Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Red Hat Stock Splitting

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the splitting-heirs dept.

zerOnIne writes "ZDII has a story detailing that Red Hat plans to split their stock on a 2-for-1 basis, sometime about January 7. " The story also talks about Red Hat filing a 3.6 million dollar loss on a revenue of 5.4 million. Sales were up 24 percent from this time last year.

146 comments

  1. Oracle as well by DarkClown · · Score: 1

    Oracle is splitting as well.
    I was at CompUSA this weekend and actually saw people purchasing both corel and redhat. Cool!!

  2. Damn! by randombit · · Score: 1

    Christ, I knew I should have gotten in when I could have. I know a guy who got in at $80, he'll be raking in the cash now... [Guess who feels stupid now!!!]

    First post?

    1. Re:Damn! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a shock, Slashdot reports on Redhat splitting, but nothing on them posting a $3.6 million loss. As has been said before, nothing negative about Linux will ever appear on Slashdot.

  3. First Post no Doubt by NatePWIII · · Score: 0

    How can they have a loss when their making that much money?!? Thats insane.
    You'd think by now they were rolling in the cash with Redhat's popularity. I mean even I bought a copy just 'cause I wanted the cool Redhat Stickers .

    Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
    NPS Internet Solutions, LLC npsis.net

    --

    Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
    www.haidacarver.com
    1. Re:First Post no Doubt by speek · · Score: 1

      They didn't make that much money. 5.4 million is a piddling amount. I had no idea they were that small. I'd say they will need to continue "losing" for a long time, especially once you realize that "losing" money is another way of saying they re-invested it into growing the business. This avoids losing the money to taxes and shareholders.

      --
      First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
    2. Re:First Post no Doubt by bubbasatan · · Score: 2

      Well, it's a fairly simple matter to have revenues of $54 million and a net loss of $36 million. Revenue is (to oversimplify a bit) the amount of money brought in. Net income (or loss) is essentially income minus expenses. In this case, that means that Red Hat spent more than they took in. Most accountants would accuse me of tragically oversimplifying this matter, but that is my right as an American. On another tack, RedHat's revenues were significantly higher this year than one year ago. That is a good sign. Now it's up to management to turn those higher revenues into a net profit. I am not exactly a RedHat fan, because I believe that RedHat is showing some early signs of Microsoftian corporatism, and that is highly counterproductive to the open source movement. However, I must temper my anti-RedHat sentiments with the facts that a) they are promoting a better product than Microsoft has ever created, b) they are open source contributors, and c) it's just plain Linux. We all take a few bitter pills, so I guess I'll reluctantly throw in my support for RedHat's continued success.

      --
      Windows is going the way of phlogiston...
    3. Re:First Post no Doubt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that is 5.4 and 3.6 million.. Not 54 and 36.. They have a long way to go to get to those tiny numbers..

    4. Re:First Post no Doubt by Jburkholder · · Score: 2

      Because they are plowing money into their 'product' instead of controlling expenses instead to make a profit. They are very early in their lifetime as a companyand are spending money expanding and ramping up their offering and r&d in anticipation of future revenues.


      Someone in the market thinks that they will be making _far_ more that $54 million in revenue per year in years to come. So they pour all that capital into expenses like paying salaries, hiring talent, etc and in 5 years their revenue should be in hundreds of millions, then they will dial back on expenses to generate a net of 30% or more. That kind of a return will be what corporate investors will probably be looking for from a semi-mature growth company. I dunno. If I had cash on hand I would buy up some shares.

    5. Re:First Post no Doubt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Acquisitions, like the Be and Corel rumors will definitely put RH in the poor house.

  4. Gawd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Huge losses for this quarter.

    Stock soaring to the point of needing to split.

    God, I love Wall St.

    1. Re:Gawd by speek · · Score: 2

      It all depends on market value. If the stock plunged to what common sense would dictate the company was "really" worth, there'd probably be a number of companies lining up to buy them out, thus driving the stock price up (unless a majority of shares were held back by RedHat to prevent this).

      Losses are not really indicative that the company isn't worth anything. They made money - they just are re-investing it, which is exactly what they should do. If you could declare a loss to the government, even though you'd made all sorts of money, I'm sure you would, to avoid taxes.

      --
      First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
    2. Re:Gawd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      True that their revenues did grow, but their losses grew at a greater percentage. This is what you should be looking at here, I think.

    3. Re:Gawd by speek · · Score: 1

      So either they've become much more inefficient (unlikely), or, they're investing more aggressively (very likely). Whether I (as a hypothetical shareholder) think this is good depends on whether I think their business plan warrants, and will repay, the risk.

      It seems obvious that they are simply investing more aggressively (partnering with Dell, buying Cygnus being primary evidence of this).

      Personally, I'd be more concerned that their revenue grew only 24%. That just doesn't seem high enough for all the hype around RedHat, Linux, and their stock price. At that rate, it will take them approx. 3 years to reach 12 million in annual revenue. Another 3 to reach 25 million.......
      They'd better ramp up that growth rate in the next year, or it won't be good. But, I expect they will.

      --
      First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
    4. Re:Gawd by Skyshadow · · Score: 2
      [sigh]

      Look, you can argue that Red Hat is or isn't a good stock buy at this point, but you can not argue that it makes any sort of technical sense. Based on earnings, P/E and any other indicators you can imagine, Red Hat is a laughably overvalued stock. No amount of aggressive investments or aquisitions are going to be able to fix that.

      The whole thing is going to come down hard. When it does, I worry that the whole Linux community will be discredited in the eyes of the business-types. I also worry that a lot of geeks (many of whom think they're somehow suddenly market gurus) are going to lose their shirts.

      Geeks without shirts can be downright ugly.

      ----

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    5. Re:Gawd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is any one as concerned as me? I think companies like this are going to cause a big bubble worse than the depression. My prediction for 2000, if we make it!

    6. Re:Gawd by symbolic · · Score: 1

      I LAUGHED when I saw this. Here we have a company with a market cap of more than $18 BILLION, with revenues of only $5 MILLION, and a $3.6 million loss for the year. I can't help but think that at some point, there are going to be an AWFUL lot of people losing an AWFUL lot of money once the stock price starts to reflect the real value of the company. Is the market just STOOPID or what?

    7. Re:Gawd by Skyshadow · · Score: 2
      Well, it does make sense to make money in this fashion if and while you can. It's just a matter of knowing when to escape.

      ----

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
  5. 24% growth? by speek · · Score: 1

    24% growth doesn't seem like fast enough growth to justify the way their stock price has grown.

    --
    First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
    1. Re:24% growth? by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 2

      That is 24% PER QUARTER. That is an TERRIFIC growth rate. Most companies do well to get 15% per year. Dell, one of the fastest growing companies I ever heard of has been growing at 50%/year in the past.

  6. This is not news by um...+Lucas · · Score: 4

    I'll go ahead and take away my +1 bonus because i'm about to say somehting that's not nice about redhat. Well, not redhat... But just because everyone here owns Redhat stock, that doesn't make this a newsworthy event... Stocks split all the time. It changes nothing. You get twice as many shares but they're all now worth 1/2 as much. They do this to "make the stock more accessible to the smaller investors" which means nothing because anyone can buy a single share of the stock... and if you can't squirrel away $200 for a single share of the stock, you shouldn't be buying up stocks anyways... Show your support for the company by buying their products instead.

    1. Re:This is not news by mrdisco99 · · Score: 1
      If the stock is made more accessible, then smaller investors are more likely to buy it, thus making it more attractive. Granted, it's not much, but it can drive the price up slightly. Also, splitting is a sign that the stock price has gone up considerably, and thus is doing well.

      +++

      --

      +++
      NO CARRIER

    2. Re:This is not news by Nehemiah+S. · · Score: 3

      This is very inaccurate. A stock split is good for the stockholders for several reasons.

      First off, the smallest amount of change that can occur in a stock is 1/16 of a dollar- called a "teenie" in wall-street speak. Think about what this means- originally there were 60 million RH shares, now there are 120. If the stock moves at the minimum possible delta, you make twice as much money when the stock has split. It doesn't sound like much, but once it has split 2:1 four times you are talking rounding up (or down) a whole dollar/original share every time the price moves. That's a lot of capitalization on a technicality.

