Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

SCO Shares Plunge, Canopy Management Change

Posted by samzenpus on Wed Dec 22, 2004 06:09 PM
from the that's-a-shame dept.
bretberger writes "Shares in Utah's SCO Group went into a tailspin late Tuesday as news spread of both deepening losses and an apparent coup at the software company's corporate parent, the Canopy Group."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Good news (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:11PM (#11163388)
    Lots of good news before XMas. Best christmas present if you ask me. No software patents in EU, Microsoft fined and SCO stock down. What more can one ask?
  • News? (Score:5, Funny)

    by neoform (551705) <djneoform@gmail.com> on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:13PM (#11163392) Homepage
    Is this really news, who here actually thought SCO was gonna win? really though..
    • Re:News? (Score:5, Funny)

      by grub (11606) <slashdot@grub.net> on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:20PM (#11163461) Homepage Journal

      Yeah, exactly. And when Laura DiDio said: "The fate of SCO is one of the big question marks. New management at Canopy . . . may push [SCO] to try and settle." I was thinking "Settle for what? Not having IBM kick their collective asses into orbit around the sun?" I don't think they're in much of a position to try bargaining.
      • Re:News? (Score:5, Funny)

        by tdemark (512406) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:32PM (#11163588) Homepage
        IBM Laywer: I'm thinking of a number. I'll write it down on a piece of paper.
        SCO Lawyer: OK

        The IBM lawyer grabs a pen a scribbles on a sheet of paper, folds the paper in half, and slides it across the table. The SCO lawyer reaches, picks up the paper, unfolds it, and sees this:

        ----------------
        | |
        | _ |
        | / \ |
        | / \ |
        | | | |
        | | | |
        | \ / |
        | \_/ |
        | |
        |______________|

        IBM Laywer: Do we have an agreement?

        - Tony
        • Re:News? (Score:5, Funny)

          by Otter (3800) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:44PM (#11163707) Journal
          Nice ASCII illustration but you forgot the punchline [snpp.com]:

          Burns: I'm going to write a figure on this piece of paper. It's not quite as large as the last one, but I think you'll find it fair. [draws a giant zero]

          Hutz: I think we should take it.

        • Re:News? (Score:4, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:57PM (#11163799)
          SCO Lawyer #1: Give me a moment to discuss this with my associate.

          SCO Lawyer #1: (aside to SCO Lawyer #2): dude he totally drew a vagina. We're gonna get PUSSY!

          SCO Lawyer #2: (to #1): I know it! It's 100% grade A putang for us! Daryl is gonna be STOKED! I'm gonna step out and call him now. (steps out) Dude! Pop open a foamer and sit down, Christmas is coming early this year.......

          #1 (to IBM Lawyer, stifling laughter and adjusting pants): All right, we've considered your offer and are prepared to accept it. Do we, uh, accept it here or somewhere else?

          IBM Lawyer: What the fuck are you talking about?
      • Re:News? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by SoSueMe (263478) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:54PM (#11163784) Homepage
        Is this not the same Laura DiDio who has been so reviled by Slashdot in the past as being less than tech-savvy and a mouth-piece for corporations?

        Each of these claims have had some merit as well as critisism of the Yankee Group reports.

        Are they another firm that waits until the writing on the wall is written in neon and suddenly pipe up with a resounding "Me too!"

        • Re:News? (Score:5, Informative)

          by bckrispi (725257) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:54PM (#11163775)
          Reading the article, It looks like the "cap" just means that $31 mil will be the most Boies & co. can charge when this fiasco is finished. This was in exchange for more lucrative terms should SCO win a settlement/be bought out. It doesn't mean "as soon as we spend $31 million, we're dropping the suit".
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:14PM (#11163400)
    Great time to buy! Remember kids, buy low, sell high!
  • by Pacifix (465793) <{moc.liamg} {ta} {namohgj}> on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:14PM (#11163408)
    Isn't that name kinda ominous? A canopy blocks out the sun, gets everybody under one thing and cuts you off from the primal forces. Perhaps something more honest, like maybe COBRA?
  • ...is if the parent co, Canopy Group, and all of the corporate criminal scumbags in charge over there lose their shirts and their golden parachutes mid fall. Otherwise, it will be them who are laughing all the way to the bank, despite the validity of the linux community's claims of fraud. This current administration won't go after them. Given what they have been doing lately to fuckups, they would probably give Darl an award...
    • by sl3xd (111641) * on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:48PM (#11163737)
      This current administration won't go after them. Given what they have been doing lately to fuckups, they would probably give Darl an award...

