Yahoo! SCOX Review

Message ID: 394293 Posted By: bill_beebe Posted On: 2006-08-09 21:12:42 Subject: Dead Stock? Recs: 0 SCOX share price has dropped by a factor of 10 since it started the scam lawsuit against IBM in 2003. I just wanted to point this out to the remaining SCOX bagholders so they won't miss out on anything. ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "bill_beebe" under the following license: License:  CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0 ------------------------------------------------------------

Message ID: 392866 Posted By: walterbyrd Posted On: 2006-07-24 18:26:09 Subject: is there really cause for gloating? Recs: 0 I'm glad the brook wells finally woke-up and gave IBM a very well deserved partial victory. And I'm glad to see scox's share price declining. But, I don't get all the "darl is getting reamed" and "scox is being slammed" bluster. To me, the sad bottom line looks like this: 1) wells does not give scox a slam-dunk victory everytime, but she does as much as she can. During the last hearing, I don't think she could have given scox a 100% victory without seriously risking an appeal from ibm. 2) Scox share price dropped to $0.56 the day darl took over - and that was on half as many shares as scox now has. Scox's market cap is still nearly 10X what is was pre-scam. 3) Darl is not hurting, neither is Yarro, and it's likely that no harm, of any kind, will come to either. This scam has been a windfall for ...

Message ID: 387834 Posted By: freecode_99 Posted On: 2006-07-06 19:53:00 Subject: One BIG lie Recs: 25 The one big lie that is ofen repeated here is that UNIX Business is shrinking. No, it's not. SCOX UNIX business is going away, but UNIX will live on without them. Just a fact for those wondering. Ask the Open Group, IBM, HP, SUN or anyone with a real UNIX business (not SCOX - they are a sham of a scam). Their businesses are not chump change like SCOX (really Caldera wearing a SCO suit - a SCO lawsuit to be precise - that is rather moldy and worn-out, but they keep claiming it is brand-new and a prize-winner). I think people should not be fooled into thinking that UNIX is dead - it simply isn't. What is dead is the SCOX lawsuit idea that UNIX is dead. UNIX outclasses Windows by miles. Anyone who runs servers knows that. Linux and UNIX are more aligned in business than anything (except for SCOX - who are aligned with the wingnut brigade and about as much a par...

Message ID: 381266 Posted By: panglozz Subject: Re: RFC: Nymshifting SSM asks: >>For what purpose does stats post under both the stats nym and the panglozz nym?? Seriously. Why do that?<< "stats" was a very confining persona. I expressed my discomfort with this very early in my first "usenet" style posting career (May 2004), when Al. P. questioned missing sources for a post on the Bert Young relationship with the March First bankruptcy. I felt recently that "stats" had become an "issue". So it was easier to send him off to a well deserved rest, than try and solve whatever the issue might be. Of course now, Panglozz has created a "stats shifting" issue-- further proof of just how stupid stats can be. This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0. See also https://yahooscoxreview.blogspot.com/2006/06/rfc-nymshifting....

Message ID: 381130 Posted By: panglozz Subject: RFC: Nymshifting I'm getting dinged by DDT for nymshifting. Is this a hanging offense? Obviously DDT is cycling through several attacks: SEC/kook letter, nym-shifting, failure to return library books***. I have noticed a more than a bit of overt hostility between the given name crowd, and the nymshifters. For instance, an anonymous poster (insert irony here) followed me around Groklaw linking back to Y! crossposts. I'd like to hear from the "who-I-am-and-proud-of-it wing" on whether they hold grudges of the nymshifters. ***my own sarcastic attack, though no one followed up on the straight man jest. This Yahoo! SCOX Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution under the following license: CCL Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0. See also https://yahooscoxreview.blogspot.com/2006/06/re-rfc-nymshifting.html