      Another reason the price matters is that many people are shallow enough to think that since RHAT is going for 236 and MSFT is at 110, RHAT is overvalued. They don't always look to see that there are 5.174 billion microsoft shares out there, compared to the 60 million rhats. (because msft has split a dozen times or more)People are more likely to buy 50 shares at 75 than 50 shares at 250- that is just human nature.

      I can surely think of more reasons, but my office is starting a Christmas party and if I don't run I will miss the apple pie... yumm...

      Rev. Nehemiah

      --
      ... and there is no doubt, that one day he will be
      where the eye of his telescope has already been
    3. Re:This is not news by speek · · Score: 1

      Some would argue that splitting the stock is an artificial way to increase it's market value, mostly by the mechanisms you describe. They mask the real and true data of how the company is actually doing, and try to get people to buy with these psychological tricks. Shareholders might say this is a good thing to do - it makes my stock go up, but some would suggest that artificially inflating the market is a bad idea. I generally would agree that it is bad to do.

      Great sig, btw!!

      --
      First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
    4. Re:This is not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > First off, the smallest amount of change that > can occur in a stock is 1/16 of a dollar- > called a "teenie" in wall-street speak. Bzzt. thanks for playing... stocks can (and do)move in increments as small as 1/256. dont open yr big yapper if you dont know what the hell yr talking about.

    5. Re:This is not news by rsborg · · Score: 1
      First off, the smallest amount of change that can occur in a stock is 1/16 of a dollar- called a "teenie" in wall-street speak.

      Then why do I constantly see stock prices like 23 31/64, or 45 117/128? If these prices are valid, then your first point doesn't carry a lot of water.

      Honestly, I would like to know...

      Your other points do make sense, tho (as opposed to making $$)

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    6. Re:This is not news by kootch · · Score: 2

      completely bogus.

      "If the stock moves at the minimum possible delta, you make twice as much money when the stock has split"

      - nope. you're making the same amount whether the stock splits or not. Face it. And if you're really worried about a 1/16 up or down, you really should get another job as shown by the daytrading info out there.

      ":Another reason the price matters is that many people are shallow enough to think that since RHAT is going for 236 and MSFT is at 110, RHAT is overvalued. They don't always look to see that there are 5.174 billion microsoft shares out there, compared to the 60 million rhats. (because msft has split a dozen times or more)People are more likely to buy 50 shares at 75 than 50 shares at 250- that is just human nature. "

      no offense, but the average investors doesn't make a difference to the stock price. Fund managers and investment bankers that buy in blocks way and above the means of the normal joe investor are the ones that move the stock. "Market Makers".

      One reason that it DOES make sense for companies to split their stock is to make it more available to their employees who have options and strike prices on their shares. The company really doesn't care about joe investor in terms of making the stock price more available.

      One other thing that splitting the stock IS good for is increasing the float (number of outstanding shares). Increasing the float generally stabilizes the stock price a bit, especially in low cap stocks or stocks that only sold a few million shares. This prevents run-ups on unavailable shares of stock.

    7. Re:This is not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you really should get another job as shown by the daytrading info out there.

      heh... coming from someone whose homepage is students.hamilton.edu???

      rotflmao.

    8. Re:This is not news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, what's newsworthy is the fact that only a few months after RHL came on the market at -- what, $15 a share? I forget -- it's already gone up to where it HAS to split before people can afford to buy more. (Still kicking myself, HARD, for not buying a round-lot when I could have.. ;-)

      Another newsworthy point is that RHL *does* have the fundamentals to back up its valuation .. IBM is not a small customer.

  7. Rehdhat Stock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    stock splitting while losing money? cool!! How do I do that?

    WORST POST!!!

  8. Check out all those new cars! by meckardt · · Score: 2

    Our office is right down the street from Red Hat's new HQ. We've noticed a substantial increase in the average value of the car driven by Red Hat employees during the last few months.

    I'm sure that this earnings news is going to have some impact on the cost of Red Hat's shares, but I don't think that it will bother option holding employees all that much!


    Mike Eckardt meckardt@spam.yahoo.com
    1. Re:Check out all those new cars! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seeing as how none of the employees at Red Hat can sell their stock until sometime around late February, I'd say this can be chalked up to imagination more than reality. Either that, or the Red Hat employees coincidentally bought expensive cars at the same time.

      Either way, the IPO hasn't brought any of them any riches yet. Their wealth is still on paper.

    2. Re:Check out all those new cars! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they're just cashing in their options before the stock tanks.

    3. Re:Check out all those new cars! by tytso · · Score: 1

      Remember, RHAT is still in their lockout phase. So none of the employees are using RHAT stocks/stock options to raise money for those nice cars. It's likely that they got the $$$ off of other Linux company stocks (Corel, Andover, Applix, etc.)

  9. Could be good by jd · · Score: 2
    I'm surprised they're only doing 2:1, given the share price. They could easily have managed a 3:1, or even squeezed 4:1, and still kept the share prices within the "conventional" range (read: between the ground and the stratosphere).

    As for their profits, it shouldn't be too long before they're in the black, on the balance sheet. Their growth has been consistant, up to now, but should take off now that they're getting the attention of the suits as well as the techs.

    A couple of years ago, I predicted that within 6 years, Linux would match Microsoft in the total number of users out there. 4 more years to go, and it's looking like I might not be too far off track.

    --
    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)
    1. Re:Could be good by bigbird · · Score: 1
      A couple of years ago, I predicted that within 6 years, Linux would match Microsoft in the total number of users out there. 4 more years to go, and it's looking like I might not be too far off track.


      The difference is, not every user will be paying for the software. How many copies of Linux do you think a company that wants to run it on 500 machines? 1, 5, maybe 10?


      Even if the number of Linux users matches that of Windows, copies purchased will be an order of magnitude less - and divided between the different distributions.

      --
      Great Windows SFTP Server!
  10. Caldera by fishlet · · Score: 1


    Question: Isn't Caldera a public company as well? How has there stock done compared to Red Hat?

    --


    Blender And Linux Fan
    1. Re:Caldera by SoftwareJanitor · · Score: 2

      No, Caldera is still privately held, and is owned largely by Ransome Love and the Noorda family trust. There have been rumors of a Caldera IPO floating around by haven't heard any particular date or price mentioned.

  11. This gives me the shivers by hodeleri · · Score: 1

    Red hat loses 3.6m and gains 5.4m and is splitting two for one. This flashes that gets that little warning light in the back of my head blinking.

    Just the same, I can't see why this would be bad, there just isn't really much of an obstacle to their growth. This is probably what REALLY freaks me out.

    --
    marotti.com
    1. Re:This gives me the shivers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just you wait, the bubbles goin' a burst. I assure you of that.

  12. Damn stocksplits... by Jikes · · Score: 3

    Perhaps we should move #redhat to UnderNYSE... Their servers don't suck so f***ing much...

    --
    -troll taker
  13. Actually splitting does make a difference. by winterstorm · · Score: 1
    Stocks don't split all the time, though in this bull market it does happen more often. When a stock splits it makes the stock more affordable and I suspect that it makes the stock price a bit more stable. If you are suddenly given 200 shares where you had 100, you can sell half and keep half where previously you had to sell all or nothing (generally selling anything less than 100 shares is considered an "odd lot" and your not always allowed to sell "odd lots".

    I don't know anything about stocks, this is just my guess.

    1. Re:Actually splitting does make a difference. by xyzzy · · Score: 2

      This "odd lot" stuff is a myth. There is no additional cost to buying/selling 100 shares, although commissions might kill you. This has been true for like ~20 years now, since deregulation of the securities industry.

      The issue of small investors, however, is very real. If you want to invest $2,000, and the share price is $3,000, you can't even get in the game. If the share price is $1,200, you can only buy *1* share, and you have $800 you can't do anything with. I've made these numbers up, but when you're talking share prices in the > $200 range, the effect is an issue. Smaller share prices let you fit the money you have to invest to a number of shares with greater ease.

      And for an extreme example, check out Berkshire Hathaway, which has never split its stock. The ticker is BRK.A, and it's trading at $54,000 a share today. They issued special shares, BRK.B, to deal with this issue, which trade at exactly 1/30th of the price.