      You seem to be under the delusion that some other administration would go after them. White collar crime is nothing new, as is the tacit guarantee that white collar criminals are virtually unpunished (with a few token ones like Martha Stewart and a couple of Enron officers). The fact is that it's nearly always the extremely wealthy, ivy-league educated that even compete for the presidency. And one thing can be said of the wealthy: They have a great deal more sympathy for the problems of their fellow upper crust than they do for the problems of any other economic strata. Democrat, Republican, whatever... The rich have the belief that they pay the taxes, so they should get the police -- not the areas that actually have crime. They pay the taxes, so the laws should benefit their lifestyles, not the mid and lower class.

      And never forget that Kerry still has even more money than Bush.

      Nor can I think of any president in the last half-century that did much to prosecute white-collar crime.

      And before that, there was the great depression, where everybody was poor anyway...

      Hmm... I've got it! We need another Theodore Roosevelt. A guy that spent his presidency breaking up monopolies and fighting for the working class.
      He's dead, though. And I doubt he'd win a modern election.
      • by dillon_rinker (17944) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @07:11PM (#11163894) Homepage
        And I doubt he'd win a modern election.

        Yup. I was looking at the only known picture of TR and FDR last night and said wistfully to my wife "Why can't we have someone like that be president again?" The answer, of course, is television.

        WRT white collar crime - no one walks the streets at night worried that a white collar criminal might kill them pointlessly while looting their pension fund.
  • <nelson>
    AH-HAH
    </nelson>

    Seriously, SCO should be in the OED under "schadenfreude". I love seeing this stuff!

  • by maddu (522722) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:15PM (#11163414)
    Who wants to bet that before long Microsoft will march in as White Knight and have proxy control over SCO. Hell, it already controls it indirectly!
    • by Samari711 (521187) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:22PM (#11163479)
      Why would MS touch it with a 10-foot poll? They got enough negative press for orchestrating the BayStar deal, there's no way in hell they want anything to do with SCO at this point. What's probably going to happen is Canopy will carve out any useful IP and resources from SCO and form yet another company while it leaves SCO as a litigation company. then another Canopy company will buy out SCO, initiating the new change of control procedure which gives Darl & co. a set of nice golden parachutes and they walk away from the mess with all the investor's cash.

      What I want to know is how illegal this whole racket was...

    • by bill_mcgonigle (4333) * on Wednesday December 22 2004, @07:49PM (#11164172) Homepage Journal
      Novell will be the one to come in and snatch up SCOX.

      Novell is making Linux the centerpiece of its technology strategy, so it has something to loose.

      Ending this thing once and for all would endear the Linux community to Novell, so it has something to gain.

      It also has $475M [zdnet.com] earmarked for acquisitions.

      Novell has a history with SCO/Canopy. Ray Noorda was the chairman at Novell before he started Caldera. Darcy Mott was Novell's Treasurer, and R. Duff Thompson was Senior Vice President of Corporate Development. Even Darl McBride came through Novell.

      SCOX [yahoo.com] has a $79M market cap. For this small portion of their acquisition warchest, all this goes away and they get real linux street cred. Their marketing department should be lobbying hardest for this one.

      When they're done with that they'll buy UNIX(TM) from The Open Group and geeks will write songs about them.

      Only if they want to crush Redhat, that is.
      • by RickBlaine (842883) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @11:07PM (#11165399)
        There is absolutely zero upside for Novell in buying SCOX. And absolutely zero downside for not buying SCOX. SCOX is shooting blanks (header files????) on the legal front. And Novell already has linux street cred for 1. buying SuSE, 2. Sending a "STFU" letter to SCOX re the IBM suit and 3. pretty much shutting SCOX down in the "slander of title" suit.

        You don't get street cred for rewarding extortion. Look at where SCOX was before they pulled this BS. About a buck [yahoo.com] a share. And SCOX has diluted shareholder value (in other words, printed and sold more stock) since then. Let's see: option 1. Pay more than 4x the original value of the company for an extortion threat or 2. let SCOX die a slow, painful and public death for being idiots. Anyone thinking of getting good PR by preventing this company from publicly bleeding to death from its self inflicted gut-shot is stupid. Paying off extortionists is *always* bad PR.

