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.""

5 of 376 comments (clear)

  1. 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
  2. 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.
  3. 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.