Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Caldera Software Businesses Linux

SCO Receives Nasdaq's Delisting Notice 208

Posted by timothy
from the well-there's-always-licensing-the-name dept.
An anonymous reader writes "This somewhat amusing press release of sorts tells us one of those things we've all been waiting a while for. SCO(X) has announced that 'it received a Nasdaq Staff Determination letter on December 21, 2007 indicating that as a result of having filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the Nasdaq Listing Qualifications Panel has determined to delist the company's securities from the Nasdaq Stock Market and will suspend trading of the securities effective at the open of business on Thursday, December 27, 2007.' PJ at Groklaw has surmised that with effectively zero cash resources left, Novell doesn't stand to get much more than SCO's furniture, if even that. Ding dong, is the wicked witch finally dead yet?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SCO Receives Nasdaq's Delisting Notice

Comments Filter:
  • by Chrisq (894406) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:20AM (#21829620)
    Novell doesn't stand to get much more than SCO's furniture,

    If there was any proof that this was by design (which it probably was) could the directors be held liable in the US?
    • by Linker3000 (626634) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:31AM (#21829724) Journal
      Maybe they could sell the chairs to Steve Ballmer?
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Kjella (173770)
      In theory - yes.
      In practise - I'll believe it when I see it. As long as the directors can drag up some crackpots to claim they acted in good faith based on their analysis or advice, they usually walk away with no problems at all. The level of deception and fraud you have to prove in order to make anyone personally responsible is very high, Gross incompetence is unfortunately not enough.
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by fataugie (89032)
        And honestly, don't most corporations carry insurance for their upper management to cover this sort of thing (personal lawsuits)? Unless they have something really damning, the worst that would happen is the insurance would pay off.

        These guys aren't in the Enron/Global Crossing/Tyco realm....they're just fucking idiots.
        • by Forge (2456)
          Sad but true.

          The corporate vale is very thick. Odd as it seams, all SCO's management would need to do to get shafted royally is pay personal expenses directly from the company accounts and skip the AGM.

      • by Eggplant62 (120514) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @11:26AM (#21830320)
        Yahbut, if you look closely at the entire history of the case, you'll find that there was intent to deceive from the get-go. Darl and his minions all thought up this neato scheme to defraud everyone by claiming their IP was in Linux in hopes that someone would pay them off to shut them up. Unfortunately, IBM fought them tooth and nail through purposefully-prolonged discovery shenanigans. Novell noticed the stink and put in their two cents, contracturally directing their proxy, The SCO Group to stand down from their threats. TSG decided instead to carry on the FUD at the behest of their master, the big software monopoly out in the Northwest, damn the torpedoes. Unfortunately for the masters, they didn't get enough fear, uncertainty and doubt out of the whole picture to ensure a big win with the new bloatware OS of the year to get anyone to buy it. Instead, we've got major PC manufacturers selling preloaded boxes carrying Linux picking up a nice segment of the market now.

        Surely someone will be drawn and quartered in there for the lies and coverups necessary to try to make it all believable.
      • How do these people have anything other than bright futures ahead? The directors have all been high-profile people in the news for many, many years now. Daryl McBride probably has a slew of potential opportunities in front of him. He should have no problem getting tons of offer letters, considering how well known his name is and the unique experiences that he has had (like trying to sue every company in america).

        I'm sure we'll see him as the CEO of Royal Crown soon, suing Coke and Pepsi for stealing his
        • by VE3MTM (635378)
          If I were on the board of [insert large corporation here], I know I would say "hell no" to hiring him. He already drove SCO straight into the ground and turned their name, their trademarks, into a farce. Would you really want him running your business? What would make any board of directors *want* him running their company?
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Methuselah2 (1173677)
      They still have SCO's good name to sell, don't they? ;-)
    • by toxic666 (529648) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @12:14PM (#21830804)
      Webster on Groklaw (a lawyer) says yes. Not criminal, but personal civil liability against the directors. There is already a finding by Kimball in Utah that the MS and Sun license money was converted (legal term) and should have gone to Novell. That opened them up to civil suits from Novell.
  • by Apple Acolyte (517892) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:21AM (#21829628)
    "Once again the conservative sandwich-heavy portfolio pays of for the hungry investor!" - Dr. Zoidberg

    I wonder if you could get a sandwich with SCO stock right now. . . .

