Slashdot Mirror
SCO Possibly Delisted from NASDAQ
canfirman writes "Reuters is reporting that SCO could be delisted from the NASDAQ because "it has not filed its annual 10-K report with the SEC". The company claims it's because "it is examining matters related to stock issued as part of its compensation plans". SCO Stock is sitting at $4.30 at opening today. It'll be interesing to see where it goes from here."
SCO Lawyer: Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider: Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk...
Judge: Wait a minute! I'm not going to let you use the Chewbacca defense. This is a carny-like head game from the television show South Park.
SCO Lawyer: But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now, think about that. That does not make sense! Why would a Wookiee--an eight foot tall Wookiee--want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself, what does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! "Look at me, I'm a lawyer defending SCO, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca. Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense. None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberating and conjugating the Emancipation Proclamation... does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense. If Chewbacca lives on Endor, IBM must have stolen our code we GPL'ed and put on our public FTP site. [pulling a monkey out of his pocket] Here, look at the monkey. Look at the silly monkey! [Judge's head explodes]
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
SCO is dying...
In the USA, we like stuff watered down, like beer, television, and freedom.
While I'm no fan of SCO, particularly after their get-rich-quick plan to sue IBM and license code-which-may-or-may-not-be in Linux, this whole story seems little more than gloating and hardly worthy of a /. post. Is the news that slow today?
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
... when you don't fill your TPS Report.
Since SCO has stocks issued to the public, aren't they required to fill out the proper paperwork? How does one who own SCO stock supposed to sell his stock? Can they do this w/o getting sued by their share holders?
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
The witch is dead the wicked witch is dead! OK, now I have to work...
"I am a patient boy. I wait I wait I wait. My time is water down the drain..." Fugazi
SCO Stock is sitting at $4.30 at opening today. It'll be interesing to see where it goes from here.
It will go up. Where else would it go? Afterall they own linux code. And very soon every linux user will be paying them $699 license fees
They just don't want people to be able to watch their stock anymore, so they've made this move to change their stock symbol. Security through obscurity, indeed.
Ryan Fenton
Opened just fine for me...quick...almost too quick actually {shifty eyes}
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
Here is the story: http://ca.us.biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050217/lath062_1 .html
-- these are only opinions and they might not be mine.
Knock! Knock!
Who's there?
SCO!
SCO who?
Symbol change tomorrow:1 .html
http://ca.us.biz.yahoo.com/prnews/050217/lath062_
Flourescent (adj): smelling like ground wheat.
...to use the new cover sheet on their 10-K report. Did SCO get that memo?
It'll be interesing to see where it goes from here.
I predict it'll be going downhill....if there's any downhill left, that is.
/\ \o/
\ | <--- Darryl
\^
\
\
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
The rules that lead to being delisted are pretty cut-and-dried. However, a company with a solid business plan to rescue themselves will more often than not be given a break and allowed to remain listed while they work things out. Failing to file your 10-K is almost never an "accident". Add to that the fact that SCO really has no business plan beyond lawsuits and I think we'll likely be seeing them de-listed fairly rapidly.
It's simple: I demand prosecution for torture.
Yes, I'm serious.
.nosig
If the nasdaq adds an 'e' to the symbol then SCO will have 30 days to file the 10-k before they are delisted. Also the nasdaq routinely allows companies to extend the 30 day deadline if the company can make a case for why they are late in filing....so while they are likely to get an e I find it unlikely they will allow themselves to be delisted.
Like the slow realization that all of their income was just sent to David Boies and now there's nothing left to pay the temps that put together the filing for the SEC?
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
If SCO dies during the trial , where does that leave the whole Linux IP issue ? Not proven ? Wouldn't it be better if they can at least survive until they get totally defeated in court, as a deterrent against other legal attacks ?
the wolves at his door
are starting to snarl
this is a sad day
for our dear ol friend darl
We hoped and we prayed
we would see this day come
now the world shall see
suing linux is dumb
The stock on the nasdaq
is being delisted
I hope darls ass
is feeling quite fisted
writing this poem
has been so much fun
under my bosses nose
so I am under the gun
thank you for allowing
my poetic roll
now go ahead and mod me
a useless old troll
Obama is a twitter sock puppet
After Enron crashed, their stocks certificates actually became worth more as souvenirs than any possible redemption value (little or none.)
The article said they are having difficulties with reporting their stock based compensation. There are new (and quite ridiculous) laws concerning stock option expensing. There are various methods to calculate the value of stock options, and every way is more "correct" than the others, and even more "wrong." They are probably having a disagreement with their auditors on their estimates of the value of their stock options.
There is probably nothing wrong with the Accounting department.
