"Keeping that stock price high until they can sell is clearly of some importance to Boies, Schiller and Flexner LLP."
Well, the news is that SCOX from over $22 in just four weeks ago is down to $13.86 as of today. That's the decrease of 41% in the share value. But that is not the end of it. The way I see it, the stock had broken its so-called weekly support when it was at $14. That means much lower level is ahead for SCOX. $12 is the next stop, but then $8 is the intermediate support.
[off the topic] SCOX stock is at $10.75 and it is resting on its daily support line that extends from May 2003. That line if broken would lead the stock to a sharp fall, however, the other more likely possibility is that SCOX will rebound from the support and continue one more leg up to over $15 range. The 5th wave up (Elliott wave count) should finish the sequence of progression from the bottom of Feb 2003. If that happens shorting SCOX at that level is a lot less risky than doing it at the present. To test this scenario would suffice to see if SCOX can make above $12 first and if it does, the progression up will continue. The timeline for the next top is around the end of Aug 03.
SCOX stock has a fair chance to reach $12-14 price in the next few weeks, to be more specific, two weeks. Than what? In my opinion, that should do it, in other words, the stock is getting extremely overbought (weekly stochastic indicator) and ready for a major sell off, which by the way is also true right now about many other stocks as well, in NASDAQ especially, which SCOX is part of.
"People need to realize that they [SCO] really could have a case here...", that's the assumption their case is based on, but that's a subjective notion on their part, whatever that means for them, in court they will have to show what that really is and so far the prospect for that is far from certain, or even less than on sound grounds, shaky, some would say. Therefore, I'm not going to lose my sleep over their PR in news media, because those claims are just that: not worth the paper it is printed on.
He, he, take it easy, he probably wrote that to get some folks fired up. "After 7 years, it's kind of sad to see NT4 go", I believe that should be the cause for celebration, never had heard much good about NT and the list of failures is long.
Linux is related to communism in the following way: Finland that Linus T. comes from was once bordering with the communism country. Well, not good enough?, hereâ(TM)s another one: the whole IP idea is a capitalist ditch to save their falling model of doing business. Anything that is out there that seems to threaten that model such âoeopen sourceâ, âoefree softwareâ, is going to be to their dislike and labeled as anti-property, anti-free trade, âoeunpatrioticâ, etc.
It is capitalist way of saying that intellectual property is part of a religion of ego-centered and selfish model that ought to predominate always and everywhere. Since Linux is about sharing code and software innovation it is a threat to that insanity. But they will defend it tooth and nail and SCO Groupâ(TM)s lawsuit against IBM is an example of it.
I wonder how IBM can support Linux development and then got to UK government and say itâ(TM)d be dangerous for you guys to use opensource software and GLP in particular. Or, is it that Linux for them is only as good as they define for it to be? In other words, it can run on mainframes but since governments use IBMâ(TM)s mainframes it is not ok to use Linux on them? A lot of questions, I guess the world of software is becoming increasingly complicated. Since close source and IP is about profits, ego and more profits, and GPL software is becoming widely available; their scare tactic is the business model that suits well Microsoft, but IBM is in the same boat with them, therefore IBM is no friend of GPL/Linux.
Guess what, the next thing we know is that IBM is going to replace all their AIX and Linux implementations with SCOâ(TM)s products.
Perception of stock market by investors is OFTEN not based in rational thinking. What? â" Some would say. It is not, because the last so called dot.com mania that ended around Mar 2000 clearly shows that. There were companies that lost 70-90% of their stock value since then (including VA Linux and Red Hat), many went bankrupt, and many more will still go under, because of overvalued perception that got suddenly removed.
According to Elliott Wave International, www.elliottwave.com, investor perception is based on psychological and socioeconomic factors. You can analyze any particular stock chart for hours and you will see that fundamentals arenâ(TM)t there but people keep buying that stock. Why? Because the force of believe that is behind it is stronger than rational analytical considerations.