    • Hermes: Those boots cost me 99 dollars and 98 cents. You invest it how you want...
      Hermes Son: I'm going to buy two shares of SCO!
      Hermes: Oh! A risk taker!
    • Leela: Zoidberg owned 51% of the company?
      Hermes: The shares were worthless, and he kept asking for toilet paper!
    • by Firethorn (177587)
      When I read this I imagined being handed a sandwich from a local vender wrapped in SCO stock - much like fish&chips used to be wrapped in newspaper...
    • Maybe not, but they make ok wrapping material.
  • New stock symbol (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Just Some Guy (3352) <kirk+slashdot@strauser.com> on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:24AM (#21829660) Homepage Journal

    $0.18 to $0.12 [yahoo.com] in 45 minutes. Impressive!

    • by Ang31us (1132361) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:29AM (#21829700) Homepage
      Thanks for the link. I especially love the earnings per share at N/A and the price to earnings ratio at N/A. Great business model, Darl!

    • So the company is dirt. What's happened to the litigious bastards responsible? Has Darl McBride got away with a fat severance package and a job at Microsoft, or did the directors of SCO go down with their ship in any meaningful way?
      • by badasscat (563442) <[basscadet75] [at] [yahoo.com]> on Thursday December 27, 2007 @12:32PM (#21830994)
        Has Darl McBride got away with a fat severance package and a job at Microsoft, or did the directors of SCO go down with their ship in any meaningful way?

        Darl McBride continues to be with the company, as do most of the other important company directors.

        As with every other piece of SCO news, people around here are overreacting to this. Being de-listed from the NASDAQ doesn't really mean a whole lot, because they weren't counting on using any investor money at this point anyway. They've put all their financial eggs in one basket, and that's the lawsuits. And those are continuing; SCO has even said they'll appeal the Novell ruling.

        This doesn't mean SCO is "dead", not any more than they were yesterday or the day before anyway. Essentially all that's changed is that you won't be able to point and laugh at them on Yahoo Finance anymore.

        It's maybe one more nail in the coffin, but they've been building that coffin for a while now, and it's still not finished yet.
        • by fwarren (579763) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @05:33PM (#21834414) Homepage
          It is not likely that they will appeal. Standard operating procedure is they have to put up some money into a trust in case Novell does prevail. They don't have the money to put in the trust. Even if the US Bankruptcy Trustee would green light the deal. So they can claim they have been wronged all day long and that they will appeal.

          Practically speaking the only way they can even have a chance with IBM is if they can fulfill step one in the process. Who owns the copyrights. SCO has to own them to be able to continue with the case. Until they win IBM or come out of bankruptcy, they don't have them money to appeal the Novell decision. Until they appeal the Novell decision, they don't have a chance of owning the copyrights they need to win the IBM case. Thus a perfect chicken and the egg or catch 22 scenario.
        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          "Essentially all that's changed is that you won't be able to point and laugh at them on Yahoo Finance anymore."

          Wanna bet? Alternate link to yahoo message board for SCOX [yahoo.com].

          If anyone deserves to be kicked on the way down, its' these SCOXsuckers ...

    • by techpawn (969834)
      I know it's denoting de-listing but I was hoping for FSCK
    • by MMC Monster (602931) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @11:41AM (#21830466)
      There was a guy a while back who put in a bid for 1337 shares at 0.07 cents, or something like that. He may end up owning the entire company. :-)
    • nah the 1y Target Est: 5.00 is impressive, optimism springs eternal!
  • Dropping due to (Score:3, Insightful)

    by WillRobinson (159226) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:27AM (#21829688) Journal
    Institutional investors don't keep stock that is desisted, so its just being dumped. Bet they wish they did that yesterday.

