Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Darl McBride Leaving SCO?

CmdrTaco posted more than 6 years ago | from the take-the-money-and-run dept.

Linux Business 126

JoGiles writes "Linux-watch is reporting that while The SCO Group may go on to pursue its plans with a $100 million buyout, it will do so without its longtime CEO Darl McBride. Buried in the proposed MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) between Unix vendor and Linux litigator SCO and SNCP (Stephen Norris & Co. Capital Partners) is the note that "upon the effective date of the Proposed Plan of Reorganization, the existing CEO of the Company, Darl McBride, will resign immediately.""

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

three cheers (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22445508)

hip hip!..

HA HA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22445532)

slashdot is a penis pump!

Re:HA HA (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22445578)

Slashdot's not a bong! It's for my Schlong!

Re:HA HA (1)

schnikies79 (788746) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446124)

Epic win for the Van Wilder reference!

The man's name (2, Funny)

smitty_one_each (243267) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445536)

...is an anagram of Lard [google.com]

Re:The man's name (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22445762)

Yep! and that is probably the most interesting observation that will occur in the entire discussion.

I mean, who the fuck cares about the minutia of all this shit?

I'm more concerned about the mean temperature of squirrel testicles in north-western Canada.

Re:The man's name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22445932)

Brr Clime Dad rather suggests global warming is a myth?

Oh please, give it a break (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#22448350)

You really give lard a bad name.

Pending approval... (5, Informative)

LinDVD (986467) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445548)

Assuming all of this stuff is approved by the bankruptcy courts for starters. I find it amazing how the tech media latches on to what MIGHT happen and not what actually HAS happened. "The SCO Group" didn't get any money yet, but many in the tech media act like they did.

Of course, that quasi-journalistic slut, MOG, projects that McBride's leaving was a goal of the Groklaw audience, when in fact, it never was.

Re:Pending approval... (4, Interesting)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445652)

THIS is actually the most important point of all.

And are there any possibility to let the court know what the public opinion on this is? The Chapter 7 [wikipedia.org] should be more appropriate.

At least SCO weren't eligible to file for Chapter 12 [wikipedia.org] . Wonder what would have happened if they also were owning a huge farm in the midwest too...

Re:Pending approval... (-1, Flamebait)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447826)

And are there any possibility to let the court know what the public opinion on this is?

Reminder: Public opinion and Linux Fanboi opinion are two different things.

Re:Pending approval... (5, Interesting)

burnin1965 (535071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445806)

Assuming all of this stuff is approved by the bankruptcy courts for starters.


Good point. The quick headlines that were generated for stories are highly inaccurate, i.e. its not a $100 million buy out and it looks to be only $5 million at first glance.

It could turn out after a full review of the facts that this is just another attempt to perpetrate additional theft of Novell's cash through the bankruptcy court as was the last attempt to sell Novell's assets [groklaw.net] .

We'll have to wait and see how Novell and IBM respond in the bankruptcy court.

Re:Pending approval... (3, Interesting)

penix1 (722987) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446250)

I suspect that if it is a real offer the judge will approve it for two reasons. First, there are clauses that cover owed expenses in the event of loss(es) at trial(s) and second it gets this out of his court. it will be awfully hard for a creditor, even one that has so much at stake as Novell, to complain when SCO is floated this "loan" to have an objection if it will get them paid. That is, after all, why we are in the bankruptcy court in the first place.

The objection to the first sale was because there was no clause covering losses of the cases. Also, they were trying to sell property in dispute. That isn't the case with this offer. This is a hostile takeover plain and simple.

I predict the judge will allow it *IF* there is some up front money involved such as a trust or some such to cover a fall through. I don't think the agreement on its face will carry the day. In short, money talks.

Re:Pending approval... (2, Insightful)

Tony Hoyle (11698) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445872)

I don't think this buyout will be allowed. The assets of SCO are in dispute - probably mostly owned by Novell at this point.. and the market cap of SCO is only 2.5M anyway. If they're found to owe more than that there's no company left to be bought.

Re:Pending approval... (4, Interesting)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447294)

It's not truly a buyout. However, it is not uncommon in bankruptcy for a company to take out a new loan that is used to pay off all the old ones (aka consolidate loans). In this situation its kinda shady how they're doing it, because they're trying to save Darl from being responsible for everything...that is the bigger kicker here if this actually goes through, not just the money infusion.

Re:Pending approval... (1)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446470)

Of course, that quasi-journalistic slut, MOG...
I'm sorry, you lost me at the "quasi" part.

Re:Pending approval... (2, Interesting)

thomas.galvin (551471) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447568)

Of course, that quasi-journalistic slut, MOG, projects that McBride's leaving was a goal of the Groklaw audience, when in fact, it never was.
Of course not. Getting covered in honey and dropped onto a nest of fire ants, sure, but leaving SCO? Nah.

Why does this matter ? (1)

posys (1120031) | more than 6 years ago | (#22448164)

please tell us why this matters? I so sorry, I just don't see it...

so long... (1)

C0vardeAn0nim0 (232451) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445554)

so long, and thanks for all the grief.

wanna bet one dollar that he'll sue SCO and/or SNCP as soon as he's kicked out ?

Re:so long... (1)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445600)

I doubt he will, he'll be awarded a massive payout "in recognition for hiw work over the last years" and to "compensate him for future earnings", etc etc.