Therefore, it would be interesting to find out who are the investors behind SCO (trading symbol SCOX), because those are the people that keep SCO alive and make contributions to their sorry lawsuit against a lot of decent people. Maybe you can find out since you are connected to option trading and financial information that may not be available to everyone. By the way, I also do option trading, but SCOX doesnâ(TM)t have options, so you canâ(TM)t trade it on options like IBM, MSFT, INTC, etc. The only way with it is to go long or short. In my opinion, SCOX still has a chance to go higher, intermediate term. From current 10.30 down to 9.50 then to $13-14 range and then really tank down to hell.
Good post, Iâ(TM)m surprised you got âoe0â score for that. "SCOff at" is really funny and some/. moderator missed this one big times, they should have given it "5" score just for the tricky language that is also subject oriented.
Seriously, if we stop talking about SCO vs. IBM/Linux than we could also stop talking about many other things and so peace of mind would envelope us all - not a bad idea. Do you know what would that mean to/. ? It wouldnâ(TM)t be necessary for it to exist.
But I agree that âoepeople with a strong case keep quiet until they get to courtâ, thatâ(TM)s what IBM is doing, they almost said nothing so far. I think that is only people connected to GPL/Linux/BSD and such who worry about who is going to win that case, IBM doesnâ(TM)t, maybe they should but they donâ(TM)t.
Mainstream investors had not heard about SCO's lawsuit, so they donâ(TM)t even care about SCOX stock. SCOX even though it rose from $1 to $10 in just few months is not a mainstream name on Wall Street, but the fact is that SCOX meteoric rise has something to do with psychology of their shareholders. One would wonder what do they think and imagine about SCOâ(TM)s business prospects?
Whatâ(TM)s wrong here is that thereâ(TM)s no rationale that would be based in financial fundamentals, earnings, profits, etc. Itâ(TM)s rather irrational mania fueled by news. But irrational mania can move markets and stocks and it does its job as far as SCOâ(TM)s execs are concerned. They fulfilled their purpose to SCOâ(TM)s shareholders. And so SCOâ(TM)s shareholders are confident that their execs will do whatever necessary to keep the stock going up. Remember dot.com mania? Some stocks were over evaluated by hundreds of times yet people kept buying even when there was no profit. But you may also remember what folled. A lot of those stocks are no longer traded or lost up to 90% of their price value from the beginning of 2000.
Lindows had a prior license agreement with SCO and they said the lawsuit against IBM and the alleged license infringement is not going to affect them. I tired to post a discussion on that subject here on/. But it wasnâ(TM)t accepted even though it is a relevant item-subject to this whole story. The article âoeLindows.com Revelation Could Be Fatal Blow to SCO Caseâ is posted on www.linuxdailynews.com: http://www.ofb.biz/modules.php?name=News&file=arti cle&sid=236
[for investors and speculators only] As the story about SCO suing IBM is unfolding, SCOX stock went from $1 in Feb this year to $4 in May, then to $8.5 in the end of May, then to $12 today. Some people were already selling short that stock at $8.5, but SCOX, after what happened today, has a good chance to go even higher following a pullback to $9.8. How much higher?, $13-14 is the next high in two-three weeks from now. If you want to ignore this information you can, but I'm going to make some moeny instead. [the next update will follow in a month]
It is not legal, or rather legally sound, what SCO is doing to IBM, because they didn't prove anything in court, not even that they own UNIX. But they have the guts to go with it anyway. Why? "IBM believes that our contract with regard to AIX is irrevocable and perpetual and there is nothing further to discuss," said IBM spokeswoman Trink Guarino. Well, if that's the case then why IBM is not taking any preemptive action against SCO? Is that because they have nothing to worry about? IBM may win the case but what SCO is trying to do is to undermine IBMâ(TM)s business with AIX/Linux, therefore thereâ(TM)s something to worry about.
