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.""
Millions of customers? Is this still in their SEC filings? Isn't there a duty for public-traded companies to be truthful?
Million(s) of customers implies at least two million. Are they earning $4.50 per quarter from each customer? $18 per year per customer? What kind of Unix is this that costs $18?
Time to update the SEC filings and news releases, no? Is it necessary to point out something like this, to give notice, before a company can be charged with defrauding investors?
Time to fess up, Darl. Does SCO really have two million or more customers on $9,258,000 quarterly revenue?
How about: The SCO Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: SCOX) helps hundreds of customers to grow their businesses everyday!
It seems like there are still a couple of companies out there that still use SCO software. I'm wondering if it would be profitable to start a consulting firm specializing in moving your proprietary in-house software to other UNIX platforms. Those folks should be starting to get nervous about their platform of choice still being around this time next year...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
One of my clients uses Avaya Conversant Voice Response Units. The underlying engine is a Unix box running SCO. Avaya announced more than a year ago that they were de-supporting the platform. New platform runs SunOS. Coincidence? I think not.
Sadly, the company I work for still has a handful of SCO servers in our server room (fortunately I'm not responsible for any of them). We've been replacing what we could, but it's quite the project to migrate our legacy mission-critical systems (which have been running fine) to Linux.
At least from us, they are still getting something. But it's getting less and less with every passing quarter, I would think. The main reason to migrate off the platform, ethical issues aside, is the concern about the future of SCO and continued availability of support for these systems.
You can accomplish anything you set your mind to. The impossible just takes a little longer.
Ahh, but VA isn't losing nearly as much as they used to. In fact, they lose less every quarter and are poised for a turnaround. It'll be interesting to see if they pull it off.
At the same time, new consulting opportunities will come up for support and/or migration of SCO systems once the company has folded. There are a lot of legacy systems out there running UnixWare, and there would likely be a decent-sized market for support.
Much larger companies didn't take this long to die with simmilar losses even though they had much higher revenue. Commodore for example fell due to simmilar losses in the single digit millions but they were making revenue in the single digit BILLIONS!
If Commodore couldn't handle long-term $2 Million losses with a total revenue over $1 Billion, what makes you think you can handle it with less than $10 Million in revenue, SCO? Just die already!
... and in the DRM, bind them.
"Not using a piece of Free software because someone you don't like used to own a bit of the company that released it to the world?"
Makes sense to me. Your choice of who you take funding from may very well indeed reflect on your integrity. Why not?
Could you explain why it justifies name calling?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Man what a conference call!!! Let's see, the first seven minutes was a huge lawyer like disclaimer that sounded like an EULA, and they only had two callers... one a private investor, and the other was a local newspaper. The gist of the conference call should be a warning to investors, "There are no millions of customers. If there were, then why did they have to cite so many ~6 foreign customers?" It sounds a great deal like they are praying on OpenServer 6 to be their salvation as the litigation isn't doing so well. If they can woo current customers over OpenServer 6, appropriately named 'legacy' they are completely sunk. I would be willing to bet that any current customers who are using SCO are more than likely seeking alternative solutions... which is a plus to Linux geeks. This means new jobs for old customers who wish to remain profitable. Imagine waking up for work at the auto factory and finding that your main supplier of engines are out of business? It should also be noted how outdated SCO training is. The only tests you can get are from Prometric, and Monster.com yeilds only 103 listings with the hitword SCO internationally. This certainly does not support the claim of 'millions of customers'. Just in case you're wondering, Red Hat yeilded 390 results... keep in mind that the word Linux was excluded from that search. The hit word Linux yeilded more than 1,000 jobs. Remember SCO's not Linux per say, but their own proprietary version of UNIX.