Its happened before, and will happen again... in fact, it happens everytime a company fails. Sometimes it makes me think that working for a living is such a stupid thing to do.

Re:so long... (4, Interesting)

gnasher719 (869701) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445800)

I doubt he will, he'll be awarded a massive payout "in recognition for hiw work over the last years" and to "compensate him for future earnings", etc etc.
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if he got sued by Novell rather soon (not that this would have to do anything with him leaving, they will sue him anyway). Darl McBride got a huge bonus for making the company profitable - however, the only profits that the company made is money that according to Novell was actually theirs. That will be decided in the courts in April or so. I am quite sure that if the court decides for Novell, and Novell cannot get all their money from SCO, and the bonus paid to McBride turns out be incorrect, then Novell will go for his own money.

It is not something that companies would normally do, but in this case there are exceptional circumstances.

Not the real bad guy (4, Interesting)

Bruce Perens (3872) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445648)

I think Darl was just a front, as Ransom Love was for Caldera. Ralph Yarro was the real boss of both. I guess he's out too (not sure), but IMO the new investor is pursuing the same program, and Microsoft is still behind it.

Re:Not the real bad guy (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22445718)

IMO the new investor is pursuing the same program, and Microsoft is still behind it.

Bruce, now that Vista has bombed at the Corporate offices, you think Microsoft will still have an incentive to pursue Linux in court?

Re:Not the real bad guy (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22446834)

"Bruce Perens" is a "has been" at best, and a "never was" more realistically. A loud mouth that OSS can and should do without.

Re:Not the real bad guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22446882)

You're right. In fact, all CEOs are just fronts for Microsoft, and no corporation actually conducts an independent existence with its own bad ideas. Thanks for enlightening us to the true peril.

Re:Not the real bad guy (1)

pembo13 (770295) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447632)

What's with all the ACs replying to you?

Re:so long... (1)

Tolkien (664315) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445774)

But he doesn't lack enough money to be bought out to have enough money to sue them...

It's "up to" $100M (5, Informative)

eddy (18759) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445560)

A fairly important distinction, as anyone with Cable or ADSL will know.

I can assure you, when Novell is awarded the money SCOXQ.PK owe them, there will be none there.

Re:It's "up to" $100M (1)

Bruce Perens (3872) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445682)

It's really important to spread this point. People think that SCO has a $100M "War chest" now. Not so.

Re:It's "up to" $100M (1)

rumblin'rabbit (711865) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447150)

What? How then will the SCO board of directors award a big, fat departure bonus to McBride for all he's done for the company, its stockholders, its clients (especially those that he sued), and of course the IT industry in general?

Perhaps we can take up a collection.

Don't go (1)

should_be_linear (779431) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445562)

I tought now it supposed to be Final Battle with ultimate evil of Carlyle group and SCO, all those good names like Bush, Bin Laden, Gates, McBreid, and all of sudden he is leaving? No Death Star explosion in the end?

Smoking Bacon (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22445656)

SCO receives money from Stephen Norris, who is connected with Prince Waleed Bin Talal Bin Abdulaziz Al Saud [google.com] , who can be seen here [blogger.com] with Bill Gates?

Re:Smoking Bacon (2, Informative)

sherpajohn (113531) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445796)

Mr. Norris was a co-founder of the Carlyle Group (and ironically the current head of that group is the ex-CEO of IBM ;).

Its all BIG money though...which begs the question - why? I mean does any really believe this up to $100M investment in the walking corpse of SCO is based on the possibility of them doing well business-wise? As many have pointed out its more likely a small fee to ensure that a) the anti-Linux FUD machine keeps operating b) a few scoundrels gets paid off and disappear c) certain skeletons stay firmly ensconced in the closet d) by going private a) and c) are easier to perform out of the eyes of stockholders or the SEC. given the financial weight of the folks behind this its just a tad on the scary side if you ask me.

No! (1)

gbutler69 (910166) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446278)

Mr. Norris was a co-founder of the Carlyle Group...
Holy Crap Batman! You mean Chuck has betrayed us? He's gone over to the Dark Side?

Re:No! (1)

PurpleBob (63566) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447028)

What, campaigning for Mike freaking Huckabee isn't "dark side" enough for you?

Re:No! (2, Funny)

MadnessASAP (1052274) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447372)

There is no dark side, there is only Chucks side and the other side is dead.

Re:Smoking Bacon (2, Interesting)

daniel23 (605413) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446342)

Mr. Norris was a co-founder of the Carlyle Group (and ironically the current head of that group is the ex-CEO of IBM ;).

This is nothing but speculation, spy vs. spy, but...

doesn't IBM have a strong interest in SCOg's existence right until the day of the judgement? They invested a lot of time, reputation and money into this defence and may want to harvest a judgement that settles a number of questions once and for all.
They could have saved themselves a lot if they had bought SCO earlier but this would have encouraged other litigators to try forced buyouts on them, and IBM apparently didn't want the allegations to stop but wanted a ruling declaring them false and void.
MS got plenty FUD out of the story but since SCOg lost almost all of its case (if they ever had any) there is no good reason for MS to continue covered funding.
SCO bleeds money just to make sure Novell won't get what they owe them, and approaches death. At the same time threatens to spoil the trial by going bankcrupt.
IBM might want to secretly tunnel some money into the corpse to make sure a zombie SCOg has just enough strength left to take all the beating IBM has prepared for them.

