10K Filing Suggests Grim Outlook for SCO

dacarr writes "SCO has filed their 10K with the SEC — and according to this, their own assessment of the company's outlook is pretty grim. As usual, PJ of Groklaw has a good synopsis of the filing highlights. In short, it boils down to one thing: unless there's a miracle, even SCO doesn't think they're going to come out of this. 'As a result of the Chapter 11 filings, realization of assets and liquidation of liabilities are subject to uncertainty. While operating as debtors-in-possession under the protection of Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, the Debtors may sell or otherwise dispose of assets and liquidate or settle liabilities for amounts other than those reflected in the consolidated financial statements, in the ordinary course of business, or, if outside the ordinary course of business, subject to Bankruptcy Court approval. In addition, under the priority scheme established by the Bankruptcy Code, unless creditors agree otherwise, post-petition liabilities and prepetition liabilities must be satisfied in full before stockholders are entitled to receive any distribution or retain any property under a plan of reorganization.'"

Re:Finally!

[Ngarrang]

I feel sympathy for the employees who were unable to find other employment already. They will soon be without jobs. I mean, if they are still THERE, their prospects are certainly not any better once unemployed.

Wow

[davmoo]

I swear I can hear a fat lady singing...

Not this again...

[Otter]

As usual, PJ of Groklaw has a good synopsis...

We have this story every freaking quarter (and I post the same comment every freaking quarter): 10K's are always written that way, stuffing any imaginable disaster into the text to ward off liability.

For heaven's sake, nerds, if you don't believe me, at least believe Neal Stephenson's lengthy explanation in Cryptonomicon!

Re:huh?

[Anonymous Coward]

Exempting the profanity, parent post should be modded funny, not troll

Re:Finally!

[ddrichardson]

I agree that SCO were unethical and was with you right up until you compared them to the SS. That's just silly.

Septic Services

[rumblin'rabbit]

I never understood why SCO didn't sell their Unix business very early on during the legal proceedings with IBM. What sane IT manager would buy their product? My suggestion for the world's toughest job is a saleman for SCO - you need a real snappy comeback when your prospective customers ask if SCO is going to sue them like SCO sued their other clients.

You may as well try to run a catering business under the "Septic Services" brand.

I can only imagine that there were legal reasons for holding on to the Unix business.

Re:Finally!

[nuzak]

Mike Godwin, pick up line 1.

You couldn't even get away with this idiocy in the echo chamber that is Groklaw, let alone here.

If I was an employer, I'd see a former SCO employee (not executive mind you) as someone who was determined to stick it out when things got bad. Not something to entirely base a decision on, but not an unadmirable quality.