Message ID: 380377 Posted By: walterbyrd Posted On: 2006-06-14 09:10:00 Subject: SCOX OWNS NOTHING, KILLS ITSELF Recs: 13 Scox is, at best, about 1% of msft's ongoing FUD campaign against Linux. At least, scox was that, at one point. Now scox may not even be that much. IBM, Novell, Red Hat, Chrysler, and AutoZone; we're not looking for a fight from scox. In each case, scox either initiated a bogus lawsuits, or brought on the lawsuits by blatant Lanham Act Violations. Nobdoy "screwed" scox. Msft just paid scox to file lawsuits in order to create a perceived legal cloud over Linux. The effectiveness of msft's little scam (to kill the competition via massive abuse of the US legal system) is debatable. Don't take my word for it, it's all been well documented. ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board us...

Message ID: 376230 Posted By: jcauseyfd Posted On: 2006-05-30 10:35:00 Subject: Stock performance Recs: 7 Hmm, was just going through some old stuff and found my old "Grokfund" which was composed of stocks involved in the SCO-scam. The portfolio was created in August 2004 and assumed that I purchased equal amounts (roughly $10,000) of each company adding up to a $50k investment and then a $2,000 investment in SCOX. I think it had something to do with some debate at the time about SCOX being no more than 4% of a portfolio. The results so far show: Autozone (AZO) up 15.48% Daimler-Chrysler (DCX) up 24.22% IBM (IBM) down 5.38% Novell (NOVL) up 17.86% Red Hat (RHAT) up 79.97% The SCO Group (SCOX) up 10.86% JCausey ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "jcauseyfd" under the following license: Licens...

Message ID: 355401 Posted By: saltydogmn Posted On: 2006-03-21 09:19:00 Subject: Google Finance sucks ass Recs: 18 Dear saltydogmn@gmail.com: Oops, your post does not comply with our Community Guidelines, which can be found at http://www.google.com/googlefinance/communityguidelines.html Please take a few minutes to review these guidelines and try again. Regards, The Google Team Original Posts ---------------- Group: The SCO Group, Inc. Subject: Joint SCOX press release for Google/Yahoo LINDON, Utah, March 21 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") ( Nasdaq: SCOX - News), the owner of the UNIX (R) operating system-based investor fraud and stock scam, and a leading provider of UNIX-based litigation, paranoia, and net.kook wookie support, today announced their reactions to the creation of a new stock scam discussion board on Google Finance. Newly appointed Executive Vice President of Putting Things On Top Of Other Things, Tim Negris,...

Message ID: 355399 Posted By: hamjudo2000 Posted On: 2006-03-21 09:14:00 Subject: SCOX regrouping, again Recs: 18 SCO Me was not mentioned in the latest financial filing. This means that they have stopped pushing it at every opportunity. Maintenance renewals dropped 43% this quarter. They are an indication of [lack of] future OS sales. Stock volume and pumping activity dropped dramaticly after the March 14 pump. They didn't mention the pumped price in their 10-Q. SCOX came out with a couple weak offerings. It seems that SCAMP isn't targeted at customers. It sets an arbitrary price to use in legal proceedings. The other new feature is support for dual core processors. There is no indication that any customers care. However, the scam must go on. Ralph has a lot to lose if SCOX stops operating. He still has millions that he got from Canopy. So even if the PIPE fairy pulls out, Ralph can and must keep things going. What will their new plan be? Will th...

Message ID: 353966 Posted By: stats_for_all Posted On: 2006-03-15 13:44:00 Subject: SCAMP >> artificial $ for damage Recs: 19 I see SCAMP as a quasi-artificial offering presented so the "damage award" experts now scribing their reports can cross multiply LAMP installations world-wide by the SCAMP retail price. Tony Lawrence's scathing tech deconstruction of the Netscape v. Apache and terminal shell v. PHP orientation of SCO should undermine any residual doubt about SCO readiness for its stack. Argos, the UK retailer, has a wikipedia entry. It mentions that the local store server is not coordinated with the touchscreen display that customers must enter orders on. The touchscreen uses a web-interface to company wide DB-- meaning no local conditions and prices were available. We can suppose that SCAMP will allow the local server to offer the touch-screen web display. Progress marches on. ----------------------------------------------------------...

