Nasdaq to Delist SCO Sep 27 269
symbolset writes "The Nasdaq Staff has decided to delist SCO at open of business on September 27, 2007 under their discretionary authority and as a result of SCO filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. SCO can get a hearing but "There can be no assurance that the panel will grant the Company's request for continued listing.""
"a leading provider of UNIX(R)software technology" (Score:5, Insightful)
So, leading providers often file Chapter 11?
Slashdot contributed a lot. (Score:4, Insightful)
Do They Even Have Any Customers?????? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not as big a deal as it sounds (Score:4, Insightful)
Somehow I doubt it. Salon.com didn't start suing people with bogus claims. I'm sure certain influential and VERY large corporations will see it as their duty that SCO won't rise again...
Re:What happens? (Score:4, Insightful)
I beg to differ: this doesn't make sense. Because if you're only going to buy 100 shares for say $20 then I agree the "risk" is minimal. After all, the most you can lose is $20. Wow big deal. However you'll have a hard time paying your $14 ($7 each way) commission on that.
So if you're going to go in for a fair chunk of change - say $20k or so (around 100k shares), I wouldn't consider losing 50% ($10k) or even 5% ($1k) "minimal" risk. Yeah ok shorting the stuff makes sense, but if you get caught on the wrong side for some reason (like you said, it went up 50% somehow) it won't take very long for you to shit your pants.
If you play with a stock from a company with non-existent fundamentals like SCO, don't complain if you get burned. You will probably get better odds on the roulette table at your nearest casino.
Re:What about Micro$oft ? (Score:3, Insightful)
Like SCO tried bullying IBM?
Slashdot kept us aware of SCO & Groklaw's anal (Score:5, Insightful)
However, this is how I figure it, and I'm serious, not joking: Slashdot kept the SCO issues and Groklaw's analysis of them in front of the eyes of a lot of Slashdot readers who were executives or knew executives, and in the normal course of discussing computer issues, created a culture of understanding SCO as not trustworthy.
As poor as the editing of Slashdot is sometimes, I don't know any better way to get computer-related news. If you know of a better way, please mention it.
Unimpressed by his apology; he doesn't get it (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not impressed. Anyone can say, "Oh. Er, oops." It's easy to couch it in terms that *sound* like you're really humble, like "I was really REALLY wrong." Big deal.
He makes it sound like it just so happened that the geeks were right and he was wrong. "Turns out those amateur sleuths were right." He refers to arguably one of the largest communities of people who do this for a living plus interested and competent hobbyists as though he were saying, "Oh, look! Those little kids turned out to be right after all."
He does not see *why* we saw that SCO had no leg to stand on. He does not realize how, next time, he can do better than the flip of a coin. He says, "... the pack of amateur sleuths who were following the case on a Web site called Groklaw and who claimed to know for sure that SCO was going to lose," and doesn't realize the painstaking review and due diligence that went on there that would put wikipedia to shame.
He says:
Er, so SCO failed because Linux was too successful?
No, Mr. Lyons. SCO failed because SCO was wrong , and if they had won, they still would have been wrong except there would have been a miscarriage of justice. It's not because someone threw the dice wrong or that the "pack" known as Slashdot or Groklaw happened to have a good day. It's not because you've been getting too much email pointing out that you were misinformed, Mr. Lyons, or ignorant.
You don't fool me. Your basic thinking shows through in your words, even though those words sound nice on the surface. Kinda like the press releases of this other company I know that turned out to be wrong.
-----
(By the way, I expect Laura Didio and Enderle to write something like, "Well, darnit, looks like Novell owns the rights to Unix, not SCO. So we'll just wait for Novell to sue Linux for blatant copying of Unix source into Linux.")
Yeah, but did he learn anything? (Score:5, Insightful)
A reporter's job isn't to be a stenographer for whatever anyone wants to say. We have press releases for that.
Reporters are supposed to get stories, sort out the various facts, and if someone's feeding them bullshit, point that out. The tendency for reporters today to be "balanced" in reporting on an issue really just means that people with nothing to back up what they say are put on even footing with people who have facts to back up their claims.
Let's hope Lyons learned that he actually has to do some, you know, reporting, as part of his job.
Re:This is really bad news for me. (Score:2, Insightful)
The quote is only funny if you think that prostitution - trading sexual favors for other favors - is inherently incompatible with feminism. I see little reason why it would be, unless one considers every prostitute a victim of oppression, which hardly seems to be the case here.
Just because you're a feminist doesn't mean you need to be good at writing papers, or be willing to exert the time and energy to do so, nor does it mean that you need consider sexual favors degrading. It simply means that you want women to have an equally powerful (socially and legally) position as men. Whether that position includes "I suck your dick/cunt if you do something for me" is up to the individual.
Sorry about the offtopic rant, but this shit keeps on circulating here in Finland, where some people want to ban prostitution "for their own good", and that kind of oppression - forbidding adults from doing something just because you don't happen to like it - gets my hackles up.
Re:"a leading provider of UNIX(R)software technolo (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is really bad news for me. (Score:5, Insightful)
$20K is peanuts as far as an investment stake is concerned. An MBA is worth upwards of $20K a year. You would have to turn the $20K to $400K to match. Not very likely.
If you want an investment, there is nothing better than education. There is no stock that can turn $20K into a $20K annuity in two years.
On the other hand the most likely story is that this is simply someone out to yank everyone's chain by constructing a sob story that gives everyone a good chuckle.
Re:This is really bad news for me. (Score:3, Insightful)
Too many people are suffering the quick return addiction:
- on investment, day-traders buy low and sell back quick high (sometimes)
- companies hire pre-trained people for low wages and work them raw for high profits (then dump them instead of training if the skills need change)
- Companies go to outsourcing their skills and talent because it looks good on the books now (but not good for the company's value in the long term)
- Schools teach kids to pass tests now, not to be employable in the future.
Yeah, really bad.