  14. success is great, but it can be dangerous by mathboy · · Score: 1

    What happens when you pour $1B into linux over 2-3 years in this huge hype? Are we all sure this wont change the face of Linux, and OSS in general from all this money being involved? Remember money tends to corrupt - you will see branding, competition inside linux itself, and suddenly people will be writing code for one distribution that will absolutely NOT work on any other - because its been designed that way. Major software writers today who have 'OSS morals' may not do this - but what will joe blow coder for Linux startup X be doing when his boss indicates that this is a Good Thing[tm]?

    Already we see MUCH code that is totally unusable on *BSD coming out of coders using linux. They're writing code thats pretty general, they just happen to be using linux at the time - next thing you know it wont run anywhere else.

    What happens when people take this the next step further and write for only one distribution?

    Bill Gates will be looking to do a replay of the fracturing of the Unix market as what happened in the 80s - we do NOT want this to happen again.

    Math

    1. Re:success is great, but it can be dangerous by evilpenguin · · Score: 2

      When the source is open, I just can't see this happening. This has been touted time and time again, and it just keeps not happening.

      It does hilight the importance of educating those consumers now thinking about Linux in what free software is, what the various licenses mean, and why it matters that the source be now and forever free/open, even if the consumer is not a programmer and never intends to be. We need to make sure people understand how the source protects consumer interests.

      I have seen no signs of efforts to create incompatbility, although I have seen potential for incompatibility arising out of sheer complexity. That's why I think the LSB project remains important.

    2. Re:success is great, but it can be dangerous by deefer · · Score: 2

      suddenly people will be writing code for one distribution that will absolutely NOT work on any other

      Well, this will happen. I'm a Win32 coder by day (oh, the shame, this will be instant Score : -1 Troll :) and getting into Linux by night / weekend. I don't have time or inclination to do much more than that; there's too much to get my head around and frankly too much coding can kill you. I don't have time to play with *BSD distributions.
      That said, I do play at coding under Linux (port scanning stuff at the minute hehehe :). It's hard enough as it is, without having to get into other OS's as well. But when I get something together that's worth letting other people see, I will GPL it, and publish it on my website. And if someone wants to use it on *BSD, they're welcome to take my code, and get it to run on their box, it they think it's a useful tool. That's the power of the GPL, IMHO...

      --

      Strong data typing is for those with weak minds.

    3. Re:success is great, but it can be dangerous by sansbury · · Score: 1

      Just because Red Hat has a market cap of 18.25 Billion does not mean that they have 18.25 billion dollars cash in the bank. All it means is that based on the number of shares currently being traded, people are willing to pay ~$260 for one of them. Multiply by X shares, and you get the market cap.

      Red Hat got a small portion of that 18 billion when it sold shares in the IPO, and can make more if it seels more of the shares it holds. But that would increase the supply on the open market, which pushes the price down.

      All of which is not to say that there isn't a lot of Linux money out there now, only that it may not be as much as you think. As they say, paper money...

      -cwk.

    4. Re:success is great, but it can be dangerous by mathboy · · Score: 1

      It HAS already happened. As it is people write code already for LINUX specifically, even tho its just generic unix code (hell, with a bit more care it would even run under Win95). I dont see a problem with writing the most compatible code if the overhead to do so is low. But already people rely on specifics of that disitribution.

      As I said, there are a number of things that cant be compiled for FreeBSD just because they were developped under linux. And Im not talking IPCHAINS or something else that talks to the linux Kernel. Im talking generic stuff like "this is a nice personal scheduler" or the like. (Possibly a pathalogical example, but there are many examples near this.)

      Check this The Register Article about how Redhat is now losing more money than it was before.

      What happens when the major shareholders come calling for their profits in 3 years? These shareholders may not understand OSS at all. "I thought this was going to be the next Microsoft! Where's my money!" and they may suggest solutions of "Well, obviously all the linux distros are doing well, I dont see why we dont hold 95% of the market. Start branding, just like Microsoft did." Before you know it, people working at these companies are going to have to make important decisions about how they want to write software, as well as package it, or even market it. THere's no OSS marketing guide out there, we're just trusting people out there to do the right thing.

      And when these upstanding moral coders who believe in OSS have to QUIT to standup for their beliefs - then someone will take their place in 5 seconds, and do as the executives say, who do as the board of directors say, who in turn represent the shareholders.

      I think we will begin seeing this in a couple years.

      I KNOW that redhat is supposedly making its money on service and support as well as training courses and the like, but people are likely to call up support at the place where they bought their distro from. If RedHat doesnt hold 95% of the Linux distro market, then by definition it WILL be facing competition. This is a good thing for consumers in traditional pay-for-software markets, but bad for OSS which is bad for consumers when the software WAS free.

      Competition makes companies stake out territories and hold onto them. This is done through branding as I said, and through fostering loyalty. If enough loyalty isnt generated from mere 'great service', then I would say that proprietary code and protocols will be rearing their ugly heads before we know it.

      All Im saying is we should be VIGILANT. Is there any reason not to be?

      Math.

    5. Re:success is great, but it can be dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about all this hype surrounding Red Hat in general. Personally I find it rather worrisome on the whole... How many people out there are still trying to find out how the stock value of a company selling so-called "free software" in $99 boxes at major software stores can be worth over $200/share besides me? Its ridiculous... how much longer will it take for Red Hat to become almost like a Microsoft of Linux? It is already starting to get to the point where the Red Hat brand name is being used interchangably to describe Linux in general. Red Hat will become a huge corporation on the shoulders of countless free software developers out there whose code makes up Linux, and most of them aren't getting a cent! I've heard the excuses.. the price tag is for the box, the manuals, but really -- none of it would even be necessary if that software wasn't in that box also. Personally, I really like Linux. I use it both at work and at home, and recommend it to countless people as a network administrator and consultant. I just think we should keep free software exactly that - free.

    6. Re:success is great, but it can be dangerous by evilpenguin · · Score: 2

      I don't disagree with you that it is something to be concerned about, but so long as the code is GPL'ed it simply cannot go far. They can't take it under. Period. Sure they can write proprietary extensions, but how many open source developers will use a closed interface? I know I won't do so.

      I think the concern is overstated.

      "Branding" is fine (well, not really -- Intels campaign suggesting that a Pentium III will miraculously energize your 33.6 kbps Internet connection springs to mind), but I do not see how adding closed extensions to RedHat could possibly be perceived as an advatage in the marketplace. Let's say you're a closed source ISV (like an Intuit) who decides to port your product to Linux. Do you do it in a way that ensures you can market to the largest possible number of computers, or do you do it in a way that narrows the market?

      Microsoft did not get to be the lion's share of the desktop market by fragmenting the market; they did it by consolidating the market. Developers started writing apps exclusively for Windows after Windows controlled the market. Many ISVs still develop Mac versions, and those that don't took a look at the cost of porting their code to gain a small market share and decided it wasn't worth it. If RedHat amounts to 50% of the Linux market, and Linux comes to be, say, 20% of the PC market, then ISVs might well port to Linux, but are unlikely to port to RedHat exclusive extensions.

      As for anyone dumb enough to buy RedHat stock at current prices, you get what you deserve. By now, it should be obvious to anyone that there is a bit of a bubble in the technology stocks, esp. the linux and .com stocks.

      If you bought 'em cheap, swell. Hold 'em. If not, I'd take my profit before it evaporates.

  15. Splits don't make mony by Booker · · Score: 2

    [Guess who feels stupid now!!!]

    I give up... you? :-)

    A stock split doesn't make anybody any money. If you had $1000 of RHAT immediately pre-split, you'll have $1000 of RHAT immediately post-split.

    Kind of like the guy who went in to buy a pizza, and they asked if he wanted it cut into 8 pieces or 6 pieces. He said "better make it 6, I could never eat 8 pieces..."
    ----

    1. Re:Splits don't make mony by randombit · · Score: 1

      If you had $1000 of RHAT immediately pre-split, you'll have $1000 of RHAT immediately post-split.

      Yes, I know, but I've read that after stock splits the price usually jumps up, because the stock becomes more affordable (ie, it's ~240 now, but it will only cost ~120 afterwards, so it at least seems cheaper, though of course you only own half a share in pre-split terms then).