These kind of things donâ(TM)t go unnoticed by IBMâ(TM)s clients. Theyâ(TM)ll worry about it and also if they use SCOâ(TM)s software at the same time thereâ(TM)s more to worry about it. A friend, who works for IBM said âoeour lawyers will take care of thatâ, they may, but until then IBMâ(TM)s business will suffer especially if combined with other issues like their accounting and profit reporting probed by SEC. The next stop for IBMâ(TM)s stock is around $76, down from $90 in the beginning of May this year.
âoeAgain, significant shareholder risk exists in SCOâ â" I would agree with that. But their shareholders probably already âoefactored inâ risks of this lawsuit and they keep buying more stock of SCOX. Why? Because in the situation like this speculation is the bottom line. Their CEO said this, Novell said that, GPL, etc. Speculation fuels that stock up and thatâ(TM)s all they care about. When they think the time has come to sell it they will sell in a hurry and SCOX will end up in a dumpster. But if they made 100% profits on it or more nothing else matters (in their twisted mind), they can go to Hawaii or Bahamas for good vacation and laugh about how they duped OS community into believing that their claim might had been true. Then, the revenge of nature is that no money lasts forever.
Probability is on the side of what you said, but who would want to sue SCO for GLP infringement? FSF? Do they have money to do that? If they had, can software idealists sue the hard-core corporate scum backs? Maybe they should but so far thereâ(TM)s no indication of that. Why? Because it is probably not in their nature. One might even make an observation that itâ(TM)d have to be a compelling case to start such thing. Who would provide evidence? But anything is possible, so Iâ(TM)m getting ready to short SCOX stock when it hits $10.25-10.50 mark.
What would you need support for? Unless you're running a large network with a lot of those SeSE desktop workstations and each cost you $600?, wait the minute, what company could fall for that? If you really need support for a large network of Linux workstations use third party vendor, such as Linuxcare, rather than SuSE distro's native support that has little if any base in the USA, they closed their support here (US) two years ago or so. So, SuSE's "support" is just a gimmick to sell the product.
CrossOver comes in Xandros Desktop Deluxe 1.0 and that distro includes XFS file system that integrates well with MS domains, if that's what you want. Also, CrossOver is a seperate product that can be installed on almost any Linux distro. It's hard to imagine that Linux user would pay for desktop distro $600, no way Jose.
WebSphere Application Server 3.5 supported in Linux was for several distros: RHat 6.2, Caldera 2.3 e-Server and 2.4 e-Desktop, Suse 6.4 and Turbolinux 6.0.x Server. The installation aslo had to include glibc-2.1 But there's a new version of WSph., so that may have changed.
Re: SCOX - when to short it...
on
Latest SCO News
·
· Score: 1
"First, disclosure: I am short SCOX...", well, yeah, SCOX may still go higher in my opinion as a trader, up to $10-10.25. Weekly stochastic is still not at 100 pts, but if you're short already that wouldn't hurt much if one shorted it today, just be ready when a margin call comes, depending how many short shares you have. But the thing is that even if SCOX goes higher to $10.25 I wouldn't exit short position, because the next thing we know SCOX goes from $10.25 down to $5.00 and probably lower later. Timing? Around June 13 - July 3, 2003.
Some of your statements are inaccurate; âoebuying options contracts has a predetermined downside: the cost of the contractâ â" since you buy something it has its price but why is that disadvantage in buying options? It isnâ(TM)t, because options cost far cheaper than the âoeunderlyingâ value of the stock. IBMâ(TM)s share that cost say $90, for 100 shares youâ(TM)d pay $9000, while one call option at $90 âoestrikeâ might cost just $300. For every one point, or $1, if IBM stock goes up, you gain some value. So, on 100 shares youâ(TM)d gain 100 (shares) * $1 = $100, but your total investment was a whooping $9000.
