Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Linux Business Your Rights Online

SCO Possibly Delisted from NASDAQ 366

Posted by Zonk
from the my-karma-ran-over-your-dogma dept.
canfirman writes "Reuters is reporting that SCO could be delisted from the NASDAQ because "it has not filed its annual 10-K report with the SEC". The company claims it's because "it is examining matters related to stock issued as part of its compensation plans". SCO Stock is sitting at $4.30 at opening today. It'll be interesing to see where it goes from here."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SCO Possibly Delisted from NASDAQ

Comments Filter:
  • by robyannetta (820243) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:26PM (#11700517) Homepage
    Judge (to SCO): Where's your evidence?

    SCO Lawyer: Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, I have one final thing I want you to consider: Ladies and gentlemen, this is Chewbacca. Chewbacca is a Wookiee from the planet Kashyyyk...

    Judge: Wait a minute! I'm not going to let you use the Chewbacca defense. This is a carny-like head game from the television show South Park.

    SCO Lawyer: But Chewbacca lives on the planet Endor. Now, think about that. That does not make sense! Why would a Wookiee--an eight foot tall Wookiee--want to live on Endor with a bunch of two foot tall Ewoks? That does not make sense! But more important, you have to ask yourself, what does this have to do with this case? Nothing. Ladies and gentlemen, it has nothing to do with this case! It does not make sense! "Look at me, I'm a lawyer defending SCO, and I'm talkin' about Chewbacca. Does that make sense? Ladies and gentlemen, I am not making any sense. None of this makes sense! And so you have to remember, when you're in that jury room deliberating and conjugating the Emancipation Proclamation... does it make sense? No! Ladies and gentlemen of this supposed jury, it does not make sense. If Chewbacca lives on Endor, IBM must have stolen our code we GPL'ed and put on our public FTP site. [pulling a monkey out of his pocket] Here, look at the monkey. Look at the silly monkey! [Judge's head explodes]

  • by Your Anus (308149) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:26PM (#11700523) Journal
    SCO is dying...
    • It is now official. Netcraft confirms: SCO Unixware is dying

      One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered SCO community when IDC confirmed that SCO Unixware market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that SCO has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. SCO is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead
    • Not quite (Score:5, Insightful)

      by temojen (678985) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @01:19PM (#11701399) Journal
      A low or de-listed stock does not spell death for a company. it does mean:
      • It's much harder to raise capital in the future
      • If a majority of shareholders think the company's assets are worth more than the outstanding shares, it'll be liquidated. As long as the majority of shares are held by "true believers" this can't happen.
  • Gloating? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ackthpt (218170) * on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:26PM (#11700525) Homepage Journal
    SCO Stock is sitting at $4.30 at opening today. It'll be interesing to see where it goes from here."

    While I'm no fan of SCO, particularly after their get-rich-quick plan to sue IBM and license code-which-may-or-may-not-be in Linux, this whole story seems little more than gloating and hardly worthy of a /. post. Is the news that slow today?

    • by grub (11606) *

      Is the news that slow today?

      You and I are both subscribers... looking into the mysterious future, I'd have to say "Yes."
    • What can we say... they need a good kicking.

      Their stock is down over $0.25.. that's a good start. People are dumping it like a psycho girlfriend.
    • Re:Gloating? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by seanadams.com (463190) * on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:36PM (#11700699) Homepage
      this whole story seems little more than gloating and hardly worthy of a /. post

      This isn't gloating, it's war. We can gloat when the litigious bastards are out of business completely.

      Slashdot is read by zillions of people who can not only sell their SCO, but also advise others to do so. Slashdot is also read by all kinds of mainstream journalists who might not otherwise notice what SCO is up to. One could argue it's been a damned effective campaign so far. Were it not for /. clearing up the FUD, their stock would probably still be flying high on rampant speculation.
      • by RobertKozak (613503) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:58PM (#11701080) Homepage
        Were it not for /. clearing up the FUD, their stock would probably still be flying high on rampant speculation.

        Darryl : "aaarg. And I would have succeeded if it weren't for those pesky slashdotters and their stupid dog!"
      • Which Endgame? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by ackthpt (218170) *
        This isn't gloating, it's war. We can gloat when the litigious bastards are out of business completely.