      Of course this is a sign that RH stock is doing good generally as well.

    2. Re:Splits don't make mony by Wah · · Score: 1

      yes, but the next time a news story or alliance drives the price up $6, you make $12. Given the volatility of many stocks and Linux's current hot prospects, this should make stockholders happy. Too bad to hear their revenue growth, I hope they can weather the storms (from cautious stockholders), show OSS has a business future, and remain Free. (not beer)

      --
      +&x
    3. Re:Splits don't make mony by Dman33 · · Score: 1

      You are right and you are wrong. Yes, the split itself does not actually make anyone money, but as a result of the split
      - shares become more affordable
      (which will spur additional trading == good thing)
      - and if the company continues it's success it leads to better profits down the road.

      If RHAT goes up 17 points because of some good news wouldn't you rather have double the shares you had last month???

      So yes, someone that got in at $80 is doing fine right now.

    4. Re:Splits don't make mony by Ares · · Score: 2

      The company I work for has had a habit of splitting; the board likes to keep the price around 100-120 a share. So, the price gets up to 150 or so, they declare a 3:2 split, 200 or so gets a 2:1. Last time we were trading at about 80, they called for a 3:2. The price went up 10 that day. At the closing bell on the div-date, we traded at 300, which takes us to 200 split adjusted. We're now at 250. *

      What's my point? When a split is declared, the price of the stock tends to go up, so everyone can double the number of shares they have, for the reasons mentioned in some of the other posts in this thread. Fact is, this is typical stock behavior. So, even though the actual split doesn't change the value of the stock, the calue goes up in the time preceding the split. Incidentally, we tend to take a small hit in the week or so after the split (no doubt from the people who sell off the shares they gained, in profit-taking).

  16. Who cares? by st.n. · · Score: 2
    Is this really "news for nerds"? I mean, every company splits its stock once in a while, and when looking at the current price of RHAT it looks quite reasonable to split it. But that doesn't change anything substantial, so I can't see the reason why this is a /. news.

    - Stephan.

    Carpe diem.

    1. Re:Who cares? by drewsiph · · Score: 1
      Some nerds are interested in the financial markets, and some are not. that does not mean that the mainstream "news for nerds" should boycott the interests of those nerds who may not be mainstream.

      Of course if anyone asks me, I am not a nerd; i am a geek.

      -drew

      ---------------------------------------
      "But can she pound the mileage?"
      "I'm going out for an easy 10, how about you?"

    2. Re:Who cares? by st.n. · · Score: 1
      Just for the record, I am interested in financial markets, and I have Red Hat shares myself. But I'm a bit surprised to find every single financial news now on slashdot ... if I want those I usually went to Yahoo's split calendar or something similar.

      And on nerd vs. geek, since I'm not a native English speaker, I'm not that good at those fine differences - sorry.

      - Stephan.

      Carpe diem.

    3. Re:Who cares? by ncc74656 · · Score: 1
      And on nerd vs. geek, since I'm not a native English speaker, I'm not that good at those fine differences - sorry.

      One way to look at it is that a nerd is someone who thinks he's cool or wants to be cool, but most definitely is not cool, while a geek is someone who really doesn't give a damn one way or the other.

      The Geek Code website (no link because I don't remember where it is/was) had another "nerd vs. geek" definition. The Jargon File should also have some useful info regarding nerds and geeks.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    4. Re:Who cares? by barleyguy · · Score: 1

      Rule # 1: If it's on Slashdot, it automatically becomes "News for Nerds", because this is the news, and this is where the nerds are.

      Rule # 2: Most stories have at least one post that says "Is this really news for nerds?". I think this is a waste of a perfectly good post.

      Rule # 3: If you don't like a story, skip over it. I, for example, tend to skip over anything written by JonKatz, because I can't stand his writing style. But I don't go bitch about it (except right now, of course).

      Rule # 4: Somebody cares. One persons earth shattering news is another persons complete drivel.

      I'll get off my soapbox......

      --
      --- "So THAT's what an invisible barrier looks like!" - Time Bandits
    5. Re:Who cares? by smileyy · · Score: 1

      I believe the argument is that /. has a story capacity of n stories a day. If m stories are posted that a lot of people think isn't news for nerds like it was back in the good old days, then /. is only ( ( 1 - m/n ) * 100 )% as useful as it used to be.

      --
      pooptruck
  17. FirstPostBot 2000 by fishlet · · Score: 0


    Be the first on your block to own a copy of FirstPostBot 2000. This powerful application monitors Slashdot automaticly and when a new story arrives... quickly submit's a FIRST POST message in your behalf... LIKE MAGIC! All you have to do is start it and forget it! Our helpful TrollSoft staff is ready and willing to help you will all your Slashdot posting needs. For more info, contact us at 555-1212.

    --


    Blender And Linux Fan
    1. Re:FirstPostBot 2000 by zabraboof · · Score: 1

      I'd like the phone number for the Post Office, please :)

  18. Growth is 24 percent versus last quarter by JMcJames · · Score: 5

    A couple of folks have misreported this (including Slashdot). Third quarter growth is 24 percent from the previous quarter. The growth is 63 percent compared to 3rd quarter of last year.

    1. Re:Growth is 24 percent versus last quarter by speek · · Score: 1

      Aha! I've been spouting off about how 24% growth didn't seem so hot to me, so thank you for making this clear.

      63% is very respectable, and a world of difference from 24%.

      (switching to my on-lin broker......)

      --
      First, make it work, then make it right, then make it fast, then, make it bloated!
    2. Re:Growth is 24 percent versus last quarter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      redhats growth will probably take a big hit when the corel distro gets proper recognition. most people new to linux find corel WAY easier than redhat. and in the end , new users are what will drive growth.

  19. What I want to know by FascDot+Killed+My+Pr · · Score: 1

    Three years ago RedHat estimated there were 7-10 million Linux users (in the US?). I also heard that up until then the marketshare was doubling every year.

    Well, I think it's obvious that Linux is growing faster now, but let's say it is still x2 every year. That somewhere between 56 and 80 million Linux users, right now.

    1) Are any of these numbers still accurate?

    2) If so, and Linux is doubling (or more) every year, why did RedHat do so poorly (24% vs 100%)?
    ---

    --
    Linux MAPI Server!
    http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
    (Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
    1. Re:What I want to know by kuro5hin · · Score: 2
      If the use of linux as a whole is doubling every year, that doesn't necessarily mean that each linux distro's sales will double every year. It is still free software, and many people will get their CD's from cheapbytes, so nibble off that bit of the market. Then figure that since there's no legal restrictions on the number of installs you can do from a single CD, that'll bite off another chunk of redhat's sales (ie a company would only buy one disk, even if it was converting ten servers to linux). Factor in people installing from their buddy's RH 5.2 CD, etc etc. You get the picture.

      I think a 24% increase in sales is actually pretty stunning, for an idea that most people said was insane to begin with. I mean, they're selling software that can be had for free or extremely low-cost in many places (ok, I know 80 bucks isn't particularly expensive, but it is compared to 3 bucks). In any case, I think that capturing nearly a quarter of that 2x increase in direct sales is pretty damn good, and better than I would have projected for them, if I were trying to work out the numbers before the fact.

      Just my 2% of $1. :-)

      "Get away from my house you freak!"
      -Neal Stephenson

      --
      There is no K5 cabal.
      I am not the real rusty.
  20. bang by josepha48 · · Score: 1
    that is the sound of the gun as I shoot my self for not having the money at the time that I was invited to buy the stock.. does anyone else want to shoot them selves because of similar situation.. I am glad that they are doing so well, I just wish I was on the bandwagon...

    send flames > /dev/null

    --

    Only 'flamers' flame!

  21. Stock splits are good by trance9 · · Score: 2

    The net brought us online daytrading, and now with Red Hat, VA, PERL, etc., the daytraders finally have something to do: get all excited over HOT! HOT! HOT! linux stocks.

    This split is great. Previously options on RHAT were just too damn expensive--you buy and sell options in units of 100, and at RHAT's prices that meant the minimum options bet was a couple thousand dollars. Now that RHAT options are affordable, all those daytraders who are furiously reloading their stock screens and trading every five minutes have been given yet another way to blow their life savings away.

