rose more than tenfold between May and July, according to Bloomberg data.
It seems that Slashdotters aren't the only ones who've been shorting SCO.
~==>RocketSHE
http://www.dead-baby-joke.com/
Hillarity ensues.
I think this is a perfect time to start a dicussion on the topic of shorting stocks.
.com boom, it would have made the bust much less painful. The buyers would have lost less money because they could buy in at a lower price, and the short sellers would have been rewarded for seeing that Pets.com was going nowhere fast.
For everyone who doesn't know, shorting (a.k.a selling short) is when you sell a stock that you don't own in ancitipation of buying it back later (hopefully at a lower price). Basically, the way it works is your stock broker borrows the stock from someone who owns it. The broker lends it to you, so that you can sell it. At some point, when you decide that you want to cash out, you "cover your short" by buying the stock so that your broker can give it back to whoever they borrowed it from.
Shorting is more risky than buying because:
1) There's a limited return, but no limited loss
2) The original owner of the stock can decide to sell, and if your broker can't find a replacement, you might be forced to sell before you're ready.
However, shorting is a very important highly underrated method of investing. Shorting keeps stock prices in check by allowing investors to "vote with thier wallets" without being shareholders of the company. Lower prices mean that people lose less money when stocks tank, and it also means that investors can buy into stocks at a more reasonable price, making them more acessable to everyone.
Some people think shorting is wrong, even immoral, but I argue that if more people had seen short selling as a viable investment strategy during the
And just in case you're wondering....
I do not, have not, and will not own shares of, or short interest in, SCO Group Inc.
OK, OK... now I know I'm getting out of hand; but what if Microsoft is really looking to "buy" Linux? What I mean is, if during this lawsuit period, Microsoft bought "the rights" to linux from SCO (and let's tag another double-quotes) "in good faith?" Could MS then claim that they are immuned from liability to the GPL? They bought exclusive rights from SCO, right? Could they then turn around and say "Well, we'd sue SCO over this and get the answer striaght, but they've been out of business for over a year now"? Then they take off with the kernel, never having to give source back in the process. Seems like they could bury just about anyone who tries to take them to court over it. Deep, deep pockets, ya know?
Maybe I need to take my medicine...
put the what in the where?
Just as a share of MSFT does not give you licenses to the array of Microsoft products. Shareholders and clients are different things.
Will there never be an end to the constant stream of Bastard Moderators From Hell that accost /.?
The election recount??? Microsoft antitrust?? Can he really do any damage (besides tying up the judicial system) ?
Can you ping me now?... Good!
Dunno if it's in good taste to link to my own comment in a previous slashdot article ... I'll let the mods decide.
Get your info straight from the SEC
Rats leaving the sinking ship?
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
'SCO Group executives have sold about 119,000 shares of their company since it filed a lawsuit against IBM in March...' I'm wondering, sold to whom? o even better who is the stupid that buys the stock.
The package said "Windows XP or better. Pentium Class Processor or better"... So I got a Mac with OS X
This is definitely a case for the SEC and the FTC to become involved. The reason they haven't is because those poolitical organizations don't do much of ANYTHING unless there's lots of ass kissing publicity in it for them. And since the SCO case hasn't even made it as a bumper on the network news, it's not on their radar.
Namely, this one:
Vice President Michael Wilson sold his entire stake of 12,000 shares between July 14 and July 18, the Washington Service said.
And the fact that there are 13.7 million outstanding shares isn't relevant, only the number of shares owned by the SCO board. It also says that the total profits involved in insider sales has totaled $1.2 million. That sure sounds like massive profit-taking to me.
Time to buy 'em a present!
http://www.davrie.com/downtime.html
And I wouldn't call one exec selling some stock as a 'selloff'.
"Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
Could the day of the rope be drawing near for these vermin?
I say they televise the execution and furthermore, carry it out in the parking lot of SCO. Save taxpayer dollars that way..
a law like that might make executives care about what they do to the little people
What is needed is candidates that represent the little people. That's why Californians need to vote for Gary Coleman. He represents the little people.
This entire suit stinks of a stock value manipulation scam. If you look at there history SCOX you can see they have managed to increase the value of the stock from less than a dollar to $15.02 a share at one point. It started dropping again last week when IBM announced the counter-suit. Now they have sold the stock at $10.06 a share. last update reported $9.72. SELL SELL SELL
I hope the SEC is watching this!
Science is the Real TRUTH!
(1) When the Linux crowd proves they aren't using stolen SCO IP, the stock will fall apart, and these guys will face a shareholder's lawsuit and a serious investigation. Expect these guys to get the hell out of the country, fast.
OR:
(2) Linux actually *does* have SCO IP stuck in it, and these execs just want to bail out while the stock is high and before people realize that Linux will survive whether it has to pull some code out or not.
That would have been a very nice idea for the t-shirt contest, don't you think? :)
This is so typical it's barely newsworthy. The amount of corruption amoungst upper management and the upper class has reached epidemic proportions and has done more harm to America and Americans than all the terrorists, foreign and domestic, have ever caused.
The affluent are the enemy. The truth is most wealth is transferred not earned and these people have corrupted the system to insure they receive the vast majority of all production even though they contribute little or nothing.
Slavery is alive and well in America. Now it's not just poor "lesser" races, it's just the "lesser" poor.
Oh, and being in the middle class just means you're paid just enough to just get back to work.
Low class simply means there's nothing left to exploit.
Actually, most of the sells were automatic. Ie, a threshold is set and when the stock gets there a certain amount get sold. Its one of the ways execs try to avoid insider trading.
"Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
There is nothing wrong with making money when a company's sock goes up.
However what is illegal is when you use fraud to pump up the level to sell off. You basically have Executive Officers canibalize the company at cost of shareholds so they can make a profit. This isn't what shareholders bought into. This isn't what Execs are supposed to do with companies.
This has always been a weakness in the system. When the CEO sees profit, why operate in a manner that is healthy for the company? The only thing standing in the way is the government who can and will take all of the ill gotten money and throw you in prison.
Here's a list of all the insider trades that have taken place at SCO in the last year. Each sale has been worth tens of thousands of dollars to the seller -- in one case, hundreds of thousands.
How could you say it was obvious if no one, except for the Enron execs, saw the collapse of Enron coming?
What seems obvious to me is that the SEC picks and chooses who to go after and how hard to punish them. They gave those Enron pukes a slap on the wrists for their crimes, but is making a big scene of punishing Martha, whose scam was chump change in comparison, by bending her ass over a couch.
Will the SEC be as severe with the SCO? I can only hope so.
If they started at .95 cents a share and went to 16.00 a share...
I that takes them from $113,050 invested to 1.9 million, in return. Dang, if I had the 113k to invest eh?
Noorda is now offering up nice campaign contributions to the republican party. It is gaurenteed, that McBride, Noorda, etc will be getting off scot free.
Do we know why he sold them? No. Maybe he needed to buy a car and required some up-front cash. Maybe his daughter got injured in an accident and he had to cover some medical bills. We have no idea why he he sold them. And besides, does it matter? Just because an executive sells off his stock doesn't make it a problem. Is that what "Corporate Responsiblity" has come down to, CEOs and VPs unable to sell any stock for fear of being labeled as a criminal?
I can most certainly deny that a 100% sale of stocks is significant. If he were a majority shareholder, I would see inpropriety. But since he held such a small stake in the company, and since we do not know all the details, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the man.
I'm suprised no one posted this before:
Insider and Form 144 Filings at SCO
SCO GROUP's Insider & restricted shareholder transactions
couldn't this be a perfectly legitimate, even conservative strategy to protect investments? I mean, most stocks get dumped when any company enters an unstable period, eg: trying to sue an industry (the outcome could be good, or it could be bad, but no one cares, since its unstable).
Since these trades were made after the announcement, I think the executives are in the clear. Any investor in that company could have taken advantage of this too.
In the past two months, several MILLION shares of this very company (LNUX) have been sold by insiders. Link here And the financial history of VA Linux has been many times worse than SCO's could ever be.
I bought one share of Damlier Chrysler, walked into the Dodge dealer. When I flashed my stock certificate, he just handed me the keys to my brand new Viper.
Yepper, a new Viper for $35!
This doesn't mean they expect to lose. People sell stock all the time to do things like buy a house or invest elsewhere even if the stock is doing well. They could trying to diversify, anyone smart does so at least to some degree, especially if they have a family.
Yahoo lists 82k insider shares sold in the last 6 months. This is only 1.4 percent of insider holdings. Even if the number is much higher this is not a huge exodus yet. In fact it shows a bit of confidence. After all, this was a $2 stock in January.
This could be taken as SCO's officers hedging their bets, however its hard to say because no matter how lousy SCO's situation might be if it loses, these people may be already diversified well enough with outside holdings to risk it all. It's tough to say is really what this means. The CEO's cash salary was only $82k last year. We all know a CEO can't possibly live on that little. Maybe he needed a Bentley. Hard to say.
Now if they were buying shares, that would say a lot more about the case. People sell for many reasons, but there is only one reason to buy: you think the stock is going to go up and stay up until the next selling period for insiders.
I wonder what the various linux companies are doing?
The very next story in the business section of the SLTrib is also about SCO (click the blue right arrow at the bottom of the original article or click the link below):
8 3192.asp
http://www.sltrib.com/2003/Aug/08122003/business/
A solution to the problem with music today
Request your free CD of my piano music.
Dear Slashdot Poster, Earlier today it was brought to our attention that an article posted to the Slashdot.com website mentioned that SCO executives were selling off their interests in the company. This letter is to inform you that the terms "SCO" and "SCO Stock" used in conjunction are owned exclusively by SCO and any unauthorized use without proper licensing is a violation of our intellectual property. In a good-faith effort to allow the general public to bring their posts about the SCO Company into licensing compliance, we are offering you the limited opportunity to properly license the terms "SCO" and "SCO Stock" for only $15,000 USD. This fee will not only allow you to use the terms "SCO" and "SCO Stock" but also the more valuable term "SCO Executives" without the need to pay any further licensing fees. It will be in effect until August 15th 2003 after which the fee will increase to $35,000 USD and WILL NOT include the right to use the term "SCO Executives" in your posts. Please contact SCO if you have any additional questions or to purchase a license. We appreciate your compliance with our demands and hope to have a long business relationship with you in the future. Sincerely, SCO(tm) Check out the great Linux PC I'm selling!
Anthony Papillion
Advanced Data Concepts, Inc.
"Quality Custom Software and IT Services"
Sellign shares becuase you as a public officer of a corporation know in fact that your public statements to pres sand investors is false is illegal under all State Blue Sky Laws and the lwas that SEC enfources..
Don't Tread on OpenSource
Hmmmm... has Boies ever won a case? Just curious. He must get his rep from somewhere...
All's true that is mistrusted
1) SCO was on a fishing expedition when they conjured up the lawsuit (why just go at IBM and not every single organization currently using Linux?)