Re:Smoking Bacon (1)

m0nkyman (7101) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446432)

That was my first thought on seeing this as well... Who has something to win by SCO staying alive just long enough to finish the court case... the added bonus is that if IBM owns SCO when it goes down the toilet, nothing gets buried that they don't want buried....

Oh no! (0)

gilesjuk (604902) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445570)

This saviour of SCO appears to know what it's doing.

Darl has been a total idiot all the way, making FUD with no proof. In the end pretty much nothing he said held any wait.

Re:Oh no! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22445636)

>In the end pretty much nothing he said held any wait.

I don't know about that. I think we waited plenty long enough for the SCO case to end! :D

Re:Oh no! (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#22448368)

So? It kept the price of a dead company's shares above the penny market area.

Mission accomplished.

settle in for a long ride (4, Insightful)

davejenkins (99111) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445594)

I fear that we're in for a long ride on this one. Back in the Day, we all figured that the SCO lawsuit would be quashed within 6 months. I remember a talk at a LinuxWorld several YEARS ago where Eric Raymond or someone openly challenged them to show us all where the 'infringing code' was. Several years ago...

Lawsuits around the GPL and Linux codebase will become a permanent fixture. Our dreams of a single case to finalize up everything nice and tidy are never going to come true. I have every confidence that Open Source will survive, and the GPL will remain intact, but the lawsuit will always be there-- there's just too much potential money sloshing around, and law schools keep pumping out the evil.

Re:settle in for a long ride (2, Insightful)

mangu (126918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445664)

Lawsuits around the GPL and Linux codebase will become a permanent fixture

Except for that quotation that often gets mentioned here: "first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win", or something like that.


They can't remain locked in step 3 forever.

Re:settle in for a long ride (1)

Bruce Perens (3872) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445670)

Well, there's not much question that we've beaten this case before hearings started. It is better to have the verdict and NOT settle or just let the case die than to leave it dangling. But I agree that it is possible for abusers to delay a case for 5 years before hearings even start. I would think that whatever subsequent cases happen, judges and defense will be informed by this case.

Bruce

Re:settle in for a long ride (4, Interesting)

TheLinuxSRC (683475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446556)

I would think that whatever subsequent cases happen, judges and defense will be informed by this case.

I think this is probably the most important point you make with regard to future lawsuits.

The courts in the SCO cases have given SCO every opportunity to produce evidence to back their case. SCO has spent millions trying to find that evidence and by the time they realized it did not exist they had already dug themselves in way too deep and could not back out.

Also, as a result of the SCO cases, the BSD lawsuit agreement [groklaw.net] was brought out in to the public. What is interesting here is the amount of Unix code that is now licensed under a BSD license. It is my understanding that BSD licensed code can be included in the Linux kernel and released under the GPLv2 along with the rest of the Linux kernel.

Being that there is no Unix code illegally included in Linux, it would seem this avenue of attack is no longer open (or at minimum, not feasible). What worries me more is the next logical vector of attack, patents. I agree with a statement you made earlier, "I think Darl was just a front, as Ransom Love was for Caldera. Ralph Yarro was the real boss of both. I guess he's out too (not sure), but IMO the new investor is pursuing the same program, and Microsoft is still behind it.".

Microsoft themselves could never sue a Linux company directly for a couple of reasons. First of all MS does not need the bad publicity it would bring. They currently have the perfect scapegoat, why not continue using it? Secondly, Microsoft has anti-trust issues to concern themselves with that their scapegoat does not have.

The only solace that I find in the fact that the next war will be based around patents is that the courts have become better educated in technology and that Linux has been virtually exonerated of any copyright issues. Quite frankly, patents scare me.

Re:settle in for a long ride (1)

YaroMan86 (1180585) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447562)

I'm not so sure about the patents thing. Microsoft is already throwing around the old 235 patents bullshit. I think anyone can see that these patent violations don't likely exist. Aside from Microsoft, what patents does SCO hold that are relevant to Linux or even UNIX? They can try to FUD it like the copyrights, I suppose, and try to go to court again without a shred of evidence.

In response to many posts I've been seeing about MS being involved in some way with this $5 to $100 megadollar deal? I doubt it. I don't think links with the Carlyle Group, Saudi's and ultimately Gates are really plausible in this case. Sure, you can make a line between Mr. Morris and Mr. Gates, but the way I see it, the longer and more convoluted the line of association is, the less likely this line is relevant. I could link half the people listed in my phone book to this case if I tried.

Its almost akin to charging someone with murder simply because the victim was your wife's cousin's girlfriend's best friend's wedding planner's barber. Get real.

I'm no defender of Microsoft, but unless there's something more concrete linking Microsoft to this deal, I don't believe they're involved.

Re:settle in for a long ride (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22448944)

What about my father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate?

Re:settle in for a long ride (5, Insightful)

Epiphenomenon (977580) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445852)

It's bizarre and sad that first Turing and von Neumann invented programmed machines, then the Unix folks invited everyone to write good things that other people could use, and now, the fact that someone owns software means that if you want to write a program and give it away, you have to prove that no-one owns it. It's not that code wants to be free. A lot of it doesn't. But why should the code that does want to be free have to go to court first?