    Given that the average slashdot reader is obviously a sweaty, shifty-eyed daytrader who spends all agonizing over every 2-3% change in the price of linux stocks, this definately is stuff that matters!

  22. finance, game, and/or information theories by MattMann · · Score: 1
    this is an unsolved problem of finance theory, but many finance professors don't buy the "more affordable" reasoning because small investors can trade in odd-lots, and the odd-lot surcharge is not enough to explain the rise in share prices after a split.

    Instead, it has been suggested a la game theory that the split is an informational signal that management insiders are bullish about continued increases in the share price. mentioned FWIW...

  23. More than the static view on stock splits. by winterstorm · · Score: 1
    You can't necassarily look at a stock split in such a static light. A stock split can be the cause to an effect. For instance when a stock is so highly priced as RedHat's the split may make the stock affordable to "smaller" investors, and the increase in demand could cause the stock's price to rise post-split. On the other hand, when the stock splits each investor ends up with twice as many shares, and if they perceive the stock as volitile they might be inclined to sell as much as half of their holding because the split enables them to keep some and sell some; and that would lower the value of the stock.

    I don't know anything about the stock market; this is just my guess.

    1. Re:More than the static view on stock splits. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      A stock split can be the cause to an effect. For instance when a stock is
      so highly priced as RedHat's the split may make the stock affordable to "smaller" investors,


      You mean the people who only wanted to buy one share?

  24. Re:Who cares? (I don't) by jpc · · Score: 2

    Absolutely. Slashdot needs to go back to its roots and not become a money obsessed site for other people. Being bought was clearly a bad thing. Look what happened to Wired after they became obsessed by large piles of cash, it turned into an unreadable waste of space.

    And the adverts suck. Maybe its time to fork slashdot. Or rename it slashdot.com.

  25. Nabokov's Invitation to a Beheading by RobotWisdom · · Score: 2

    Apropos of nothing, Vladimir Nabokov used the image of a red top hat to imply someone beheaded by a guillotine.

  26. This has gone beyond rediculous... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Granted the more money RedHAT has to pour into Linux the better, however the market valuation is TOTALLY out of line with redhat's future earnings potential. Other established companies (such as corel and oracle) can come up with a linux distribution, package it with their products, support it themselves and leave redhat high and dry. No one (except us nerds) gets excited about an operating system. They want applications. If I were a stock trader, I'd be buying other linux companys, redhat seems to me like a baloon waiting to burst.

  27. Loss due to Cygnus acquisition? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I right in guessing this loss was due to Red Hat's acquisition of the Cygnus behemouth? Reporting a loss is not dangerous just as long as you meet your quarterly revenue estimate. It's companies that are overly optimistic about revenue that run into trouble on Wall St. Companies like Microsoft know the game well: they purposely underestimate revenue for the next quarter then "Surprise! We pulled raked twice as much cash as we estimated we would!" New stocks like RHAT don't have that luxury of playing numbers games (yet)

    1. Re:Loss due to Cygnus acquisition? by guacamole · · Score: 1

      acquisition != loss

      take a look at an introductory accounting text.

  28. Daytraders who don't Get It. by kuro5hin · · Score: 2
    This is why you will sell and people who understand the business will not. I see an awful lot of short-term daytraders grabbing at linux stocks because they're hot right now, and then freaking out at the fact that the company is losing money and dumping them. You will lose in this deal, because you don't understand the market that the company is in.

    I only wish I had money to buy redhat, because at $18B, the company is still vastly undervalued. MSFT is worth $579B, so by my calculations, RedHat still has $561B worth of expansion yet to do. BUT... it won't happen overnight.

    To those who get it: buy a goodly chunk of RedHat, and then squirrel it away and forget you even have it. Don't read the "investor" message boards, and don't check the ticker. Just hold onto it for dear life.

    Your children will thank you.

    "Get away from my house you freak!"
    -Neal Stephenson

    --
    There is no K5 cabal.
    I am not the real rusty.
    1. Re:Daytraders who don't Get It. by ucblockhead · · Score: 1

      The trouble with this argument is that there is really no way RedHat can be the "next Microsoft" with its current business model. Because they sell a shared resource, they will never gain the sort of market-share Microsoft has with the kind of margin Microsoft has. In addition, since they don't control the source, they can't use undocumented APIs and the like to promote the developer or application wings of their business.

      They are not a bad company. But they will never be the "next Microsoft" as long as they are a Linux company. To be the "next Microsoft", not only would Linux have to shut out Windows on the desktop, but RedHat would have to drive all other Linux distributions and app-makers into a small minority market-share. That's just not going to happen.

      (Thank God for that, BTW.)

      --
      The cake is a pie
  29. Loss == stock price increase? by Chemisor · · Score: 1

    Am I being naive or is it strange that the stock price rose after the company declared that it is operating at a loss? Seems to me like the stock is being inflated way past its real value and is bound to crash sooner or later...

  30. Your ship will come in, don't worry by cthompso · · Score: 1

    The Linux tsunami will lift all our boats, whether one owns a particular stock or not. One reason to be sanguine is the nature of Linux companies, which is to spread the wealth beyond just the top execs. So, if you are good with Linux, odds are that within 5 years you will be working for some company that gives equity (stock options, whatever) to ALL workers as a matter of course.
    So don't sweat it. I think we'll all be doing quite nicely.

  31. Put ".com" in your company name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Red Hat would have filed as "RedHat.com" this would have happened last month.

  32. Liberal conspiracy to destroy Microsoft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I see news like this, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Red Hat continually posts embarassingly bad losses and their stock continues to perform well. It kind of makes a guy wonder what's really going on behind the scenes. But when I look at what the Government is doing to Microsoft, I start thinking .. "ya know, maybe there's more here than meets the eye."

    The criminal intrusion upon Microsoft's corporate sovereignty by the Liberals in this country is stunning enough, but when I see people rally behind "products" such as Linux, I start to fear for our way of life. These people are hell-bent on destroying Microsoft, and therefore are hell-bent on destroy a major component of our nation's great economy. This nation is built on the idea of big thinkers coming up with big ideas and making a handsome reward for those ideas. The Liberals want to destroy Microsoft for its success, and they want to commoditize ideas and remove the right for individuals and corporations to control their own destinies and actions. They attempt to hide their clandestine subversions behind cries of "freedom", a popular buzzword that is at best meaningless.

    So who is propping up Red Hat's stock? I'll tell you who. These are the same people that want to be able to read all of your e-mail. These are the same people that want to take our guns away. These are the same people who preach the doctrine of "if it feels good, do it." A mind that is freed from its moral foundation is a mind that is easily controlled. That's what this is all about. Free-thinking people with strong character and moral backgrounds would never accept the introduction of Communism in this country, but if the Liberals are able to bring down Microsoft and control the minds of the people with their big-government Liberal smokescreen, Communism can do more than get one foot in the door. It can begin to make major inroads into our way of life.

    Think about it. Do you really think that the government spends $600 dollars on a hammer and $1200 on a toilet seat? Absolutely not. The Liberals take most of this money, put it in a slush fund, and use it to invest in companies that they believe will advance their cause of destroying capitalism and Christianity. Friends, they think they are winning. The sad fact is that maybe they are, at least for the time being. But it's not too late to take our country back. We can educate people about the state of affairs. The Liberal Media won't let us use their airwaves, but we've got the Internet. The Liberals haven't completely removed our ability to speech on the Internet .. not yet, anyway.

    Let's get to work.

    1. Re:Liberal conspiracy to destroy Microsoft? by WinTired · · Score: 1
      ..."freedom", a popular buzzword that is at best meaningless.

      Sadly enough, you're not the only one who thinks that way.

      --

      -------------------------
      "People ask FAQs all the time". - David Allen

    2. Re:Liberal conspiracy to destroy Microsoft? by NatePWIII · · Score: 0

      Amen.

      Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
      NPS Internet Solutions, LLC
      "yourname.com for $55"

      --

      Nathaniel P. Wilkerson
      www.haidacarver.com
    3. Re:Liberal conspiracy to destroy Microsoft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You retard.