        -Blaine

  • by schon (31600) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:16PM (#11163425) Homepage
    ... Colonel Mustard, in the boardroom, with a letter opener.
  • "Plunged?" (Score:3, Insightful)

    by pclminion (145572) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:17PM (#11163429)
    I'd hardly call a drop of 7.5% a "plunge." Stock prices always react this way when bad news is accounced, and they usually come back up again. I've made quite a bit of (virtual) money playing this game.

    I've seen companies take a 35% hit based on bad news and return to previous prices in less than a week. Considering the apparent magnitude of the announcement and the ensuing PIDDLY 7.5% drop I'm going to wager on the stock price returning to its recent levels.

    I'm placing a market open order for (virtual) shares of SCOX right now.

    (This is not financial advice, I'd barely even consider it virtual financial advice.)

    • Re:"Plunged?" (Score:5, Informative)

      by Megane (129182) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:58PM (#11163810)
      I'd hardly call a drop of 7.5% a "plunge."

      Especially when the stock was 25% lower less than two months ago.

      I do have to thank SCOX for one thing, though. They got one of the Groklaw readers to pester UCal for a copy of the secret AT&T/BSD agreement under a Freedom of Information request. As it turns out, there wasn't any thing scary in there after all.

  • WHY?? (Score:5, Funny)

    by burbankmarc (838977) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:17PM (#11163432)
    Now how are people going to get their license for Linux?!
  • Settling? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DeathFlame (839265) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:18PM (#11163435)
    "The fate of SCO is one of the big question marks. New management at Canopy . . . may push [SCO] to try and settle."

    Settle? Does anyone see IBM settling? Why would they when they will win.

  • SCO Insider Trades (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:18PM (#11163439)
    Here it is- the regular SCOX insider trades report! Sell, sell, sell- even while it was going up.

    12/07/04 BAYSTAR CAPITAL II L P Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security 10,000 Open Market Sale proceeds of $45,870.00

    12/07/04 BAYSTAR CAPITAL II L P Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security 6,100 Open Market Sale proceeds of $28,745.00

    12/01/04 BAYSTAR CAPITAL II L P Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security 15,000 Open Market Sale proceeds of $61,767.00

    11/30/04 BAYSTAR CAPITAL II L P Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security 70,500 Open Market Sale proceeds of $273,550.00

    11/24/04 BAYSTAR CAPITAL II L P Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security 60,000 Open Market Sale proceeds of $216,181.50

    11/22/04 BAYSTAR CAPITAL II L P Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security 37,500 Open Market Sale proceeds of $131,250.00

    11/19/04 BAYSTAR CAPITAL II L P Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security 10,000 Open Market Sale proceeds of $35,000.00

    11/17/04 BAYSTAR CAPITAL II L P Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security 10,000 Open Market Sale proceeds of $35,465.00

    11/08/04 BAYSTAR CAPITAL II L P Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security 100,000 Open Market Sale proceeds of $372,615.00

    11/05/04 BAYSTAR CAPITAL II L P Beneficial Owner of more than 10% of a Class of Security 22,000 Open Market Sale proceeds of $80,900.00

  • Hope (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FiReaNGeL (312636) <fireang3l@hotmail. c o m> on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:19PM (#11163443) Homepage
    I hope for only one thing :

    That their (inevitable) demise receive AT LEAST AS MUCH publicity on public news channels / papers that their foolish lawsuits received. To inform the population that it was FUD. Or else they'll have (kinda) suceeded in inspiring a doubt in the minds of many concerning Linux legitimacy. No one on slashdot, obviously, but the common man who heard on news that SCO was suing IBM on UNIX/Linux for code thievery... maybe.
  • by pjwalen (546460) <pjwalen@@@pezdispenser...net> on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:19PM (#11163444) Homepage
    I was certain the, honorable and the trusted SCO Software would come out ahead of those socialist pirates known as Linux users. Who's with me?
  • DiDio Doin it Again (Score:3, Interesting)

    by LithiumX (717017) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:19PM (#11163450)
    So what, exactly, is the deal with Ms Didio? I could understand her possibly (giving her benefit of the doubt) originally siding with SCO as an analyst... but over time her constant support, constant praise, and general attempts at propaganda make it more than obvious she's got a heavy leash being held by someone over there.

