Unoffical empeg BBS

Quick Links: Empeg FAQ | Software | RioCar.Org | Hijack | jEmplode | emphatic
Repairs: Repairs | Addons: Eutronix | Cases

Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#211107 - 17/04/2004 09:53 Benchmark $8.32 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool - 2 Hours [Re: wfaulk]
genixia
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 08/02/2002
Posts: 3411
who's gonna get the UNIX ownership then?

In bankruptcy the remaining assets would be auctioned or sold off to claw back some money for the creditors. Stockholders are the lowest class on this list, below employees owed wages, business suppliers owed money, and investors holding loan notes or preferential shares.
_________________________
Mk2a 60GB Blue. Serial 030102962 sig.mp3: File Format not Valid.

Top
#211108 - 17/04/2004 09:58 Benchmark $8.32 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool - 2 Hours [Re: wfaulk]
gbeer
carpal tunnel

Registered: 17/12/2000
Posts: 2656
Loc: Manteca, California
There are always creditors when a company goes belly up. If SCO dosen't sell the rights before dying, the bankruptsie (spelling?) court will sell off all IP. Including the rights to UNIX weither its worth anything or not.
_________________________
Glenn

Top
#211109 - 17/04/2004 17:39 Benchmark $8.32 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool - 2 Hours [Re: wfaulk]
canuckInOR
carpal tunnel

Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3137
Loc: Portland, OR
See, if SCO does die, who's gonna get the UNIX ownership then?
Is this some sort of trick question? SCO doesn't actually own UNIX. The trademark is owned by someone else. The copyrights are claimed to be owned by SCO and Novell both, so if SCO dies, I'd presume that leaves Novell with an uncontested claim. All SCO really owns of UNIX (as far as I can tell), is the right to sell and collect license fees for Novell, some documentation, and some historical legacy code (to which they don't necessarily own the copyright, so really have no control over).

Top
#211110 - 18/04/2004 09:38 Benchmark $8.32 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool - 2 Hours [Re: canuckInOR]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
I'd forgotten that whole "who owns Unix" quagmire. Let's ignore it for a second.

I wasn't looking for the theory of who would get "it" (whatever SCO owns) but the actuality of who would get "it". My point is that IBM would seem an obvious candidate, but I don't know that I want a major Unix vendor owning "it", as they could conceivably force Solaris, HPUX, Irix, etc. (wow, the crowd is getting thin) out of the market by refusing to license, leaving AIX, which I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#211111 - 18/04/2004 19:06 Benchmark $8.32 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool - 2 Hours [Re: wfaulk]
ashmoore
addict

Registered: 24/08/1999
Posts: 564
Loc: TX
except that even IBM seem to prefer linux right now
Although someone out there could actually attempt to buy 'it' in an attempt to restart the legal cases.

Apparently there are companies out there who specialize in buying IP from failed companies only to try to screw money from everyone else in court.
_________________________
========================== the chewtoy for the dog of Life

Top
#211112 - 29/04/2004 13:20 Benchmark $8.32 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool - 2 Hours [Re: ashmoore]
JBjorgen
carpal tunnel

Registered: 19/01/2002
Posts: 3441
Loc: Guadalajara, MX
Just bumping the thread since DaimlerChrysler made a motion to dismiss SCO's lawsuit with prejudice today. Looks like they were as low as $6.27 today.
_________________________
~ John

Top
#211113 - 29/04/2004 13:24 Benchmark $8.32 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool - 2 Hours [Re: JBjorgen]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
Not that this has any direct relationship to your post, Jon, but it's important to note that even though everyone seems to be predicting SCO's death, SCOX is still trading at twice the price of two years ago:

_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#211114 - 29/04/2004 13:28 Benchmark $8.32 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool - 2 Hours [Re: wfaulk]
JBjorgen
carpal tunnel

Registered: 19/01/2002
Posts: 3441
Loc: Guadalajara, MX
IIRC, they were hurting pretty badly back then. Not to mention that there hasn't been a single major ruling one way or the other. As soon as they get ruled against, I imagine the stock price will dip further.
_________________________
~ John

Top
#211115 - 29/04/2004 14:05 Benchmark $8.32 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool - 2 Hours [Re: JBjorgen]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
True. I've only ever seen two SCO installations in my life, so they must have been living solely on Unix licensing. Maybe the lawsuits weren't engineered by MS; maybe they just had no other funding source.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#211116 - 29/04/2004 15:06 Benchmark $8.32 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool - 2 Hours [Re: wfaulk]
bonzi
pooh-bah

