Slashdot Mirror


10K Filing Suggests Grim Outlook for SCO

dacarr writes "SCO has filed their 10K with the SEC — and according to this, their own assessment of the company's outlook is pretty grim. As usual, PJ of Groklaw has a good synopsis of the filing highlights. In short, it boils down to one thing: unless there's a miracle, even SCO doesn't think they're going to come out of this. 'As a result of the Chapter 11 filings, realization of assets and liquidation of liabilities are subject to uncertainty. While operating as debtors-in-possession under the protection of Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, the Debtors may sell or otherwise dispose of assets and liquidate or settle liabilities for amounts other than those reflected in the consolidated financial statements, in the ordinary course of business, or, if outside the ordinary course of business, subject to Bankruptcy Court approval. In addition, under the priority scheme established by the Bankruptcy Code, unless creditors agree otherwise, post-petition liabilities and prepetition liabilities must be satisfied in full before stockholders are entitled to receive any distribution or retain any property under a plan of reorganization.'"

149 comments

  1. R.I.P. by scharkalvin · · Score: 1, Funny

    Rest in Pieces

    1. Re:R.I.P. by somersault · · Score: 2, Funny

      More like Roast In Pieces (of faeces?)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:R.I.P. by oringo · · Score: 0

      Not yet... If M$ successfully buys Yahoo!, I predict that M$ will trade BSD in with SCO products to legitimize their support to SCO

    3. Re:R.I.P. by Tuqui · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >Not yet... If M$ successfully buys Yahoo!, I predict that M$ will trade BSD in with SCO products to legitimize their support to SCO

      That will mean that MS is accepting that Any Unix is better than their Win Server.

    4. Re:R.I.P. by mrxak · · Score: 1

      Ding dong the witch is dead?

    5. Re:R.I.P. by somersault · · Score: 1

      For the full lyrics, please scroll down. Thankyou.

      --
      which is totally what she said
  2. My Mutual Fund :-( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Looks like my "America's Sleaziest Companies" mutual fund is going to take another hit this year.

    1. Re:My Mutual Fund :-( by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

      The shares of Microsoft should help sustain its value.

    2. Re:My Mutual Fund :-( by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

      The shares of Microsoft should help sustain its value.
      Microsoft is considerably down, too. And with the Yahoo deal, both profit and cash on hand would plummit as well.

      I suggest sticking with insurence and drug companies.

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    3. Re:My Mutual Fund :-( by vistic · · Score: 1

      You could have made a killing shorting SCO stock

  3. Ah, yes! by AltGrendel · · Score: 1
    The final stages of the slow motion train wreck that is SCO begin.

    We hope.

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

    1. Re:Ah, yes! by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      How many times are we going to read the same headline? "SCO is bankrupt," "SCO filed a report with the SEC declaring bankruptcy," "SCO doesn't believe they can survive this lawsuit." They're dead. This is old news.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    2. Re:Ah, yes! by mpe · · Score: 1

      How many times are we going to read the same headline? "SCO is bankrupt," "SCO filed a report with the SEC declaring bankruptcy," "SCO doesn't believe they can survive this lawsuit." They're dead. This is old news.

      How about "SCO to relocate to Sunnydale" :)

    3. Re:Ah, yes! by rk · · Score: 1

      Or as Darl McBride calls it: "going home for the holidays."

    4. Re:Ah, yes! by morcego · · Score: 3, Funny

      They're dead. This is old news.


      Do you mind ? We are entitled to all the gloating we can get out of this.
      --
      morcego
    5. Re:Ah, yes! by Sciryl+Llort · · Score: 1

      War's over, man. IBM dropped the big one.

  4. Dear Slashdot: by goodmanj · · Score: 1

    Enough already. You "won".

    1. Re:Dear Slashdot: by rubycodez · · Score: 2, Funny

      no, there are matters which only a court of law can resolve the SCOX stories will continue. you will read the SCOX stories. you will love the SCOX stories. you will smile as you read and love the SCOX stories.

    2. Re:Dear Slashdot: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Leave SCO alone right now! I mean it! Anyone that has a problem with them you deal with me, because them is not well right now.

    3. Re:Dear Slashdot: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leave SCOX Alooooooone!

    4. Re:Dear Slashdot: by calebt3 · · Score: 1

      Anyone that has a problem with them you deal with me This coming from an Anonymous Coward.
  5. huh? by gEvil+(beta) · · Score: 4, Funny

    Things are looking grim for SCO? I obviously missed something. When did this happen?

    --
    This guy's the limit!
    1. Re:huh? by Nimey · · Score: 5, Funny

      When all you cock-smoking teabaggers didn't pay your $699 license fee, that's when.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    2. Re:huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where have you been?? Under a rock?

    3. Re:huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Exempting the profanity, parent post should be modded funny, not troll

    4. Re:huh? by eln · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's a parody of a very well known (to those of us who browse at -1 anyway) troll. The profanity is absolutely critical to the joke.

