Phil writes: >http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/02/sco_baystar_agreement/ > >I must say I don't entirely understand it yet.
Here's my cynical take: Baystar invested $20m in Series A stock and later bought another $20m from RBC (I didn't see what they paid - call it $xm). So they have invested $(20+x)m. In April, Baystar tried to get a refund from SCO for (all?) its Series A stock - giving various reasons. Clearly SCO didn't want to refund the $20-40m, and maybe had some aspects of the anti-stock-dumping agreement on its side, but it agreed to negotiate. The two side agreed on something which the article seems to describe as ending up with SCO giving Baystar $13m plus "two million ordinary shares." So Baystar retrieved maybe 50% of its cash $(20+x)m investment and got 2m shares (worth or potentially worth?) - sure beats 10cents on the dollar; SCO got out of paying $20-40m in cash by paying $13m (33-65%) plus some shares. -- --henry schaffer ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
