Message ID: 215017
Posted By: phandsvrta
Posted On: 2004-12-21 17:08:00
Subject: Live updates as I listen in

Escrow cash of $5M placed in special account for "litigation expenses".
Total cash on hand : $31M

Message ID: 215025
Posted By: phandsvrta
Posted On: 2004-12-21 17:10:00
Subject: And more....

Costs of revenue $19.7M for the year.

Est costs of $3M/qtr in 2005.

Anticipate an appeal against IBM!

Cash & litigation costs...

$31M to BSF
$1.7M paid already.
$5M in escrow,
Leaves only $7M for ongoing operations!!!

Message ID: 215031
Posted By: phandsvrta
Posted On: 2004-12-21 17:13:00
Subject: And more...

Q1 2005 : will conclude IP agreement from 2003 with Center7/Vintela for software. : $500k income in Q1.

Message ID: 215035
Posted By: spamsux99
Posted On: 2004-12-21 17:13:00
Subject: Re: And more...

Bert sounds like he wants to cry. Darl is slurring as usual.

Message ID: 215044
Posted By: jgabriel66
Posted On: 2004-12-21 17:15:00
Subject: Darl Speaks

Sounds like Darl is just going through the motions. Saying all the usual things, but no enthusiasm. Like he only wants to get through it and get it over.

Message ID: 215046
Posted By: phandsvrta
Posted On: 2004-12-21 17:16:00
Subject: and more......

Darl : we will get IBM case in front of a jury!!

Unix business now "profitable" after cost reductions - gives long list of customers for Unixware and Openserver.

SCO MarketPlace - win/win, but no actual evidence that any developers have signed up.

Q2 2005 : "Major" OpenServer upgrade.
We believe there is value in Unix licensing, and if we win in court, we will see increase in revenue.

Await Utah IBM PSJ request.

Message ID: 215052
Posted By: phandsvrta
Posted On: 2004-12-21 17:19:00
Subject: Now into detail on court cases

Sounds like bullshit to me - nothing specific, except dates in court, and vague assurances of confidence.

Admits loss of DC case, except timeliness action, but will not pursue it pending IBM - we can refile if necessary, and we may appeal.

Autozone - nothing much to say.

Message ID: 215072
Posted By: phandsvrta
Posted On: 2004-12-21 17:24:00
Subject: Headcount down

Headcount down to "just under 200"

Message ID: 215114
Posted By: phandsvrta
Posted On: 2004-12-21 17:36:00
Subject: Al Petrofsky asks BY

Did you issue 400k shares to BSF?

BY : No, we gave them cash instead as part of the capped fees.

Message ID: 215148
Posted By: manyhats23
Posted On: 2004-12-21 17:52:00
Subject: Q4 Conference Call Audio

Message ID: 215166
Posted By: atul666
Posted On: 2004-12-21 18:19:00
Subject: Other things not mentioned...

* Nothing about the change-of-control 8K they just filed.

* Nothing at all, in fact, on the whole takeover front. Not even any mention of confidential discussions with undisclosed parties.

* Nothing about Raimondi's departure. Isn't it normal practice to thank departed BoD members for their many valuable contributions? Is Darl just being rude, or what?

* Also, nothing about a replacement for Raimondi.

* Not a word about ProSCO / SCOInfo, or GL for that matter.

* No new wookies, like the "German shorts" thing from a couple of quarters back.

* No frothing at the mouth about Linux. Darl used to be quite good at this.

* Not a word about the most recent alleged attack against SCO's website. There was a time when they'd have been screaming bloody murder, extracting every last drop of PR value out of that episode.

* I was wondering if they'd take this opportunity to leak the privileged email in the IBM case. Nope. And nothing about IBM "hacking" their website, either. Don't they have anybody on staff anymore who coaches Darl to act all indignant about stuff like this?

* Nothing about the BSD settlement becoming public. The old Darl would've sued the state of California for disclosing it, and muttered darkly about going after GL and the media for publicizing it.

Message ID: 215214
Posted By: al_petrofsky
Posted On: 2004-12-21 19:47:00
Subject: Conference call questions

Sorry I wasn't well-prepared for actually being called on,
and so I just asked about the two rather boring things I
happened to be thinking about right then:

-- The sealed proposed third amended complaint in the IBM
case, about which Darl seemed willing to confirm at least a
couple details.

-- The 400,000 shares owed Boies that were never issued.
That's the question I wished I had asked last time, when it
would have been more interesting. It appears to be moot now
that Boies has agreed to a renegotiation.

On the Daimler thing: it would be surprising if Darl is
correct that Daimler agreed to a dismissal without
prejudice, because we know Daimler had been unwilling to do
that. However, I don't think we can just assume Darl has it
wrong. It's conceivable that: (1) Judge Chabot, in the
interest of just getting this thing off her docket, urged
Daimler at the hearing to accept a dismissal without
prejudice; and (2) Such a dismissal has recently been
entered, but I haven't seen it yet.

I didn't bother asking about that because I know we'll see
the actual court records soon enough.

Message ID: 215218
Posted By: heimdal31
Posted On: 2004-12-21 19:53:00
Subject: Re: Conference call questions

<< Sorry I wasn't well-prepared for actually being called on,
and so I just asked about the two rather boring things I
happened to be thinking about right then>>

Thanks, Al. I would love to have seen Darl's face when he heard your name. I'm sure he recognized it.

I didn't hear the call. Were you given the opportunity to ask more, or did they just move on? Could you tell at what point they cut off your voice feed?

Message ID: 215243
Posted By: manyhats23
Posted On: 2004-12-21 20:31:00
Subject: Listening to Stress

Just listened to the conference call again ...

Mr. Young doesn't sound comfortable at all. Pointed financial questions had him stammering a bit more than a CFO should.

Mr. McBride sounded more resigned than ever. Some posters have reflected that without Mr. Yarro at Canopy watching out for Darl, he might very well be flying without a net.

The exit of Mr. Yarro and Mr. Mott has severely shortened the list of friends that SCOX has. I suspect that Mr. Yarro will resign from the SCOX in order to save himself from further investigation. As for Mr. Mott, the "personal reasons" excuse sounds plausible for him to exit the SCOX Board also.

That leaves ... uh ... hmmmmm ... uh ... no one. Darl is flying the rocket on his own. I think he finally looked out of the rocket's window and saw it's heading straight for the cold, hard, unforgiving Utah desert.


Message ID: 215284
Posted By: manyhats23
Posted On: 2004-12-21 23:11:00
Subject: CC Audio (Anti-Troll Topic)

The audio was recorded from a publically available website, and there were no restrictions that I could or read that prohibited recording the conference call. What would the difference be if a reporter taped the call for use (as sound bites) during a radio news broadcast?


Authored by: Steve Martin on Tuesday, December 21 2004 @ 06:06 PM EST

Um, is the content of the call copyrighted? If so, recording and posting it
could be a violation. Comments?

The texts of these Yahoo Message Board posts have been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board users "phandsvrta", "spamsux99", "jgabriel66", "manyhats23", "atul666", "al_petrofsky", "heimdal31" under the following license: License: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0.

Copyright 2004 Yahoo! SCOX. Messages are owned by the individual posters.