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.”

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…?

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.

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.

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.

From what I could gather, there may be more to it. Some of it I am told about privately.

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…)

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…)

This must mean I’m on the right topic. Good.

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?

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.

Don’t you have any pride?