    Now, to pierce that corporate veil...
    • by Chrisq (894406)
      Of course we should remember that "they" could well include your pension fund.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by jedidiah (1196)
        ...yet another good reason to trust no one else with "your" money.

        If you don't understand it at all, don't delegate to someone who claims to.

        Stocks are bad. Mutual funds are bad^2.

        Keep in mind that some pension funds bought into those junk-bond style subprime mortgage investment products.

        A little stupidity and a little greed you have the perfect sucker/mark. This is especially so if the mark happens to be in charge of a corporation, investment fund or pension fund.
  • by SirLurksAlot (1169039) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:29AM (#21829698)

    Haha!

  • Ding dong (Score:3, Informative)

    by ozmanjusri (601766) <aussie_bobNO@SPAMhotmail.com> on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:29AM (#21829706) Journal
    Is the wicked witch finally dead yet?

    No, the wicked witch is still spreading FUD [theregister.co.uk].

    She's down one Winkie now though.

    • by Baron_Yam (643147) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:32AM (#21829734)
      I think you need a more recent reference that 2004 to prove your point...
    • by Foobar of Borg (690622) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @11:09AM (#21830122)

      No, the wicked witch is still spreading FUD [theregister.co.uk].
      He threatened to sue while in Singapore. Can't they cane him for that there (please)?
    • by Chrisq (894406) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @12:07PM (#21830730)
      From SCO site [sco.com]:

      SCO intends to maintain business as usual throughout the Chapter 11 proceedings. Subject to court approval, SCO will use the cash flow from its operations to meet its capital needs throughout the reorganization process.

      Other companies such as Delta Airlines, Texaco, Dow Corning, K-Mart, United Airlines, Toys R' Us, Macy's Department Stores and others have emerged from Chapter 11 protection after restructuring themselves for success. We intend to do the same.
      • Ok, let's do a David Letterman style top-10 list on ways SCO could "restructure themselves for success"! Ready?

        • #10, Rent Darl out as a dummy to Jeff Dunham
        • #9, Go into the fertilizer business
        • #8, Build a transporter and beam themselves to Bizarro world
        • #7, Get all Shakespeare in their "reorganization" and kill all their lawyers
        • #6, Block Redmond at their firewall so they don't get any more great ideas from "those guys"
        • #5, Pie. Sell Pie. Who doesn't like pie?
        • #4, Move to Montana and be a
      • by oahazmatt (868057)

        Other companies such as Delta Airlines, Texaco, Dow Corning, K-Mart, United Airlines, Toys R' Us, Macy's Department Stores and others have emerged from Chapter 11 protection after restructuring themselves for success. We intend to do the same.

        Of course, there's the other side of the spectrum. My first tech job went under when the CEO paniced and spent so much time trying to unload the company to a corporation that he had to sell it for pennies on the dollar. And one of my favorite comic book publishers, Cr

  • Okay then (Score:5, Funny)

    by L337Motif (1203898) <l337motif@nOSPAm.gmail.com> on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:31AM (#21829732)

    Novell doesn't stand to get much more than SCO's furniture

    I'm fine with that. One of my friends in Redmond could use a few more chairs.

    Miguel.
    • by sm62704 (957197)
      One of my friends in Redmond could use a few more chairs.

      You lucky stiff. I need low friends in high places, but all I have are high friends in low places.

      -mcgrew
  • And so.. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Cleon (471197) <cleon42.yahoo@com> on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:35AM (#21829778) Homepage
    Let us take a moment to remember SCO, and all that they did for us. For yea, they did take douchebaggery to new heights, and may their executives never again find work, and their lawyers develop sores. May their stockholders be infested with fleas in places they cannot scratch, and the offices that they occupied cursed for all time. As we prepare to bury this pitiful excuse for a company in the grave of history, may its death continue to be slow and painful.

    And let us say:

    Bwa ha ha. Ha ha. Ha ha.