At the same time if you bought just 10 call options, your investment is $3000 and with $1.00 price movement in stock the gain would usually be $400*10=$4000 subtracting investment of $3000, youâ(TM)re left with $1000 gain, right? If you could use the whole amount of $9000 for buying call options youâ(TM)d have around $3000 in gain. Thatâ(TM)s why options are such attractive leverage against the underlying stock value: you donâ(TM)t need to have huge money to use options and gain more than by buying/selling stocks.
âoeThere is a limited upside: the cost of the contract. There is an unlimited downside though; the more the price of a stock moves against you the more you looseâ â" not really clear what you mean by âoea limited upsideâ. Downside/upside are basically have the same potential for calls and puts depending on the stock movement. If the stock moves against you thereâ(TM)s nothing that prevents you from closing your position and exiting with a limited loss, you donâ(TM)t have to wait until the option loses its all premium value or expires worthless âoeout of the moneyâ at the expiration date.
âoeThere is not really any way out of selling a contract except the expiration dateâ - ??? on what options?, equities, stock options? You probably never traded any options yourself, I make several option trading a day, in and out, the same option can be bought/sold at your own decision and nothing else, you donâ(TM)t need a broker to do that or wait until expiration date for that option to make profit. I would recommend Optionetics or Shaffer's option tradding classes for those who are into this subject.
Better yet, no "Linux kernel-savvy hacker signs SCO NDA", why? Because it might be below Linux kernel-savvy hacker's dignity to afford SCO the privilege of playing into their strategy game. It'd create an impression that their claim might be legitimate since a Linux kernel-savvy hacker was curious enough to see it. If you have curiosity for something it usually means that you're making an effort to acquire some knowledge. But in this case what a Linux kernel-savvy hacker would acquire is the SCO's spin that comes with it. It might be even possible that a Linux kernel-savvy hacker while looking for a new employment needs to earn living while SCO is making their spin and so it turns out that a Linux kernel-savvy hacker becomes SCO's employee later on. Well, obviously, a Linux kernel-savvy hacker would have more dignity than that, right?
Slashdot Mirror
"Keeping that stock price high until they can sell is clearly of some importance to Boies, Schiller and Flexner LLP."
Well, the news is that SCOX from over $22 in just four weeks ago is down to $13.86 as of today. That's the decrease of 41% in the share value. But that is not the end of it. The way I see it, the stock had broken its so-called weekly support when it was at $14. That means much lower level is ahead for SCOX. $12 is the next stop, but then $8 is the intermediate support.
[off the topic]
SCOX stock is at $10.75 and it is resting on its daily support line that extends from May 2003. That line if broken would lead the stock to a sharp fall, however, the other more likely possibility is that SCOX will rebound from the support and continue one more leg up to over $15 range. The 5th wave up (Elliott wave count) should finish the sequence of progression from the bottom of Feb 2003. If that happens shorting SCOX at that level is a lot less risky than doing it at the present. To test this scenario would suffice to see if SCOX can make above $12 first and if it does, the progression up will continue. The timeline for the next top is around the end of Aug 03.
Yeah, that would be an interesting read, but the link is not getting any page back, so what happened? Is Linux getting proprietary?
SCOX stock has a fair chance to reach $12-14 price in the next few weeks, to be more specific, two weeks. Than what? In my opinion, that should do it, in other words, the stock is getting extremely overbought (weekly stochastic indicator) and ready for a major sell off, which by the way is also true right now about many other stocks as well, in NASDAQ especially, which SCOX is part of.
"People need to realize that they [SCO] really could have a case here...", that's the assumption their case is based on, but that's a subjective notion on their part, whatever that means for them, in court they will have to show what that really is and so far the prospect for that is far from certain, or even less than on sound grounds, shaky, some would say. Therefore, I'm not going to lose my sleep over their PR in news media, because those claims are just that: not worth the paper it is printed on.
He, he, take it easy, he probably wrote that to get some folks fired up. "After 7 years, it's kind of sad to see NT4 go", I believe that should be the cause for celebration, never had heard much good about NT and the list of failures is long.