    4. Re:Liberal conspiracy to destroy Microsoft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh, yes. "Retard." It must be comforting for you to dismiss me as a retard; then you can avoiding dealing with what I have to say. But I know things. I keep a close eye on the state of affairs in this great nation, and I see things every day that disturb me. Know this: when you're in line at Egghead buying a copy of Red Hat Linux, you may as well just take your $50 and send it off directly to the Chinese Communists in Beijing. Put it in an envelope marked "Here You Go." What will they be doing with your $50, friend? Perhaps a Silkworm missile? What about a nuclear warhead? Can I interest you in an ICBM?

      This country is surrounded by those who would do anything to destroy us. One needs only look to our neighbors to the north. The Canadian socialist regime is conspiring with the Chinese Communists to undermine our economy and take us over from within. That is what is at stake here. That is what you must consider when you purchase and install Linux, or any other non-Microsoft operating system. It's not just your future. It's the future of our children, as well.

    5. Re:Liberal conspiracy to destroy Microsoft? by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      Know this: when you're in line at Egghead buying a copy of Red Hat Linux, you may as well just take your $50 and send it off directly to the Chinese Communists in Beijing.

      I love it. You wouldn't happen to be "S" from comp.os.linux.advocacy, would you? He's made similar loopy claims, though not nearly as eloquently as you have.

    6. Re:Liberal conspiracy to destroy Microsoft? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't make me taunt you again. I'll send you running back home, crying, to Uncle Bill in Redmond, you Micronazi...

  33. Generally you can't buy just one share. by winterstorm · · Score: 2

    While it is possible to buy one share, in practice you must generally buy 1 "block" of shares which on most markets is 100 shares.

  34. Re:RedHat doomed to fail?!? by Dman33 · · Score: 2

    I take it you do not know anything about how a company works, eh? Look at what Redhat has done in the past quarter. It costs money to buy a company or two or three. The 'loss' is just reinvestment, and it is a sign that the company is really making changes. Try waiting more than one quarter to judge things like this.

  35. Look at amazon.com: Have they made dollar one yet? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the market will fall HARD once people realize that businesses can't live on pure hype forever anymore than people can stay awake on crystal meth [hi echelon!] for only so long before they finally crash.

  36. Here's why it's news by / · · Score: 3

    It's just one more milestone in the mainstreaming of Linux, and people like to hark those milestones with fanfare. Linux is officially big enough for a company selling it to split its stock.

    And besides, there are legitimate reasons for splitting one's stock: avoiding the impression of overvalue, reducing the violent swings in value that correspond to changes of a few percentage points, increasing the pool of stockholders to broaden the holdings, etc.

    --
    "If one is really a superior person, the fact is likely to leak out without too much assistance" -- John Andrew Holmes
    1. Re:Here's why it's news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is posting "only" a 3.6 million dollar loss also a milestone? So what they're splitting, they've been hyped like crazy so their stock went up. Sooner or later it will crash. It's not like RH actually makes a profit like VA Research.

    2. Re:Here's why it's news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Profit like VA Research? I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but VA Research had a net loss of $15 million for the three months ending 10/29/99. http://biz.yahoo.com/p/l/lnux.html

  37. Where's the disclaimer? by profi · · Score: 1

    CmdrTaco, where's the disclaimer stating that you own Red Hat stock and have a vital interest in reporting positive news about the company? Slashdot is getting really sleazy these days.

    1. Re:Where's the disclaimer? by Rakarra · · Score: 1
      CmdrTaco, where's the disclaimer stating that you own Red Hat stock and have a vital interest in reporting positive news about the company? Slashdot is getting really sleazy these days.

      I'd be more inclined to agree with this if he's "forgotten" to include the loss RedHat took or shoved that news out of the main announcement.

    2. Re:Where's the disclaimer? by CmdrTaco · · Score: 1

      I don't own any dork! (God I wish I did!)

      --
      Pants are still optional, but recommended for you.
  38. Wall street riding high on crystal meth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I swear, the market is being driven on pure hype. Companies taking huge losses while their stock keeps going up (Red Hat); companies that have been around for years, not yet netted dollar one, and their stock also keeps rising (amazon.com); How long can you sustain youeself on nothing? Like the guy who's been wildly productive for a week straight with no sleep riding high on crystal meth... the longer and further he rides, the harder he's going to fall later. And the fall may kill him.

    1. Re:Wall street riding high on crystal meth! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is OLD news. ;-)

  39. Doh, yes. But will it take the US down with it? by Colin+Smith · · Score: 1

    The bizarre prices of these internet stocks and Linux can't possibly last but the interesting question is will the US economy collapse as a result of the huge falls that are on the way? Will it cause panic amoung the day traders and then the hardened professionals?

    Will you have to dodge the jumpers when you walk past a cyber cafe?

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Doh, yes. But will it take the US down with it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a word, no. If all the Linux/Internet stocks crashed it would not cause a problem in the US economy. Why? Because Mutual Funds, 401k plans etc don't hold Linux or Internet stocks. They hold stable, long term profitable stock - like Microsoft. In another 10 or 15 years IF Redhat is still around and has been consistantly turning a profit for that length of time then the US economy might become vulnerable to a RH stock crash. But not today.

  40. Another reason why Stock splits are good by WillAffleck · · Score: 2

    Also, if you got in at the IPO and held the 400 shares (or the 100 I had in the second group), you can now sell some of your shares. And, if like most Linux coders, you could only scrape up enough to buy 100 shares, now you can sell 100 of them and stop scraping by with no cash reserves.

    --
    Will in Seattle
  41. Huh? Buy 100 shares, sell 99. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe no one sells shares one at a time but what's to stop you from buying the minimum lot (say 100) and then turning about and selling 99?

    1. Re:Huh? Buy 100 shares, sell 99. by winterstorm · · Score: 1
      Well technically no one can stop you but you have to find someone who wants to buy 99 shares. If you trade on-line your order will be defered for manually processing in most cases meaning your order might take quite some time to process. In this wacky world I'm sure you can do it, but I'm not sure how easy it would be.

      The on-line trading service I use (Investorline) won't let me trade odd lots easily on some exchanges. Does anyone here have any reasonable amount of experience buying/selling "odd lots"?

    2. Re:Huh? Buy 100 shares, sell 99. by Foz · · Score: 1

      I buy and sell odd lots with Datek all the time. They charge ~ $10 a trade, and consistently fill my odd lot requests very quickly.

      -- Gary F.

  42. Didn't you get the memo? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot is being renamed to "Stockdot".

    1/3 of the stories are news that we can get from any of a dozen stock-oriented sites.

    A Stockdot spokesman said, "We used to cover obscure but interesting technical material. Now that Linux has hit the stock market, however, many geeks have discovered that capitalism is fun and profitable. When your net worth increases exponentially, you don't have to worry about keeping up with the hard stuff anymore. Would you like some hot grits?"

  43. The Wisdom of the Market by vinyl1 · · Score: 3

    Ah, the wisdom of the stock market! What does this consist of? About three quarters of the men and probably half the women in the country, making bets on matters they know nothing about. Just think of all these people, and how much they know about Linux and computers, corporate finance and macro-economics. If you think this adds up to close to nothing, you may be right. For now they are all merrily marching in one direction, on the golden road to unlimited wealth. But mobs of uneducated people are not necessarily the safest bunch to fall in with. I'll stick to coding and get rich the old-fashioned way.

    1. Re:The Wisdom of the Market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know how to play with stocks, I'll make my money at the casinos, it's easier.

  44. Splits make tons of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1
    Yeah, all the people who own RHAT based on discounted net present value of future earnings stream will agree with you, splits are bookkeeping.

    The other 99% owners and prospective owners of RHAT are influenced by the psychological level of a $260 share price versus a $130 or $86.66 share price.

    The tough part is beating the crowd into the split news. Fuhgeddaboudit. Figure out how to get in on the next RHAT-at-80 instead (hint: read Slashdot and look for emerging companies).

  45. I think you need your ass kicked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ASAP

  46. [provocative] Any chance of a cover up? by LinuxParanoid · · Score: 1
    What do you think the odds are that Red Hat is announcing the split at the same time as their earnings to help enthusiasts ignore any possible negative interpretations of revenue growth in favor of the potential upside of the split?