        I prefer them to stay in business but completely disengage from their anti-Linux/anti-Open Source antics. Darl and his goons should leave and people with some damn sense should go in and revive the company and work with Linux and Open Source communities.

        Slashdot is read by zillions of people who can not only sell their SCO, but also advise others to do so.

        Are there actually any die-hard /. readers h

      • Re:Gloating? (Score:5, Insightful)

        by sconeu (64226) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @01:18PM (#11701384) Homepage Journal
        Were it not for /. clearing up the FUD, their stock would probably still be flying high on rampant speculation.

        I suspect that GrokLaw has quite a bit to do with it, too...
      • Re:Gloating? (Score:5, Informative)

        by ReelOddeeo (115880) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @02:28PM (#11702476)
        Slashdot only occaisionally has a story about SCO. And when they do, such as the current thread, it is already (very) old news.

        If you want to know what is going on with SCOXE, you need to follow Growlaw every day, and also the SCOX message board at Yahoo.

        This is very worthy of a Slashdot post. These bastards have told huge lies in the media and press. Made the most outrageous claims about Open Source, the GPL (unconstitutional, communists, etc.), created a cloud of FUD about Linux intellectual property, and even a FUD cloud about open source in general. They have engaged in a stock scam to unjustly enrich themselves while doing the previously mentioned things. They have claimed to own rights that they do not own. They have accused everyone who uses Linux (that is me personally) of owing them license money. They have sued Linux users (although not over Linux use per se). They have threatened to sue any Linux user (i.e. me personally). They have produced not one shred of evidence that they own anything in Linux.

        This is not gloating.

        The truth needs to come to light. Anyone found to have engaged in criminal activity should be prosecuted.
    • Re:Gloating? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by ArmchairGenius (859830) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:40PM (#11700761) Homepage
      Not filing your SEC filings is always bad. When it gets so bad NASDAQ delists you, it means that you are about to get sued, and get sued hard. I can pretty much guarantee a Section 10(b) fraud class action gets filed against SCO in the near future. And I also am willing to bet the SEC will start investigating them as well... Good thing they have plenty of lawyers....
      • by turtledot (827674)
        >"When it gets so bad NASDAQ delists you, it means that you are about to get sued, and get sued hard."
        Next we'll see an anouncement from SCO complaining about the litigious nature of society today.

        Maybe they'll take out a full page ad in NY Times..

        To a chemist it's Fe-y, to everyone else it's iron-y...
    • Re:Gloating? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gstoddart (321705) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:40PM (#11700763) Homepage
      While I'm no fan of SCO, particularly after their get-rich-quick plan to sue IBM and license code-which-may-or-may-not-be in Linux, this whole story seems little more than gloating and hardly worthy of a /. post. Is the news that slow today?


      Well, TFA is a Reuters article pointing out that the SEC is considering de-listing a publically traded company because they are in arrears wrt the paper-work they are required to have on file.

      This publically traded company is involved in lawsuits that affect several companies and technologies.

      It's not as if it's a link to some guys blog -- clearly Reuters thinks it's worth mentioning.

    • At present it has tanked > 7% which is at the $4.00 mark. Given the severity of the news, I would have expected it to take a dump a lot further than that - 7% is severe but stocks have lost more than that for relatively minor or unfathomable reasons before now.
  • by Jimpqfly (790794) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:28PM (#11700558) Homepage Journal
    ... when you don't fill your TPS Report.
  • requirements? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by AviLazar (741826) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:29PM (#11700560) Journal
    Since SCO has stocks issued to the public, aren't they required to fill out the proper paperwork? How does one who own SCO stock supposed to sell his stock? Can they do this w/o getting sued by their share holders?
    • Re:requirements? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by DenDave (700621) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:35PM (#11700682)
      Actually the district attorney will probably end up dragging McBride and his CFO in his office asking what the heck the monkey business is about. After reading above post I expect that McBride will pull a monkey out of his sleeve ..
      Whilst I am not purporting to give legal advice, common sense dictates that if you own SCO stock, you should be on the horn to your lawyer jsut about.... now...
    • Re:requirements? (Score:3, Informative)

      by oliana (181649)
      Being publicly traded and being available on a regulated stock exchange (NASDAQ, NYSE) are two different things. People who own the stock if it gets de-listed will have to find buyers in a different market.