    5. Re:huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a parody of a very well known (to those of us who browse at -1 anyway) troll. The profanity is absolutely critical to the joke. More info here. There's actually a user account specifically created for this troll, if you can believe that ...
  6. SCO is dead by sakdoctor · · Score: 1

    ...and SCO confirms it.

  7. Finally! by Doug52392 · · Score: 1, Informative

    Took SCO that long to go bye bye? I can't wait until they go completely broke. SCO thought that, since they bought Unix from AT&T in the 1990s, that they should own Linux as well and sued everyone. About time they fell as a result of that! Rest in Pieces, SCO :)

    1. Re:Finally! by Ngarrang · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I feel sympathy for the employees who were unable to find other employment already. They will soon be without jobs. I mean, if they are still THERE, their prospects are certainly not any better once unemployed.

      --
      Bearded Dragon
    2. Re:Finally! by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The other problem is the stigma on your resume now.

      "I see you have a long.... Oh.. you work for SCO right now? I have heard enough, we will be in touch. Have a good day."

      The rank and file are not responsible for the stupidity but it does affect you when you are out there looking for jobs.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Finally! by armanox · · Score: 4, Informative

      Actually SCO didn't buy UNIX from AT&T. Novell did. And that's the whole problem. SCO thinks they bought it from Novell, but they didn't.

      --
      I'm starting to think GNU is the problem with "GNU/Linux" these days.
    4. Re:Finally! by Trigun · · Score: 0

      And I feel really bad for all those German SS guards who couldn't find employment elsewhere. At what point did continuing employment with a company which decided to act in, at the very least, an unethical manner absolve you of consequence and deem you worthy of my pity? I don't care if you were the receptionist, you had to have some kind of clue as to what was going on, and that means complacency.

      Pity not these fools, for they have brought spite and vitriol upon themselves. They are the damned; the cast-offs from society.

    5. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      And I feel really bad for all those German SS guards who couldn't find employment elsewhere


      I invoke Godwin on the parent post. And anyone who replies to this post is a Nazi :-)

    6. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not like they couldn't see this coming - pretty much the only thing SCO has been doing for the last couple of years has been this kind of ridiculous litigation - and for the past year (at least) it's been really clear that they stood no chance of winning it. With virtually zero assets, virtually zero products and virtually zero legitimate income - how could they possibly stay in business?

      If those employees didn't find another job a year ago, it can only be because they had no other prospects - nobody with any sense of morality (or impending doom!) would stick with a sleazy company like that if they had an 'out' somewhere.

      Worse still, potential employers might have been interested in someone with the sense to jump ship in the early stages of this slow train wreck - after all, loyalty is worth something. But someone who stuck it out this long is beyond loyalty and into the realms of stupidity...that's not going to make life any easier in the job market.

    7. Re:Finally! by ddrichardson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree that SCO were unethical and was with you right up until you compared them to the SS. That's just silly.

      --
      A thistle is a fat salad for an ass's mouth...
    8. Re:Finally! by ronadams · · Score: 4, Informative

      Holy hell, they're employees at a tech industry, not genocidal anti-Semetic soldiers for a facist dictator. Somewhere, Mike Godwin is rolling around in his gra-- err, bed.

      And if you think a receptionist, or even many engineers, are going to have a farking clue what abhorrent decisions the board of the company was involved in, you don't understand people (especially non-nerds), big companies, or reality very well. And to suggest that former or present SCO underlings are scum whose children deserve to go hungry for the sins of their fathers, in some epic divine retribution, is hateful, callous and unthinking.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    9. Re:Finally! by ari_j · · Score: 2, Funny

      You're forgetting one thing. SCO is just about entirely a legal team now, so anyone who currently works there is not only a lawyer but a lawyer who is capable of joining in SCO's legal chicanery with a straight face. I don't think they'll be so bad off.

    10. Re:Finally! by Penguinisto · · Score: 1
      Not to be snarky, but they could've left in mid-2003 (when SCO first filed), in 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007... each year harder than the last to explain, but still...

      Utah's local tech industry had a bit of a boom during 2005-2007 (I lived there up until early 2007), so it's not like they didn't have a choice.

      If an employee stuck with them for this long, pity is going to be kind of hard to come by, IMHO.

      /P

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    11. Re:Finally! by aztektum · · Score: 1

      It's called social Darwinism. If, as a SCO employee, you buried your head in the sand and let the companies mgmt run it into the ground, and have a hard time finding work, good... sorry don't be such a sheep next time.

      I'm sick of sympathy for people that would claim they were "just doing their job." Their job is being an accountant, a software engineer, a janitor, whatever, which can just as well be done at a company that isn't in a hurry to fuck themselves over.

      That's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    12. Re:Finally! by Secrity · · Score: 1

      SCO doesn't own Unix. Caldera (now called SCO) bought the old SCO Unix distribution. They also have the right to sell licenses to Unix System V; but they have to give 95% of the Unix license money to Novell (who owns Unix System V).

      Neither Novell nor SCO owns the "Unix" name, UNIX® is a registered trademark of The Open Group. http://www.unix.org/trademark.html

    13. Re:Finally! by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 1

      And if you think a receptionist, or even many engineers, are going to have a farking clue what abhorrent decisions the board of the company was involved in, you don't understand people (especially non-nerds), big companies, or reality very well.

