Slashdot Mirror
SCO Announces Q2 2005 Results
gaijincory writes "SCO announced it's second quarter results Wednesday. Their net loss came in at just under $2 million. Revenue was $9.2 million (down from $10.1 million in the same quarter of the prior year). The decrease in revenue was "...primarily due to continued competitive pressures on the Company's UNIX products and services.""
Here's a list of the some of the current activity of SCO's various court battles.
Quick update: SCO has filed a "report" stating that they will not be filing a motion for a preliminary restraining order against Autozone.
Current events:
SCOvIBM: Four motions have been briefed, and a hearing was held on 21 May 2005. Judge Kimball is still considering these motions regarding the scheduling order, the motion to narrow the scope of IBM's 9th counterclaim, the motion to depose IBM's CEO, and SCO's motion to file another amended complaint. Discovery continues. Redacted and unsealed motions are dribbling out, with IBM and SCO apparently unable to agree entirely on what will remain sealed. Another discovery battle is shaping up around the issue of privilege logs, though the parties have agreed to consult with each other before making a motion to the court to resolve such disputes.
SCOvNovell: Judge Kimball has taken Novell's motion to dismiss SCO's amended complaint under advisement, after the 25 May 2005 hearing.
RedHatvSCO: This case is still completely stayed. However, "if the claims or counterclaims in the pending SCO litigations change, and it would no longer be an inefficient use of judicial resources for this court to consider whether the LINUX system contains any misappropriated UNIX system source code, or if there is evidence that SCO has misrepresented the issues of this case, or the Utah litigation," Red Hat can refile their motion for reconsideration to lift the stay.
SCOvAutoZone: The "60 days of limited discovery" regarding the preliminary restraining order have ended, and SCO has declined the opportunity to file a motion for a preliminary restraining order. Thus, the matter is stayed "pending further order of the court." In SCO's report to the court regarding the just completed discovery, SCO hints that it may file a motion to lift the stay to pursue claims "based solely on Autozone's migration to Linux," because they claim to have found "extensive copying ... of what SCO believes to be programs
containing ... OpenServer code." This matter is unrelated to any copyright
infringement action SCO could bring against a general Linux user.
In summary:
Licenses on continued use for existing installations.
As systems get migrated to [insert OS of choice] their revenue stream will decline slowly over time.
"Piter, too, is dead."
Just look at their three year stock price: http://quote.morningstar.com/Quote.html?Ticker=SCO X&TimeFrame=Y3#PriceGraph
The hump in the middle is pretty much indicative of speculative traders reckoning that SCO may have had an outside shot in winning the lawsuit vs. IBM. Of course, since that stock price has come back down to earth it shows that those traders have actually gained a little bit of common sense. Although in reality, $4.10 is way overpriced for this company, considering they turned a profit in exactly one out of six years since being traded publicly: http://quicktake.morningstar.com/Stock/Income10.as p?Country=USA&Symbol=SCOX&stocktab=finance
No investor in their right mind would touch this company.
It's public information. From yahoo
Not sure why they don't list the CFO or CTO salary. This is the yearly salary, so for the quarter, it looks like it would have saved about $300,000 in cost. Thus, they still would have had a large loss.
Looking for any old 8-bit Heathkit/Zenith software/hardware - http://heathkit.garlanger.com
well... revenue is down (they're taking in less money):
revenue second quarter of fiscal year 2005: $9,258,000
comparable quarter 2004: $10,137,000
but losses are significantly down (this is good for them- they are losing less):
net loss second quarter 2005: $1,962,000, or ($0.11) per share
net loss comparable quarter 2004: $14,726,000, or ($1.04) per share.
so who knows if they're dying, but the decrease in losses coupled with the steady revenue ($9 mil ain't too shabby) makes them look ok.
> so who knows if they're dying, but the decrease in losses coupled with the steady revenue ($9 mil ain't too shabby) makes them look ok.
They have about $9M left in unreserved cash. The loss would have been almost $3M except for a 1 time gain of $700K+ on sale of stock that had been written off.
SCO has cut developers and marketing to get the cash flows down. It has not really worked.
Continued buisness is a loss.
New buisness (lawsuits) is a bust.
Keep in mind that when you receive $1 million for a service contract, you don't recognize $1 million in revenue. You space it out over the contract length (ex: 10 years) and show it as revenue in tiny portions (ex: $100,000 per year). So this is probably cash they received *long* ago that is still being recognized as earned revenue in the period that it is allocated. I doubt there is a whole lot of *new* money coming in.
Mr. Darl C. McBride , 45 Chief Exec. Officer, Pres $ 986.00K N/A
That works out to $986,000. That's almost a million of it right there. Not sure where you're getting $300,000 total, the K at the end means 'thousands'. The decmial place is just there so you can say like, 11.20K for 11,200.
SCO just issued a *QUARTERLY* report.
About $300,000 is what D. McB makes *QUARTERLY*.
*QUARTERLY*
Umm, no. Wealth, of course, is problematic - we don't tax wealth, we tax income. And for income:
the top 2% make 10.7% of the "adjusted gross income", and pay 21% of the income tax. So they're taxed at about twice the average rate.
Since the other 89.3% of the income is paying 79% of the income taxes, they're paying about 2.2x the rate the rest of us are.
Note - figures from the IRS, as of 2001. Later figures are not yet available, and will no doubt be modified somewhat for later years - the last time the rich got a tax cut, they ended up paying a higher fraction of the income taxes.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"