      There are several non-regulated stock markets out there. http://www.otcbb.com/ [otcbb.com]Is one.

      • Yeah, but where you you find buys for a company with no assests except a groundless law suit?
      • by 955301 (209856) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:58PM (#11701073) Journal

        Okay, so next up, SCO tries to sue the NASDAQ small cap exchange for their delisting policies.

        The current shareholders of SCO sue them for failing to file the necessary paperwork to maintain the listing and thereby affecting their ability to trade the stock.

        And I'll be sued for pointing out the obvious demise of this company. Finally.
      • Re:requirements? (Score:5, Informative)

        by BreadMan (178060) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @01:30PM (#11701594)
        Companies that don't do the minimal filings can get trade on the pink sheets [invest-faq.com] market, but that's not very liquid.

        IIRC, I don't think a copy can list on the bulletin board unless they do the necessary filings under the 1934 securities act, like the 10-K and other annual reports. Maybe I'm confusing the bulletin board with something else.

        Getting a delisting notice is not good, but not the end of the world. Having that "E" on the end of your symbol until you get your paper work in will get you dropped out of a lot of mutual funds who won't hold stocks that don't conform to the market's rules. If you want to make a bet on SCOX, you can try going short if you think they won't make the reporting deadline. Peeking at the short ratio, looks like a lot of people are thinking the same.
  • Ding Dong! (Score:2, Funny)

    by scmason (574559)
    The witch is dead the wicked witch is dead! OK, now I have to work...
    • by DataPath (1111) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:36PM (#11700694)
      You're getting ahead of yourself. We're still at the part where the which is saying "I'm melting! I'm melting!"

      Only after the witch is well and truly gone do you sing that. In the meantime, we stare in simultaneous horror, awe, and delight.
  • by vivek7006 (585218) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:29PM (#11700573) Homepage
    SCO Stock is sitting at $4.30 at opening today. It'll be interesing to see where it goes from here.

    It will go up. Where else would it go? Afterall they own linux code. And very soon every linux user will be paying them $699 license fees
  • by RyanFenton (230700) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:31PM (#11700599)
    They just don't want people to be able to watch their stock anymore, so they've made this move to change their stock symbol. Security through obscurity, indeed.

    Ryan Fenton
  • Another link.. (Score:5, Informative)

    by slashkitty (21637) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:32PM (#11700632) Homepage
  • by PortHaven (242123) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:33PM (#11700637) Homepage
    Knock! Knock!

    Who's there?

    SCO!

    SCO who?
  • SCOX - SCOXE (Score:5, Informative)

    by ballpoint (192660) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:34PM (#11700649)
    • SCOX, SCOXE, SUXOR

      These haxors and their funny spellings. Why can't they just write "SUCKS"?
    • What's the NASDAQ rule for appending an E? What does it stand for? What does it indicate? Are other poorly-managed stocks similarly stigmatized?
    • by saldek (139594)
      The google adwords below that article are hilarious :

      Sponsor Results
      Fast Bankruptcy Auto Loans
      Qualify for an auto loan after bankruptcy in 30 seconds before you apply. 93% approved nationwide. Rapid decisions to your e-mail. Amistoso Español.
      www.fundingway.com
      Bankruptcy Auto Title Loan
      LoanMart's mission is to advance cash to any automobile owner who needs extra money. LoanMart is a direct financer - not a bank. Find out how we can help you. Visit us today.
      www.800loanmart.com
      Auto Loan Application - Ban
  • by macserv (701681) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:37PM (#11700709)
    ...to use the new cover sheet on their 10-K report. Did SCO get that memo?
  • by GillBates0 (664202) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:37PM (#11700710) Homepage Journal
    It'll be interesing to see where it goes from here.

    I predict it'll be going downhill....if there's any downhill left, that is.