      First, SCO is a little bitty company. They are not Microsoft or IBM or Apple. Their R&D budget has fallen precipitously, so they just can't have that many full-time engineers. So, how many of those engineers can be completely oblivious to this thing called "the Internet"? Do you really think it's the case that none of them have read about these events from a perspective outside their own company? If what you say is true, then the only ones who know what's going on are ones that have no friends at work, who never talk to their coworkers, who never chat up the secretary. If the atmosphere is so poisoned that what you suggest is really true, then yeah, I'd be willing to write them off as unfit for functioning in a real company.

      And to suggest that former or present SCO underlings are scum whose children deserve to go hungry for the sins of their fathers, in some epic divine retribution, is hateful, callous and unthinking.

      I feel bad for the kids who have no control over the horrible career decisions their parents have made. Beyond that, I just can't be bothered to care.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    14. Re:Finally! by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Funny

      I agree, it's shameful. There's no need to go round insulting the SS like that.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    15. Re:Finally! by ronadams · · Score: 1

      I didn't say completely oblivious. Also, you'd be surprised how different the SCO side of things might look from the inside, especially to those not as versed in the issue. When your livelihood depends on it, you tend to be in favor of your company's success.

      --
      Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
    16. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy hell, they're employees at a tech industry, not genocidal anti-Semetic soldiers for a facist dictator.

      At the very least they ought to have a chance at a job as pope.

    17. Re:Finally! by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Do they outsource their janitorial work?

      The lawyers generally work for firms, and won't have SCOX on their resumes unless they decide to. Even Darl's brother seems not to be an employee.

      The people left are secretaries, a FEW software people (I think) and possibly some janitors. And Darl. (I haven't checked their web site, so this is just what I've pieced together en passant. Don't rely on it for anything important.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    18. Re:Finally! by myth_of_sisyphus · · Score: 1

      It's like when I worked at Pets.com. The stock was at 2 cents--for a couple months.

      My boss turned to me one day and said "Ummmm...what the hell are you still doing here?" (While I was browsing the internet and my mouth full of bagel.)

      That was my notice. Seriously.

    19. Re:Finally! by nuzak · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Mike Godwin, pick up line 1.

      You couldn't even get away with this idiocy in the echo chamber that is Groklaw, let alone here.

      If I was an employer, I'd see a former SCO employee (not executive mind you) as someone who was determined to stick it out when things got bad. Not something to entirely base a decision on, but not an unadmirable quality.

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    20. Re:Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > SCO thinks they bought it from Novell,

      Not quite. Caldera thought that the Santa Cruz Operation had bought Unix from Novell when they bought the business and the SCO name from Santa Cruz.

    21. Re:Finally! by ari_j · · Score: 1

      You must be new here.* This is Slashdot, where we don't let facts get in the way of a good joke, a heated discussion, or even an outright flamefest.

      * - I know you have a uid about 1/6 of my own, so maybe you just had a momentary lapse.

    22. Re:Finally! by dbIII · · Score: 1

      The whole problem was really a scam on SCO. Linux was just the excuse and IBM was the brick wall to run the company into to create the chaos required for the scam. The courts were slow because they are not set up to handle people bringing deliberately unwinnable cases in. A lot of those legal costs went directly to Darl's brother. SCO will vanish but Darl will go on to cause havoc elsewhere, and if he repeats his earlier behaviour he will sue what remains before it goes.

  8. Stock Holders? by Ngarrang · · Score: 1

    "...in full before stockholders are entitled to receive any distribution or retain any property under a plan of reorganization..."

    All 3 of them?

    --
    Bearded Dragon
  9. In the words of that old country classic by sizzzzlerz · · Score: 4, Funny

    How can I miss you if you won't go away.

    1. Re:In the words of that old country classic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly! And in connection, I believe Microsoft is attempting to go after Linux in a similar fashion. "They stole from us" is the usual quote. Its all noise and blather from Ballmer. However, if he should suddenly loose *ALL* of his good sense, then this can foretell the result.

  10. Re:I think this would be appropriate... by somersault · · Score: 3, Funny

    Microsoft is dead? :DDDDDDD

    *dances around before reading the summary again*

    Oh, wait.. it was just the witch's bitch :(

    --
    which is totally what she said
  11. Just Compensation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...for all those greedy son's of bitches who sought to get rich riding this patent troll corporation to the winner's circle.

    Maybe next time they will think twice about making money from the labor of others.

  12. Debtor's Prison by bhima · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Unless this includes all the SCO management doing a stint in some medieval debtor's prison, it's not nearly grim enough.... On the other hand I think this is a great opportunity to start a Linux distro with SCO personality to provide all the remaining SCO user base a less painful transition after the death of SCO. We could even call it Pescadero Linux, because we all know how well the last project with that name turned out.

    --
    Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    1. Re:Debtor's Prison by Nimey · · Score: 1

      Pescadero == Phoenix/Firebird/Firefox, yes?