Linux is related to communism in the following way: Finland that Linus T. comes from was once bordering with the communism country. Well, not good enough?, hereâ(TM)s another one: the whole IP idea is a capitalist ditch to save their falling model of doing business. Anything that is out there that seems to threaten that model such âoeopen sourceâ, âoefree softwareâ, is going to be to their dislike and labeled as anti-property, anti-free trade, âoeunpatrioticâ, etc.
It is capitalist way of saying that intellectual property is part of a religion of ego-centered and selfish model that ought to predominate always and everywhere. Since Linux is about sharing code and software innovation it is a threat to that insanity. But they will defend it tooth and nail and SCO Groupâ(TM)s lawsuit against IBM is an example of it.
I wonder how IBM can support Linux development and then got to UK government and say itâ(TM)d be dangerous for you guys to use opensource software and GLP in particular. Or, is it that Linux for them is only as good as they define for it to be? In other words, it can run on mainframes but since governments use IBMâ(TM)s mainframes it is not ok to use Linux on them? A lot of questions, I guess the world of software is becoming increasingly complicated. Since close source and IP is about profits, ego and more profits, and GPL software is becoming widely available; their scare tactic is the business model that suits well Microsoft, but IBM is in the same boat with them, therefore IBM is no friend of GPL/Linux.
Guess what, the next thing we know is that IBM is going to replace all their AIX and Linux implementations with SCOâ(TM)s products.
How would you name the site about SCO "factoids"?, I propose: scosucks.org
They must have removed that link because it is no there. What was that about?
Perception of stock market by investors is OFTEN not based in rational thinking. What? â" Some would say. It is not, because the last so called dot.com mania that ended around Mar 2000 clearly shows that. There were companies that lost 70-90% of their stock value since then (including VA Linux and Red Hat), many went bankrupt, and many more will still go under, because of overvalued perception that got suddenly removed.
According to Elliott Wave International, www.elliottwave.com, investor perception is based on psychological and socioeconomic factors. You can analyze any particular stock chart for hours and you will see that fundamentals arenâ(TM)t there but people keep buying that stock. Why? Because the force of believe that is behind it is stronger than rational analytical considerations.
Therefore, it would be interesting to find out who are the investors behind SCO (trading symbol SCOX), because those are the people that keep SCO alive and make contributions to their sorry lawsuit against a lot of decent people. Maybe you can find out since you are connected to option trading and financial information that may not be available to everyone. By the way, I also do option trading, but SCOX doesnâ(TM)t have options, so you canâ(TM)t trade it on options like IBM, MSFT, INTC, etc. The only way with it is to go long or short. In my opinion, SCOX still has a chance to go higher, intermediate term. From current 10.30 down to 9.50 then to $13-14 range and then really tank down to hell.
Good post, Iâ(TM)m surprised you got âoe0â score for that. "SCOff at" is really funny and some /. moderator missed this one big times, they should have given it "5" score just for the tricky language that is also subject oriented.
/. ? It wouldnâ(TM)t be necessary for it to exist.
Seriously, if we stop talking about SCO vs. IBM/Linux than we could also stop talking about many other things and so peace of mind would envelope us all - not a bad idea. Do you know what would that mean to
But I agree that âoepeople with a strong case keep quiet until they get to courtâ, thatâ(TM)s what IBM is doing, they almost said nothing so far. I think that is only people connected to GPL/Linux/BSD and such who worry about who is going to win that case, IBM doesnâ(TM)t, maybe they should but they donâ(TM)t.
Mainstream investors had not heard about SCO's lawsuit, so they donâ(TM)t even care about SCOX stock. SCOX even though it rose from $1 to $10 in just few months is not a mainstream name on Wall Street, but the fact is that SCOX meteoric rise has something to do with psychology of their shareholders. One would wonder what do they think and imagine about SCOâ(TM)s business prospects?
