SGI files chapter 11 - SGI

This is a discussion on SGI files chapter 11 - SGI ; http://www.sgi.com/company_info/news...sgi_reorg.html So if I am reading this correctly, those of us that happen to still own SGI stock will now receive nothing...? Matt S....

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: SGI files chapter 11

  1. SGI files chapter 11

    http://www.sgi.com/company_info/news...sgi_reorg.html

    So if I am reading this correctly, those of us that happen to still own
    SGI stock will now receive nothing...?

    Matt S.


  2. Re: SGI files chapter 11

    In article <1147099227.062890.131430@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups. com>,
    mayamatt wrote:
    >http://www.sgi.com/company_info/news...sgi_reorg.html


    >So if I am reading this correctly, those of us that happen to still own
    >SGI stock will now receive nothing...?


    That does seem to be what it says.

    I think that maybe stockholders would have a right to sue to block
    the transaction, or at least a right for "standing" in the court
    hearing.

  3. Re: SGI files chapter 11

    mayamatt wrote:

    >

    http://www.sgi.com/company_info/news...sgi_reorg.html
    >
    > So if I am reading this correctly, those of us that happen to still own
    > SGI stock will now receive nothing...?
    >
    > Matt S.



    Nah, you'll continue to receive what you currently own: paper with no
    value. hehe. Sorry!

    I'm curious to learn how this reorganization will affect SGI executives with
    stock options as part of their compensation package? I suppose they would
    probably be entitled to the new common stock.
    --
    --
    People Against Corruption * Right Always Triumphs
    Website: http://sarnia.selfip.org

  4. Re: SGI files chapter 11

    It's funny. I sold all my SGI stock about 2 weeks ago on the advise of
    a friend that
    said that once a company gets to the point of delisting, there is no
    point in holding on.
    I'm not a big investor or anything but buying a 100 shares of SGI is
    part of a longtime
    fantasy (even if it was only .38USD a share )
    It's sad to see this happened but they brought it upon themselves. I
    still believe that
    1) a focus on lower end workstations like the O2
    2) cheaper developer tools/libs (sorry, developing for Irix was too
    expensive)
    3) a Java VM that was less than a full release behind every other
    platform.
    4) follow through on the plan to port IRIX to an Intel (IA64? I forget)
    processor
    could have saved this company.
    Thoughts?


  5. Re: SGI files chapter 11

    "Freemania" wrote in news:1147123310.723776.325900
    @u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com:

    > It's funny. I sold all my SGI stock about 2 weeks ago on the advise of
    > a friend that
    > said that once a company gets to the point of delisting, there is no
    > point in holding on.
    > I'm not a big investor or anything but buying a 100 shares of SGI is
    > part of a longtime
    > fantasy (even if it was only .38USD a share )
    > It's sad to see this happened but they brought it upon themselves. I
    > still believe that
    > 1) a focus on lower end workstations like the O2
    > 2) cheaper developer tools/libs (sorry, developing for Irix was too
    > expensive)
    > 3) a Java VM that was less than a full release behind every other
    > platform.
    > 4) follow through on the plan to port IRIX to an Intel (IA64? I forget)
    > processor
    > could have saved this company.
    > Thoughts?
    >
    >


    1) Yes

    2) Yes

    3) Yes

    4) Yes

    -ks

  6. Re: SGI files chapter 11

    Freemania wrote:

    > It's funny. I sold all my SGI stock about 2 weeks ago on the advise of
    > a friend that
    > said that once a company gets to the point of delisting, there is no
    > point in holding on.
    > I'm not a big investor or anything but buying a 100 shares of SGI is
    > part of a longtime
    > fantasy (even if it was only .38USD a share )
    > It's sad to see this happened but they brought it upon themselves. I
    > still believe that
    > 1) a focus on lower end workstations like the O2
    > 2) cheaper developer tools/libs (sorry, developing for Irix was too
    > expensive)
    > 3) a Java VM that was less than a full release behind every other
    > platform.
    > 4) follow through on the plan to port IRIX to an Intel (IA64? I forget)
    > processor
    > could have saved this company.
    > Thoughts?


    I'm not going to comment on the four points that you raise, as I really know
    very little about SGI's business and the marketplace as a whole. However,
    I will say that I absolutely love my SGI Indy and that I really want to get
    more of these wonderful old machines.