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    2. Re:Debtor's Prison by bhima · · Score: 1

      Natch

      I hasten to add that Pescadero does not mean Phoenix or Firebird or Firefox in any language that I am aware of. I'm pretty sure Pescadero means 'fisherman' in Spanish or Portuguese. However the link, from the 0.1 build, is permanently forged in my brain and thus pops up when I think Phoenix... which is what I was thinking when I was thinking Linux Distros for a SCO UNIX replacement.

      --
      Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
    3. Re:Debtor's Prison by vbraga · · Score: 1

      Fisherman in Portuguese is "Pescador". "Pescadero" sounds like Spanish, but I don't know for sure.

      Your idea is nice. If you're still interested, email me about it.

      --
      English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
    4. Re:Debtor's Prison by Ed+Avis · · Score: 1

      What remaining SCO user base?

      Linux used to have some thing called iBCS (Intel Binary Compatibility Standard) where you could run (some? all?) SCO Unix binaries on your Linux/i386 box, but it rotted and iBCS2 was recently pulled from the kernel.

      --
      -- Ed Avis ed@membled.com
    5. Re:Debtor's Prison by dacarr · · Score: 1

      What remaining SCO user base? McDonald's comes to mind.

      --
      This sig no verb.
    6. Re:Debtor's Prison by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      Home Hardware (a Canadian hardware store chain) runs a program in their stores called PRISM on SCO Unix to handle their inventory, POS, and I don't know what else.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
  13. Money spent on litigation by gihan_ripper · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For me, one of the interesting facts in the report is the amount they've spent on litigation since Oct 31, 2004: a massive $13,167,000. At least they're honest about their chances of survival: "Our limited cash resources may not be sufficient to fund continuing losses from operations and the expenses of the SCO Litigation."

    --
    Phoenix, Boston, Little Rock, see a pattern?
    1. Re:Money spent on litigation by PolarBearFire · · Score: 1

      They have to be honest, otherwise they would be broke AND in jail.

    2. Re:Money spent on litigation by dbIII · · Score: 1
      I wonder how much of that 13 million went to Darl's brother?

      I'm looking forward to the liquidation auction of the SCO assets. I'd like to put in a bid for Darl's ego but I'm afraid the shipping costs would be a fortune.

  14. Wow by davmoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I swear I can hear a fat lady singing...

    --
    I want a new quote. One that won't spill. One that don't cost too much. Or come in a pill.
    1. Re:Wow by Critical+Facilities · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yup. Her name is Karma, and she's a real bitch.

    2. Re:Wow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excellent punch line. I applaud you.

  15. There is no SCOX by p3d0 · · Score: 1

    They were delisted at the end of December.

    --
    Patrick Doyle
    I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    1. Re:There is no SCOX by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      at the moment their symbol is SCOXQ.PK, would you feel better with SCOX*.*?

    2. Re:There is no SCOX by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      I'd feel better with "SCO", rather than people watching trying to be extra clever by naming them by their ticker symbol.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
    3. Re:There is no SCOX by Captain+Nitpick · · Score: 1

      I'd feel better with "SCO", rather than people watching trying to be extra clever by naming them by their ticker symbol.

      Calling The SCO Group "SCO" confuses them with the Santa Cruz Operation (SCO), which previously owned the UnixWare and OpenServer rights and SCO trademark. The SCO causing all the trouble had the NASDAQ symbol SCOX, the earlier company had SCOC.

      Unlike calling Microsoft 'MSFT', calling The SCO Group SCOX actually helps avoid confusion between two similar entities. I've seen a few people try to promote the use of 'TSG', but it did not catch on.

      --
      But then again, I could be wrong.
    4. Re:There is no SCOX by p3d0 · · Score: 1

      Good point. Groklaw seems to like calling them SCOG.

      --
      Patrick Doyle
      I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
  16. Doesn`t matter, The already won. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All the fuss, efforts, time and money wasted had one objective, and that objective was reached.

    For many years they messed up the Open Source community, pusshing us back and jeopardizing the software market. For cheap.

    The SCO`s neck is a small price to be paid: the damage is already made, and the ones that REALLY were responsible for all this sh*t will stand unpunished.

  17. Selling assets? by oahazmatt · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...Debtors may sell or otherwise dispose of assets... Dibs on the Unix code!

    ...what?
    --
    Those who believe the Internet is private,
    find their privates are on the Internet.
    1. Re:Selling assets? by kpoole55 · · Score: 1

      The nail in their coffin was that they didn't own the Unix code. It still belongs to Novell who are currently distributing SuSE Linux.

  18. Business as usual by jeiler · · Score: 1

    In short, they learned nothing. They are sorry for nothing. They're still looking to make some money somehow, but not for common shareholders or those they owe money to. They'd like not to be held responsible for any of the damage they've caused.

    Others, Lord, others!
    Let this my motto be:
    Let me push and shove and trample
    as long as it's for me!

    Just out of curiosity ... has anyone ever totaled up an estimated dollar-amount or dollar-equivalent for the damage SCO has causes?