2) they're only in it for the money (as opposed to justice/vindication on the subject of their code supposedly stolen)
3) that they know their case is weak and their stock is likely to drop (you don't sell when you're confident in your stock, you might set a stop limit, but selling is a sure sign of no confidence)
In trying to find a bright side (I know this behavior is to be expected on their part, but it is pretty sickening), perhaps this could signal the end of this frivilous case and any concerns about the future of Linux?
From news.google.com -
SCO Execs Dumping Stock
Slashdot - 10 minutes ago
Lindon, UT - The SCO Group announced the launch of a campaign to shoot 1% of all babies born in the US.
Look at SCO VP Wilson did. He bought at very low prices 12,000 shares for $7920 and turned around and sold the shares for about $129,000. That is a nice profit.
2003-07-15 WILSON, MICHAEL SEAN
Senior Vice President 6,000 Option Exercise at $0.66 per share.
(Cost of $3,960)
2003-07-15 WILSON, MICHAEL SEAN
Senior Vice President 6,000 Sale at $10.66 - $10.8 per share.
(Proceeds of about $64,000)
2003-07-14 WILSON, MICHAEL
Senior Vice President 6,000 Option Exercise at $0.66 per share.
(Cost of $3,960)
2003-07-14 WILSON, MICHAEL
Senior Vice President 6,000 Sale at $10.77 - $10.87 per share.
(Proceeds of about $65,000)
I wonder if it won't be long before a U.S. Attorney or the SEC starts sniffing around SCO like a shark smelling blood. IANAL but this sounds like a pump and dump to me, not to mention RICO, extortion, you name it.
I wanted to short SCOX stock when it was at 12. I believe that their house of cards will eventually crumble, when the copyrighted code is eventually revealed in court records. Linux will be quickly patched to remove any tainted code, and life will go on for everybody else as normal... except SCO. Their huge loss in the court case will tank them. Good riddance, I say!
:)
This is just my belief. I'm not sure if it will actually come to pass, but I'm willing to bet money that it will. Unfortunately, my Etrade account wasn't ever set up to handle margin trading (which is a requirement to short stocks). I put in the margin application as soon as I realized this. I only hope that the SCOX bubble can last as long as it takes for Etrade to upgrade my account! Then I can short SCOX out, just like pouring water in a SCO Unix computer....
Dr. Demento On The 'Net!
The CFO dumped 14,000 shares out of 235,000 reported shares...hardly a sell off. Conventional investment thinking would have him selling a hell of a lot more than that after the price skyrocketed.
Plus no one stopped the other stock holders from selling.
Plus Plus, Can't we make money by "reverse investing" against SCO? I heard that the Al Queda terrorists did this (reverse invested) against the airline industries major carriers, especially those directly involved in the skyjackings.
I went to battle MC Escher, but drew a blank
...Or does anyone else see it as rats leaving a sinking ship?
Begin business plan\
kick sand in the biggest bully's face
try to convince him he should apologize
Try to quietly run like hell while he's getting ready to kick the crap out of you.
End business plan\
Yeah, that'll work.
-Goran
Carpe Scrotum - The only way to deal with your competition.
I think there's a great opportunity to make some easy cash by sh0rting this stock, don't you think? I think a dive to sub 1 dollar in the next few months is not of out of the question once IBM starts firing the cannons.
Someone had better clean up the FRICKING MESS at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office before someone is awarded a patent on the wheel or fire.
Catherine
It wouldn't do to sell ALL the stock just yet. There's still the possibility of a buy-out by SOMEBODY, especially if the trial proceedings swing at all in SCO's favor.
Nothing worth doing is worth doing today.
Well when you stocks go from $5 in Jan to 15 in Jul Its time to sell regardless of the law suit.
Waiting for the perp walk
where Darl, soon to be darling of the Club Fed
crowd walk in front of TV cameras.
Don't believe government sharks are circling?
Everyone here seems to want to make like the SCO guys are evil and believe in the lawsuit.
I don't believe that SCO has hidden ANYTHING, including code. There is no stolen code and SCO thinks this lawsuit is as goofy as we do. But they also believe that they'll make a quick buck on it.
So give them points for good humor. Give them points for having the balls to try it. Give them bonus points for not hiding or denying the fact that this is all just about making a quick buck for the execs of a dying company.
You just have to admire that.
These assholes are gonna laugh all the way to the bank and we're going to laugh right alone with them.
. Quit playing Monopoly with Bill. Switch to one of many non-Microsoft products today.
Most of the SCO executives are still holding on to quite a bit of stock. They're going to have to pump it a few more times to get rid of it. Now the license announcement is causing slow recovery of the price but in real terms, the price has plateaued and more hammers are going to fall on them. SUSE has all but announced they're cooking up something nasty, Sony and other consumer electronics firms aren't going to want to pay for their bogus licenses. Last but not least, every kernel contributor is a bomb that could go off at any time. Some of them may even have money for ruinious countersuits of their own.
So what to do? They would have a hard time topping themselves in the outrageous statement department. I see at least four more pumping actions they can pull. They can loudly announce that they will "soon" be filing suit against large corporate users. When the price flattens out again, then they can actually file some of them. Then it's loud announcement time again. This time they'll bleat that individual users and small organizations are being sued. Then they can actually sue a few.
They're like a turd on the ground. Yeah, we'll be able to squash it but the smell will stick to our shoes for a loooong while.
