BayStar, Goldfarb testifies, dumped SCO because its stock price,
financial performance and the viability of its UNIX products all
appeared to be in decline, and he "was also very concerned about SCO's
high cash burn rate." Pure financial animals get nervous when that
happens. But the kicker was he began to realize that Microsoft, whose
senior VP of corporate development and strategy had promised that
Microsoft would in some way guarantee the SCO investment, started
showing signs it might not do that after all:
"Mr. Emerson and I discussed a variety of investment structures
wherein Microsoft would 'backstop,' or guarantee in some way, BayStar's
investment.... Microsoft assured me that it would in some way guarantee
BayStar's investment in SCO."
Let me interrupt my narrative to quickly ask, Why ever would Microsoft
guarantee BayStar's investment in SCO? What would be the business
purpose here? What would Microsoft's benefit or payback be? What were
they hoping for as the return on the investment? And why didn't they
wish to invest directly? Pray do explain. Joke. Joke. Anyhow, after the
investment was made, Goldfarb says, "Microsoft stopped returning my
phone calls and emails, and to the best of my knowledge, Mr. Emerson was
fired from Microsoft."
So was this an exec over stepping the mark? or just following out his
bosses "wishes"....how does it go? who will rid me of this priest? out
pop a couple of knights and wallop a peaceful man gets dead....just
cause a king wished it.....the similarities just dont miss me....
So the knight in shining armour got sacked.....someone clicked he had
just put MS is a bad position and he became the fall guy.....how lucky
can you get.....
Lets see, work for MS and get dumped.....do a deal with MS and get
dumped....what a trend......
;]
regards
Thing
|
Similar Threads