    --

    If you haven't been down-modded lately, you aren't trying.

    Sacred cows make the best hamburger.

    1. Re:Business as usual by djp928 · · Score: 1

      According to my admittedly cursory examination, the share price of SCOX (now SCOXQ.PK) peaked at around $17 a share sometime in 2003. At the time, they had close to 14,000,000 shares outstanding.

      So that's approximately $238,000,000 of shareholder value reduced to just about nothing in five years. And that's just shareholder value. No telling what they cost other companies such as IBM in legal fees, what they cost taxpayers tying up the court system for years with their spurious lawsuits, or what they've cost Slashdot in bandwidth hosting these articles. ;-)

  19. Filed their 10K? by sm62704 · · Score: 2, Funny

    All they have left is ten thoudand bucks? Dammit Jim, I'm a nerd, not a banker!

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    1. Re:Filed their 10K? by SamuraiMike · · Score: 2, Informative

      All they have left is ten thoudand bucks? Dammit Jim, I'm a nerd, not a banker!
      According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_10-K):

      A Form 10-K is an annual report required by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), that gives a comprehensive summary of a public company's performance.
    2. Re:Filed their 10K? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Time to dip into the rainy day fund. Hey, where's the coffee can? Where's McBride? MCBRIDE!

    3. Re:Filed their 10K? by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      I shouldn't have to google to find out what a non-nerd term means, any more than a banker reading "news for greedheads, stiffs that mutter" should have to google to find out what RAM is.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    4. Re:Filed their 10K? by sm62704 · · Score: 1

      I wish you would have posted that early enough to get modded, it was hilarious. Thank you for it!

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  20. Netcraft? by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2, Funny

    So we won't have to wait for Netcraft this time?

    --
    The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    1. Re:Netcraft? by Tango42 · · Score: 1

      You trust SCO to get anything right?

  21. Chapter 11 Statistic by webword · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From Maximizing Chapter 11 Success:

    "A staggering 85% of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy cases never make it to a confirmed plan of reorganization. In fact, lack of cash causes many companies to liquidate within a few weeks after filing."

    Maybe it's not all bad...

    Several companies has come out of it: United, Dow, Texaco, Delta, Toys R Us, Macy's and others.

    1. Re:Chapter 11 Statistic by subl33t · · Score: 1

      "United, Dow, Texaco, Delta, Toys R Us, Macy's"

      All those companies had products people actually wanted...

  22. What they really mean by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We have filed a post-effective amendment to a registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), which has been declared effective, covering the potential resale by two of our stockholders of up to 923,019 shares of common stock, or 4.3% of our outstanding common stock. The selling stockholders are bound by certain selling limitations, which limit the number of shares of our common stock that may be sold at one time.


    In other words: "Our outlook reeks to high heaven and we are afraid that people will dump their stock as quickly as possible. In order to slow this down, we're limiting shareholders in how much they can sell at once. Hopefully, this helps keep our stock from going to worthless (instead of the near-worthless that it is right now)."

    The share price right now is 6 cents. It should be interesting to see how low it falls today.

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    1. Re:What they really mean by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      As a followup to my own post, SCOX really didn't fall much today. (From 6.5 cents to 6.25 cents.) My two theories are that:

      1. Everyone pretty much knows they're boned anyway. So SCO saying "we're boned" doesn't have much of an impact. It's being greeted with a "Well, Duh!" response rather than a "AAHHH! SELL NOW!" response.

      2. People want to sell, but can't. After all, to sell a share of stock, don't you need to find someone who wants to *buy* that share?

      Given that, SCOXQ's price may have hit a bottom for the foreseeable future.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    2. Re:What they really mean by djp928 · · Score: 1

      I can't even imagine who still holds shares of SCO. They were de-listed from the NASDAQ and now trade on the OTCBB (over the counter bulletin board, or "pink sheets"). If you held shares of SCO before de-listing, you likely lost everything if you didn't sell (that's generally what happens to holders of common stock once a company goes into Chapter 11).

      But you're right, you can't sell a stock if you can't find someone to buy it from you. For most common stocks traded on the big exchanges, this is almost never an issue--the volume is high enough that you'll find a buyer almost instantly. But OTC stocks can go weeks or months without a buy/sell transaction.

  23. Not this again... by Otter · · Score: 5, Insightful
    As usual, PJ of Groklaw has a good synopsis...

    We have this story every freaking quarter (and I post the same comment every freaking quarter): 10K's are always written that way, stuffing any imaginable disaster into the text to ward off liability.

    For heaven's sake, nerds, if you don't believe me, at least believe Neal Stephenson's lengthy explanation in Cryptonomicon!

    1. Re:Not this again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Not trying to nitpick too much, but...

      10K's are annual reports, companies usually only file them once per (fiscal) year. They may file amended 10-Ks (10-K\A) more often if the information in the original 10-K was inaccurate/incomplete.

      The quarterly filings are 10-Qs, you've probably commented on the language there (or one of their many 8-Ks).