In Soviet Russia, asses suck this joke.
I realize you say this in jest, but I'd like to point out the obvious anyway:
Instead of targetting specific companies, the needs of the community would
probably be better met by efforts to improve existing software and documentation. New software to cover existing gaps is good too. If our offerings
improve, then the community and its resources will grow too, giving us more
power to defend ourself later.
SCO was a good wake up call. Serious enough to make us aware of the dangers,
but weak enough that it couldn't actually harm us. The next danger might not
be so hollow.
*sigh* back to work...
It is now official. Netcraft confirms: SCO Unixware is dying
One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered SCO community when IDC confirmed that SCO Unixware market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that SCO has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. SCO is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.
You don't need to be an amazing psychic random number generator to determine SCO's future. The hand writing is on the wall: SCO faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for SCO because SCO is dying. Things are looking very bad for SCO. As many of us are already aware, SCO continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.
SCO Unixware is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time SCO developers Ben Dover and Rod Inasse only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: SCO is dying.
Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.
GNU leader Richard Stallman states that there are 20 users of NetBSD. How many users of OpenBSD are there? Let's see. The number of NetBSD versus OpenBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 20/5 = 4 OpenBSD users. SCO posts on Usenet are about 1/200,000 of the volume of homoerotic love story posts. Therefore there are about 5 million gay geeks. A recent article put homoerotic geeks at about 80 percent of the SCO market. Therefore there are (40+20+15)/2*(X+i^5) = 37.5 SCO users. This is consistent with the number of SCO Usenet posts.
Due to the troubles of SCO, abysmal sales and so on, SCO went out of business and was taken over by Sun who sell another troubled OS. Now Sun is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.
All major surveys show that SCO has steadily declined in market share. SCO is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If SCO is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. SCO continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, SCO is dead.
Fact: SCO is dying
zosxavius photography
anyone else notice that under "products and services", SCO lists its court cases?
very funny and depressing at the same time.
SCO's paying their lawyers in stock, which explains their entire strategy: keep the stock price elevated, and cash them in, before they inevitably lose the case and it all collapses. Delisting SCO right away could castrate that strategy, if the lawyers haven't sold any stock yet. Maybe those sharks won't be able to afford to defend themselves from an SEC investigation of that criminal strategy, and get disbarred.
--
make install -not war
bid: 3.88 ask: 3.91 They're not doing so hot today...
If religous zealots don't believe in Evolution, then why are they so worried about bird flu?
Okay, so next up, SCO tries to sue the NASDAQ small cap exchange for their delisting policies.
The current shareholders of SCO sue them for failing to file the necessary paperwork to maintain the listing and thereby affecting their ability to trade the stock.
And I'll be sued for pointing out the obvious demise of this company. Finally.
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
Were it not for /. clearing up the FUD, their stock would probably still be flying high on rampant speculation.
Darryl : "aaarg. And I would have succeeded if it weren't for those pesky slashdotters and their stupid dog!"
Bet this
http://www.nasdaq.com/about/nasdaq_listing_req_fee s.pdf
Listing requirements
$10mil in outstanding equity
750,000 outstanding shares
$1.00 minimum share price
400 shareholders
as well as other requirements for filing such as the form they missed .. triggering the reason for this artical
Couple points:
1. Many brokers don't let you short a stock that is below $5.
2. Delisting a stock decreases liquidity which can make it very difficult to cover your short if the stock rises precipitously.
Unlike buying a stock which has a limited downside potential (the stock goes to $0 in which case you lose your entire investment), shorting a stock has a theoretically infinite downside potential. If you short a stock at $4.30 and it goes up to $1,000,000 per share, you've lost almost a million dollars for each share you shorted. Of course, that's not realistic, but the point is that shorting a stock is not to be taken lightly.
I'm a big tall mofo.
Haha - Boies was paid in stock! Take your unsaleable shares to hell, scammer!
--
make install -not war
The "10-K" is the backup data behind a company's annual report. It's the single most important disclosure of a company's financial status. The SEC allows 3 months after the close of the fiscal year for a 10-K filing. SCO's year closed at the end of October, and their 10-K was due at the end of January. Late filing of a 10-K or 10-Q (the quarterly report) is considered a major red flag for a stock. When I was following dying dot-coms, a late 10-K or 10-Q was a strong indicator of trouble. Nobody files late because they have unexpectedly good numbers.
SCO filed an NT-12K form with the SEC, asking for a 15-day extension. "The Company currently anticipates that the Form 10-K will be filed by no later than the fifteenth calendar day following the date on which the Form 10-K was due." They missed that date, too.
There has to be something really embarassing in the compensation plan. Really embarassing, if they're willing to risk delisting from the NASDAQ.