Re:settle in for a long ride (4, Insightful)

burnin1965 (535071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445988)

Back in the Day, we all figured that the SCO lawsuit would be quashed within 6 months. I remember a talk at a LinuxWorld several YEARS ago where Eric Raymond or someone openly challenged them to show us all where the 'infringing code' was.


In a way it was quashed in about 6 months. Based on their stock price [yahoo.com] the fairy tale was over quickly as it became apparent to any rational being that it was all BS. And requesting the code was the most obvious blow to their case as any argument against pointing to the publicly viewable code was simple nonsense.

Other than a few "journalists" with questionable credibility no sane person believed a word coming out of tSCOg's mouth pieces once they refused to show the code. And the ultimate blow was when the judge explained how close they came to losing the entire case on a summary judgment because they failed to produce even the most minute amount of evidence [silicon.com] to support their reasoning for being in court in the first place. That statement from the judge was based in part on all the outrageous claims the tSCOg mouth pieces had been spewing in the media and their failure to simply show the code.

Yes it has dragged on for years, and yes it cold drag on for more years, but the game was up long ago and most people know that. Now all we can hope for is that IBM and Novell will be willing to continue spending cash on the lawsuits long enough to ensure the perps and backers of this scam lose significant face.

And you are right, no matter how this ends it will never be the end, there are several people making massive profits who feel threatened by open source and they will continue to fund idiotic attacks like this as long as its a financially viable option for them. There are also the rabid anti-FOSS individuals who will rant until the end of time because they are so enamored by the likes of Microsoft that they'll believe and rabidly support every piece of FUD they are spoon fed.

Yeah, its not over, and we'll never hear the end of it. But life goes on.

Law school != evil (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22446284)

Law schools don't pump out evil. Venture capitalists with insane schemes that they want to get out of do.

Re:settle in for a long ride (1)

drew (2081) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447074)

Lawsuits will always exist wherever there is money. You don't have to have a valid complaint or even a reasonable expectation that you will win in order to sue somebody. If there's enough money there, and somebody can come up with a halfway believable story about how it should have been their money, then there will always be people willing to file a lawsuit, regardless of how outlandish their claims are, whether because they've actually deluded themselves into believing they have a legitimate complaint, or because they are willing to gamble on getting an easy settlement or a gullible judge or jury.

Unfortunately, no matter what field you're in, it seems that money attracts slimeballs, and much as I may dislike them, I have a hard time faulting lawyers or law schools for meeting the demand.

Luck for SCO. (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445598)

Luckily Darl McBride took most of the spotlight for SCO's action. SCO still has a fare amount of "Good Will" (In accounting it is not how nice or moral the company is "Good Will" is name recognition) With Darl Fired from SCO, SCO has a chance for a comeback because it is not their products that caused its downfall but poor and immoral leadership. As for the normal day to day business I never heard any major problems, I have heard more problems dealing with Microsoft, IBM, and Sun then dealing with SCO. SCO still has a huge battle but without Darl Pushing the path to hell, the company can, in time, redeem itself.

Re:Luck for SCO. (1)

eddy (18759) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445678)

>SCO has a chance for a comeback because it is not their products that caused its downfall

BWAHAHAHAH!

You sir, are deluded.

I can only conclude that you haven't read their SEC filings for the last six years or so, where they admit that their products are not competitive. They're not competitive because their products SUCK.

Re:Luck for SCO. (2, Insightful)

C0vardeAn0nim0 (232451) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445850)

it's not because their products suck. is because their product is a unix for x86 platform, so it have to compete with "good enough" products that are pretty much free (as both in freedom and beer) like linux, xBSD, solaris x86.

and in the higher end, even on open patforms like sparc, it's tough to beat HP/IBM/Sun.

since the days of old SCO (now tarantella), they always operated on a niche. now this niche disapeared, or was taken by the newcomers. old SCO realized that, got rid of the unix business and wen't on selling applications until they were bought by Sun.

if the new SCO (former caldera) had did the same, using their unix business to finance the development of other kinds of software, phase out the unix business, maybe they wouldn't be in this situation.

Re:Luck for SCO. (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446456)

Difficulty in competing is different then having bad products. Linux, *BSD are free OS that are Unix or Unix like enough to have minimal learning curve. SCO main business was Unix for the x86 Platform. SCO Unix could actually be better then Linux and *BSD but because you have free alternatives potential customers are willing to make the tradeoff they figure the benefit of free outdoes the benefit of paying for some feature, or benefit. Sun, IBM, HP and Even Apple (successful Unix venders) provide hardware lock in as a competitive advantage. The OS Will run smooth because the hardware will run smooth, Because people still need to pay for hardware anyways they may consider going with a Unix vender. But if you are on commodity hardware then you have a huge uphill battle just to try to sell your OS.