    /\ \o/
    \ | <--- Darryl
    \^
    \
    \
  • Just curious for those investment savvy people out there. If you sell short and they get delisted what happens?

    I hope I did not just cause Etrade to be /.
    • > If you sell short and they get delisted what happens?

      The shares don't disappear because they get delisted. They continue to exist, and they even continue to trade. They just don't trade on NASDAQ; they trade only over-the-counter. This will tend to lead to a sharp decline in the price of the stock. You'll likely make a nice profit out of that short.

      Chris Mattern
    • I just tried to short it at Schwab (first time I've ever shorted anything in 20 years of investing).

      Got back an error message "The stock is either ineligible to be shorted or no shares are available to short."
      • Re:SELL SHORT? (Score:3, Informative)

        by Skjellifetti (561341)
        You can only sell short if the last price is the same or higher than the previous price. This prevents short selling in a declining market which would have the effect of causing the price to crash. This is an SEC rule.
    • Re:SELL SHORT? (Score:5, Informative)

      by bigtallmofo (695287) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:59PM (#11701090)
      Couple points:

      1. Many brokers don't let you short a stock that is below $5.
      2. Delisting a stock decreases liquidity which can make it very difficult to cover your short if the stock rises precipitously.

      Unlike buying a stock which has a limited downside potential (the stock goes to $0 in which case you lose your entire investment), shorting a stock has a theoretically infinite downside potential. If you short a stock at $4.30 and it goes up to $1,000,000 per share, you've lost almost a million dollars for each share you shorted. Of course, that's not realistic, but the point is that shorting a stock is not to be taken lightly.
  • They'll appeal (Score:5, Interesting)

    by sfjoe (470510) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:38PM (#11700724)

    The rules that lead to being delisted are pretty cut-and-dried. However, a company with a solid business plan to rescue themselves will more often than not be given a break and allowed to remain listed while they work things out. Failing to file your 10-K is almost never an "accident". Add to that the fact that SCO really has no business plan beyond lawsuits and I think we'll likely be seeing them de-listed fairly rapidly.

  • by drdanny_orig (585847) * on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:39PM (#11700734)
    Is there any way to purchase a single share and get a hardcopy certificate? I think an SCO stock cert from this month might be a really cool thing to hang on the wall.

    Yes, I'm serious.

    • by ishmalius (153450) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:48PM (#11700897)
      After Enron crashed, their stocks certificates actually became worth more as souvenirs than any possible redemption value (little or none.)
      • Headline: SCOX CHANGES EXCHANGE

        Body: The SCO Group (formerly NASDAQ:SCOX) has decided to move from its' longtime home on the NASDAQ, to online auction house EBay. They will also move from electronic record keeping to issuing stock certificates. SCO CEO Darl McBride said of the move "we think this will more accurately reflect our value in the marketplace, and allow us the opportunity to continue aggressively pursuing infringements against our intellectual property. Oh yeah - cash, certified cheque, or m
    • when you can buy an entire roll of SCO stock at your local supermarket? Available in 6, 12 or 24 roll packages.
  • Well, this campaign appears to be winding down. Which evil company should we target next? We should at least be prepared so we're not caught without someone to bash on /.

    And don't say Microsoft. That's too easy.
    • Re:Who's next? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Dan Ost (415913)
      I realize you say this in jest, but I'd like to point out the obvious anyway:
      Instead of targetting specific companies, the needs of the community would
      probably be better met by efforts to improve existing software and documentation. New software to cover existing gaps is good too. If our offerings
      improve, then the community and its resources will grow too, giving us more
      power to defend ourself later.

      SCO was a good wake up call. Serious enough to make us aware of the dangers,
      but weak enough that it couldn't
  • by draos (672972) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:40PM (#11700753)
    If the nasdaq adds an 'e' to the symbol then SCO will have 30 days to file the 10-k before they are delisted. Also the nasdaq routinely allows companies to extend the 30 day deadline if the company can make a case for why they are late in filing....so while they are likely to get an e I find it unlikely they will allow themselves to be delisted.
  • If they go down. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DrStrangeLug (799458) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:42PM (#11700811)
    If SCO dies during the trial , where does that leave the whole Linux IP issue ? Not proven ? Wouldn't it be better if they can at least survive until they get totally defeated in court, as a deterrent against other legal attacks ?
    • > If SCO dies during the trial , where does that
      > leave the whole Linux IP issue ? Not proven ?
      > Wouldn't it be better if they can at least survive
      > until they get totally defeated in court, as a
      > deterrent against other legal attacks ?