    Ha.
    • You should really work "lamentation of their women" in there somewhere.
    • At $0.12 a share, I'm wondering if we can't all buy one as a souvenir...
    • by canuck57 (662392)

      Let us take a moment to remember SCO, and all that they did for us. For yea, they did take douchebaggery to new heights, and may their executives never again find work, and their lawyers develop sores. May their stockholders be infested with fleas in places they cannot scratch, and the offices that they occupied cursed for all time. As we prepare to bury this pitiful excuse for a company in the grave of history, may its death continue to be slow and painful.

      Let us not forget the Microsoft connection. Fro

  • Why the 6-day delay? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by davidwr (791652)
    The letter is dated 12/21. Why did it take until 12/27 to make the newswires?

    Either SCO got it but didn't release it, or SCO didn't get it in a timely manner.

    This should have been released to the public at least 1 trading day before the effective date.
    • by peragrin (659227)
      This is SCO we are talking about. they probably released the letter after close yesterday on purpose.
      • Under the law important news about a stock has to be released in such a way that all investors know what is happening. There should not be some investors who know the important news when they are trading and other investors who do not know the news when they are trading. Publicly traded companies handle this by either making the announcement after the close of trading for the day or by asking for a trading halt while the news disseminates. So SCO was correct to make the announcement after the close.

        Where
    • by daeg (828071)
      It would be interesting to find out who unloaded their stock between the 21 and 26 of December.
    • by sm62704 (957197)
      Why did it take until 12/27 to make the newswires?

      Slashdot has the slowest firehose on the planet!
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Jim Hall (2985)

      It took until 12/27 to hit the newswires because the SCO press release is dated 12/27. [sco.com] The newswires picked it up the same day, today.

  • by Ang31us (1132361) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:38AM (#21829794) Homepage
    Some of my favorite quotes [wikiquote.org] from Darl McBride: "And C++ programming languages, we own those, have licensed them out multiple times, obviously. We have a lot of royalties coming to us from C++." "Obviously Linux owes its heritage to UNIX, but not its code. We would not, nor will not, make such a claim." "We didn't start this, but we're going to finish it."
  • by Archangel Michael (180766) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:38AM (#21829800) Journal
    Tis but a flesh wound.

    ----

    I'm not dead yet .... Shuddup
  • by Billosaur (927319) * <wgrother@OOOopto ... inus threevowels> on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:40AM (#21829816) Journal

    Chairs... conference tables... lights... cubicles... free copy of Unix with each purchase...

  • Dear Sco:

    It was fun, but please DIAF (oops, too late).

    Love,
    The Community

    P.S. F*CK YOU!
  • poor SCO (Score:4, Funny)

    by JeanBaptiste (537955) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:47AM (#21829870)
    guess I should have paid my $699 licensing fee.
  • Not the scooter...What do you think about Openwave? From this year's performance, they're following in SCO's footsteps...
  • by Gossi (731861) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @10:50AM (#21829916)
    ...is SCO's blurb at the bottom. I quote: "SCO owns the core UNIX operating system, originally developed by AT&T/Bell Labs and is the exclusive licensor to UNIX-based system software providers". Uhm, SCO...
    • by Kazymyr (190114)
      Beh. Anyone can put anything on a web page. Just because mine says "I'm the Creator of the Universe, the Alpha and Omega" doesn't make me that. Or so they say.
    • by swillden (191260)

      SCO owns the core UNIX operating system, originally developed by AT&T/Bell Labs and is the exclusive licensor to UNIX-based system software providers

      Actually, that might just be true. The second part (exclusive licensor) is true, actually. The first part depends on what "owns the core UNIX operating system means". It's pretty clear they don't own the copyrights on AT&T UNIX, and the definitely don't own the UNIX trademarks, but you could interpret "exclusive licensor" as "owner" without too much stretching.

      In any case, whatever they are or are not, they're not going to continue being for too much longer.