Delisting kicks a stock down to the pink sheets. That's where the penny stocks favored by spammers and scammers live.
Pitty the poor fool who just dumped nearly 8-thousand shares, at $4. Hope the buy price was a cool $3 -- say in March, 2003? Let's see. That would still be $8000 in earnings, over a 24 month period.
Ouch!
Bert: Hey Darl, got a moment?
.. oh now it's on me. Okay.
Darl: BERT BUDDY! Come on in. Hey, wanna brew?
Bert: I, uh, no thanks. I have some important news.
Darl: Lemme guess, we total kicked Linux's ass today, right? Lay it on me bro.
Bert: Well, you see Darl, you know our stock? The ticker symbol is gonna change to SCOXE, just wanted to let you know that.
Darl: It is? Whoa! Awesome! Why are you doing that Bert?
Bert: It's because our stock is in the toi.., uh, actually the guys at NASDAQ think the Linux lawsuit is "eXtremelly Excellent" and they wanted to honor us with a special long ticker symbol.
Darl: Whoooooooooa!! Bert!!! That's KILLER. HIGH FIVE BRO!
Bert: I uh.. you've got beer all over
Darl: Bert man you need to LOOSEN UP! We ROCK!
Bert: Uhm, yes Darl, I'm just going to close the door now and get back to work. I'll send somebody by to clean up all these beer cans.
Darl: No way I'm building a TOWER out of all these cans and I'm putting it behind the door so when somebody opens it it'll totally knock them over and make a big sound BOOM! See yah Bert!! Linux is TOAST! We're gonna be so rich!!! WOOO!!!
I prefer them to stay in business but completely disengage from their anti-Linux/anti-Open Source antics. Darl and his goons should leave and people with some damn sense should go in and revive the company and work with Linux and Open Source communities.
Slashdot is read by zillions of people who can not only sell their SCO, but also advise others to do so.
Are there actually any die-hard /. readers holding the stock? I think not, except possibly speculators who put $1000 in and are hoping for a lottery payout, but can afford to write off the loss if SCO dies. As far as advising people who hold SCO stock, if you hold stock it's in your best interests to follow it rather than rely on /.ers to call you up.
"d00d, dr0p ur sc0 st0ck!"
Slashdot is also read by all kinds of mainstream journalists who might not otherwise notice what SCO is up to. One could argue it's been a damned effective campaign so far. Were it not for /. clearing up the FUD, their stock would probably still be flying high on rampant speculation.
Hm. Slashdot has some good information, but a savvy reader looks to it as a starting point, not the endpoint of seeking information.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Selling short requires two things:
(1) Selling shares that you don't have (you borrow them, and pay some kind of interest on the loan usually 25-300bp over prime or so), this opens your position.
(2) To close this position, you need to buy back the shares (to give back to the person you bought them from). If the stock is thinly traded (e.g. a delisted SCO would trade on OTC-Pink Sheets), it might be difficult to buy them back.
Judge: Closing Statements.
SCO Lawyer: Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury, I'm just a caveman. Your world of technology frightens me. I don't understand computers and the devils inside of them that make all those pretty pictures and noises. But the one thing I do know is that SCO owns Linux.
Jury Foreman: Your honor, we find for SCO and their Caveman Lawyer.
You gotta figure if they lose, the price will drop well under $1. If they win, it could rise to $100. If you work out the figures you've got a winning bet (assuming your perception of the odds is correct, which is a big assumption).
I personally shorted at $15, again at $10, and again at $8. I have only covered about 5% of what I shorted. I am tempted to short even more, but I feel like the potential gain is too small ($3 and change per share) to risk losing so much (as much as $100 per share, maybe more, maybe less).
So.... Could I wait for the stock to drop to 0.01, then just buy the whole company for like $20.00?
I'm serious. Would this be the vehicle by which someone Pro-Linux could acquire what actual rights SCO had, then choose to release them into the GPL for certain, as well as formally acknowledge that the debated rights had also been GPL'ed?
In short, buy Darl out like he wanted but not at the price he wanted? Then turn what's left of the company into something useful?
Headline: SCOX CHANGES EXCHANGE
Body: The SCO Group (formerly NASDAQ:SCOX) has decided to move from its' longtime home on the NASDAQ, to online auction house EBay. They will also move from electronic record keeping to issuing stock certificates. SCO CEO Darl McBride said of the move "we think this will more accurately reflect our value in the marketplace, and allow us the opportunity to continue aggressively pursuing infringements against our intellectual property. Oh yeah - cash, certified cheque, or money order only, no refunds, buyer pays shipping."