    Personally, I run Linux on my Indy and I'm quite happy with it. Linux does
    not yet support some of the hardware that I'd like it to, but it is
    generally a very stable operating system that is perfect for server use.
    I think that SGI should just abandon IRIX and put more focus on Linux -- if
    that's truly the direction in which they choose to go.

    As for SGI filing for chapter 11 protection, I'm glad that they have done
    so. The statement they released, says that they expect to emerge from
    bankruptcy protection in about six months -- and with less debt to hold
    them down. The new financing that they're getting will give them some
    capital to play with, and allow them to more aggressively pursue their
    reconstruction agenda. It's good to see that Dennis McKenna is exercising
    this option while it's still one of many, as opposed to waiting for
    bankruptcy to be an avenue of last resort.

    As for SGI porting IRIX to Intel, why? Why waste limited time and
    resources on an operating system that they've already chosen to abandon?
    Especially when you consider just how outdated the OS is? I think SGI
    would be much further ahead to hitch their wagon to an emerging OS like
    Linux. That's where they should focus their attention. Make Linux
    totally SGI friendly by building in the missing pieces that currently make
    Linux unattractive to the IRIX diehards.

    There's a plethora of legitimate reasons for SGI to finally kill IRIX and
    move exclusively to Linux:

    1) They need to show that they have a very clear and finite direction.
    This cannot be achieved by being indecisive on their chosen OS. SGI
    customers need to know that SGI is delivering product that will continue to
    serve their needs well into the future. As a result of this, it makes no
    sense for SGI to build on an OS that they really want to leave behind.

    2) SGI has already lost many loyal customers to cheap Intel hardware that
    runs the Linux operating system. If Linux is where the SGI faithful are
    going, then it is not only wise for SGI to follow suit, you could
    reasonably argue that SGI has an obligation to follow suit.

    3) The Linux that IRIX faithful know and love does not have to be the Linux
    that SGI adopts as their official OS. When you consider that Linux is an
    open source architecture, it becomes readily apparent that there is much
    room for customization and inclusion of proprietary technologies that would
    make SGI Linux "best of class".

    There's a whole host of reasons for SGI to just cease IRIX development and
    fully embrace Linux. Not least of which, are the economic reasons: 1)
    Linux gives a company like SGI a good starting point, where most of the
    work is already done. For a company in bankruptcy, Linux could save them
    a lot of development costs. 2) Linux is already marketed quite well by
    legions of volunteers, websites, and publications. This free advertising
    is a boon to companies wanting to peddle the OS for profit.

    I'm going to end my post here; I really know very little about this stuff
    and I don't want to make myself look too much like an idiot.

    --
    --
    People Against Corruption * Right Always Triumphs
    Website: http://sarnia.selfip.org

  7. Re: SGI files chapter 11

    On 8 May 2006 14:21:50 -0700, Freemania wrote:
    > It's sad to see this happened but they brought it upon themselves. I
    > still believe that
    > 1) a focus on lower end workstations like the O2


    Right... it's nice to move to a highend niche, but you shouldn't forget
    that you need developers which again need cheap workhorses. Yes, client
    server is the thing sometimes... but I imagine there is plenty of market
    for cheaper workstations even if you are aiming towards the higher end.

    > 2) cheaper developer tools/libs (sorry, developing for Irix was too
    > expensive)


    Actually... if it's worth it 1000 US$ for the developer tools going
    with a 10000 US$ system isn't too bad. If you know where you are going
    and you are sure the paths will also be there tomorrow.

    > 3) a Java VM that was less than a full release behind every other
    > platform.


    Can't comment on that... I have no gut-feeling on the importance of
    Java in SGIs common environments.

    > 4) follow through on the plan to port IRIX to an Intel (IA64? I forget)
    > processor
    > could have saved this company.


    No, that probably would have been a way to even faster ruin.



    Gerhard
    --
    SGI Hardware Info and Museum -- http://sgistuff.g-lenerz.de/
    "Wanted Items" -- http://sgistuff.g-lenerz.de/collection/wanted.php

    ( iris / IRIX / IP22 )

  8. Re: SGI files chapter 11

    > 4) follow through on the plan to port IRIX to an Intel (IA64? I forget)

    Considering what's already out there and established, I couldn't see
    that working; I just don't think there's a big enough market for pure
    unix on that sort of hardware (cheap PC's). Besides, it would leave a
    bad taste in the mouth - keep IRIX on the quality hardware and let it
    die with grace, if it must go.


