Slashdot Mirror
SCO Stock In Danger of Delisting, Again
hweimer writes "In 2005, SCO got into delisting trouble because they failed to file their annual 10-K report in a timely manner. SCO seems to be headed the same way again for a different reason: the stock price is too low to meet Nasdaq's requirements. Quoting: '[W]hat can a company do to boost its share price? Besides stopping to burn money and come up with a working business model, I mean.'"
Many companies buy back their own shares, both to boost share price and to give stockholders a return not based on dividends. I don't know if SCO has the cash to do it any more, but...
When your business model depends upon litigation, and you have no one else to sue. What do you expect to happen?
K
It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
That's not entirely true. If a company has revenue, there's a possibility that they can trim back to ONLY that revenue. If the revenue coming in is more than the cost to support that revenue stream, then the company can continue on. The problem comes in when your revenue is smaller than the cost of maintaining that revenue. Then you're screwed.
If I were an SCO investor right now, I'd be getting together with the other investors to stage a coup. Do like Take Two and fire the board and executive staff. Then install someone who will fire SCO's "crack" team of lawyers (drugs aren't good for you anyway) and start sweeping through the company firing anyone who's not related to the few revenue streams that SCO actually has. Normally that would be a sad (and often dangerous) thing for a company, but in SCO's case, I doubt that many tears will be shed.
Once the company is pared down, then the focus should be on two areas:
1. Improve the customer relations that SCO has been driving into the ground for so long.
2. Look for ways to leverage the remaining company to produce new or enhanced products; thus opening up new sources of revenue.
Normally, I'd say that this is a plan put forward by a wannabe-CEO looking for a Golden Parachute job. As scary as it sounds though, I think it might actually work in SCO's case. *IF* (and this is a big "if") the investors get their tails in gear and flip the company upside down NOW. The longer they wait, the less likely they are to succeed.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
After 30 days of trading below $1., they'll get a warning notice from NASDAQ. Then they have to trade above $1 for ten straight days out of the next 90, or get a second notice, and a second chance to get their stock above $1 for ten straight days.
What is *more* troublesome for the SCOundrels is that if they're under $1 on May 15, they're likely to be dropped from the Russell Microcap index, which would likely trigger a selloff from funds referencing it.
As much as this stock is being shorted by people waiting for the death plunge, either case may be enough to finally tip it over. And with the case obviously headed for oblivion, the likelihood of a Black Knight stepping in with bags o' money again is pretty slim.
SCOX DELENDA EST!!
Technology experts Dan Lyons and Maureen O'Gara were also on hand to bolster SCO's claims. "We've seen all the SCO materials and while its far to secret to disclose, there is no doubt in our minds that NASDAQ is actually a front for Groklaw."
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
I think someone's been playing too many adventure games.
Redundancy is good And also good.
Not enough. He forgot to take the rope from the hanging corpse in the janitor's closet.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Here's what happens:
1) Novell gets Unix back.
2) Novell does deal with Microsoft.
3) Novell changes name to SCO.
4) Novell (i.e. SCO) stops SuSE.
5) Novell (SCO) sues IBM.
6) Prifit!
return 0; }