According to the story, SCO burned through $14 million last fiscal year. They had $10 million in the bank in April. This is about 8 1/2 months worth of fuel. This is assuming that this year is the same as last in terms of revenue (probably going down) and expenses (probably going up). So 8 1/2 months from April puts them running on fumes in December. I doubt this saga will drag on for years.
The Current SCO Situation...via the medium of song
:-)
Please mirror and spread if you agree with the sentiment (if not the singing
The Asshat Song [2.73MB MP3]
SCO are silenced for once?
I hate SCO and the lawsuit as much as anyone else but I'm not sure this in itself is direct evidence of a pump & dump scheme. Consider that for the first time in a long time the stock is worth some money, it is possible they just want to cash out a little bit because of the chance something bad might happen. True these actions are perfectly consistent with what they'd do if the lawsuit was bogus but also consider what you would do if the loads of stock you had suddenly shot up in value 1700% and you were suddenly very rich, wouldn't you be tempted to pull it as fast as you could as well? Also it's been pointed out that it is only about 2@ of the insider shares they have, I hate SCO and what they're doing but I think the stock selling thing might be getting a little overblown.
I stole this Sig
Put options give you the right to sell the stock at a later date, but at, say, today's price. The only risk is the price of the put, wheras when you short stock you have arbitrary exposure if the stock goes up.
Also, it is probably easier to get approval from a broker to trade puts. Shorting stock basically means him lending you stock. Buying puts avoids that aspect of it.
Go back to k5.
I have corrected in in my copy.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
[eco2geek@Jean-Luc]$man sco
SCO(6)NAME
sco - FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) spreader and SCO Group satirizerSYNOPSIS
sco OPTIONDESCRIPTION
SCO Group alleges that IBM misappropriated SCO's intellectual property and put it into Linux. SCO sued IBM for more than $3 billion (up from an original claim of $1 billion) in damages, and sent 1,500 letters to businesses warning them of possible liability for using Linux. Many critics think SCO's tactics are simply a way for a dying company to salvage whatever profitability it can. The most jaded critics allege that SCO's actions are a way for the company management to sell off stock at artificially inflated prices before the company folds (a.k.a. a "pump and dump" scheme).-q, --quote
Displays a quote associated with the case. Quotes come from industry analysts, IBM and SCO Group officials, and leaders in the Linux community.-dp, --display-proof
Displays the Linux kernel code that SCO alleges belongs to it (the result is a blank page, since SCO refuses to release its "evidence" publicly). Press "q" to return).-skl, --sco-kernel-license
Displays the license agreement of the Linux kernel that SCO is distributing with its OpenLinux distribution, on its publicly-accessible ftp site. (Surprise: It's the GPL.)-l, --legalize
Asks if you wish to delete the entire contents of-lb, --legalize-boot
Asks if you wish to delete the entire contents of-v, --version
Prints the version and copyright information, then exits.AUTHORS
Sosume Donchuwana and Greedo UnBridledDISCLAIMER
SCO, the SCO Group, and OpenLinux are trademarks or registered trademarks of Caldera International, Inc. and used here for satirical purposes only.SEE ALSO
http://slashdot.org/search.pl?topic=88sco 1.0 - August 2003 - SCO(6)
I don't know why monday was such a bad day for SCOX (or rather i don't know why all other days aren't), but the course going back up and the heavy Volume set in when SCO announced that some undisclosed Fortune 500 Company bought at least one of their Linux licenses. The announcement was at 1400 and that's when the downward trend halted.
It's makes you lose all confidence in the stock market when you see such a reaction to an anouncement that really doesn't give out any hard facts (like the number of sold licenses) and is obviously designed to misrepresent a few sold licenses as a major revenue stream.
I will really laugh out loud when all those idiots who bought SCO stock will fall on their faces. I hope they then turn around and sue the SCO management.
"By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
I read in Adbusters once. It was about revoking corporate personhood. Used to be that corporations existed at the sufferance of the public. They were allowed to operate for fixed periods of time, like 5 or ten years. Sort of like the Hudson's Bay Company. At the end of that time they had to petition to renew their right to exist. If they behaved badly, they were squashed like bugs.
Then there was a landmark case in this country back in the 1800's (Santa Clara County v. the Southern Pacific Railroad) that established that corporations are legal persons. They have all the rights that an actual person has, except they exist potentially forever and don't have any of the responsibilities that you and I have. So essentially General Electric is in the eyes of the law an incredibly large, multi-billionaire. But unlike you or I, GE cannot now be put to death for its crimes.
Adbuster suggested that either we revoke corporate personhood, or we institute the death penalty for corporations that cannot behave. Ahem, can anyone think of any corporations we might apply this to?
Do what you can, with what you have, where you are.
As the old saying goes. Check around for which political campaigns SCO has contributed to. If they're high up enough, you won't see more than an Enronesque hiccup (with maybe one or two convenient "suicides" to silence potential whistleblowers).
I tell you, these patterns are becoming so predictable.
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
This is non-news. Why do the lame moderators here even accept this type of junk post.
Ok now tell me the difference between these two real life scenarios:
Company says it has valid intellectual property claims against a major corporation that will generate revenue, when in fact the execs know it is false (SCO incident)
Company says it has valid billing claims from partners that are major corporations that will generate revenue, when in fact the execs no it's false (WorldCom)
Now if you try to tell me Worldcom is justified and it's up to the investor to psychicly know when a company is lying then your secret life as a slashdot asshat will be exposed...
You are basically saying if a company lies to investors it's up to the investor to know they are lying...
So if I say I have a secret patent claim against microsoft and start selling stock to people in company xyz that is supposed to benifit from my patent claim, even though I know the claim is utterly and completely false, it's all ok?