    2. Re:Not this again... by bark76 · · Score: 1

      So what you're saying is that it's just pining for the fjords...

  24. Apologies to Mel Brooks by Sciryl+Llort · · Score: 2, Funny

    # Springtime for Linux and opensource
      Hackers are smiling and glad.
      Linus can give his code away
      SCO's sinking day by day!

      Springtime for Linux and opensource
      - Winter for mister McBride!
      Springtime for Linux and opensource
      - Coming to the end of the ride... /#

    1. Re:Apologies to Mel Brooks by farkus888 · · Score: 1

      damnit, now my coworkers are going to wonder why I'm singing to myself about hitler all day.

      --
      thats right, I rarely use capitals. deal with it. but don't mistake my laziness for stupidity
    2. Re:Apologies to Mel Brooks by laejoh · · Score: 0

      Thank $diety there's the law to stop people from singing out of tune!

      :)

  25. SCO are like the black knight by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happens to the debt with Mellisa Gates^w^w Baystar, or was that one of these famed "charitable" contributions we hear so much about?

    1. Re:SCO are like the black knight by shentino · · Score: 1

      Ctrl-W?

      Er...

  26. Tough shit. by dj42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This company spent $12M on sales and marketing in '05, and $12M in '06. Meanwhile, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT was $8M / year in 05 and 06.

    In 07 they slashed all spending by about 20-30%.

    They've been losing 20% / year in UNIX revenue since 06, in spite of price increases.

    Obviously, in '07, someone in charge got a realistic expectancy of the company and started cutting cost (as they should), given the fact they had no chance to sustain their business model.

    This is how business works. It is fucking cut-throat, and if you can't get your shit together, afford the lawyers, and sustain an operational model, you fail.

    --
    We are one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. Back to you with the weather, Bob!
  27. Duke Nukem quotes by V!NCENT · · Score: 0

    What are they waiting for, christmass?

    --
    Here be signatures
  28. Good riddance to bad rubbish by mark72005 · · Score: 1

    I guess the "Can't make money on your own? Try to get it in court" business model didn't work out so well.

  29. Chapter 7 here we come by stox · · Score: 1

    Liquidation, the final answer.

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
  30. 10-Q suggests grim outlook for Slashdot (LNUX) by NineNine · · Score: 1

    Slashdot really shouldn't be poking fun here. Sourceforge (the owners of Slashdot) is bleeding money, and makes money now only from from Google AdSense and selling crap on thinkgeek.com. (http://yahoo.brand.edgar-online.com/fetchFilingFrameset.aspx?dcn=0001144204-07-066697&Type=HTML)

    1. Re:10-Q suggests grim outlook for Slashdot (LNUX) by Secrity · · Score: 1

      Isn't making money from AdSense and Thinkgeek pretty much Sourceforge's business plan? Don't they make money from other ads too? I don't normally see them, but I know that they do have ads beside AdSense.

    2. Re:10-Q suggests grim outlook for Slashdot (LNUX) by Phantom+Gremlin · · Score: 1

      The outlook isn't really that grim for the officers of Sourceforge. For example, Mr Jenab paid himself $546,000 last year plus exercised $2,280,000 in stock. That's a healthy chunk of change for a company with a market cap of only $123M.

      The above is quite typical of small companies, IMO. The people at the top make sure they take very good care of themselves, regardless of whether or not the company does well.

  31. The only way to save them... by bondjamesbond · · Score: 0

    Not that anyone wants to save them, but the only way they could save themselves is to open source SCO Unix. Not that they'll do this, or anything.

    1. Re:The only way to save them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They can't open-source it, because they don't own it. I don't think Novell itself could open source it, unless they clean up the third party IP baggage that's sure to be there.

  32. That business plan in full by badzilla · · Score: 1

    1. Launch mindlessly stupid litigation doomed from start
    2. Stock price tanks
    3. Then a miracle occurs
    4. Profit!

    --
    "Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace." V.Stone, Microsoft Corporation
    1. Re:That business plan in full by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you missed it:

      1. Launch mindlessly stupid litigation doomed from start
      2. Stock price skyrocket
      3. Execs dump insanely inflated stock
      4. Profit! (for those in on the scam)
      5. Reality sets in
      6. Stock takes a dump
      7. Loss! (for the suckers left holding the bag)

      The SCO "fiasco" was wildly successful. Who cares that the company is a smoldering wreck? Those in on the gag cashed in their chips long since, and are just hanging around to provide plausible deniability.

      captcha: guilty (I kid you not)

  33. Darl & lawyers should be prosecuted for fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Darl funnelled shareholder's money into lawyers' pockets under the thinly veiled ruse of defending something that he alleged SCO owned when the whole world knew that this was nothing short of a moronic claim.

    If I were an SCO shareholder, I'd be wanting Darl to get jail time for misusing the money we put into the company. CEOs have a duty of care and custodianship, which he manifestly ignored.

  34. Is it too early to say? by corvi42 · · Score: 1

    Ding, dong the witch is dead.