Re:Luck for SCO. (1)

jack455 (748443) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447482)

Difficulty in competing is different then having bad products. Linux, *BSD are free OS that are Unix or Unix like enough to have minimal learning curve. SCO main business was Unix for the x86 Platform. SCO Unix could actually be better then Linux and *BSD but because you have free alternatives potential customers are willing to make the tradeoff they figure the benefit of free outdoes the benefit of paying for some feature, or benefit. Sun, IBM, HP and Even Apple (successful Unix venders) provide hardware lock in as a competitive advantage. The OS Will run smooth because the hardware will run smooth, Because people still need to pay for hardware anyways they may consider going with a Unix vender. But if you are on commodity hardware then you have a huge uphill battle just to try to sell your OS.
Red Hat cooperates with CentOS, a free beer clone of Red Hat. CentOS, by your argument, would have a huge advantage over Red Hat in terms of Linux marketshare. Puzzlingly, that turns out not to be the case. In corporate use, Red Hat is the market leader, even though their support costs are some of the highest in the industry. Additionally Sun, HP, and IBM all sell hardware with a Linux install optionally available. And BTW, Apple is not, strictly speaking, a Unix vendor. Their OS is Unix-based, though. And you do not generally see Apple servers replacing or competing with Unix and Linux servers. Apple competes firmly in the Desktop, in a market where SCO does not.

Re:Luck for SCO. (2, Interesting)

Zeinfeld (263942) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445894)

Luckily Darl McBride took most of the spotlight for SCO's action. SCO still has a fare amount of "Good Will" (In accounting it is not how nice or moral the company is "Good Will" is name recognition)

Nope, not close.

Good will appears on the balance sheet as an asset when a company buys another and pays more than the value of the fixed assets. So if company A buys company B for $100 million and company B has $10 mill worth of equipment (machines, desks, etc) the $10 mil is added to capital and the $90 is credited as goodwill.

It is a real asset as the goodwill can be used to offset profits for tax purposes.

In SCO's case I would have a really hard time believing that the goodwill should still be counted as an asset. SCO has no real ongoing business except litigation. Bankruptcy pretty much destroys any claim they could make for business continuity. So they should probably report the goodwill as a loss.

NOT $100 Million, THAT WAS HYPE. (5, Informative)

Bruce Perens (3872) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445606)

Folks,

This is not a $100 Million dollar offer. That was hyperbole. There will be a line of credit, but going in there is only a couple of million to take the stock profit and then what they need to pursue the case and pay off interest on existing debt as it is billed. Say $10 Million max. Remember that the Benchmark investment was unwound? This one will probably go through the same thing.

Bruce

Re:NOT $100 Million, THAT WAS HYPE. (4, Informative)

Bruce Perens (3872) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445616)

Oops, that's "take the stock private".

Re:NOT $100 Million, THAT WAS HYPE. (0)

Vellmont (569020) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445744)

That makes a lot more sense. I didn't quite understand how any sane investment group would expect to make back $100 million on this dumb SCO case. But a 10 million dollar risk at a perceived chance to make a lot more makes more sense.

At this point in the ruling though, I just don't see how they intend to win the case.

Re:NOT $100 Million, THAT WAS HYPE. (4, Interesting)

toxic666 (529648) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445808)

And the interest rate is LIBOR + 1,700 Basis Points. That translates to 20% - 22.5% annual interest (using LIBOR rates over the past 1 year) which must be paid MONTHLY. SCO has lost money every single quarter of its existence, except for its blockbuster one in which it sold licenses to Sun and MS (which the court found to be improperly converted in its preliminary summary judgments). And now they have to pay credit card rates for financing?

Hello conspiracy theorists! This "deal" is nothing more than a cover to take the company private in an attempt to protect it from investigation into the PIPE fairies who funded its litigation from the word go. And you can bet (based upon the failed York deal they tried to shove down the BK court's throat in November) it was cooked up by people more powerful and "financially creative" than the existing SCO management.

Don't be surprised if an attempt to limit his liability is Darl's Golden Parachute.

Im LookiIng forward to the sco rep calling (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22446244)

'Hello im ringing from Sco and my name is George Bush snr, can i interest you in an im not going to sue you this year license'

All /. laughs

It's all in the name! (1)

donscarletti (569232) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445610)

You know why Caldera/SCO has gone down hill so far? The name of the CEO.

I hear the name "Ransom Love" (Caldera's founder) and into my head comes a dude with a cravat, an ornate basket hilt rapier, a big black hat with a feather in it, possibly a lacy handkerchief in his pocket which was a favour of some Maiden in a past adventure.

I hear "Darl McBride" and I just think frilly pink dress and cowboy boots.

The Ransom Love look may look foppish today, but is still cool in a mid renaissance kind of way, but Darl McBride B-list Nashville crooner image is not what any public corporation wants.

The only way to save them would be to employ a CEO called "Max Power".

It's not the way I see it (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445772)

I hear the name "Ransom Love" (Caldera's founder) and into my head comes a dude with a cravat ... I hear "Darl McBride" and I just think frilly pink dress and cowboy boots.


To me, "Ransom Love" sounds like a pimp's name, and "Darl McBride" sounds like a drag queen.


Well, those are just the images that come to my mind, YMMV, of course.

He will not leave a poor man (2, Insightful)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445624)

Darl McBride will leave a rich man. At least richer than he is now. From my own estimates, he will leave at least US$ 10 - 14 million richer. At 4% interest in a fixed deposit account, Mr McBride can live a pretty decent life even in America's most affluent neighborhoods for virtually no work to be done.

Re:He will not leave a poor man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22445712)

At 4% interest in a fixed deposit account, Mr McBride can live a pretty decent life even in America's most affluent neighborhoods for virtually no work to be done.

