Slashdot Mirror
McBride At A Loss For Words
An anonymous reader writes "That, at least is the verdict of Linux Business Week's Maureen O'Gara, who reports that, with all the latest twists and turns, with BayStar and RBC in particular, SCO's CEO was finally bereft of words to describe what it's all been like. In the end he settled for 'This is like...nothing.' As O'Gara herself says, the latest SCO news is plain weird."
The seem ripe for an SEC investigation. How many shady share trades can they go through before someone looks at it?
Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. -- H. L. Mencken
And there's the bottom-line. Don't produce anything worthwhile and use your <ahem> IP to generate revenue via lawsuits. As if we didn't know ....
Still, the 'jettison management' bit has to have Darl sitting on the edge of his seat!
Alison
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein
Baystar must think the same. Otherwise, why call selling stock at a loss a 'financial opportunity'?
It is an opportunity, if you realize it is insanely overpriced right now, and will only go down in the future. Never mind that you are going to loose money by selling the stock at a lower price than you bought it for; they are selling it at the highest price it will ever be in the future. This is their best opportunity to minimize their losses.
The backers are getting out. Watch SCO burn...
'Sensible' is a curse word.
... is BayStar, who seems to be much more interested in funding IP lawsuits than in Real Business.
I thought "Wow, the stockholders have woken up!" when I first read about the whole BayStar thing.
But fact is, BayStar has issues with SCO because the former is saying "Dump all your staff, minimize expenses, and just sue, sue, sue." and the latter isn't totally complying - so BayStar is taking their ball and going home.
The fuckwits.
McBride is at a Loss for Words
Maybe he shouldn't have used them all up before.
This is probably a good thing. In fact, as it presently stands Darl could teach a thing or two about not running your mouth off unnecessarily to a certain other proprietary Unix company.
Google confirms: Ruby is the world's most beloved programm
I think Baystar wants to keep SCO low profile and is telling McBride to shut his mouth because if more people were aware of their parasitical business model, I think it would hurt them financially and they might suffer some backlash from the public at large. As it stands now, probably only the IT community, and maybe just a subset of that, is aware of the implications of this lawsuit.
"No one likes working in a hamster wheel, and your shop smells of cedar shavings from here." - TaleSpinner
From the Article:
"BayStar hasn't withdrawn its demand that SCO return its money and BayStar's lawyers, he said, still haven't told SCO's lawyers how SCO breached their contract. So McBride figures BayStar doesn't have a legal leg to stand on and won't be able to get its money back."
hasent this been what SCO is doing to IBM - Not telling them anything..
"Horserace" is my guess.
:)
Think of this situation as the mirror of an Angel Investor with an up and coming company. The Angel might invest in 10 startups and have 9 of them die before going public and yet still make a fortune.
In this case, if they can buy 10 failing companies $100M each, each having a $1B+ lawsuit in process, only 1 of those guys has to win their lawsuit for BayStar to make their money back and then some.
What is the best chance that BayStar has for SCO to win? SCO has to focus EVERYTHING on winning (even though by doing so they almost certainly will disappear after the win anyway).
Perhaps this should be the defition of a "Devil Investor"?
I wouldn't be at all surprised if SCO hinted that they would do just this, but they probably din't -commit- to it.
Of course we all know that some times 10 companies out of 10 fail, so BayStar could screw themselves out of the cash, which is why they put pressure on their investments to do the burn-out legislation in an all-out attempt to win.
And I'm with you, I would smoke hundreds of millions of dollars if someone gave me billions to do so
It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
There for awhile, SCO was a pretty darn good engine for anti-Linux FUD. And it's pretty clear that was the specific intent of all of Darl's motormouth behavior. But that strategy has by now completely played itself out.
Now, the absolute WORST thing that could happen in that regard is for any of the court cases to wrap themselves up. If your goal is anti-Linux FUD, a wrap up of any of the suits would appear as a Linux stamp of approval and send it off running.
So the question is, after attempting every stalling tactic in the book, what effect would a change in ownership of the IP at the center of the court cases have on the cases themselves? And is Baystar in a position to facilitate just such a change of ownership?
Guess we'll know pretty soon...