  • "All I want for Christmas is to see SCO die"
  • by oahazmatt (868057) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @11:00AM (#21830012) Journal

    Novell doesn't stand to get much more than SCO's furniture...
    Why do I have the feeling McBride's sofa is sewn together from the pelts of one thousand penguins?
  • by Ubi_NL (313657) <joris@NosPAM.ideeel.nl> on Thursday December 27, 2007 @11:00AM (#21830018) Journal
    The funniest IRC quote ever (and happy to burn modpoints for it, as this will doubtlessly be flamed down):

    From http://bash.org/?106579
    Topic in #os: hey guyz, stop pickin on irix.
    <SCO> w00t! i bought unix! im gonna b so rich!
    <novell> /msg atnt haha. idiot.
    <novell> whoops. was that out loud?
    <atnt> rotfl
    <ibm> lol
    <SCO> why r u laffin at me?
    <novell> dude, unix is so 10 years ago. linux is in now.
    <SCO> wtf?
    <SCO> hey guyz, i bought caldera, I have linux now.
    <red_hat> haha, your linux sucks.
    <novell> lol
    <atnt> lol
    <ibm> lol
    <SCO> no wayz, i will sell more linux than u!
    <ibm> your linux sucks, you should look at SuSE
    <SuSE> Ja. Wir bilden gutes Linux f&#252;r IBM.
    <SCO> can we do linux with you?
    <SuSE> Ich bin nicht sicher...
    <ibm> *cough*
    <SuSE> Gut lassen Sie uns vereinigen.
    * SuSE is now SuSE[UL]
    * SCO is now caldera[UL]
    <turbolinux> can we play?
    <conectiva> we're bored... we'll go too.
    <ibm> sure!
    * turbolinux is now turbolinux[UL]
    * conectiva is now conectiva[UL]
    <ibm> redhat: you should join!
    <SuSE[UL]> Ja! Wir sind vereinigtes Linux. Widerstand ist vergeblich.
    <red_hat> haha. no.
    <red_hat> lamers.
    <ibm> what about you debian?
    <debian> we'll discuss it and let you know in 5 years.
    <caldera[UL]> no one wants my linux!
    <turbolinux[UL]> i got owned.
    <caldera[UL]> u all tricked me. linux is lame.
    * caldera[UL] is now known as SCO
    <SCO> i'm going back to unix.
    <SGI> yeah! want to do unix with me?
    <SCO> haha. no. lamer.
    <novell> lol
    <ibm> snap!
    <SGI> :~(
    <SCO> hey, u shut up. im gonna sue u ibm.
    <ibm> wtf?
    <SCO> yea, you stole all the good stuff from unix.
    <red_hat> lol
    <SuSE[UL]> heraus laut lachen
    <ibm> lol
    <SCO> shutup. i'm gonna email all your friends and tell them you suck.
    <ibm> go ahead. baby.
    <SCO> andandand... i revoke your unix! how do you like that?
    <ibm> oh no, you didn't. AIX is forever.
    <novell> actually, we still own unix, you can't do that.
    <SCO> wtf? we bought it from u.
    <novell> whoops. our bad.
    <SCO> i own u. haha
    <SCO> ibm: give me all your AIX now!
    <ibm> whatever. lamer.
    * ibm sets mode +b SCO!*@*
    * SCO has been kicked from #os (own this.)

  • I mean, I don't care about financial matters or stocks or suh, I'm a nerd. Money, to me, is just a tool, an easy way to trade goods and services. The kind of person who eagerly seeks financial news and links to the WSJ and the like worships money. I think worshiping oes' tools is foolish.

    But SCO is different. So YAY SLASHDOT! The only thing I'd like to see different is a) for McBride to go to prison for fraud and b) Sony to get delisted.

    -mcgrew
    Happy nude year! [slashdot.org]
    • Money, to me, is just a tool, an easy way to trade goods and services.

      Hand in your geek license right now. You get it back when you installed a bittorrent client.
  • by roystgnr (4015) * <roystgnr.ticam@utexas@edu> on Thursday December 27, 2007 @11:13AM (#21830158) Homepage
    No? And he's still got all the money he made via his pump-and-dump, too?