Registered: 13/09/1999
Posts: 2401
Loc: Croatia
I've only ever seen two SCO installations in my life, so they must have been living solely on Unix licensing.
They (I am talking the original Santa Cruz Operation now, not Caldera) were quite strong player in their best days. After licensing Xenix (early System III port to 8088) from no less than Microsoft (who in turn licensed the SysIII source from AT&T) around 1980 SCO nursed it until more capable processors came out, and Xenix/286 and Xenix/386 in various versions and flavours were quite popular. A bit later came SCO Unix (later called SCO OpenServer), a relatively good, 386+ port of SysVr3, which is virtually unchanged to this day. I saw hundreds of them. The main competitor (there were many) was Interactive Systems Corporation product, also SysVr3 (significantly better than SCO, IMHO), and the competition was quite brisk. A month or two after ISC launched SysVr4 as one of AT&T's principal publishers, Kodak sold it to Sun, which ruined then discontinued it in short order. Soon AT&T sold its Unix System Laboratories (with Unix and excellent transaction monitor Tuxedo, now owned by BEA) to Novell, which didn't quite know what to do with it, but continued to develop a version of SysVr4 half-heartedly. It became UnixWare. Then SCO bought Unix operation from Novell (Unix name went to X/Open, Tuxedo to BEA), had mostly failed joint development effort with HP, focused on Tarantella (whatever that might be) and sold Unix to Caldera, which itself was Linux-focused startup by ex-Novell people.

My company was a very early adopter of Unix on Intel for business applications, so I lived through all of this. Fascinating history.

Er, what I was actually trying to say, there are many SCO OpenServer and UnixWare installations.
_________________________
Dragi "Bonzi" Raos Q#5196 MkII #080000376, 18GB green MkIIa #040103247, 60GB blue

Top
#211117 - 03/05/2004 11:17 Benchmark: under $6.00 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: bonzi]
jimhogan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
They (I am talking the original Santa Cruz Operation now, not Caldera) were quite strong player in their best days.

Great history! Yes, tons of small-mid business installs like PoS. In 1999, I was faced with the task of installing SCO on 50 Panasonic Toughbooks for a mobile blood banking systems (at ~$500 per seat IIRC). We kept asking the vendor "...and this doesn't run on Linux *why*?". I left that project later in 1999, but I hear it runs on Linux as of 2000-2001. I think lots of SCO customers were asking that type of $25,000 question.

SCO under $6.00 this fine Monday AM.

Note: to be consistent with my stated rules, I was going to mark the day that SCOX first trades/drops below $5/$1, not the day it *closes* below those prices. I think Genixia's instincts (re: rapid downward acceleration are good.) Maybe he wasn't pessimistic enough, though!!
_________________________
Jim


'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.

Top
#211118 - 03/05/2004 22:07 Benchmark: under $6.00 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: jimhogan]
canuckInOR
carpal tunnel

Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3137
Loc: Portland, OR
A handy link to the SCO ticker on Yahoo, for those lazy folks following this thread.

Top
#211119 - 07/05/2004 14:41 Benchmark: under $6.00 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: canuckInOR]
tonyc
carpal tunnel

Registered: 27/06/1999
Posts: 7058
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
_________________________
- Tony C
my empeg stuff

Top
#211120 - 07/05/2004 14:47 Tangent: stock and Google [Re: tonyc]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
I'm not a financial whiz, so help me out. There's been a lot of talk about people looking down on Google for having two different stock classes, the more influential of which will be held onto by Google insiders. First, why? Who cares? Second, what would the difference be between the Google folks hanging onto (to make up numbers) 5000 of these shares that are worth 10,000 normal shares and not having these special shares and just keeping 50,000,000 normal shares? I just don't get it. I don't get why anyone cares one way or the other.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#211121 - 10/05/2004 15:17 Benchmark: under $6.00 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: tonyc]
canuckInOR
carpal tunnel

Registered: 13/02/2002
Posts: 3137
Loc: Portland, OR
Current price as of 4pm, May 10th: $4.992

Top
#211122 - 10/05/2004 15:26 Benchmark: under $6.00 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: canuckInOR]
tonyc
carpal tunnel

Registered: 27/06/1999
Posts: 7058
Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
w00t! Unless I'm mistaken, I'm the closest entry posted here... Wonder if anyone else emailed Jim with something closer.