    --

    There are a thousand forms of subversion, but few can equal the convenience and immediacy of a cream pie -Noel Godin
  35. One thing I want to know.... by dfenstrate · · Score: 1

    ...is the quality of the office furniture they'll soon be selling off.

    I could use a good desk or two, and maybe a nice office chair.

    --
    Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
  36. Septic Services by rumblin'rabbit · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I never understood why SCO didn't sell their Unix business very early on during the legal proceedings with IBM. What sane IT manager would buy their product? My suggestion for the world's toughest job is a saleman for SCO - you need a real snappy comeback when your prospective customers ask if SCO is going to sue them like SCO sued their other clients.

    You may as well try to run a catering business under the "Septic Services" brand.

    I can only imagine that there were legal reasons for holding on to the Unix business.

    1. Re:Septic Services by rkhalloran · · Score: 2, Informative

      Because (as came out last fall) SCOX didn't own the UNIX code to start with; they only inherited a resellers' agreement and royalty collection business from Santa Cruz. The copyrights (such as they are) to the legacy UNIX codebase stayed with Novell.

      THAT'S what sent the stock into the pink-sheets, and prompted them to file Ch. 11 the day before the trial in Utah to determine how much of their bank balance *should* have gone to Novell as royalties. That trial restarts in April, by which time the SCOundrels will have probably burned through as much money as possible just for spite.

      SCOX(Q) DELENDA EST!!

    2. Re:Septic Services by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      That trial restarts in April, by which time the SCOundrels will have probably burned through as much money as possible just for spite.

      The trial will not restart in April because the SCOundrels will file for Chapter 7 protection the day before it starts. But you're right that they will give as much of the remaining cash as possible to their cronies before that date, because they will lose control of the company after it.

    3. Re:Septic Services by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      You may as well try to run a catering business under the "Septic Services" brand.
       
      Sam and Ella's Diner?

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
  37. They've already said they've done RIF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although that was a Reduction In Force...

  38. Sympathy for employees? by merc · · Score: 1

    Oh PLEASE! I have ZERO sympathy for any loser that has stayed with SCO this long. In fact, in the history of IT I can't think of any group of employees that deserve to be laid off more.

    Anyone who has continued with SCO after all these years of FUD, lies and litigation deserves nothing but heartache. In addition I *highly* recommend they avoid applying where I work, if I see SCO on a resume that continues past 2003 they can take a hike.

    In my view they were complacent in a lie. Besides that the writing was on the wall long ago so they shouldn't be shocked that they're out of work.

    --
    It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
  39. Are we sure they are dead? by mythras · · Score: 1

    Would be a bitch if they respawned on top of all of us during our victory dance. Yeah, been playing too many MMOs lately, but that's the first thing that came to mind.

  40. Quoting Old Man McBride by Caped+Cod · · Score: 2, Funny

    "And I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for those meddling kids."

  41. Yep. Now novl and acacia are msft's b!tches by walterbyrd · · Score: 2, Informative


    Scox was dead before the scam. If not for the scam, scox would have gone belly up three years ago. All that msft money is all that kept scox alive.

    No matter, plenty more b!tches where they came from. Now msft is using novl and acacia to continue fudding linux.

  42. Scox can not open source SCO Unix by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    1) scox doesn't own the UNIX code, scox only sells Unix for novell, and scox keeps a 5% kickback.

    2) even if scox did own unix, there are numerous contracts (HP, IBM, Sun, etc.)that forbid the open sourcing of UNIX.

    3) UNIX has already been open sourced, for the most part. There is very little, if any, UNIX code left that has been open due to AT&T v Berkeley.

    4) if there is any UNIX that has not been open sourced, it isn't worth anything technically. Open sourcing UNIX may help stop the bogo litigation, but that's it.

  43. msft does not need scox, so scox is dead by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Since a federal judge has already ruled that scox does not own unix, the lawsuit is now officially a joke. Which means that scox is no longer useful as a fud tool for msft. Scox has not been a real company since the msft sponsored scam began. Scox was nothing but a msft PR stunt.

    Considering that scox officially does not own linux, and that scox has filed for bankruptcy, and scox has been delisted, and msft doesn't need scox: yeah, I think we can stick a fork in it.

  44. Fat Lady... by ehaggis · · Score: 1

    ...Please sing! When will it end?

    --
    One ring to bind them - should probably have more fiber and less rings in their diet.
  45. Re:That business plan in full - not quite by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    More like this:

    1. Arrange a deal with msft to fud linux for big money.
    2. Launch strategic litigation doomed from start - but "winning" is not the point.
    3. Accept $17 million directly from msft - and $12 million directly from Sun.
    4. Accpet $50 million in msft arranged "loan."
    5. Stock price skyrocket
    6. Some Execs dump insanely inflated stock - then resign
    7. Execs that are left give themselves extremely generous pay and bonus for over 5 years
    8. Profit! (for those in on the scam)
    9. Reality sets in
    10. Stock takes a dump
    11. Loss! (for the suckers left holding the bag)

    Stock price, scox profits, etc, are just a distraction. The real point of the scox-scam is to put a legal cloud over linux. Msft wants everybody to know that if you contribute to linux, you better have $50 - $100 million to fight msft in 5 year long bogus lawsuit.