      A couple points: a) You're a little behind the times on interest rates - which have been cut in the past few months. b) The "interest" a bank pays you is (after taxes in the US) barely enough to compensate for inflation. If you start spending that interest you will soon find yourself de-capitalized. "Putting the money in the bank and live off the interest" is the most ludicrous thing you could ever do. There are plenty of tax-free alternatives (although US citizens are stuck with paying taxes on their worldwide income even if they leave the US) at very low risk - muni bonds, government securities, etc, that offer better interest rates than your bank. Then of course a fair chunk of it can be used for better returns. Hell if I can make 20% on my money PER MONTH as a day trader (yes, that's right, per MONTH), I'm sure he can do better than 3 point odd percent per year.

      Still, $10M US is a fair chunk of change - and that is assuming he has nothing today - which I'm sure is not the case. Although his company may be bankrupt I am sure he is not.

      Either way, see you in the stock market.

Re:He will not leave a poor man (1, Offtopic)

bogaboga (793279) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445818)

I will agree with you on every point you raised. I had not considered those facts. I would like to inform you that I was once a day trader dealing with currencies and a 20% return per month is pretty possible. But I must also mention that success in the stock market or even forex market is tough. I made money (lots of it) in a day.

I once remember making over USD 6,000 in a single day...that was when our trade deficit numbers were read and the market went wild. But I was also burnt several times to the point that I asked myself what I was doing.

I know from statistics that success in this field is less than 5%. That is dismal. I thought of buying some stock predicting software but the cost is just too much, over US$3,000. What is your formula for success in this business? Do these softwares work? I'd like to know. Thanks.

Re:He will not leave a poor man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22446150)

Try online poker, it's easy money

Re:He will not leave a poor man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22447624)

Try online poker, it's easy money


Yeah, for the guy that owns the online poker site anyway.

Re:He will not leave a poor man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22447444)

But I was also burnt several times to the point that I asked myself what I was doing.

      It cost me 100k and 10 years to learn patience, to learn to not trade on emotions but pick stocks on a fairly consistent trend (up OR down), and to not get greedy. "Stock predicting software", "hot tips", and all that other bullshit is just that. Don't try to predict the market, don't try to anticipate a stock. Go with the momentum. It's not as glorious, but it's a lot less risky. You don't make money on the price difference between buy and sell, you make it on the number of shares you turn over per day (ie. you also only want to trade stocks with a pretty high volume so that you're not the only fish swimming with the sharks).

I'd rather make $100 20 times than $2000 once (and then lose $10k on bad trades - and if you're a day trader you know exactly how fast THAT can happen). Greed kills. Pick a nice, smoothly trending stock, make a couple pennies and get the hell out. You can always buy it/short it again, but money in the bank is just that. You don't HAVE to invest at all times. Do it only when you're sure you're going to make a couple bucks - when the stock has SHOWN you what it's doing, not what you THINK it's going to do. Because 9 times out of 10 you are wrong. "Yeah but it fell 10% it has to stop I am going to buy it"... wait, it's going to fall 20%. "Yeah but look, it just shot up 30 cents in 2 minutes"... wait, you'll end up buying it at the top and it's really going to trend down today. Etc. Sudden moves are like a lottery. Once in a while you win, but you lose more. Play the trend. Momentum. And patience.

But I agree it's not for everyone. And I still lose money some times - everyone in this business does. But I make much more than I lose. 300k a year on 80k capital is not a bad ROI in my book. That 80k is traded very often - I did over $1 million worth of trading on Friday. Made 3 grand. Not a huge profit, but a profit (on a shitty day, Friday was awful - up/down/up/down). But what do I know.

thank goodness (4, Funny)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446120)

McBride can live a pretty decent life even in America's most affluent neighborhoods for virtually no work to be done.
I know there's no justice in this, but we really don't want this guy doing any more work.

Re:thank goodness (4, Insightful)

Hotawa Hawk-eye (976755) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446562)

Actually, I would -- making small rocks from large rocks while wearing a nice bright orange jumpsuit.

Re:He will not leave a poor man (1)

Opportunist (166417) | more than 6 years ago | (#22448402)

Hmm... I guess I'm not the only one here who'd say it ain't a bad prospect to see that man never mess with IT again, so it's fine by me if he can do that.

Resigns as CEO (1)

xixax (44677) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445626)

So maybe Darl will be a regular Joe Average employee rather than an executive? I'd hazard a guess that Darl will find a gracious home somewhere in recognition for his diligent service, but it's not out of the question that he might stay on to fetch coffee for the prince or something.

SCO is a strawman (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22445692)

If SCO dies, the community will go after Novel and other MS puppets. So it costs less to give $100M to resurrect SCO and keep it alive as a troll to take the role of the bad guy. What is $100M for a company with annual profits near $40B?

Only $5 million, + option for debt (1)

burnin1965 (535071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445698)

The headlines and article contents are not 100% accurate. After reading the MOU [groklaw.net] it turns out that they are only paying $5 million, not 100.

The other $95 million is a line of credit from which they can borrow at a whopping 17% interest rate.

I could be wrong but this looks more like a pay off for the perps and a privatization veil to cover their tracks once they pay off the coming judgments using the line of credit and then allow the entire scam to vanish into vapors.