Message ID: 353783 Posted By: freecode_99 Posted On: 2006-03-14 15:42:00 Subject: Well, here's one thing for certain Recs: 11 SCO Group, for all of their balderdash and bombastic statements, are definitely funneling money out of the company to pay for something, but whomever is getting the money, it isn't going to "A" Team legal expertise. BIFF, for all of his troll-antics, is probably acting on behalf of SCOX seeking advice for their pitiful representation to date. Whomever is getting the SCOX money, they aren't attorneys (or at least not very competent attorneys). The legal battle appears to be nothing more than a cover for the end of that money funnel - and whoever is squirreling away those millions of dollars "spent" for what amounts to junior-grade representation in the courts. Somebody is playing the scam to keep squeezing the teta of this lawsuit to milk it until it's just skin and bones. Don't help the fools write their ...

Message ID: 353457 Posted By: hamjudo2000 Posted On: 2006-03-13 12:43:00 Subject: Scamp, today's challenge Recs: 20 The notion of spending $999 for Scamp is absurd. There are hardly any posts today talking about it. Yahoeuvre found just 5 since the press release came out. It's just so absurd, that it is hard to think about. However, some journalist might get the press release and come to this board for some background information. So we should make some effort. Let's see: o SCOX does not create security patches in a timely way. Therefore, it is not wise to connect a SCOX system to the internet. o SCOX is involved in several lawsuits, any of which may lead to SCOX's bankruptcy. o SCOX's finances suck. Even if they aren't driven to bankruptcy in a lawsuit, they will run out of cash as soon as their mysterious benefactor, the "PIPE fairy", stops providing regular cash infusions. o Once SCOX dies, support for Scamp goes away. o ...

Message ID: 353250 Posted By: walterbyrd Posted On: 2006-03-12 10:00:00 Subject: explain biff's position? Recs: 6 I never get a direct answer out of biff, so I won't try. I have never agreed with biff, but I used to understand what he was arguing. At least to the extent that I understood his basic premises. It seems there was a time when biff didn't flip-flop that often. Biff used to argue that novell owned the Unix copyrights, and that novell transferred those copyrights to scox. Then, on the novl board, biff argued that novl owned the copyrights, and novl still owns the copyrights. When I pointed out, to biff, that this contradicted his previous position about scox owning the copyrights. Biff claimed that scox both owned the copyrights, and did not own the copyrights. Now biff is flip-flopping again. Now biff is arguing that novl never owned the copyrights. Or is it that novl both owned them, and didn't own them? It's 07:53 here in denver. As ...

Message ID: 347116 Posted By: walterbyrd Posted On: 2006-02-17 15:19:00 Subject: why is a real exec working for scox? Recs: 1 darl and yarro are not real execs in my opinion. They are part of a bunch of byu frat boys who work together on various scams. Negris, on the other hand, seems like a real exec. Negris has been an exec for Oracle and IBM. Why does somebody like that want to work for scox? Maybe I've over-rated the guy? ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "walterbyrd" under the following license: License:  CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0 ------------------------------------------------------------

Message ID: 343158 Posted By: ColonelZen Posted On: 2006-02-06 08:32:00 Subject: THIS STOCK IS A SCAM Recs: 13 The company practically out of money and has huge legal liabilities and no viable products. They've tried to extort money from Linux users without any evidence that Linux users have any obligation. In support of their extortion scheme they've publically made claims about copyright infringements in Linux which did not exist which both hurt other companies' businesses and rendered SCOX liable for Lanham violation claims. They appear not to even own the copyrights they claim were infringed - and from letters they sent to Novell before commencing this travesty they appear to have known it before they started. They've defamed thousands of programmers who have contributed to linux, and by proxy millions of Linux and open source supporters. IN MY OPINION they've been manipulating the stock price, probably illegally, to maintain the illusion o...