    Then the bad guys won. The fact that they managed to hurt stupid greedy investors more than honest innocent competitors does little to mitigate their victory.
    • You are aware that those greedy investors do so with the money from normal people who want to build up a nestegg for retirement, yes?

      In fact, as long as the people responsible for this pump'n'dump game are free to enjoy their spoils, this is a loss-loss situation.
  • Now they have a way to redeem their memory forever: release SCO UNIX's full source code to the public domain.
  • Is it possible that the complete control of SCO(X) can be transferred to Novell through a court decision?

    (OK, Novell may not want it, but anyway)

    And in that case - can the board of SCO(X) be held liable for anything? It seems to me that if anything - the board of SCO(X) has at least deceived the share holders.

    The only good thing that may come out of this is that it serves as a wakeup-call for investors since they will be a bit more aware that the course taken was bad for business. If I was an investor

  • by HangingChad (677530) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @11:30AM (#21830364) Homepage

    Novell doesn't stand to get much more than SCO's furniture,

    I'll be happy to liquidate it for them. Imagine being able to sell SCO office furniture on eBay? Along with a certificate of authenticity. Heck, I'd bid on a piece myself. It's like owning a piece of the Titanic of tech history.

    • Uh, it's not the Titanic of tech history. No one on the Titanic was going: "We did NOT hit an iceberg, the ship is NOT sinking."

      It's the Bush Administration of tech history.
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by ArsonSmith (13997)
        Actually part of the problem was that people thought they did hit an iceberg but that the ship was still "unsinkable" Otherwise evacuation of the ship would have started earlier and more people would have survived.
  • by figa (25712) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @11:32AM (#21830386) Journal
    SCO is listed on [pinksheets.com] Pinksheets [pinksheets.com].
  • by Animats (122034) on Thursday December 27, 2007 @12:00PM (#21830656) Homepage

    For those of you who don't follow this mess, SCO voluntarily went into bankruptcy in September, the day before the SCO vs. Novell trial was to start. This stopped that case. For about two months. Novell asked the bankruptcy judge to let their case continue. After frantic maneuvers from SCO, which went nowhere, the bankruptcy judge let the Novell case proceed. It will go to trial in January or February. The only remaining issue there is how much money SCO owes Novell. SCO already lost on the "who owns UNIX copyrights" issue; Novell owns them.

    The IBM and Red Hat cases are still pending, so if anybody wants to buy up SCO (the company's entire market cap is only $2.4 million today), they'd be stuck with those potential liabilities, on top of the Novell liability. That's why nobody is snapping up the remains of the company.

    Plan on visiting the liquidation auction some time next summer.

    • by phrostie (121428)
      and Mcbribe gets to laugh all the way to the bank after giving himself and his cohorts all those raises and bonuses
      • by Firethorn (177587)
        This might make for an interesting question:

        Could the stockholders go after Mcbride and othe SCO executives for mismanagement and such?
  • SCO stuff may be finally worth something...

    1) go bankrupt
    2) sell furniture on EBay
    3) get amazed when Darryl's chair sells for one millllion dollars
    4) profit!!!

    Look MA, no question marks!
    • by calebt3 (1098475)
      3.5) Get even more amazed when you notice that chairs in the company (including Darryl's after a considerable bid war) were bought by the same bidder and they are now being shipped to Redmond, WA.
  • A 3 letter domain is always valuable. And Caldera. That a great name for a company or product. Perhaps Novell could rename there obscure SuSe LiNuX DiStRiBuTiOn.

  • Sorry to rain on everyone's parade, but SCO filed for Chapter 11 (reorganization), not Chapter 7 (liquidation). To quote this guy from Texas [fulwilerlaw.com]:

    Businesses may used Chapter 7 bankruptcy to liquidate or Chapter 11 bankruptcy to reorganize their business and repay their debts over a period of years under a "plan." Business that want to continue as going concerns must use Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

    So no used furniture for Novell, SteveB or anyone else. IANAL, but IIRC on the plus side Chapter 11 doesn't discharge debt

Hackers of the world, unite!

Working...