IBM and Novell Will Object (3, Interesting)

HangingChad (677530) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445724)

This plan has a better chance than the York debacle, but IBM and Novell will certainly want to see the money. If Norris Capital Partners has to front the 100 million in escrow this could get interesting.

For Microsoft this has to be like being caught in an endless corporate version of Fatal Attraction. Backing the SCO litigation probably looked good when the Vista release was delayed but now SCO has them by the short curlies. MS has to keep coming up with cash for their demanding paramour. And it's getting harder to design deniable sources for that cash. Hard to say what SCO has on them, maybe they keep threating to go state's evidence on the anti-trust behavior. Maybe MS thinks it's worth a couple hundred million to keep the litigation cloud intact. I'm leaning toward the former. This can't be worth it from a business strategy perspective. It's expensive and it's not working. If anything it's backfiring. It's the kind of advertising that Linux can't normally afford.

It's really hard to tell if this is calculated malfeasance or serial incompetence. With Microsoft it's sometimes hard to tell the difference.

Most definitely this doesn't have anything to do with McBride, other than I'm sure they'll want to keep him quiet. Which means making sure he's happy, which will likely involve a large sum of cash when he leaves.

This whole thing is such a loser. If MS would put that time and money into developing an operating system and other software that provides value to the user, they could forget all this stupidity with SCO. It's tacky, pathetic and...should be...beneath the dignity of a world class company.

Re:IBM and Novell Will Object (1)

Faylone (880739) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445792)

It's really hard to tell if this is calculated malfeasance or serial incompetence. With Microsoft it's sometimes hard to tell the difference.
The thing about a corporation is that it can in fact be both, each from different people.

Re:IBM and Novell Will Object (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22446860)

beneath the dignity of a world class company.

There is one flaw in your logic: Microsoft is not a world class company.

James Blunt wrote a song about it (0, Offtopic)

tmk (712144) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445780)

Did I disappoint you or let you down?
Should I be feeling guilty or let the judges frown?
'Cause I saw the end before we'd begun,
Yes I saw you were blinded and I knew I had won.

[...]

Goodbye my lover.
Goodbye my friend.
You have been the one.
You have been the one for me.

Re:James Blunt wrote a song about it (1)

laejoh (648921) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445956)

So did the Velvet Underground:

I am tired, I am weary

I could sleep for a thousand years

A thousand dreams that would awake me

Different colors made of tears

Kiss the boot of shiny, shiny leather

Shiny leather in the dark

Tongue of thongs, the belt that does await you

Strike, dear mistress, and cure his heart

Severin, severin, speak so slightly

Severin, down on your bended knee

Taste the whip, in love not given lightly

Taste the whip, now plead for me

Vagina Rock (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22447306)

Dude, guys don't listen to music like that.

For my generation, it's the equivalent of listening to Barry Manilow

Heck, I'd chip in... (1)

patmandu (247443) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445854)

...let's raise $100mil and get this clown out of there. Isn't it worth that much to have him gone? Then again, he has provided a lot of entertainment over the years... :)

Darl's okay with that... (0, Offtopic)

WarPresident (754535) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445858)

He wanted to spend more time suing his family for theft of his genetic source code.

Read Groklaw's article, highly instructive (1)

Laxator2 (973549) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445870)

Here is the article: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080214125705140 [groklaw.net] After a lot of searching, the friends/money trail lead to a pig hiding in the corn field. I'm sure that his retirement from M$ will act as a poor excuse this time.

And here's the silver lining (1)

dacarr (562277) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445924)

So this, then, if approved, will have the now much maligned SCO scontinuing, most likely - just not at the hands of the litigious Darl McBride.

You know what? I kind of hope this gets approved. McBride's name is already mud, so he doesn't deserve to be with this company or running it. Some of the board have already left. (Is Sontag still there?) Basically, this would be a wise business and bankruptcy decision - resuscitate the company, but resuscitate it without those responsible for running it into the ground.

This comes back, then, to the pursuit of the legal claims. IANAL, but checking on things, just because they're "pursuing" them doesn't mean they are going to attempt to pursue them to an end that is in their favor (i.e., the original SCO vs. IBM case that brought this up in the first place), more properly it means that they're likely going to merely weigh their options and see if it's worth going in on. What I predict is that, if approved, the new SCO will settle with Novell, drop their claims against IBM, scuttle the SCOSource program, and focus on what they were doing in the first place. What they do with Unix or Linux dev is anybody's guess.

Re:And here's the silver lining (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | more than 6 years ago | (#22447928)

Actually they plan on suing IBM for more money and to go more aggresively after Novel.

At least thats what I read from the last SCO story here. What is odd is IBM's former chairman is the CEO of the Caryle Group. The Caryle Group has been mentioned in Fareignheight 9-11 as a proment pro war defense consulting group that backed Bush and milked huge government contracts with Haliburtin and DOD. I think Bush SR. is on the board of directors but I could be wrong.

This company is a rat and even less ethical than the old SCO. I truly shudder what they are up too and would not be suprised if some high powerful people such as Bill Gates have ties to them. They have alot of friends in Washington and are as evil as Enron and Haliburtin.

Re: I might take this bet myself... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22448208)

I'm thinking the investors were approached for a loan/bailout. I'm thinking SCO said too much and the vultures decided on a quick way to make some money. As others point out, they are only out $5M in cash, the rest is a line of credit. Why push Daryl out the door?