  46. As Seinfeld would say by pak9rabid · · Score: 1

    thats a shame.

  47. The title frightened me for a second by VampireByte · · Score: 1

    When I saw "grim" I thought that meant SCO had somehow found a way to survive.

    --

    Run and catch, run and catch, the lamb is caught in the blackberry patch.

  48. Not pieces! Some one please eat them whole! by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    If they are split up into pieces, it increases the likely hood that some well funded patent troll will pick up part of them and resume the lawsuits. I'd like it if the court just rules that all of SCO belongs to Novell. Then Novell should just release any of the things that SCO claimed were UNIX code, or ideas as GPL.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
    1. Re:Not pieces! Some one please eat them whole! by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1

      I doubt Novell can release SCO's products under the GPL.

      If you've ever dealt with a SCO system, the copyrights are a complete mess. Many of the header files have Microsoft copyright notices along with the ones you would expect. There's BSD notices. There's AT&T notices. The cost of sorting all of this out to where it could be released under any license would probably be extreme.

      Then SCO made a bigger mess by packaging FOSS into their "custom" packages, not giving notice to SCO users about the real source of it.

      And, just my personal little rant, why should it be GPL? Big chunks of it are BSD-derived. Why not the darn BSD license? GPL is great if you're trying to make a political statement, but it scares the lawyers, especially lawyers who aren't used to technology.

      --
      The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
  49. Good! by EddyPearson · · Score: 1

    Your constant patent trolling HAS NOT paid off. Now die the death reserved for legal predators like yourself.

    You've contributed sod all in the past 5 years, why? Because you couldn't be bothered to innovate.

    I don't want to hear the name SCO mentioned again, they're a bunch of jumped up layabout lawyers, who are quite happy to take with the left and sue with the right. Fuck them, they won't be missed.

    --
    You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
  50. a slight correction by cp.tar · · Score: 1

    s/thinks/claims

    --
    Ignore this signature. By order.
  51. SCO business plan under Darl by swschrad · · Score: 1

    1. wildly optimistic legal research

    2. sue everybody including star customers

    3. hunker down for duration of battle to ultimate victory.

    4. crash and burn against wall of common sense and law

    5. ???

    6. liquidation in disgrace.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  52. Re:I think this would be appropriate... by lazarusdishwasher · · Score: 1

    I think you might be wrong, if I remember the movie correctly the east and west each had a wicked witch. So if we are drawing parallels to the movie we should be looking for the magical ruby slippers to prevent the other witch from becoming more powerful. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_Witch_of_the_East

  53. Queue the Office Space soundtrack by restive · · Score: 1

    "...die motherf-cker, die motherf-cker..."

  54. why is this on /. a week late? by ChipC · · Score: 1

    The date on the Groklaw article is Jan 30, 2008, about a week ago. I read it then ... why is it considered news today?

    1. Re:why is this on /. a week late? by dacarr · · Score: 1

      I, for one, didn't see the 10K report until I ran into in on Yahoo. Apparently, there aren't enough of us keeping eyes on PJ. =^_^=

      --
      This sig no verb.
  55. Yes but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'll have a party when they are dead, buried, and go away. Not before.
    This is P.R.

  56. $699 license fee by jgoemat · · Score: 1

    If you had bought $225,483.87 worth of SCO stock at $20 per share (11274 shares) you could now sell it at $0.062 per share to pay for your $699 license fee for a single processor... Or you could have shorted 36 shares back then and actually made enough money to pay the fee.

  57. Yeah, we know.... by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    There were just following orders.

    Everybody does.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  58. Re:Darl & lawyers should be prosecuted for fra by jd · · Score: 1

    Well, he took care to not be caught by SCO shareholders before now, and as for custodianship, maybe the ship he was custodian of was the Titanic.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  59. Well, they joined Cartoon Network, and... by jd · · Score: 1

    ...Billy and Mandy decided Darl would make a good substitute reaper for that episode.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  60. Awww man! by splatterboy · · Score: 1

    I wanted a smoking crater not a smoking hole...

    --
    "Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts." ~The Honorable Daniel Patrick Moynihan
  61. BSD is cool with me. by Bill,+Shooter+of+Bul · · Score: 1

    No problem. Just said GPL cause thats what the license of linux is. Therefore it couldn't possibly be a problem to have Gpl'd cod in a program that was licensed under GPL. But BSD works as well. Really looking forward to putting BSD 7 through its paces. Much love for BSD.

    --
    Well.. maybe. Or Maybe not. But Definitely not sort of.
  62. Two words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good riddance.

  63. Feel bad for Darl, I've got a job for him. by LostMyBeaver · · Score: 1

    I believe I can find him a solid and stable position within my firm with good benefits and fair pay. We haven't had a full janitorial staff on hand for a long time and if he'd like, we can start him at an entry level position where he can progress to chief toilet scrubber in the first 6 months and within 5-10 years, I'm sure he can be head janitor since the current janitor looks like he's getting ready to keal over.