If you somehow prove that kind of behavior is perfectly legal you're not beating me in arguement your just helping to show how retarded American capitalism is, so either way, I don't really care...
No way. On behalf of Mr Hanky the South Park Christmas poop, and poops dumped throughout the year, we a truly offended.
No self respecting poop would have have anything to do with SCO.
Dumping this blatantly will definatly prompt a fraud investigation. Though the SCO C*Os may well buy their way out of trouble, i hope the case will be high nough profile to clear linux's name.
Businessman in 2006: "Hah, SCO said linux was bad, so it must be pretty good"
And here we have a shining example of the modernized version of the pump and dump. It's too bad that business laws are changed only after at least one company takes advantage of others.
Know we know why they filed suit......boost the price of stock, dump it, then back out of the suit.......gee, what a concept!
A) A dead baby on meathook. Q2) What's green and hangs on a meathook A2) The same baby two months later ok, I'll go seek some help now. ;o)
There's a lot of gloating here today, but I think that the SCO execs got what they wanted, the lawyers got rich, and everyone else would have benifited from this never happening in the first place.
You stopped short! Here, I'll finish it for you:
"Linux received more mention in the press than it has received in practically all of its lifespan, and those who view Linux as a competitor were shown that litigation is not the way to compete with Linux."
It's not all bad. SCO execs may win, and Linux may win, too.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
1) Read Slashdot for the and fundamentals
2) Short SCOX
3) Profit!
While $1.2 million may be a lot of money, it's pretty small as corporate scams go, and probably quite a bit less than what the lawsuit will cost SCO. If SCO execs really planned to make enough money off this scam to justify the risk, then surely there must be more money changing hands than just what is reported here.
like......duh! (spoken in my best valley blonde accent)
Hell, I would have done the same, it's predictable and very legal. Six to seven bucks to nine to twelve equals a very nice return from the money tree with very little cash.
---The Tinfoil Hat Club---
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=SCOX&d=c&k=c1&a=v&p=s &t=5d&l=on&z=m&q=l
True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
Look at this...it is obvious to anyone here that what SCO is doing is absolutely illegal. We're talking extortion, corporate fraud, etc etc. All signs point to guilty, but is anyone taking action? Is there any police force knocking on SCO's door? I mean, if this were a 'traditional' crime, we'd be at the stage now where they've robbed the Quickie Mart and are running down the streets. Where are the cops going after the guy?
America feels it needs to develop this new force to counter terrorism, whos largest success killed 3,000 people. What about companies like Enron, Worldcom and SCO who are destroying many more thousands of peoples lives on a regular basis? Where are the cops for that?! I believe america needs to develop an agency dedicated to taking out corporate powers who push around the citizens of america.
But will this ever happen? Not likely. Not while america has politicians who take generous gifts from corporations. Its not the politicians, therefore, who control the government, but the companies. Yet what was america founded on? Did corporations make the Consitution? Did corporations fight for independance? Its always been the people, and now the people are getting the shaft.
As long as it is legal for politicians to be bought out by companies, we will never see the end to things like SCO. We'll see more and more incidents of these corporate scams happening until _something_ happens. Someone has to step in with enough balls to say he/she isn't accepting corporate money, then that person also needs to gain enough popularity to win the vote. That's the only way we'll see the end to this nonsense.
It's sick, its disgusting, and in the end it'll end up destorying the values and beliefs which created america. They will have been sold off, one by one, until you no longer pledge alligence to the USA, but the MSUSA and live in the state of McDonalds on CitiBank Street.
To make a pun demonstrates the highest understanding of a language
I think that SCO sucks, too, but do you really think that the whole purpose of the lawsuit was to raise the price to dump the stock? Yeah, if that's the purpose of it, then I guess there's some kind of crime, but this is the same sort of reasoning that goes along with, say, aluminum foil hats and aliens at Area 51.
Ya just like all those crazy loons that said the new economy couldn't last! Boy, what a buncha crazies.
And those crazy analysts who thought enron and worldcom looked suspicious, man they need to get a life! How paranoid can you get!
A company like Enron would never do something illegal and ethically questionable like that, never mind a really respected company like SCO!
Insider trades here and here.
Someone has posted a list of SCO top staff and the amount they have sold off recently on linuxtoday. They link to a source on the sec website, but the link doesn't seem to work.
Tom
You come off like a serious dork when you spin out of control like that.
Much of that "new economy" doesn't stand up to old world accounting practices, at least not spread over many companies and industries. Seems like much of the new economy is desaturation or just a new way to wringe out that sponge in a new manner.
The FED is taking cautious pragmatic view of the economy, but the SEC and IRS really need to crack down hard on accounting fraud. One amazon.com=800 bankruptcies and alot of money making opportunities on bankruptcies.
Everyone is going on about the SEC, but what about the FTC investigating their business practices?
- Bawa Opindar, VP Global Services
- Bought: 7,912 shares
- Sold: 22,916 shares
- Gain: $ 132,746.40
- Robert K. Bench, CFO
- Sold: 18,000 shares
- Gain: $ 153,531.50
- Ronald Charles Broughton, Sr VP Int'l Sales
- Sold: 45,000 shares
- Gain: $ 546,749.50
- Jeff F Hunsaker, VP Worldwide Mktng
- Sold: 15,000 shares
- Gain: $ 170,194.60
- Michael P Olson, VP Finance
- Sold: 14,000 shares
- Gain: $ 135,928.00
- Michael Sean Wilson, Sr VP Corp Dev
- Bought: 12,000 shares
- Sold: 12,000 shares
- Gain: $ 121,365.00
Total ill-gotten gains: $ 1,260,515.00All this and more may be found at SCOX's SEC Page.
