Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

SCO Announces Q2 2005 Results

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the it's-be-awhile-since-we-talked-about-sco dept.

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.""

13 of 376 comments (clear)

  1. Anyone who knows about stock markets... by bcmm · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Does this mean they're dying?

    --
    # cat /dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama
    Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
  2. And the shareholders? by Colin+Smith · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They don't think it's time to start making profit the primary motive for the operation?

    --
    Deleted
  3. huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Isn't $10.2 million - $9.1 million just under $1 million?

  4. Yeah, that's it by smooth+wombat · · Score: 3, Insightful
    primarily due to continued competitive pressures on the Company's UNIX products and services.

    That must be it. After all, that horde of lawyers and getting shot down at every turn in court isn't costing you a dime.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1. Re:Yeah, that's it by RealProgrammer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, their statement is accurate, as far as it goes.

      For this quarter, the decreased revenue is primarily due to a shinking market for commercial Unix. Their long term prospects for increasing Unix revenue have been effectively squelched by the lawsuits.

      But their decreased cash position is due to paying lawyers.

      --
      sigs, as if you care.
  5. Just one question... by John+Seminal · · Score: 2, Insightful
    SCO announced it's second quarter results Wedensday. 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).

    How much did they pay their CEO, President, and all VP's? If they were not there, would that have made the company profitable?

    Suprisingly, this is how most CEO's think about the workforce. Look at motorola when they laid off 11,000 workers. Then the board decided to reward the CEO with a multi million dollar bonus for his hard work.

    Does SCO really need all those executives? I don't think so. If you ask me, it is the workers that are responsible for building a company, not the executives. There should be worker protection laws.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

  6. suing customers by Xtifr · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm sure their habit of suing their own customers has greatly helped their position in the market as well. I know that I always prefer to buy things from someone who'll sue me for having bought it later. And while I'm at it, can I get one of those new cars with the bear trap built into the accelerator pedal? :)

    1. Re:suing customers by Dukael_Mikakis · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It seems so obvious, doesn't it? Don't sue the people who pay your bills.

      The problem is that too often public companies, especially ones that aren't doing well, end up having to resort to short-term moneymaking schemes to meet their earnings (so that they have a chance to sell more stock and raise more funds).

      SCO's short-sighted profit-boosting measures should have been (and likely were) regarded as signs of a company that was (well, is) in serious trouble.

  7. Re:SCO dumps Trolltech stock? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    It's OK, folks: I'll handle this one.

    If you've been avoiding KDE because of who owns their stock, then you're a jackass. I'll bet some rather unsavory people own stock in lots of other companies you actually spend money with, so where does this bizarro unreachable standard for Trolltech come from?

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  8. Re:9 *million*? by Secrity · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are companies; including Wal-Mart and possibly McDonald's, that still use SCO Unix. I would imagine that SCO is making money by selling upgrades and support contracts to these existing customers.

  9. Nowhere to go but down by Nytewynd · · Score: 2, Insightful

    SCO is competeting directly against a free version of Unix that is better in almost every way, especially on price.

    Unless they have some kind of ingenious plan (which I doubt considering they almost always get sued when they try something new), what do they have left to offer? I guess they have the "support" options for companies too nervous to dive into a Linux environment, but that support is only as good as the company you get it from anyway.

    I got to install SCO on a PC back in about 1997. I loved it at the time, mostly because it converted my PC to Unix. Otherwise, I was much happier with either Solaris, AIX or HP-UX. SCO ranked pretty low on the list. Most versions of Linux rank right up near the top of the list now, and also run on a PC. I don't see why people would choose SCO.

    --
    /. ++
  10. Re:What a rube! by benwb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That 60% number sounds impressive, until you realize that something like 90% of the wealth in the us belongs that same 2%- proportionally they are being taxed less than the rest of us.

  11. compensation to law firms by dilvish_the_damned · · Score: 2, Insightful



    Accrued compensation to law firms:
    2005: --
    2004: $7,956,000

    I am not familar with this '--' in the context of accounting.
    Does this mean:

    a) 'zero'.
    b) $7,955,000.
    c) they dont know/lost track
    d) they are too embarrassed to say
    e) ERR: Overflow

    ?

    --
    I think you underestimate just how much I just dont care.