      That is my fear. I'd prefer to put up with another year of SCO, and have them handed their balls on a platter by a court, than to have them simply cease functioning, and some other company come along, by the foetid remains and restart the process, bringing a
    • Re:If they go down. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Jason Earl (1894) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @01:13PM (#11701308) Homepage Journal

      Getting buried in a countersuit that completely bankrupts your company without even getting all the way through trial is about the biggest deterrent that I can imagine. The next SCO wannabe will think twice before suing Big Blue. Once SCO is gone the entire question of whether or not Linux is tainted with illegal UNIX code becomes moot. With SCO out of the way the only company that has even a little bit of a shot of using UNIX copyrights against Linux becomes Novell, and Novell has essentially bet the future of the company on Linux.

      It was a stretch for Caldera (now SCO), a long time Linux distributor to pretend that they didn't know that their copyrighted code had been included in Linux. After Novell's involvement in the SCO vs. IBM case even the dimmest jury would find it impossible to believe that Novell didn't intend to distribute Linux under the terms of the GPL.

      In essence, as long as the folks who own and control the old UNIX copyrights are actively distributing Linux the community has very little to fear.

      It would be nice if the GPL was tested in court, if only to shut up all of the GPL naysayers, but that would simply be a bonus.

    • Re:If they go down. (Score:3, Informative)

      by iabervon (1971)
      There is no Linux IP issue. SCO dropped those claims. SCO's current claims are breach of contract against IBM and copyright infringement in AIX from IBM continuing their AIX work after SCO said they couldn't. Chances are that nobody actually wants SCO's assets, since they're probably mostly liabilities at this point, and there's nothing really unique and useful. So it wouldn't, at that point, matter if there was SCO IP in Linux, so long as nobody wanted to acquire it and try to argue it.
    • The hope (Score:3, Interesting)

      by mcc (14761)
      The hope on slashdot previously seems to have been that something called "piercing the corporate veil", whatever that means, will happen and IBM will find a way to make their and Redhat's SCO countersuits and such continue-- only instead of against the defunct The SCO Group, they would continue against The SCO Group's boardmembers, or against The Canopy Group.

      I think this is highly reasonable. Despite their supposed status as "investors" The Canopy Group has treated SCOX like SCOX was a puppet and they had
  • by ocularDeathRay (760450) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:46PM (#11700860) Journal
    the wolves at his door
    are starting to snarl
    this is a sad day
    for our dear ol friend darl

    We hoped and we prayed
    we would see this day come
    now the world shall see
    suing linux is dumb

    The stock on the nasdaq
    is being delisted
    I hope darls ass
    is feeling quite fisted

    writing this poem
    has been so much fun
    under my bosses nose
    so I am under the gun

    thank you for allowing
    my poetic roll
    now go ahead and mod me
    a useless old troll
  • Which part didn't you understand? The buh? Or the bye?
  • Oh this is bad news indeed. If SCO is delisted and their stock drops below a dollar then the junk faxers currently targeting my office fax machine with junk stock pitches will start sending me notices about the "great opportunity to buy SCO" at 62 cents.

    Then I'll have to choose between buying SCO stock and the fake Disney vacation offers.

    Oh the horror. Maybe I should just answer the e-mail from the nice Nigerian who wants me to transfer his millions into my bank account, instead.

    On the other hand, it's
    • Oh the horror. Maybe I should just answer the e-mail from the nice Nigerian who wants me to transfer his millions into my bank account, instead.

      Tell you what, offer to invest them in SCOXE. He'll be so grateful!

  • SCO is dead

    What? Too Soon?

    But seriously, hopefully SCO will die and stay dead!

  • If their stock keeps sliding, they may be delisted for another reason.