Tell you what, offer to invest them in SCOXE. He'll be so grateful!
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
I don't see what the problem is here, people! Things are great, couldn't be better!
First off, as to the delays on filing, we've got some deep divers from MIT working on it right now.
Plus, our more than 4,000 developers are being well compensated, morale couldn't be higher!
Finally, the new SCOXE listing will confuse our enemies at Groklaw and the Yahoo message boards, so only we can post our viewpoints there. Also, no google bombing of "SCOXE" and "litigious bastards".
All in all, another win for us.
(This post contains forward looking statements.)
"If you mess with us, we're going to take you on, even to our utter destruction, whatever occurs." - Ralph Yarro (SCO)
You can only sell short if the last price is the same or higher than the previous price. This prevents short selling in a declining market which would have the effect of causing the price to crash. This is an SEC rule.
FreeSpeech.org
The hope on slashdot previously seems to have been that something called "piercing the corporate veil", whatever that means, will happen and IBM will find a way to make their and Redhat's SCO countersuits and such continue-- only instead of against the defunct The SCO Group, they would continue against The SCO Group's boardmembers, or against The Canopy Group.
I think this is highly reasonable. Despite their supposed status as "investors" The Canopy Group has treated SCOX like SCOX was a puppet and they had their hand stuck up its ass. It would be hard to not consider them responsible for literally the entire SCO mess; they're a company which before SCO had repeatedly bought up near-death companies, milked them for potential lawsuit damages that the company could claim from others, then discarded the husks. They did this with Caldera. Then once SCO gets under the Canopy, suddenly the new CEO Darl McBride starts slinging strange copyright claims everywhere-- and it's becoming increasingly clear as SCO admits in court again and again that the "evidence" they purported at the start of the mess never existed that these claims were fraud from the beginning, and everyone involved at the time knew this. How could The Canopy Group be considered not to have directly engineered this?
Meanwhile the manners in which both SCOX's boardmembers and The Canopy Group have benefitted from SCOX's death spiral have been bizarre and incredibly poorly hidden. Right before the entire lawsuit started the SCOX board voted to issue themselves huge gobs of SCOX shares at virtually no cost, then set them all to sell once they reached a certain price-- then, funny that, started the lawsuit claims that briefly inflated the cost enough that those shares got sold. Meanwhile Canopy has done odd things such as stock transfers and "business deals" between SCOX and other Canopy holdings-- business deals that make no business sense whatsoever, what does a litigation company need with research XML technology?-- that essentially allowed them to convert SCOX stock into cash for the canopy board without directly raising anything at the SEC.
I don't know if this is realistic, it could just be wishful thinking on the part of slashdotters. I wish someone could make it clear to me whether it is. However it seems that if there's ever a situation under which corporate veil-piercing is possible, it should be this one. Corporations shouldn't be used as a shield to run around doing illegal things and then once the corporation suddenly dies say "whoops, it wasn't me, it was the corporation".
The people who made SCOX do this-- The Canopy Group and the boardmembers they installed-- clearly must have known big swaths of their claims early on were outright lies, and yet they used these claims to drive SCOX like a drunk driver behind the wheel of a bus, hurting others' businesses, costing IBM huge amounts in litigation that has gone and will go nowhere, violating the lanham act, misleading and defrauding investors and possibly even violating SEC rules, and placing SCOX into a situation where they are the target of multiple on-hold countersuits with real possibilities of damages being awarded-- and made fantastic amounts of money doing so. Once SCOX finally crashes with none of these debts or countersuits repaid, would the law really let them just walk away from this?
Irritable, left-wing and possibly humorous bumper stickers and t-shirts
Boies turned down the stock deal and renegotiated a cash deal. The cash to pay them is locked in, even in the case of the company going down or being bought out.
when you can buy an entire roll of SCO stock at your local supermarket? Available in 6, 12 or 24 roll packages.
Sort of, as a shareholder (even one share) you have full rights to place anything on the company's agenda as something to vote on at the annual meeting. Usually a vote of no confidence comes at the director rather than the managment level. Typically what happens is one big investor buys a decent sized block (say more than 10% and convinces all the little to medium sized investors) to vote with him for his slate of directors who will gut current managment and the company will follow the investor's ideas. Typically big investors only do this if they see some potential to increase the size of their portfolio (usually by splitting up the company). I've never heard of a hostile takeover that didn't involve at least one big investor coalition (Disney was pretty close, but Roy had the name in that case). If you scare managment enough but don't currently have 50% of the vote sealed up, you can sometimes get managment to buy your shares at an iflated value with an agreement you will go away. The term for that is greenmail, it was more common in the 1980s when disclosure was less available, but it does occasionally occur today.
Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.