Now for a nice, gradual descent to below the $1 mark...
_________________________
- Tony C
my empeg stuff

Top
#211123 - 10/05/2004 16:59 Under $5.00 5/10/2004 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: tonyc]
jimhogan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
w00t! Unless I'm mistaken, I'm the closest entry posted here... Wonder if anyone else emailed Jim with something closer.

W00T! Yea! All legit entries are also in posts here so you can see if anybody beat your 18 points. Oh, time for me to build that scorecard and do some math!

Ah, SCO circles the drain...

(Now back to work, Jim!)
_________________________
Jim


'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.

Top
#211124 - 10/05/2004 22:14 Under $5.00 5/10/2004 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: jimhogan]
Daria
carpal tunnel

Registered: 24/01/2002
Posts: 3923
Loc: Somerville, MA
A fine birthday gift, except I didn't guess it. I guessed my father's birthday. Oops.

Top
#211125 - 21/07/2004 17:51 Re: Under $5.00 5/10/2004 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: Daria]
JBjorgen
carpal tunnel

Registered: 19/01/2002
Posts: 3441
Loc: Guadalajara, MX
Well, SCO reportedly took a hit in the DaimlerChrysler case today...trading at $4.25 as of this writing... as low as $4.14 today.
_________________________
~ John

Top
#211126 - 21/07/2004 20:19 Re: Under $5.00 5/10/2004 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: JBjorgen]
jimhogan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
Quote:
Well, SCO reportedly took a hit in the DaimlerChrysler case today...trading at $4.25 as of this writing... as low as $4.14 today.


"The case "for the most part probably is" over, SCO spokesman Blake Stowell said.

News stories on this just started to show up on Google after the market closed, so let's see how things go tomorrow. They had a small uptick at the end of the day. "bargain hunters"? I just can not conceive of who would buy a share of that trainwreck at any price, except maybe....SCO?
_________________________
Jim


'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.

Top
#211127 - 21/07/2004 20:40 Re: Under $5.00 5/10/2004 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: jimhogan]
djc
enthusiast

Registered: 08/08/2000
Posts: 348
Loc: chicago
Quote:
I just can not conceive of who would buy a share of that trainwreck at any price, except maybe....SCO?

Microsoft?

--Dan.

Top
#211128 - 21/07/2004 21:19 Re: Under $5.00 5/10/2004 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: djc]
tfabris
carpal tunnel

Registered: 20/12/1999
Posts: 31023
Loc: Seattle, WA
OUCH.
_________________________
Tony Fabris

Top
#211129 - 16/08/2004 23:37 Under $4.00 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: djc]
jimhogan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
Quote:
Microsoft?


Finally! Under $4.00. I was seriously starting to think that our friends in Redmond had a standing buy order at $4.01!

But even that couldn't keep SCOX from getting its clock cleaned by Friday's IBM filing.

If SCOX had dropped below $1 today, the scores would look like this:



Name $5 Bet $5 Actual $5 Gap $1 Bet $1 Actual $1 Gap Score
rompel No Bet 05/10/04 38117 No bet 08/16/04 38215 152762
Philip O'Hare 04/12/04 05/10/04 28 06/18/04 08/16/04 59 205
whitey 11/02/04 05/10/04 176 01/31/05 08/16/04 168 680
frog51 07/16/04 05/10/04 67 02/02/05 08/16/04 170 577
dbrashear 04/18/04 05/10/04 22 06/07/04 08/16/04 70 232
jaidev 10/10/04 05/10/04 153 01/23/05 08/16/04 160 633
tonyc 05/28/04 05/10/04 18 10/01/04 08/16/04 46 156
JaBZ 11/25/04 05/10/04 199 03/13/05 08/16/04 209 826
genixia 08/25/04 05/10/04 107 08/25/04 08/16/04 9 134
_________________________
Jim


'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.