That they will strangely enough avoid prosecution, or at most get a slap on the wrist. Just like that trash from Enron. Oh well... Welcome to America, where money is king.
It really, truly is time for people to realize that THERE IS SOMETHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN MONEY: ETHICS.
Who do you dispise more?
1) SCO
2) RIAA
3) MPAA
4) MS
5) CN (Cowboy Neal)
his incredible success defending Napster.
you knew it was coming when you couldn't see.
Those guidlines and laws are to prevent "Front running", Buying or selling before the news is available to the general public.
It is illegal and a crime to tip investors off, for profit or other valuable consideration. The valuable consideration part is what gets alot of insiders confused. They don't have to make money themselves to be charged with insider trading activity. By merely helping somebody else capitalize on the news before hand, they are doing something illegal.
In the case of the Scox execs, as long as they are filing and notifying in a proper manner, there is nothing illegal there. Insider trading is restricted and heavily watched .. thats why we get insider trading activity reports.
Now, artificially inflating or deflating the stock with lies and false reports, thats another story and type of crime. But even here, I don't think you are going to do more then attract scrutiny to what SCO is doing. However dumb we feel their actions are ... there is no crime in being dumb. They have filed lawsuits, they have hired lawyers and they are actively pursuing somethign that they are contending is real. It's going to be very very difficult to prove any thing illegal.
Now, my personal opinion is somebody involved should ask for a Gag order on the case to keep them from extoring customers.
Their case will be shown to be demonstrably weak in a court of law, so their trying of the case in the media is akin to running up the share price on lies and deceit. Of course, unless someone can prove they knew how weak their case was, they're not going to get punished for it.
This article sums things up really well, a rareity in this age of FUD and spin. I've submitted it to Matt Drudge. SCO wants a media war? They're gonna get one!
Cry havoc, and let slip the penguins of war!
Buford "Mad Dog" Tannen
Hopefully the SEC will investigate. Definitely sounds like a pump and dump move to me.
$1.2 million worth among ALL the execs after a factor-of-ten jump? Peanuts. I'm surprised it isn't far more.
Even if they are darned sure they're going to win (and you NEVER know for sure with a court case), this looks like a bubble. It's much more likely to pop than keep rising. Even if it keeps going up the big inflation is probably over.
"Take the money and run." As I learned the hard way by NOT doing so before MY company took a factor-of-1,000 dive in the internet bubble-pop. Went from a paper multi-millionaire back to a multi-thousandaire - i.e. a working stiff with a mortgage - with enough still out on a credit card to just about cancel out my cash reserves. These guys have been through it before and it's hardly surprising if they want to lock in - or spend - some of their gain.
By the way: Looks like their war chest just got a $40 million boost from Computer Associates, who just caved on a suit SCO filed against them in 2001.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
... pardon me!
Novell's letters to SCO
DO NOT PANIC
I don't even own a share of MSFT and I can get Windows for free!
After reading, "IBM's Linux customers include Unilever NV, the world's largest maker of food and soap..." I thought:
And on a related note: On news that Unilever used Linux, millions of unix-geeks washed today some for the first time since they used a command line, which for some was a long ago as 1993. Executives were pleased and announced plans to embed the mini-cd-linux-distro-de-jour inside every bar of soap...
Stockbrokers call this kind of move a Pump and Dump
Sucker
In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.
I have read the charges against Martha as I have read most of the charges against all invovled with Enron. Just to cover my bases I searched for the charges against both at BBC News.
Martha's charged with securities fraud and obstruction of justice. But this article notes that former Enron finance chief Andrew Fastow has 109 charges against him. The first 78 federal charges (which he has plead not guilty) are of money laundering, fraud, conspiracy and obstruction of justice.
It looks like Fastow will be getting his ass bent over a couch for several hundreds of years in prison.
Thanks. I feel better now.
You look like such a "tough guy" with that little red hat of yours. Why don't you grow the fuck up and stop playing cop.
MS can't pay every quarter, so the Lights out by Xmas might still hold true.
Help fight continental drift.
Scox is a canopy company.
Canopy just won a $40 million settlement from CA.
Canopy is indirectly suing IBM though a company they control: scox.
Canopy won a huge settlement with microsoft: also by using scox, then called caldera.
Top exec at scox, sontag I think, said: "contracts are what you use against people."
Canopy controls about two dozen shell companies. All in the same area of Utah, all owned by Mormons. All the top execs are graduates of BYU, all sit on each others boards of directors, all have long business histories together. All own stock in each other, and trade that stock frantically.
If you do business with Canopy, Canopy will sue you - it's as simple as that. That is the only reason Canopy does business with another company.
Canopy companies don't really produce anything. They try to figure ways to sue other companies, and they do it very well.
Hey, does anyone know if Ransom Love is still at SCO / Caldera? He seems to be the bigshot tech developer lead / head at caldera, and he was doing all these interviews about how great it was that caldera bought sco. Can anyone reach him for a comment, maybe from inside sco, now that it's gone evil?
Really, I have contacted SCO twice to check their reaction. First time, I posed as a specialist that takes decisions about use of Linux in a dept of a big company (It's really so - I cooperate with a hospital belonging to the Russian State Railways) and told them that our lawyers expressly require SCO to prove their statements so that I may buy the license only after this proof. They responded that my letter was transferred to their management; no further answers.
