[nSLUG] Offtopic Political SCO + RBC
mctylr at privacy.nb.ca
Fri Oct 24 21:21:47 ADT 2003
On Fri, Oct 24, 2003 at 05:06:56PM -0300, Jeff Warnica wrote:
> The newsforge article is breif to almost being useless. I find it
> unlikely that RBC is investing its own money into SCO. It seems to me
> that as a bank/financial group they would be investing money in other
The Royal does also do its own investing, it cannot survive on those
meager service fees you know. :-)
> Investing other peoples money in SCO, OTOH, is what I suspect the
> article means... It is money from mutual funds, RRSP, RESPs, GICs and a
> whole lot of other TLAs and ETLAs that is going into SCO. Which is RBCs
> customers money, which is distinct from RBCs investors money. So
> harassing RBCs customer service people is exactly the right thing to do
> (if your a RBC customer that is....)
Well BayStar, which does show SCO Group - SCOX as part of their
portfolio, is not an investment fund for low level customers that's
why they call themselves a private equity cross-over fund. BayStar
does trade using "PIPE--private investment in public equity", which is
a mechanism well beyond my budget and familiarity. I wouldn't be
surprised at an one million minimum.
I think you mean RBC investing customers (those whom purchase whichever
RBC managed fund that may hold SCOX) and RBC's shareholder's (the owners
of this large publicly traded company) money.
If the investing customer has an RBC fund, I'm sorry, and they could speak
with their 'professional advisor' and perhaps even the actual fund managers
(who make the actual purchasing decisions) though I suspect they are
likely "busy" or "in a meeting" when a lowly investor calls. Although I
suspect with a bit of effort you may be able to determine if a fund you
do invest in, does hold SCOX shares. Note that since SCO Group is only
traded in the US, the fund would have to have at least some foreign content
(in regards to RRSP, etc. rules / disclosure).
In any case, I think SCO is overpriced (for past 6 months) and will be a
poor stock to hold long term because their current business practices of
income via litigation is slow and expensive and I suspect both expensive and
difficult to grow (a cornerstone of any publicly traded company) or even
sustain their present income via legal action (and press releases).
Attempting to vent your frustration about SCO's business practices at a
customer service rep, seems like a waste of effort to me.
More information about the nSLUG