    Does she expect to retain any value as an "independant analyst" in the post-SCO market? It's all too common for analysts to be paid to support a product or company, but they're usually a little less blatant about it. Who would value her opinion, knowing that her opinion is for sale?

    Though... I suspect (recently) that it's more Canopy holding her leash, than SCO, since she seems to choose Canopy over SCO when she has to (like in her recent comments - she still didn't say anything bad about them, but saved all her real praise for her theoretical overlords at Canopy).
  • Sucker! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Darth McBride (749942) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:20PM (#11163454)
    Attorney David Boies of New York agreed to cap the overall cost of SCO's lawsuits to $31 million in return for a bigger piece - 33 percent, instead of 20 percent - of any settlements.

    Dear David,

    We ran out of money, but we will give you an even bigger slice of nothing.

    Love,
    Darl
  • 5 year trend (Score:4, Informative)

    by Skiron (735617) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:24PM (#11163494) Homepage
    As seen here:

    http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=SCOX&t=5y [yahoo.com]

    SCO started the attack on Linux first (early 2003) when their stock was at the lowest point, and it paid off a bit - until now - and they are back where they started, except now everybody hates them :)
  • by WormholeFiend (674934) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:24PM (#11163503)
    I'm playing the world's smallest violin for SCO.
  • by pyrrho (167252) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:25PM (#11163504) Journal
    I don't have time to learn a new villian.
  • Rumor Has it... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by marcushnk (90744) <senectusNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:26PM (#11163523) Journal

    That Mustard is a bit of a hatchet man. (walks into a sinking ship and throws so many people overboard that its starts floating.. then points that barely floating ship back in a direction that will assure the safety of whomever is left)
    Couple that with the CFO's leaving and the REALLY piss poor financials that were released yesterday.. I reckon we're about to see the end of this whole saga.
  • by the eric conspiracy (20178) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:39PM (#11163656)
    I, for one, welcome SCO's new overlords!.

  • bogus report (Score:5, Insightful)

    by frovingslosh (582462) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @06:58PM (#11163809)
    SCO was under $3 at the beginning of November. It's last trade today was at $4.17. Yea, stocks go up and down, but to call this a tailspin is a bit extreme. It's taken a couple of bigger drops in the last two months, but the rises have been even larger. Hey, I hate SCO too, but reporting a relatively small dip in the stock as a tailspin is an overstatement based only on bias against them.
  • by Embedded Geek (532893) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @07:04PM (#11163845) Homepage
    I love numbers. You can look at them any way you want and make up nearly any story you want to go with them. While some posters are talking about "only a 7%" drop in SCO shares and say this is nothing, you can look at another number and become tingly with delight at a 99% drop in SCO's licensing revenues [theinquirer.net], from $10.3M 20034Q to $120,000 this 4Q (Forbes story with ads here [forbes.com]). This was the big contibuting factor in a total revenue drop of about 60% (and resulting stock drop).

    Naturally, the truth is somewhere in between. This is bad news for SCO's strategies. That does not mean McBride won't be able to convince his minders to hold the course and continue with litigation. Strictly speaking, at this moment, they're still convinced. Neverhteless, it's obviously a bumpy road ahead for them.

    So, don't throw a victory party yet, but I think we're all entitled to spend a few minutes smirking.

  • Classic Quotes (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dynamo (6127) on Wednesday December 22 2004, @07:40PM (#11164116) Journal
    ""The fate of SCO is one of the big question marks. New management at Canopy . . . may push [SCO] to try and settle."

    This remark just made my day. Imagine SCO trying to settle, being pressured by it's parent company, sitting with IBM attourneys, trying to 'reach out' to IBM to make some sort of agreement. I figure they'll eventually both agree that SCO has wasted all of their time and money on something that is going to eventually cost it's upper management their careers, and hopefully their freedom (but I doubt they'll realize that quite yet.)

    and this:

    "We're in a challenging business environment," he said during an earnings teleconference. "[But] we believe there is value in our Unix licensing business and we offer our customers . . . value they need to be made aware of."

    It's straight out of The Godfather. Way to tell it, Darl!