06.19.09
Gemini version available ♊︎Rumours about Novell
Summary: According to a comment, Novell may not be dishonest but just very secretive
WE ARE still trying to make sense of the claim that in Q2 of 2009 Novell managed to turn deep losses into a profit (albeit year-to-year, not quarter-to-quarter), despite signing no major contracts and seeing a higher-than-expected revenue drop. Novell must have cut down about $30 million in quarterly expenses, but where exactly?
One anonymous source suggests (and this cannot be confirmed) that:
There are big job cuts coming and for those of you that didn’t notice the job cuts at Novell have been happening for months but are being executed in such a way that reporting them publicly is not required.
I don’t think they are “cooking the books” as they have always been above board financially.
Two things that Roy has missed though, is that this year Novell’s earning will most likely drop below the $900 million level for the first time in a long time and they are selling of pieces of the business behind the scenes like the news that the New Zealand arm of the business will soon be sold to internal staff.
Can anyone close to Novell respond to these allegations? Namely the ones about layoffs going unannounced and Novell’s “selling of pieces of the business behind the scenes”? █
ᶃ Gemini Space
This post is also available in 
Content is available under CC-BY-SA
eet said,
June 19, 2009 at 8:22 am
Interpreting facts negatively, as you usually do, is A-OK and something to be expected from you, but searching for some facts, any facts that might at least seem possible what you are hoping is true – that is really, really desperate.
Don’t you have any pride?
lalala Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 10:34 am
SLANDER! LIBEL! LIBELOUS SLANDER!
lalala said,
June 19, 2009 at 10:40 am
If you can use an “anonymous” comment as source for your post, I can use this one that has a name as proof you’re an idiot.
PeterL
Roy Schestowitz is a complete idiot.
Why doesn’t he talk of IBM laying off thousands of workers despite RECORD PROFITS?
Why?
Because IBM is a Linux backer, that’s why.
Why doesn’t Roy talk of Asus dumping Linux on it’s netbooks because Linux doesn’t sell.
Why, why why…
Schestowitz is a self centered, ego maniac who has one goal in site and that is to splatter his name into every corner of the earth.
Well now he has met his match.
IOW the other side is fighting back.
I sure as hell do not agree with their methods however I do agree with their reasoning.
Schestowitz seems to think that he can stand in a public place ad yell fire and that nobody is going to call him on it.
That isn’t the way real life works.
Of course if Schestowitz actually left his dorm room and experienced real life he would know that.
But he won’t and he doesn’t.
He is a recluse, failure of a student who has been sponging off people his entire life.
Now he is learning a valuable lesson.
Hopefully he remembers it.
lalala said,
June 19, 2009 at 10:41 am
and here’s proof that you harm OSS, this one’s from Tomas:
As an OSS user for many years, I just wish Roy Schestowitz would find a different hobby to keep himself occupied. Apparently he has far too much time on his hands. Maybe stamp collecting? The reason I wish he would disappear is because his crusade is doing more harm than good. He is a walking, talking, real live example of the stereotypical Linux user that gives Linux a bad rap. I have seen some of his material used by VARS selling Windows and Microsoft products, as an example of what type of people are behind the Linux movement and it is quite effective at scaring the clients into submission. How about coin collecting Roy?
Roy Schestowitz said,
June 19, 2009 at 10:44 am
I see more libel about me than actual counter-arguments. It comes from two of our longtime trolls (going back to 2007).
This must mean I’m on the right topic. Good.
lalala Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 10:52 am
Why am I a troll? Just because I don’t agree with you? Can you actually answer that question truthfully (before your friends come to the chat to “defend” you)? You never seem to answer someone’s question when they call you out on your BS. You always resort to name-calling, slander, & subject-changing.
Chris Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 11:07 am
Hey boy, just go to http://opensourcetogo.blogspot.com/2009/06/when-zeal-becomes-zealotry-tawdry-tale.html if you want to find some proof of libel of yours for a change (note the change is meant sarcastic …)
izzypop Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 11:55 am
Roy, all one has to do is read your messages and the the obvious fact massaging and lack of verifiable proof stinks like a pile of dead clams on the beach in July. Take your Seneca College Linux desktop post of recent days. Nowhere in those links does it mention that Seneca College is moving to Linux as a desktop system. What it does say is that the computer science department is offering programs for students wishing to enter open source and Linux fields. Since that isn’t a sensational headline like your subject was you twist things and hope that people don’t catch you.
You want as much Google time as you can get and that’s a fact.
It’s so easy to discredit you using your own words it’s not even interesting anymore. I believe you are truly interested in Open Source and Linux and I do believe that you could be an asset to the community but as it stands right now you are a joke and in effect are discrediting the very people, by association, that you purport to be helping. Think about it.
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 11:58 am
Seneca College have been Fedora adopters for quite some time. Did I say they “moved” to it?
lalala Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
The fact that you ignored me and didn’t respond to my question proves that I’m on the right track. Thank you. I’ll add this to my list.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Hm. You post what amounts to a plea for some shred of support, any shred of support, for your preconceived interpretation of things and a rumor reported anonymously, and you conclude that you’re on the “right topic” because you’re not getting “counter-arguments”….?
Counter-arguments to what, exactly?
I’d point out that Novell is a publicly-traded corporation, it operated under the excruciatingly detailed Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, as do all publicly-traded companies in the wake of the Enron debacle, and its financial statements are undoubtedly pretty thoroughly audited. You’d seem to be suggesting, on a basis of zero actual evidence, that there’s just gotta be some sort of financial malfeasance going on because, well, because there’s just…gotta be. (And I’d point out that not even your anonymous rumor-monger is suggesting, as Roy seems to be–”but where exactly?”–that Novell is fooling around with their financials. So what is the “topic” here, exactly…?)