    If I'm not mistaken (IANAFE - I am not a finance expert), they have to keep their stock above $1.00 and have a total value of $10,000,000 to remain listed (this may be NYSE rules).

    I've seen some companies initiate reverse stock-splits to keep their share price above the threshold. Not being listed on NASDAQ isn't the end of the world .. not being listed on say NYSE OTOH.

    SCO may not be a very popular company, but I don't think they'll
  • This is the same way thousands of dot-coms went out. Stick a fork in 'em, they're done. SCOXE indeed.
  • SCO Website (Score:5, Interesting)

    by rokzy (687636) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:55PM (#11701026)
    anyone else notice that under "products and services", SCO lists its court cases?

    very funny and depressing at the same time.
  • Screw the Lawyers (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Doc Ruby (173196) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:56PM (#11701034) Homepage Journal
    SCO's paying their lawyers in stock, which explains their entire strategy: keep the stock price elevated, and cash them in, before they inevitably lose the case and it all collapses. Delisting SCO right away could castrate that strategy, if the lawyers haven't sold any stock yet. Maybe those sharks won't be able to afford to defend themselves from an SEC investigation of that criminal strategy, and get disbarred.
  • Real Time Quote (Score:4, Informative)

    by MrByte420 (554317) * on Thursday February 17, 2005 @12:57PM (#11701042) Journal
    bid: 3.88 ask: 3.91 They're not doing so hot today...
  • by Animats (122034) on Thursday February 17, 2005 @01:00PM (#11701095) Homepage
    SCO can't file their 10-K because "it is examining matters related to stock issued as part of its compensation plans"? That's one of the lamer excuses sent to the SEC in a while.

    The "10-K" is the backup data behind a company's annual report. It's the single most important disclosure of a company's financial status. The SEC allows 3 months after the close of the fiscal year for a 10-K filing. SCO's year closed at the end of October, and their 10-K was due at the end of January. Late filing of a 10-K or 10-Q (the quarterly report) is considered a major red flag for a stock. When I was following dying dot-coms [downside.com], a late 10-K or 10-Q was a strong indicator of trouble. Nobody files late because they have unexpectedly good numbers.

    SCO filed an NT-12K form [sec.gov] with the SEC, asking for a 15-day extension. "The Company currently anticipates that the Form 10-K will be filed by no later than the fifteenth calendar day following the date on which the Form 10-K was due." They missed that date, too.

    There has to be something really embarassing in the compensation plan. Really embarassing, if they're willing to risk delisting from the NASDAQ.

    Delisting kicks a stock down to the pink sheets [pinksheets.com]. That's where the penny stocks favored by spammers and scammers live.

  • This meltdown behavior is very familiar. It's not slow and progressive, it's halting. And then one day it just flies over the cliff and explodes. I think we're seeing that right now. And I think that if anyone ever brings forensic accountants to SCO they will find massive fiduciary problems that they saw as being covered up by suing someone.

    Let's face it, ever since Douggy's Dad had to resign for sexually harrassing the staff, SCO has had the whiff of being a shitty little disreputable bunch of corner crac
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Bert: Hey Darl, got a moment?

    Darl: BERT BUDDY! Come on in. Hey, wanna brew?

    Bert: I, uh, no thanks. I have some important news.

    Darl: Lemme guess, we total kicked Linux's ass today, right? Lay it on me bro.

    Bert: Well, you see Darl, you know our stock? The ticker symbol is gonna change to SCOXE, just wanted to let you know that.

    Darl: It is? Whoa! Awesome! Why are you doing that Bert?

    Bert: It's because our stock is in the toi.., uh, actually the guys at NASDAQ think the Linux lawsuit is "eXtremelly Excell
  • Slap a $20 down? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 17, 2005 @01:30PM (#11701584)
    So.... Could I wait for the stock to drop to 0.01, then just buy the whole company for like $20.00?

    I'm serious. Would this be the vehicle by which someone Pro-Linux could acquire what actual rights SCO had, then choose to release them into the GPL for certain, as well as formally acknowledge that the debated rights had also been GPL'ed?

    In short, buy Darl out like he wanted but not at the price he wanted? Then turn what's left of the company into something useful?

You will lose an important disk file.

Working...