Message ID: 341848 Posted By: saltydogmn Posted On: 2006-02-01 12:00:00 Subject: How do I short SCOX stock? Recs: 4 I'm thinking I can set aside some money from my previous employers' ESOP, so I can make a few extra dollars from this stock scam. However, I have never invested in any type of stock market security before, and I haven't got a clue as to where to start. I originally was totally against this idea, but I figure I might as well piss off Darl some more. Assuming I can set aside an amount, would 5 grand be too much? Let's say I want to short 1000 shares. What would it cost me, and how long can I hold on to them? Maybe even 2000... I just don't know. Please clue me in. Thanks! ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "saltydogmn" under the following license: License:  CC Attribution-NonCo...

Message ID: 340850 Posted By: hamjudo2000 Posted On: 2006-01-27 14:35:00 Subject: Updated SCOX statistics Recs: 23 Nasdaq reports that there are 20,893,000 shares outstanding. Which means the private placement shares have been reported to Nasdaq. Y! and otcbb still show 18.04 million shares. All of the websites show that the 1Y estimated target is $5. This is very out of date, but no financial analysts bother to follow SCOX anymore. I asked my cats if they would try. They agreed as long as they could remain anonymous. Both cats agreed that SCOX was likely to stay around $4 until it goes bankrupt or otherwise has to stop trading. One cat feels that the scam will last for more than a year, so his 1Y target is $4.00. The other cat feels that SCOX will not survive the year, so his target is $0.00 analyst 1: 1Y target $4.00. analyst 2: 1Y target $0.00 Average of analysts $2.00 Note that neither cat would disclose if they have any financial interest in SCOX sto...

Message ID: 335523 Posted By: heimdal31 Subject: Bert Responds Some of you may remember that I had asked Bert Young a question at the CC back before Christmas. I got a response from him last Wednesday but was waiting to see if there was a response to my followup question. Response from Bert below with only e-mail and phone numbers obfuscated. My followup in the next e-mail. BEGIN QUOTE Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2006 15:23:33 -0700 From: Bert Young <BERT YOUNG AT sco.com> To: 'tim rushing' <XXXX AT threenorth.com> Cc: 'Bert Young' <BERT YOUNG AT sco.com> Subject: RE: Exhibit B of Common Stock Purchase Agreement (fwd) Tim, When we filed the S-1 we were required to file the common stock purchase agreement as an exhibit to the filing - but I don't believe that we are required to file exhibits or addendums to the 'exhibit' unless they have material terms or conditions that need to be disclosed.....in our case, since the reps and warranties were fairly st...

Message ID: 333936 Posted By: bike4freedom2 Posted On: 2006-01-05 23:58:00 Subject: Really bad news for SCOX Recs: 6 The news must be really bad for SCOX. First, only about ½ dozen trades. Second, under 5000 shares traded. Third, the trolls have painted this board with “Strong Buy” sentiments. Heck the trolls are even getting recs. This board looks almost like a real stock is being traded. We all know this is just a scam (yes, even the trolls know), so why is SCOX wasting it's new $10,000,000 on these trolls? ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "bike4freedom2" under the following license: License:  CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0 ------------------------------------------------------------

Message ID: 322078 Posted By: freecode_99 Posted On: 2005-11-21 10:03:00 Subject: Good Morning America Recs: 12 Hello all. Scam is still the norm for the daily rush Op Reports from this perspective. At least - they won't go free (and probably not quietly once the long arm reaches out). If you want to gamble on this stock, take the gamble to Vegas, and make book and who sings soprano first when the vice grips. At least then you know the risks upfront, and no one is lying to you about your odds of winning. As far as prosecution goes, my analysis is that the preponderence of evidence will favor that once the balloon is empty of any gas. When the truth of the irrational exuberance overcomes the hot air and flatulence from Lindon, then Justice will be swift and manifold, and no exit strategy will matter. Don't worry, be happy. Have a nice day. freecode ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has bee...