Whatâ(TM)s wrong here is that thereâ(TM)s no rationale that would be based in financial fundamentals, earnings, profits, etc. Itâ(TM)s rather irrational mania fueled by news. But irrational mania can move markets and stocks and it does its job as far as SCOâ(TM)s execs are concerned. They fulfilled their purpose to SCOâ(TM)s shareholders. And so SCOâ(TM)s shareholders are confident that their execs will do whatever necessary to keep the stock going up. Remember dot.com mania? Some stocks were over evaluated by hundreds of times yet people kept buying even when there was no profit. But you may also remember what folled. A lot of those stocks are no longer traded or lost up to 90% of their price value from the beginning of 2000.
Lindows had a prior license agreement with SCO and they said the lawsuit against IBM and the alleged license infringement is not going to affect them. I tired to post a discussion on that subject here on /. But it wasnâ(TM)t accepted even though it is a relevant item-subject to this whole story. The article âoeLindows.com Revelation Could Be Fatal Blow to SCO Caseâ is posted on www.linuxdailynews.com: http://www.ofb.biz/modules.php?name=News&file=arti cle&sid=236
[for investors and speculators only]
As the story about SCO suing IBM is unfolding, SCOX stock went from $1 in Feb this year to $4 in May, then to $8.5 in the end of May, then to $12 today. Some people were already selling short that stock at $8.5, but SCOX, after what happened today, has a good chance to go even higher following a pullback to $9.8. How much higher?, $13-14 is the next high in two-three weeks from now. If you want to ignore this information you can, but I'm going to make some moeny instead.
[the next update will follow in a month]
It is not legal, or rather legally sound, what SCO is doing to IBM, because they didn't prove anything in court, not even that they own UNIX. But they have the guts to go with it anyway. Why? "IBM believes that our contract with regard to AIX is irrevocable and perpetual and there is nothing further to discuss," said IBM spokeswoman Trink Guarino. Well, if that's the case then why IBM is not taking any preemptive action against SCO? Is that because they have nothing to worry about? IBM may win the case but what SCO is trying to do is to undermine IBMâ(TM)s business with AIX/Linux, therefore thereâ(TM)s something to worry about.
These kind of things donâ(TM)t go unnoticed by IBMâ(TM)s clients. Theyâ(TM)ll worry about it and also if they use SCOâ(TM)s software at the same time thereâ(TM)s more to worry about it. A friend, who works for IBM said âoeour lawyers will take care of thatâ, they may, but until then IBMâ(TM)s business will suffer especially if combined with other issues like their accounting and profit reporting probed by SEC. The next stop for IBMâ(TM)s stock is around $76, down from $90 in the beginning of May this year.
âoeAgain, significant shareholder risk exists in SCOâ â" I would agree with that. But their shareholders probably already âoefactored inâ risks of this lawsuit and they keep buying more stock of SCOX. Why? Because in the situation like this speculation is the bottom line. Their CEO said this, Novell said that, GPL, etc. Speculation fuels that stock up and thatâ(TM)s all they care about. When they think the time has come to sell it they will sell in a hurry and SCOX will end up in a dumpster. But if they made 100% profits on it or more nothing else matters (in their twisted mind), they can go to Hawaii or Bahamas for good vacation and laugh about how they duped OS community into believing that their claim might had been true. Then, the revenge of nature is that no money lasts forever.
Probability is on the side of what you said, but who would want to sue SCO for GLP infringement? FSF? Do they have money to do that? If they had, can software idealists sue the hard-core corporate scum backs? Maybe they should but so far thereâ(TM)s no indication of that. Why? Because it is probably not in their nature. One might even make an observation that itâ(TM)d have to be a compelling case to start such thing. Who would provide evidence? But anything is possible, so Iâ(TM)m getting ready to short SCOX stock when it hits $10.25-10.50 mark.
Right, and also with XFS file system Xandros integrates well with MS domains far better than other Linux distros.
What would you need support for? Unless you're running a large network with a lot of those SeSE desktop workstations and each cost you $600?, wait the minute, what company could fall for that? If you really need support for a large network of Linux workstations use third party vendor, such as Linuxcare, rather than SuSE distro's native support that has little if any base in the USA, they closed their support here (US) two years ago or so. So, SuSE's "support" is just a gimmick to sell the product.