    I.e. if hot Internet/Linux companies are supposed to grow at 100%+ year over year in this growth phase, and Linux in the past has grown 212%/year (IDC figures), would this "lowly" 63% annual growth (24%/quarter) signal a downward shift in momentum? And is the split supposed to signal the opposite?

    Your friendly paranoid,
    LinuxParanoid

  47. Ok, I have too much time on my hands =] by NickV · · Score: 1

    In light of all the linux and Internet companies being worth billions for producing no revenue... we have:

    LINUX.COM announces IPO

    (December 21,1999) NEW YORK -- Linux.com, the definitive linux commercial, e-commerce, e-world, e-desktop, internet/intranet open-source based solutions in the western half of New York state, has filed with the SEC for an inital public offering. Pending approval of the SEC, which is inevitable since linux.com follows all internet stock trends of having no revenue, no content, no business model, and no paradigm, linux.com
    will start trading under the stock ticker LINC on the Nasdaq.

    Investors are anxiously awaiting to jump in on this IPO which is expected to shatter VA Linux Systems record setting 700% increase in one day. "It's got Linux, and it's a dot-com! What more can you want!?" asked an unnamed Goldman Sachs employee. "Who cares about what they do? I'll just ride the wave and then jump off at 315 1/2!"

    Sitting in his two room apartment in Eastern Syracuse NY, Ned Flounder, CEO, CTO and "Big Boss of the Company" highlights what Linux.com is all about. "It's about bringing a new operating system to the masses. It's about Microsoft sucking! It's about the Internet. It's about connecting these operating systems together in a world of global internet intranet mass PAN connectivity! It's about open source, and it's about closed source! It's about the global economy and e-commerce and amazon.com! It's about computers, and calculators! About the end of the millennium, with two N's, and the ball drop at Times Square... it's about positioning ---", at this point, Ned's ramble became incoherent. When WSJ reporter, I. M. Bile, asked about pecific business plans and company missions, he was told he had to leave since the plumber was coming to fix the toilet.

    Already, news is a buzz across the Linux community which is featured in such sites as Slashdot.org. "Hey! We already have a website called Linux.com! This is BULLS**T PATENT INFRINGEMENT! FREE THE CODE!", exclaims
    one Slashdot user. "FIRST POST!!!!", screams another. All, in all, the Slashdot community eagerly awaits a faithed letter, that will allow them to access this IPO if they deposit $10,000 into an E-Trade account and pass a multiple choice exam. Slashdot users, as well as wall street, wait with baited breath for the Linux.com
    IPO.

  48. Still doubling! by Per+Abrahamsen · · Score: 2
    2) If so, and Linux is doubling (or more) every year, why did RedHat do so poorly (24% vs 100%)?
    CmdrTaco didn't read the article. It is an increase of 24% compared to last quarter. That corresponds to over 130% growth a year.
  49. Spend 9 million to make 5.4 - good stratagy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Lets face it, This company is not worth a tenth of what people are paying for it. Remember you can survive on Hype for a while, but eventually they things will come back to earth. Remember they are selling a free product with lots of competition, and extreemely low barriers to entry.


    This means that almost anyone can startup a company to compete with them and the only thing they have in there favor is the name Red Hat. I know I could probably make a bundle in speculation by bying stock in either Red Hat or VA Linux, but lets face it, if you own stock in either of these two companies, you are either a serious gambler looking to make a quick buck, or should have taken a few more Economics classes when you were in school.

  50. Get ready for the next one by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    It's got to be tough to watch yourself miss out like that.

    I bet that more Linux companies will IPO in 2000 and that many of them will offer letters. This is not consolation. You have a choice, you can get ready for the next round of lightning to strike, or you can miss out on all of them if you let yourself slide into defeatism.

    So get your suit on and get in the game. Figure out where you can beg or borrow $5K. Look up where your local Kinko's and Federal Express offices are. Learn how to do wire transfers. Study up on freeedgar.com and how it works. Read the last two S-1's (Red Hat and VA Linux) so you know what they look like.

  51. you're way off.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    A couple of years ago, I predicted that within 6 years, Linux would match Microsoft in the total number of users out there. 4 more years to go, and it's looking like I might not be too far off track.

    no...your prediction is way off track. nobody will match MS for a long time.

  52. Ahahahahaha by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Hey Mr. Conservative -- remember the old line about how if you don't like what a company is doing, don't call the government, start your own competing company?

    Well, we just did!

    Microsoft has a Y2K problem. We're it.

  53. YASTP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yet
    Another
    Slashdot
    Threat
    Post

  54. We'll never know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    'cause the latest slashdot code isn't open.

  55. News for Finance Nerds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is Andover telling Slashdot to throw in all these financial articles to make the readers think they need to start putting their paychecks into Linux stocks?
    Or has Slashdot really just lost touch with the nerds?
    Or am I no longer a nerd because I'd rather read Stallman discuss writing Emacs than the RedHat CEO discuss revenue growth?

  56. But by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gee, all this time I thought people worked on Free Software because (1) it was interesting and (2) they could help other people.

    I keep forgetting that it's all about money.

    1. Re:But by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With $20 BILLION, you can be pretty f**king helpful.

  57. oooooookayyyyyyy by bobalu · · Score: 1

    Happy Birthday Tricia, I'm in the Michigan Militia....

    Forget the Commies mate, I get stopped every time I leave the house at night. I have to show my papers, recite the alphabet and dance for them. They're called The Police, and I don't mean the the rock band. Know the airline commercial that ends with "You are now free to move about the country"? Don't believe it.

    --
    The revolution will NOT be televised.
  58. The next MS by kuro5hin · · Score: 2
    My point wasn't really that RedHat is destined to be the next microsoft. I think it's clear to a large (and growing) number of people that being like MS is just not the right way to be.

    I do believe, however, that the market for RedHat is as large, if not larger, than the one for MS. It's a different market, and a different approach, but I think it's just as big. I don't think RedHat, even if it was worth 579 billion, would ever look just like MS, in any way that matters.

    And as for "shutting out windows on the desktop," it'll never happen, because the desktop won't be a market worth competing over. Today's computing environment will appear, fifty years from now, as quaint and charming, but slightly odd in the same way that the steam-powered mechanical contraptions of the victorian era strike us as quaint and charming, but somehow just a weird way of doing things.

    Sorry, but I'm in a prognosticating mood tody... :-)

    "Get away from my house you freak!"
    -Neal Stephenson

    --
    There is no K5 cabal.
    I am not the real rusty.
  59. Re: financial news on /. by MacJedi · · Score: 1
    [#Std_disclaimer] : I own shares in RHAT.

    This post is gonna make me sound like THE MAN :) but if you don't like the story, just don't read it! There is really is no reason to complain in the thread and use up needless bytes.

    With that said, maybe it is time for a "financial" icon so those not interested can simply filter it all out. Filters are great- I filtered out Katz a few months ago and have never looked back.

    /joeyo

    --
    2^5
  60. Clarification by Nehemiah+S. · · Score: 1

    actually you may be right about the minimum number- I am not a professional investor. I remembered the 1/16th thing from a book on investing I read a few months ago. I should have added a disclaimer, and would have except that the darned pie smelled so good :). Is temporary insanity a legitimate plea on slashdot? Anyway the argument holds regardless of what the unit of measure is... when you halve the accuracy of the measurement, you double the error, and the error works for you or against you depending on whether the tick is up or down. Since it is usually up, it is generally a Good Thing if you own stock before the split. This really is not that difficult of a concept...

    The point I am making is that if the stock splits, 1/16 of movement in post-split share terms is as valuable to you as 1/8 in original-share-space. Splitting twice, 1/16 becomes 1/4th. Splitting three times, 1/16th of post split share becomes like moving 1/2 originally... and it is somewhat easier to move 1/16th than 1/2. This multiplication factor is cumulative over time, and saying it doesn't happen is foolish and ignorant. It isn't primarily day traders who make money from this, since people who own stock before the split make more money than people who hang on to it for 2 minutes. Splitting is good, and makes money, or the rich guys wouldn't do it.