I’d also point out that, under the Federal WARN Act, organizations which plan layoffs of 500 people or more in any given 30-day period are obligated to pre-announce those layoffs. Moreover, Novell–as Roy has acknowledged–reported exactly the same headcount at the end of April as it did at the end of January.
Further, a look at the balance sheets and income statements should answer your question, “where exactly?” Indeed, compared to the same quarter last year, Novell reduced its cost of doing business, mostly in the “Services” line, by $14 million. Further, it reduced it’s operating expenses by about $20 million, most of it from the “Sales and marketing” line.
So, what exactly is your concern here, Roy? (FYI, I have no interest in Novell, and I don’t use any of their products, but I can read an income statement…)
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
From what I could gather, there may be more to it. Some of it I am told about privately.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
So, what are you saying, Roy? This is a publicly-traded corporation here, subject to US Securities laws. You’d seem to be suggesting–”from what you can gather”–that there’s “more to it”, based on things you were “told about privately” and won’t communicate. What “more”? This sounds really dark and ominous, or perhaps as though you’re simply making things up.
I call shenanigans. This isn’t “journalism”, Roy. You could have looked at the balance sheet–and I don’t actually believe that you did–before posting this story, as easily as I did. The $34 million in cost reductions took me less time to identify than the document itself took to download. So, all I can conclude here is that–unless you were being generally irresponsible with the facts (again)–you must have been…being generally irresponsible with the facts again…
Hm.
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Here’s something to read.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 1:30 pm
Er, I wouldn’t point people to that article in support of anything if I were you, Roy. You’re not doing yourself any favors by doing so.
A “debt writeoff”, since you don’t seem to understand the concept, is an acknowledgment of a bad debt, of monies owed the company which aren’t likely to be repaid. Your comment, “Yes, debt”, shows you have no idea what this is about. A “debt writeoff” doesn’t create debt, it settles unpaid (and unlikely-to-be-paid) debts to the company and gets them off the balance sheet.
Jumping from that to an outright accusation of “cooking the books” is incredible. Have you ever spoken to an attorney about any of these “articles” of yours…?
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 2:02 pm
From former Novell employee Matt Asay (in this audiocast):
Ashlee Vance: “And top of all this, we have Novell just today when we were recording the broadcast they had to lay their 4th quarter earnings because of a SEC probe.”
Matt Asay: “Well, I doubt, I tend… I don’t know who reported on that, but I saw something where they say, you know, this probably isn’t due to Novell massaging its numbers around Linux, which is what Dana Blakenhorn at ZDNet had claimed, I mean, I can tell you absolutely for a verifiable fact for that Novell does do that, but then again everybody does that. So… I’ve.. I’ve got the sales guys at Novell telling me that, that they do this, but it just doesn’t matter, I… I suspect that this is a tech… like a technicality that Novell has run afoul of and not a big deal, but maybe I’ll.. maybe we’ll be wrong, maybe I’ll be wrong, we should see.”
Ashlee Vance: “So you think people fudge the shipping numbers or they’re fudging revenue numbers, I mean, reve..?”
Matt Asay: “No…no… no… no not… just saying that they are putting it into different buckets. Ummm…like, some of that Linux revenue that Novell reports, based on what I’ve heard from Linux inside the company, is not Linux revenue by… by.., what are… reasonably prudently outside observer and what they would say.”
David "Lefty" Schlesinger Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 1:07 pm
Let me be completely clear here: if there is “more” to this than Novell is reporting, and if the “more” has a tangible impact on company prospects, then someone is breaking US Securities laws.
If, however, there’s no substance to this rumor, then the person spreading the rumor is arguably breaking those laws and Roy is aiding and abetting that activity.
David "Lefty" Schlesinger Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 12:52 pm
Hm. You post what amounts to a plea for some shred of support, any shred of support, for a rumor reported anonymously, and you conclude that you’re on the “right topic” because you’re not getting “counter-arguments”….?
Counter-arguments to what, exactly?
I’d point out that Novell is a publicly-traded corporation, it operated under the excruciatingly detailed Sarbanes-Oxley requirements, as do all publicly-traded companies in the wake of the Enron debacle, and its financial statements are undoubtedly pretty thoroughly audited. You’d seem to be suggesting, on a basis of zero actual evidence, that there’s just gotta be some sort of financial malfeasance going on because, well, because there’s just…gotta be. (And I’d point out that not even your anonymous rumor-monger is suggesting, as Roy seems to be–”but where exactly?”–that Novell is fooling around with their financials. So what is the “topic” here, exactly…?)
I’d also point out that, under the Federal WARN Act, organizations which plan layoffs of 500 people or more in any given 30-day period are obligated to pre-announce those layoffs; organizations which plan to close a site must do the same, but the threshold is only 50 people in that case. Moreover, Novell–as Roy has acknowledged–reported exactly the same headcount at the end of April as it did at the end of January.
Further, a look at the balance sheets and income statements should answer your question, “where exactly?” Indeed, compared to the same quarter last year, Novell reduced its cost of doing business, mostly in the “Services” line, by $14 million. Further, it reduced its operating expenses by about $20 million, most of it from the “Sales and marketing” line.
There, that wasn’t so hard, was it? So, what exactly is your concern here, Roy? (FYI, I have no interest in Novell, and I don’t use any of their products, but I can read an income statement…)
David "Lefty" Schlesinger said,
June 19, 2009 at 12:53 pm
Don’t know how that wound up posted twice. I only hit the button once…
Roy Schestowitz Reply:
June 19th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
This can happen sometimes if double-clicked. I reckon it’s a WordPress bug (which does not treat it as a dupe).