Second time I told them that I own at least one patch of at least one GNU licensed package (It's really so) and so I require them either to observe GPL or to cease and desist. No answer.
I believe at least 99 per cent of their contacts are the same kind.
all along I figured the lawsuit was a ploy for the insiders to run up the stock price with a spurious lawsuit against IBM then dump it leaving the little guys to get screwed when the stock tanked upon news that their law suit was baseless. the fact that you couldn't see any evidence without an NDA should have been your first clue.
Well, it happened before.
I made screenshots about this when google news caught my comment on the overture aquisition last month.
I mean think about it. If SCO wins, they have to buy the licence anyway. Might as well if its cheap. If they lose, like we all know they will, then they can all get togehter and sue SCO to bankrupcy for fraud:)
Linux is teh suxx0rs!!! hah4hahah4aah!11, l4m3r5, whos' the crybaby now?!?!?!
MUWAHAHAHHAHAhAA!
Fuck Beta. Fuck Dice
Maybe the execs are selling their own stocks to raise capital to buy some IBM shares? If I had any significant liquid funds at the moment, that's what I'd be buying.
If these fuggers ever actually did real time in a real prison, we'd see a lot less of this sort of crap in the future.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
"-lb --legalize-boot /boot as a way to prepare your computer for a "legal" SCO version of the kernel. If your answer is "y" or "yes", does a realistic job of pretending to delete /boot;"
Asks if you wish to delete the entire contents of
Why pretend? if somebody is stupid enough to say yes to that they might well sue you because the program didn't make them compliant with SCO's copyright claims. Do like Debian and say that it is an operation that is likely to adversely affect their system and ask them to enter "Yes, do as I say!" before doing it and then make them compliant.
You missed out:-
BUGS
All non-SCO stockholders, (excluding SCO executives and lawyers)
SCO = titanic?
The heads seem to be prepared to jump ship anyway....
obvious
Well, but the fact of the matter is that if you short a stock and the stock price goes up instead, you lose that much money per share. However, If you buy a put option and the price never goes low enough to excercise it, it is worthless when the time period is up. It also has to fall more than the cost of the option in order for you to make money. You don't put your life savings in a put option. In its most basic form, it's a high-risk, high-reward all or nothing bet. Kind of like buying SCO's stock right now ;)
Personally, I'd avoid BOTH of them (in addtion to SCO's fscking stock). See, it isn't enough to be right, you also have to be right within a certain time period. With a normal long-buy, you can have a stock fall for years before finally going through the roof. Waiting until the tide turns your way is not a luxury you would have with these two. If you short a stock you can theoretically lose an infinite amount of money. If the stock more than doubles, not only have you lost your whole initial investment, but you are now in debt. It doesn't matter if the stock goes to $.01 a year from now, if the broker thinks you might not have the cash to return his stock if it goes up any more, he can ask for it back. You will be forced to buy back the stock at whatever price it happens to be at. You can have a perfect prediction long term and still be fscked. Thats why you never sell somebody else's stock.
Sound far-fetched? Imagine you baught SCO's stock at $.60 a while back (it's at $10 now). Sure, it's a shitty, two-bit company that's going to zero, and it probably sounded like a good idea at the time. But unfortunately, as we have seen, it isn't going to take a staight line there with this lawsuit bull and few people have pockets THAT deep. You would have almost certainly lost your shirt by now. Oh and by the way, you don't get unlimited profit potential like you get with a regular stock purchase either. For your unlimited loss risk you can expect to make absolutely no more than double.
Stay far far away from this stuff kids. Your plain old ordinary stock purchase offers endless profit potential, limited loss, and the ability hold on to the stock as long or as little as you want in order to get a good price. That's how the really rich get that way and stay that way, they find a good piece of a business and hold on. Shorts and Puts are not investments. Believe me, it's no harder to pick a good long stock than it is a short one. They're a gamble, and very very few people make money and actually keep it gambling. Sure, you can make tons of money, but only to have it all come tumbling down, Enron or LTCM style, some fateful day.
One of the execs have sold all he had, many still has a sizeable amount of SCO stock.
Details at SEC, search for SCO Group.
I'm in a Unix state of mind.
..if, by some act of Fate, these executives were furious, pointing out, "Hey, jackasses - IBM. Patents. We're fucked!", and generally shaking their heads in disgust.
But I'd wager that these executives are rather happy, pointing out, "Wull, looks like the stock topped out. Time to bail and reap the riches.", and generally being slime.
Have 'em lined up and shot. Not because of their FUD against Linux and IBM, but because their workers will soon be unemployed through no fault of their own.
YEAH!
...that ramping share prices (e.g. via "dubious" lawsuits) before flogging your shares was illegal!.....
Oh wait I forgot this is SCO we are talking about... Normal laws appear to not apply as strongly as they should with them.
Jaj
IANAL but....
It seems to me that many of their claims are to do with impending lawsuits.
Surely they could just claim that they beleived what they said. So long as they stop making the claims after they have been refuted in court they may get off.
If you were making just bogus claims based on information you knew to be false you could get done for insider trading, but so long as there is not a paper trail inside SCO stating that they don't believe what they say they can't be proved to have done nothing wrong.
Unfortunaly there are probably going to be some investors who get burned by this, but in a way it serves them right for betting on a lawsuit.
see how to turn brown stuff green
The right of assembly doesn't apply here.
You are correct that corporations are regulated by seperate rules and standards than other people, but a corporate death penalty can still happen, especially when that group is doing illegal activity.
