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.""
They don't think it's time to start making profit the primary motive for the operation?
Deleted
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
How in the WORLD did SCO manage to sell 9 *million* dollars in software? That says to me you could have a monkey on the stree selling AOL CDs and rake in a couple million...
Can we drop the SCO thing yet... This is like standing on the side lines watching someone get beat to death by an angry mob and cheering for more blood.
They're dead, Jim.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
This is just the kind of crap that will happen when you take away a company's ability to innovate using patents and patent infringement lawsuits.
For those of you who are uninformed, that was a sarcastic statement.
Make my day. Mod this as Score:5, Insightful
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."
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? :)
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:
1. Steal code from open source and pretend it's theirs. ...
2. Sue open source.
4. Profit!
Ok, so it's the same as the Gnomes Underwear Plan on South Park, but it's TWICE as EFFECTIVE!
0 x 2 = 0
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
"Their net loss came in at just under $2 million."
And they earned every penny of it.
"What does slashdotting mean?"
"You've never heard of slashdot?"
"I know it makes websites not work."
Do you have a keyboard down there?
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?
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?
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.
/. ++
No, they're still better off financially than the corporation that owns this web site.
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.
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.
Can we drop the SCO thing yet... This is like standing on the side lines watching someone get beat to death by an angry mob and cheering for more blood.
You clicked the "Read more" link, too.
alt.sco.die.die.die
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.
Netcraft hasn't confirmed it, so, I just donno...
"...It's life Jim, but not as we know it..."
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
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.
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.
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"
"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.