Slashdot Mirror
SCO Stock Continues Downward Spiral
tobiasly writes "TechNewsWorld reports that three and a half years after SCO saw its stock price increase tenfold to US$20.50 following the filing of its lawsuit against IBM, it closed Tuesday at US$2.28 per share, or two cents less than where it was before the lawsuit. This follows a sustained slide fed by poor earnings results and courthouse reversals which, according to OSDL CEO Stuart Cohen, shows that 'Linux and open source software are bigger than any one company. Linux has won in the courts and is winning in the marketplace.'"
TechNewsWorld reports that three and a half years after SCO saw its stock price increase tenfold to US$20.50 following the filing of its lawsuit against IBM, it closed Tuesday at US$2.28 per share, or two cents less than where it was before the lawsuit.
Where's the SEC investigation of the SCO executives? At this point, there's plenty of evidence that this entire IBM lawsuit was a pump-and-dump scheme. What's the deal?
Push Button, Receive Bacon
Fuck You. I'm Darl Mc Bride. You can't do this to me. You suck! I don't like you. I'm gonna tell my mommy...
They did a 1 for 4 reverse split in mid '02, which brought the price up to about 2.30.
Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
A lot of people think this is what SCO wants. "Sue IBM and get lots of money when we're bought out!" IBM, apparently, does not think this is behavior it should encourage, and so it's simply attempting to squash SCO like a bug. I've got no problem with this.
Breaking Into the Industry - A development log about starting a game studio.
I'd say their only customers are those with existing SCO systems that have not been upgraded yet. It can be easier to just buy another SCO license than to migrate the entire thing. I'm sure nobody is actually doing all-new SCO installations anymore. Anyone with a current SCO system should definitely have a migration plan, because they will be stuck with an unsupported OS when SCO finally liquidates.
And reward the owners and leaders that got them into this mess? IBM should make sure they cannot get off their feet again, not back them up with money.
* Opinder Bawa has one filing for having sold 15,000 shares, and another for 8,000 shares. He would appear to have sold all the shares he possesses (but he still has a lot of options).
* Robert Bench has three filings: 7000 shares, 5000 shares, and 4100 shares.
* Jeff Hunsaker sold 5000 shares at the beginning of June.
* Darl McBride sold 7000 shares just after the suit was filed.
That's millions of dollars in stock sales. Given that the stock price skyrocketed when they announced the lawsuit, and the executive stock dumping began shortly thereafter, what do you make of this situation?
Push Button, Receive Bacon
No, at this point IBM is being accused of many things by TSG and clearly wants either the accusations to be thrown out by the court or a trial to clear their name.
:-)
Sometimes reputation has to be publically defended.
Of course, there is the alternative theory, IBM lawyers like to play with their lunch before eating it
IBM cant buy any SCO stock. If they do, it looks like IBM is "giving in" (i.e. buying them out instead of fighting).
Plus, thats assuming that they could convince those who hold the levers at SCO to sell up (if the rumors are true and Microsoft etc are the ones who are really behind SCO and the lawsuit, they are going to want to keep fighting to do as much damage to linux as they can)
The reference price of $2.30 was in March *2003*, after the reverse split.
"It shows that Linux and open source software are bigger than any one company. Linux has won in the courts and is winning in the marketplace. SCO . . . is dead."
I think the victory is bigger than just the downfall of SCO. This shows that any number of Closed Source companies, working in concert / collusion / tandem... have lost to one single man - Richard Stallman, and his GPL. It is the GPL which has tightened the noose around SCO, completely puncturing the SCO case, since they themselves were offering the 'infringing code' under the GPL. Linux and Linus Torvalds are merely incidental, given the magnitude of the victory we are seeing now... in fact, Linus was hardly involved in the case at all.
This is not just IBM vs SCO. Let's remember even IBM is not entirely behind Open Source, they have patents and interests in the Closed Source arena as well. In the ordinary world, if IBM wins vs SCO, they would control the entire Linux market, but because of the GPL, the entire Open Source community wins! In fact, this squarely places the spotlight on IBM now, specially since Lenovo is pre-loading Linux. Will IBM abandon their entire Closed Source strategy, and become the Google of the Services segment, in a truly Open Source way? Time will tell...
Companies like Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, Sun, Oracle etc. are losing. Try hard they may, but they have failed to negatively affect the marketshare and mindshare of Open Source products and the philosophy behind it. The day is not far off when Apple and MS are quoted below $1. On that day, the victory will be complete.