Top
#211130 - 17/08/2004 10:11 Re: Under $4.00 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: jimhogan]
JaBZ
addict

Registered: 08/08/2001
Posts: 452
Loc: NZ
JaBZ = jaidev
hmmmmmm when did I respond with two completely different sets of dates? :P

EDIT: ahhhhhh


Edited by JaBZ (17/08/2004 10:24)

Top
#211131 - 17/08/2004 10:49 Re: Under $4.00 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: jimhogan]
Whitey
member

Registered: 09/03/2002
Posts: 178
Loc: Louisiana, USA
well, I'm in the top 10!
_________________________
_______________________________________ former owner...now I'm just another schmuck

Top
#211132 - 17/08/2004 12:46 Re: Under $4.00 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: Whitey]
jimhogan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
Quote:
well, I'm in the top 10!


Well, for every day that passes between now and January 31, your score drops by 3 points while several others go up by 3.

Go, go, go! S-C-O!
_________________________
Jim


'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.

Top
#211133 - 16/09/2004 00:12 Re: Tangent: stock and Google [Re: wfaulk]
753
member

Registered: 25/10/1999
Posts: 149
A bit late for an answer, but here is my understanding of it.
Having a two-class stock structure is a mechanism to decouple the share price from influence and eventually control over the board of directors. Class A shares, which were sold in the public offering have one vote per share, whereas Class B shares have 10 votes per share. Class B share are - at the option of the owner - convertible in Class A shares(1:1), whereas Class A shares can not be converted.
Quote:
There's been a lot of talk about people looking down on Google for having two different stock classes, the more influential of which will be held onto by Google insiders. First, why? Who cares?

Class A shareholders have less influence over strategic decisions. Some financial experts claim that the mere presence of a super-voting-power class, depresses the market value of the normal-voting-power class. It makes takeovers less likely, wether this is good or bad depends on the color of your flag. For the founders it protects innovation, experimentation and the do-no-evil approach, while it's obviously an unfortunate structure for those who would like to takeover. IIRC there are some economical theories that would accuse this system of beeing undemocratic.
Quote:
Second, what would the difference be between the Google folks hanging onto (to make up numbers) 5000 of these shares that are worth 10,000 normal shares and not having these special shares and just keeping 50,000,000 normal shares?

If the founders held the same class of shares as the average shareholder they would need more than 50% percent to be absolutely sure to keep control. With the dual class structure they are able to maintain that control even if their stake drops below 50%. Effectively it allows one to sell more shares while at the same time keeping absolute control.
_________________________
_______ Thomas

Top
#211134 - 16/09/2004 00:28 Re: Tangent: stock and Google [Re: 753]
wfaulk
carpal tunnel

Registered: 25/12/2000
Posts: 16706
Loc: Raleigh, NC US
But essentially all they're doing is holding onto ten $10 bills instead of a hundred $1 bills. Sure, it takes up less room in your wallet, but why does anyone care? If they just had one stock class and kept 50% of the shares behind closed doors, no one would care, right? But people seem to be up in arms just because they have a different denomination. Which raises two inverse questions. First, why do people care? It's not as if they were going to sell more than 49% of the shares regardless of how they're distributed. Second, if they knew it was going to cause this backlash, why would they bother? It's not as if they actually need to save space in their wallets.
_________________________
Bitt Faulk

Top
#211135 - 16/09/2004 01:04 Re: Tangent: stock and Google [Re: wfaulk]
753
member

Registered: 25/10/1999
Posts: 149
Quote:
But essentially all they're doing is holding onto ten $10 bills instead of a hundred $1 bills.

If I understood it correctely the two class system allows them to hold onto ten $1 bills with 100 votes instead of hundred $1 bills with 100 votes, allowing them to own less of the company but keep as much control as if they would own 10 times as much. Put another way it makes control of the company cheaper and their wallets thicker since they can sell more than 50% of the stock to the public. In a single class system the onedimensional ten $10 bills instead of a hundred $1 bills comparison would be correct because percentual ownership of the company and number of votes qualities are linked, they're the same for all shares. But a two class system breaks the 1:1 link between ownership and control, they're made two seperate qualities which leaves us in a two dimensional space in which shares have to be valuated. The insiders pick the best quadrand for their purpose: cheap power.
_________________________
_______ Thomas

Top
#211136 - 25/10/2004 14:05 Re: Under $3.00 Re: SCO Death Watch Pool [Re: jimhogan]
jimhogan
carpal tunnel

Registered: 06/10/1999
Posts: 2591
Loc: Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
Back up to $3.13 now, but new 52-week low of $2.96 this AM.
_________________________
Jim


'Tis the exceptional fellow who lies awake at night thinking of his successes.

Top
Page 2 of 4 < 1 2 3 4 >