CrossOver comes in Xandros Desktop Deluxe 1.0 and that distro includes XFS file system that integrates well with MS domains, if that's what you want. Also, CrossOver is a seperate product that can be installed on almost any Linux distro. It's hard to imagine that Linux user would pay for desktop distro $600, no way Jose.
WebSphere Application Server 3.5 supported in Linux was for several distros: RHat 6.2, Caldera 2.3 e-Server and 2.4 e-Desktop, Suse 6.4 and Turbolinux 6.0.x Server. The installation aslo had to include glibc-2.1 But there's a new version of WSph., so that may have changed.
"First, disclosure: I am short SCOX...", well, yeah, SCOX may still go higher in my opinion as a trader, up to $10-10.25. Weekly stochastic is still not at 100 pts, but if you're short already that wouldn't hurt much if one shorted it today, just be ready when a margin call comes, depending how many short shares you have. But the thing is that even if SCOX goes higher to $10.25 I wouldn't exit short position, because the next thing we know SCOX goes from $10.25 down to $5.00 and probably lower later. Timing? Around June 13 - July 3, 2003.
Some of your statements are inaccurate;
âoebuying options contracts has a predetermined downside: the cost of the contractâ â" since you buy something it has its price but why is that disadvantage in buying options? It isnâ(TM)t, because options cost far cheaper than the âoeunderlyingâ value of the stock. IBMâ(TM)s share that cost say $90, for 100 shares youâ(TM)d pay $9000, while one call option at $90 âoestrikeâ might cost just $300. For every one point, or $1, if IBM stock goes up, you gain some value. So, on 100 shares youâ(TM)d gain 100 (shares) * $1 = $100, but your total investment was a whooping $9000.
At the same time if you bought just 10 call options, your investment is $3000 and with $1.00 price movement in stock the gain would usually be $400*10=$4000 subtracting investment of $3000, youâ(TM)re left with $1000 gain, right? If you could use the whole amount of $9000 for buying call options youâ(TM)d have around $3000 in gain. Thatâ(TM)s why options are such attractive leverage against the underlying stock value: you donâ(TM)t need to have huge money to use options and gain more than by buying/selling stocks.
âoeThere is a limited upside: the cost of the contract. There is an unlimited downside though; the more the price of a stock moves against you the more you looseâ â" not really clear what you mean by âoea limited upsideâ. Downside/upside are basically have the same potential for calls and puts depending on the stock movement. If the stock moves against you thereâ(TM)s nothing that prevents you from closing your position and exiting with a limited loss, you donâ(TM)t have to wait until the option loses its all premium value or expires worthless âoeout of the moneyâ at the expiration date.
âoeThere is not really any way out of selling a contract except the expiration dateâ - ??? on what options?, equities, stock options? You probably never traded any options yourself, I make several option trading a day, in and out, the same option can be bought/sold at your own decision and nothing else, you donâ(TM)t need a broker to do that or wait until expiration date for that option to make profit. I would recommend Optionetics or Shaffer's option tradding classes for those who are into this subject.
Better yet, no "Linux kernel-savvy hacker signs SCO NDA", why? Because it might be below Linux kernel-savvy hacker's dignity to afford SCO the privilege of playing into their strategy game. It'd create an impression that their claim might be legitimate since a Linux kernel-savvy hacker was curious enough to see it. If you have curiosity for something it usually means that you're making an effort to acquire some knowledge. But in this case what a Linux kernel-savvy hacker would acquire is the SCO's spin that comes with it. It might be even possible that a Linux kernel-savvy hacker while looking for a new employment needs to earn living while SCO is making their spin and so it turns out that a Linux kernel-savvy hacker becomes SCO's employee later on. Well, obviously, a Linux kernel-savvy hacker would have more dignity than that, right?