If a company is doing blatently illegal activity, for example smuggling drugs or running a brothel (where it is not legal), you had better believe that it will be taken over by the government and disbanded. The 14th Ammendment does not protect the right to consipiracy to commit crime. If the ACLU did anything other than simply express their opinions (like participating and organizing in civil disobedience protests themselves rather than defend the people guilty of civil disobedience), it would no longer exist.
IMHO, corporate CEOs and (more importantly) the board of directors should be held directly liable for corporate criminal activity...certainly much more than is the case right now. The board of directors for most companies tend to rubber stamp whatever the CEO and top executive staff want to do (with some notable exceptions), and often don't even want to know much about the general operations of the companies they are supposed to govern. This is the human element of corporations that unfortunately is where the breakdown is happening.
Every once in a while you can find companies that have been shut down, but when it comes to publically traded stock corporations (like SCO, Microsoft or IBM) it tends to be a very strong exception, particularly because of the rules and red tape necessary to even be publically listed on a stock exchange. This is normally something that a criminal group is not likely to go and do (go public with stock) just to do a quick run and leave to a non-extraditable country 12 hours before the FBI (or Interpol) come crashing through the font doors.
In the case of SCO, they are accused of manipulating the price of their stock, which is a part of the rules of public companies (that supposedly they are breaking). If they were manufacturing nuclear weapons for sale to al Queida, you wouldn't even see a hesitation to shut the place down.
If you execute a person, their heirs get to inherit (whatever the dead guy had).
If you execute a corporation, their shareholders get zip. No, wait a minute, they get the liquidation value of the corp's assets -- wait, that's zip too!
...
(The eldest, by two minutes, is disassembling his toys, God Love Him! -sniff!-)
:-}
You'd better nip that right in the bud before someone gets all DMCA on his diaper clad behind.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
I bet SCO would probably charge him even extra in an attempt to claim that the second child was an obvious derivative work of the first one so he'd have to pay extra as he is now a distributor. (I just pray to Ghu that he wouldn't have to post the "source code". :-D )
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
It's pointless to whine about moderations, but life is pointless anyway...
I can understand the flamebait mod, that is sorta' what I was going for, and funny - well, I guess, but insightful? Hell, I wrote it and I don't think it's insightful in the slightest. *SIGH* Oh well, I'll take the point and shrug.
This sounds familiar, I wonder where have I seen this kind of news... And oh, yes at that time my company was broke after that (good luck SCO!)...
If you want a copy, I've put it on here. Just copy it over to /usr/share/man/man1 and then type "man sco" from your favorite shell...
Please be gentle, my webserver is a PPro 200 with 128MB, on an ADSL line that's allegedly 1500/128. I can't believe I'm voluntarily slashdotting my own server, but this is worth it!
Have fun *grin*
"Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
That claim would probably work, but you'd have to leave one kid in the corner while the other is out playing until there's a "crash".
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Geez, I dumped my SCOX at $2 because I knew the lawsuit was a crock. Obviously their tactic was to pump up the lawsuit to the idiots AND THEN dump their stock. Time for a shareholder lawsuit, I think.
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
The "pump and dump" looks to me like a diversion of some sort. It is so clearly and blatantly illegal that there is a large risk of prosecution and incarceration in Federal "pound me in the ass" prison. The SCO folks, while assholes, are reasonably clever ones, so the only reasonable conclusion I can see is that something is going on that makes this risk completely worthwhile to them. My guess is M$, but I could be wrong.
Nonaggression works!
Bankruptcy will anhilate any remaining stock options and stock, cutting off any execs who are late in dumping. If they dump too much stock too fast the price will collapse and precipitate a crisis in confidence that may kill SCO, so they will have to be slow. Since they have no other debts, if they declare bankruptcy because of legal costs, it will probably be Chapter 7, which calls for complete liquidation, because of the consistently poor cash flow situation. Or less likely Chapter 11 which cancels all existing shares and debtors take over most or all equity. Ironically, the only major asset they have, Unix V, may go up for sale to the highest bidder (who would want to buy that for cheap, hint NOT MICROSOFT, hint IB_?). All IBM has to do is bankrupt them with a horde of vicious lawyers for complete victory. I can't see Microsoft getting involved with owning System V, or owning SCO, they would be a beacon for a lawsuit, and exposed to $billions in liability.
I have been receiving emails saying that I'm contributing to the "moral decay of society" by selling the Banned C D. That may be, but I feel Strongly that you have a right to benefit from this hard-to-find information. So I am giving you ONE LAST CHANCE to order the Banned C D! With this powerful C D, you will be able to investigate your friends, enemies and lovers in just minutes using the Internet. You can track down old flames from college, or you can dig up some dirt on your boss to make sure you get that next promotion! Or maybe you want a fake diploma to hang on your bedroom wall. You'll find addresses for companies that make these diplomas on the Banned C D. Need to disappear fast and never look back? No problem! Using the BannedCD, you will learn how to build a completely new identity. Obviously, the Powers That Be don't want you to have the BannedCD. They have threatened me with lawsuits, fines, and even imprisonment unless I stop selling it immediately. But I feel that YOU have a Constitutional right to access this type of information, and I can't be intimidated. Uncle Sam and your creditors are horrified that I am still selling this product! There must be a price on my head! Why are they so upset? Because this C D gives you freedom. And you can't buy freedom at your local Walmart. You will have the freedom to avoid Zreditors, judgments, lawsuits, IRS tax collectors, criminal indictments, your greedy ex-wife or ex-husband, and MUCH more!
Go talk relativity with your snot-eating boyfriends and keep the fuck away from real men like me.