    Kootch- why put a link to your homepage on /. if you are going to protect it with a password? Am I missing something fundamental?

    Rev. Nehemiah

    --
    ... and there is no doubt, that one day he will be
    where the eye of his telescope has already been
    1. Re:Clarification by Syberghost · · Score: 2

      I guess I'm just not seeing this. A thought experiment:

      Shares are worth $32. You own one. It goes up by 1/16th, or $2. Your stock is now worth $34.

      Now it doesn't go up; instead, it splits. Now you own two shares worth $16 each. The value goes up by 1/16th, or $1 per share. Your total stock is now worth $34.

      What's the difference?

    2. Re:Clarification by rsborg · · Score: 1

      No offense, but...

      CLUE: We're talking about the actual price, not the %increase expressed as a fraction (in your example, that would mean that 32 -> 32 1/16)

      Although it is debatable that the hard minimum slice of stock is 1/16 of a point, stock splits are all about perceived values (ppl who unknowningly think that 335 is too high for yahoo, but is a bargain for 80, after it has split 4x).

      Fear the profit-taking on 12/31/99!!!!!

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
  61. This actually happened by rcw-work · · Score: 2
    Except the ticker symbol is LNUX.

    Linux.com technically already IPO'd - they're not a separate company, they are run by VA Linux.

    Sorry to detract from the joke :)

    1. Re:This actually happened by NickV · · Score: 1

      Boo! I know, I know. Linux.com is run by VA and they IPOed. I was trying to make a funny! =]

      -Nick Vlku

  62. Re:Why moderation fails... by Rakarra · · Score: 1
    Are you seriously suggesting a post that says "all it will be worth in the future is for getting rid of the fecal residue of a Mexican Pizza" doesn't deserve the worthless/flamebait tag? I can appreciate criticism of Linux, but I have no problems when offensive garbage is moderated down.

  63. Software sux by heroine · · Score: 2

    First of all, we should ignore investor speculation, loans, and projected earnings and look at total earnings now to decide whether software can sustain a business, which obviously it can't unless you're Microsoft. Even after they shifted from software sales to internet portal banners, they still lost money. Well the consistant losses that not just internet companies but everyone is posting should raise a red flag. Did anyone make money last year? As far as I'm concerned, there are just a lot more people borrowing money than there were in 1993 but the underlying profits that would have distinguished us from 1929 are non existant.

  64. Re: Andover does not control Slashdot's editorial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As per the acquisition contract the original Slashdot authors maintain total editorial control of Slashdot. Your conspiracy theory is interesting but is invalid. Keep watching the skies. Tell us if you spot anything.

  65. Canada: Massive Narcotics/Homosexuality Exporter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Your vigilance does my heart good, my friend, but you haven't even scratched the surface of the Canadian Problem.

    Canada is a major worldwide Homosexual Training and Indoctrination Center. Fully 70% of the Homosexuals and Hermaphrodites currently operating in the United States received their initial training and orientation in Canada, 10% of those in the Maritime Provinces and the rest in Quebec. It is believed that the predominance of Quebec in the Homosexual Industry is due to the powerful French influence in that province. The indoctrination involves the use of proscribed narcotics and other proceedures too vile to mention on a public website. Suffice it to say that the homosexuals have developed brainwashing and mind-control techniques of unparalleled sophistication, which can convert virtually any normal man into a limp-wristed devotee of original Broadway cast albums and studded leather cock rings.


    Canada also produces more than one third of the supply of marijuana and model airplane cement consumed in the United States every year. Don't forget that during the tragically curtailed Noble Experiment of Prohibition, Canada became a major supply of tainted bootleg liquor to the Northern states. This was the foundation of their stranglehold on the Human Degredation Industry in the United States, a stranglehold which they have expanded every year since the abominable Day of Repeal.


    I fear for our nation.

  66. You will be eliminated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Microsoft will not be mocked. Make your peace with God, brother.

  67. Re:Canada: Massive Narcotics/Homosexuality Exporte by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, you want to smoke some weed and get it on, eh?

  68. This is madness by asianflu · · Score: 1

    First, the stock split should not by itself cause any change in anyones paper worth. The fact that news of a stock split cause prices to jump just indicates that the market has totally lost its senses.

    The few experts in value investing (who actually try to value a company based on profits, growth and dividends) are crying with frustration because the market now trades on press releases, hype, rumors, buzzwords, partnerships, patents on the obvious, promises and hot air. The 1999 nasdaq is indeed the tulip bubble and the south sea bubble all rolled into one.

    Second, lets see redhats market cap. What is it now, 15 billion? that is about the market cap of Apple computer, or any other real company that can make a few hundred million a quarter in profits from now to eternity. Dont forget -- redhat stockholders are holding it because they think it will outperform the market, bonds, cash in the bank or equity in their house. It isnt going to outperform a wet paper bag based on dividends for the next 10 years, it can only outperfom based on increasing that market cap further through further stock price rises. The greater fool principal. Motley fool has a large following indeed, but fools with cash are not a limitless commodity.

    So the last level of this nasdaq ponzi scheme is going to get burned, when a taxi driver tells you about his portfolio, it is all over. Those who buy Andover.net, RHAT, or any other stock with P but no E take note: when it comes crashing to earth, you will not have a chance to cash out. Those in the know will cash out before you, you will be left with a bunch of pretty certificates entitling you to the A4 tray of the redhat photocopy machine, and the tar from the crash will get pasted over every new and risky stock out there, VCs will retire to their gated communities to count their offshore winnings, and a lot of bright people with good ideas will struggle to scrape together the cash for a security bond on some office space..

    3 years ago, this frenzy was in the middle pages of the wall street journal, 2 years ago it was in the NY times, 1 year ago it is discussed in office hallways, now it is in the web pages of "news for NERDS, stuff that MATTERS".. this is way past a time to sell.

    Off topic: did anyone else take the time to read the long andover net IPO: do you realize what they have planned for slashdot? "beyond the banner ad". Go check it out.. you are reading a site that is going to cause a collision between those who (mostly) do not accept ads and web commerce, either actively or passively rejecting it, and a company that simply must sell you stuff to pay its investors back. It is going to be an interesting battle.

  69. You goddamn perverted hippie bastard I'll kill you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    if I ever get my hands on you, you sonuvabitch, you goddamn Canuck fairy asswipe, you God-rejecting atheist secular humanist liberal Clintonista Socialist Communist Stalinist Nazi loser troll bastard!

    COME OVER HERE AND SAY THAT!

    You wretched mutant, you poor excuse for a human being!


    If I've got some damn original cast albums around the house and maybe -- maybe I said! -- a cock ring or two -- just for research purposes -- what goddamn business is it of yours?!?! How DARE you go drawing conclusions about a RED BLOODED VIRILE CHRISTIAN?


  70. Red Hat stock poll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    cnnfn.com has a poll on whether Red Hat stock is a good buy. Its a totally useless poll but if Red Hat gets voted down it will be a black eye for Linux, so lets see that slashdot effect. Red Hat is losing by a significant margin and you can figure all the M$oft lovers are voting against it.

  71. Woohoo! Now I can make a killing. by Last+Warrior · · Score: 1
    Wow.. if i buy 3 shares now, I will have 6 when it splits.

    everybody keep investing.. I need to put a down payment on my house in saratoga.

    LW

  72. Re:Damn! cretin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Read the frickin' byline it meantions the 3,6 Mil loss.

  73. Shiftless Geeks as Sex Toys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Geeks without shirts can be downright ugly.
    True, some can, but others can be like awesomely sexy. Yum-yum. :-)
  74. this doesn't need to be on slashdot! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yeah we all love Linux and Red Hat but I hope slashdot doesn't get into the habit of reporting every little bit of widely-reported financial news. There are PLENTY of sites where you can enter your favorite companies and see all the news you want about their stock, etc. Now maybe slashdot should partner with a financial news site and put financial news and portfolio tracking stuff on here, that would be cool.

  75. C|N>K by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh dear. When can I catch you in concert?

  76. STOP the HYPE by serialk · · Score: 1

    oh yay a massive forum for hyping stocks which

    make nothing and will ont for a long time !!!

    its even worse with va since they are so
    outcompeted.

    why must there be so much commercial crap on here now ?