They could approach IBM and Novell and agree to settle all claims. Between the two of them (IBM/Novell) , they could come up with $6M and the investors walk away with a quick 20%. IF they have information, it might be worth a lot to IBM and Novell, maybe worth twice that amount, especially if other people and companies are implicated. Well, we can wish for such an outcome. Also, aside from the $5M, the rest is a line of credit that probably has contingencies on how its used or taken.

IF microsoft was involved, you can figure they would cover any losses the investor would be facing, so, bottom line, it kind looks like a good bet to make.

Is it just me ... (4, Funny)

eck011219 (851729) | more than 6 years ago | (#22445998)

... or does "Memorandum of Understanding" sound like the most boring D&D object ever? "You kill the orc. As he dies, he drops the Memorandum of Understanding, detailing the conflict between you and him and the specifics of its resolution. +2 mediation points."

mediation points (1)

game kid (805301) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446870)

I was hoping I'd get some of those, but that's apparently limited to Half-Human Wikipedia Staff [wikipedia.org] .

How much do you want to bet? (1)

rbanffy (584143) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446100)

How much do you want to bet that he will pull a Rick Belluzzo and get a nice high-paying job at Microsoft or one of its proxies?

Eg4. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22446218)

Why does it matter? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22446220)

Why does it matter if Darl McBride stays or goes? The people responsible for the SCO fiasco have already cashed out, are already flu$h, and are pretty much going to be above reproach. We knew this back in 2003 and I think it's still the case now. Our society rewards sleaze.

And where is the money ultimately coming from? (1)

3seas (184403) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446314)

Considering MS was tied to the case in a manner of giving some sort of support, perhaps it a who knows who line of financial support that traces back to MS?

Don't know but isn't it interesting that it seems SCO lawsuits may continue beyond bankruptcy of failed attempts?

the wizard (1)

phrostie (121428) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446758)

pay no attention the man slipping out behind the curtain with all the money in his pockets and the plane tickets to the Caymans

Darl McBride Leaving SCO? (1)

Robber Baron (112304) | more than 6 years ago | (#22446962)

Hopefully he'll remember to turn off the lights.

MSsco exit strategy (2, Interesting)

harvey the nerd (582806) | more than 6 years ago | (#22448236)

If one takes the "dirty, deep pockets connnection - cost minimization exit strategy" hypothesis seriously, this deal makes a lot of sense - starting with a "separate (extricate) the point man from his crimes" strategy". That way, being "safely away" from the scene of final SCO act or implosion, this may enable some diffusion of hard earned hostility to SCO, muddle and bury evidence, and the (ex)CEO is much less likely to have to rat out the significant others, especially if everything "settles" for a few cents on the dollar and fades away with the normal "defend" clauses to previous bad management. Of course society has been the big economic loser all along here, and the moral justice is a farce on the way to a 3rd world, corporate run tyranny.

Why LIBOR + 17%? (2, Informative)

stites (993570) | more than 6 years ago | (#22448510)

The terms on the proposed loan read like the fine print in a credit card agreement. The interest rate starts at LIBOR + 17%. Some of the other fine print says:

"Payments: The Reorganized Debtor shall pay accrued interest on the outstanding principal balance in arrears monthly on the first day of each month commencing on the first day of the month following the Closing Date. The entire unpaid principal balance, together with any accrued interest and other unpaid charges, shall be due on the first day of the month following the expiration of the Loan Term (which date is sometimes referred to as the "Maturity Date")."

"Late Charges Default Interest Rate: Any payment not paid within ten (10) days of its scheduled payment date shall be subject to a late charge equal to the greater of $50.00 or five per cent (5%) of the amount of the delinquent payment. Upon the occurrence of an event of default, the margin used to compute the Effective Rate will automatically increase by an additional four percent per annum from the date thereof until the delinquent payment has been fully paid, both before and after judgment."

It is unlikely that SCO will actually be able to make monthly payments so why all of the penalties and escalating interest on what is probably an uncollectable debt? One possible reason can be found in the motion (346) which SCO filed with the bankruptcy court. There SCO asks the judge to treat the money owed by SCO to SNCP as debt on an equal footing with the debts owed to other creditors. Thus if SCO goes into a Chapter 7 windup then SNCP would get the same % partial pay out as all of the other creditors. If the judge agrees to treat the SNCP money as debt then it is to SNCP's advantage to balloon the amount of the debt as high as possible through missed payment penalties and escalating penalty interest. If the judge turns down the requests to treat the money from SNCP as debt then it doesn't really matter to SNCP whether SCO is missing 1% interest payments or 26% interest payments.

----------------------
Steve Stites

 

Darl's Golden Parachute! (1)

shanen (462549) | more than 6 years ago | (#22448814)

I hope they give him a real golden parachute--made out of real gold, and make him test it--from the space shuttle. It would be worth the $100 million just to see the Darl-th Star like a meteor...

Just kidding. I just hope he's happy living under the bridge in retirement.

ugh, go away (1)

shentino (1139071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22449006)

I am getting so SICK SICK SICK of hearing about SCO.

Let's examine the meaning of life!

At least until some of those lawsuits actually get resolved or settled, that's about the only thing more newsworthy than this slowly moving train wreck.

*bangs head against brick wall*
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?