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
Time is running out for SCO. Check the scheduling order. We're past the stalling of pretrial discovery. We're past wondering if SCO has some surprise evidence. Discovery is over. Now things speed up. Expert reports are coming in now and end on September 22. On September 25, summary judgement motions start, and undoubtedly IBM will make some. Things can only get worse for SCO in the summary judgement phase, where some or all of SCO's case may be thrown out and IBM might win on some of their counterclaims. This whole thing could end in September.
If not, trial starts in February 2007.
And if not, can they make an exception for SCO?
Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
Chances are baystar didn't lose a cent on the deal. First of all they had hedges, secondly they were merely a conduit for MS money. MS will make sure they get re-imbursed one way or another.
evil is as evil does
It's worse than that.
The major client my company has which still runs SCO uses it on a server that must be certified by Auditors at enormous cost (It's a bank). The setup they have now has been in place for around 8 years and at the time they got it it cost 1/10 it's closest competitor.
They have bought replacement software + hardware anyway and are now doing internal validation (before sheling out a few million to the Auditors).
--= Isn't it surprising how badly I spell ?
Linux has won in the courts and is winning in the marketplace.
Linux has not won in the courts. IBM is doing well against SCO - but it isn't over till it's over, and the lawsuit could go on for another year, at least. Trial is currently scheduled for 2007.
Linux is not winning in the marketplace. Microsoft is winning in the marketplace, it has about 10 times as big a market share as Linux, last time I looked.
Don't misunderstand me - I'm a big Linux fan, and I'm posting this from my Debian Etch system, which is connected to the Internet thru my Debian Sarge firewall. But you don't win by deluding yourself that the enemy has lost, when in fact it is very far from losing.
Where's the Yankee Group? Where's the fathead Laura DiDio? She's been the official SCO Fan-girl from the start. I guess monkey-boy Ballmer didn't command her to make any comments at this time.
If somebody were to purchase the company, they'd acquire its liabilities, too. Pending lawsuits with Novell, IBM, RedHat, AutoZone, as well as many more potential ones. These claims and counterclaims don't just "go away" if the company changes hands.
Liquidation is the only solution.
Don't forget that's IBM that is winning, linux is hitching a ride here.
If this was happening to a smaller company, maybe it wouldn't have the funds to defend itself and would be gone bankrupt by now.
The threat is still strong.
A smaller company sues a larger one. The larger company spends so much on lawyers that it drains the resources of the smaller company, crippling the company until they can't fight any more
Except that in THIS case it's the smaller company that's been dragging it's feet at EVERY step of the way. So IBM hasn't done "something like this".
If you want to see real insider selling in a total tech scam look at GTW. On Friday GTW tanked 12% on > 2X normal volume to hit it's all time low.
CEO, and long time scam artist, Lap Shun Hui has been dumping his free shares by the millions, and not properly reporting his sales. Apparently the guy is above the law.
There has been very little insider selling involved in the scox-scam.
Yes, it would be such an injustice if SCO were actually forced to prove their case. If SCO's only way of winning is by making sure IBM doesn't have enough time to discover the legitimate source of whatever SCO picks out of a hat, then they don't have a case, and should lose. If there is no legitimate source for the code in question, IBM can't magic one up. The only reason for SCO to stall giving evidence is that they don't have any, gambled on their bluff paying off, and lost. It's a rather twisted idea of a fair trial to insist that just because somebody has less resources, they should be allowed to get away with not having their evidence examined properly.
I'm scared of numbers that can't be written as a fraction. It's an irrational fear.
LOL. That's what you're supposed to do. It's called discovery. You can't file a claim against someone without showing them the evidence you have against them regarding that claim. This enables them to mount a defense. Both SCO and IBM have asked for evidence as part of the discovery process.
On December 12, 2003, SCO was ordered by Judge Wells, "...to identify and state with specificity the source code(s) that SCO is claiming form the basis of their action against IBM". SCO claimed that they couldn't do this without access to IBM's code, and requested the entire source base to both AIX and Dynix including all versions and changes. SCO's motion was granted by Judge wells.
On March 18, 2005, IBM delivered to SCO everything they had requested. The 80 GB of code and a server machine to put it on was was delivered on time. SCO, then claimed that this information wasn't enough.
SCO has been objecting in one way or another to a judge's order for almost three years.
Who is holding up the trial again?
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.