  9. Re: SGI files chapter 11

    jonny_morris wrote:

    >> 4) follow through on the plan to port IRIX to an Intel (IA64? I forget)

    >
    > Considering what's already out there and established, I couldn't see
    > that working; I just don't think there's a big enough market for pure
    > unix on that sort of hardware (cheap PC's). Besides, it would leave a
    > bad taste in the mouth - keep IRIX on the quality hardware and let it
    > die with grace, if it must go.


    I agree with you. It seems that a lot of people want to think that what
    Apple is able to pull off, SGI should be able to pull off. However, that
    is not the case. Apple and SGI cater to two entirely different markets.
    Even when SGI loses customers, it's very seldom that they lose them to the
    Macintosh platform. More often than not, SGI's customers are lost to
    Linux and cheap PC machines.

    I think it's really all about economies of scale and scale. PC machines
    are really cheap to source, relatively simple to administer, abundantly
    available, and are hugely supported. The SGI/MIPS converse, on the other
    hand, is considerably more expensive, a little more involved in terms of
    administration (due to limited familiarity in the marketplace), and offer
    limited support.

    I would tend to think that SGI would need to differentiate themselves from
    the competition in some fashion, but they'd also need to offer the
    economies, support, and familiarity that the competition offers. The
    switch from MIPS to Intel processors gives them some mainstream
    familiarity, which means that their systems are not completely foreign to
    potential consumers. The switch from IRIX to Linux also offers a little
    more mainstream familiarity, but also combines some economies in that the
    OS is open source, and allows SGI to differentiate themselves from the more
    common Microsoft products that a lot of enterprises might be looking to
    move away from.


    --
    --
    People Against Corruption * Right Always Triumphs
    Website: http://sarnia.selfip.org

  10. Re: SGI files chapter 11

    > The switch from IRIX to Linux also offers a little
    > more mainstream familiarity, but also combines some economies in that the
    > OS is open source, and allows SGI to differentiate themselves from the more
    > common Microsoft products that a lot of enterprises might be looking to
    > move away from.


    But is this what they'll do? I doubt it. Indications are that they'll
    move away from consumer desktop computing altogether and go into server
    and storage (as has been suggested and hinted at many times, in various
    places not least of which is their own website). Maybe they'll run
    such things using an SGI variant of linux, but I feel they will still
    utilise less familiar hardware (i.e. not standard PC architecture)
    which can only be a good thing if it means massively better
    performance; this would separate their products from the mainstream and
    perhaps give them an edge over the cheaper option, aimed at customers
    who are willing to pay more for quality and speed where it counts. I
    don't really know much at all about the server or storage markets, but
    I'm sure it's just as fiercely competitive as the desktop market, so
    good luck to them I say!


  11. Re: SGI files chapter 11

    jonny_morris wrote:

    >> The switch from IRIX to Linux also offers a little
    >> more mainstream familiarity, but also combines some economies in that the
    >> OS is open source, and allows SGI to differentiate themselves from the
    >> more common Microsoft products that a lot of enterprises might be looking
    >> to move away from.

    >
    > But is this what they'll do?


    I don't know. You tell me. Is Windows an OS that is really built to
    dominate the computing world ahead?

    > Indications are that they'll
    > move away from consumer desktop computing altogether and go into server
    > and storage (as has been suggested and hinted at many times, in various
    > places not least of which is their own website). Maybe they'll run
    > such things using an SGI variant of linux, but I feel they will still
    > utilise less familiar hardware (i.e. not standard PC architecture)
    > which can only be a good thing if it means massively better
    > performance; this would separate their products from the mainstream and
    > perhaps give them an edge over the cheaper option, aimed at customers
    > who are willing to pay more for quality and speed where it counts. I
    > don't really know much at all about the server or storage markets, but
    > I'm sure it's just as fiercely competitive as the desktop market, so
    > good luck to them I say!


    I'm sure they'll figure something out.

    --
    --
    People Against Corruption * Right Always Triumphs
    Website: http://sarnia.selfip.org

+ Reply to Thread