<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_03_138200</id>
	<title>Hedge Fund Offers $2 Billion For Novell</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1267627080000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>CWmike writes <i>"A hedge fund that is already one of Novell's largest shareholders offered on Tuesday to <a href="http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9164738/Update\_Hedge\_fund\_offers\_2B\_for\_Novell">acquire the struggling, cash-rich enterprise software maker for $2 billion</a>. The unsolicited offer, <a href="http://www.streetinsider.com/Press+Releases/Elliott+Offers+to+Acquire+Novell/5400447.html">from New York-based Elliot Associates L.P.</a>, is for $5.75 per share in cash, a dollar per share more than Novell's closing price Tuesday of $4.75. The offer caused Novell's stock to leap 29\% to $6.15 in after-hours trading. Because Novell is so cash-rich &mdash; it had $991 million in cash and equivalents <a href="http://www.novell.com/company/ir/qresults/10q1/schedules\_10q1.pdf">at the end of January</a> (PDF) &mdash; Elliott says the deal values Novell as an enterprise alone at about $1 billion."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>CWmike writes " A hedge fund that is already one of Novell 's largest shareholders offered on Tuesday to acquire the struggling , cash-rich enterprise software maker for $ 2 billion .
The unsolicited offer , from New York-based Elliot Associates L.P. , is for $ 5.75 per share in cash , a dollar per share more than Novell 's closing price Tuesday of $ 4.75 .
The offer caused Novell 's stock to leap 29 \ % to $ 6.15 in after-hours trading .
Because Novell is so cash-rich    it had $ 991 million in cash and equivalents at the end of January ( PDF )    Elliott says the deal values Novell as an enterprise alone at about $ 1 billion .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CWmike writes "A hedge fund that is already one of Novell's largest shareholders offered on Tuesday to acquire the struggling, cash-rich enterprise software maker for $2 billion.
The unsolicited offer, from New York-based Elliot Associates L.P., is for $5.75 per share in cash, a dollar per share more than Novell's closing price Tuesday of $4.75.
The offer caused Novell's stock to leap 29\% to $6.15 in after-hours trading.
Because Novell is so cash-rich — it had $991 million in cash and equivalents at the end of January (PDF) — Elliott says the deal values Novell as an enterprise alone at about $1 billion.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346940</id>
	<title>Re:It's been a while, but...</title>
	<author>ElmoGonzo</author>
	<datestamp>1267637880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our operation uses GroupWise because it would cost too much to switch to Exchange.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our operation uses GroupWise because it would cost too much to switch to Exchange .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our operation uses GroupWise because it would cost too much to switch to Exchange.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345872</id>
	<title>Re:It's been a while, but...</title>
	<author>neurovish</author>
	<datestamp>1267633260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...are Novell products still well thought of in the enterprise sector?  I know Norton became a bloated piece of crapware a while ago (just like most of their products), but I haven't really paid attention to them in...shit, almost 5 years.</p><p>Are they still producing bloated piles of crap, or have the leaned their products down and made them worthwhile again?</p></div><p>No.  If anything, they are making them more bloated.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...are Novell products still well thought of in the enterprise sector ?
I know Norton became a bloated piece of crapware a while ago ( just like most of their products ) , but I have n't really paid attention to them in...shit , almost 5 years.Are they still producing bloated piles of crap , or have the leaned their products down and made them worthwhile again ? No .
If anything , they are making them more bloated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...are Novell products still well thought of in the enterprise sector?
I know Norton became a bloated piece of crapware a while ago (just like most of their products), but I haven't really paid attention to them in...shit, almost 5 years.Are they still producing bloated piles of crap, or have the leaned their products down and made them worthwhile again?No.
If anything, they are making them more bloated.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345590</id>
	<title>Re:Already Under Investigation</title>
	<author>khallow</author>
	<datestamp>1267632120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A law firm is already investigating 'potential breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law in connection with an alleged unfair takeover.' Basically seems to allege that should this deal go through, it would be unfair for current long time shareholders of Novell as Elliott's takeover would be underpaying and ripping them off. I'm not sure if this is standard operating procedure or not but one would think that the stock market would offer a good estimate of Novell's true worth. Apparently someone thinks 20\%+ on top of that is unfairly low.</p></div><p>They're probably looking to get a piece of the action. A lawsuit like that might be able to hinder a takeover and there's at least $2 billion involved. Even if they just get $1 of every $1,000 in play, that's $20 million.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A law firm is already investigating 'potential breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law in connection with an alleged unfair takeover .
' Basically seems to allege that should this deal go through , it would be unfair for current long time shareholders of Novell as Elliott 's takeover would be underpaying and ripping them off .
I 'm not sure if this is standard operating procedure or not but one would think that the stock market would offer a good estimate of Novell 's true worth .
Apparently someone thinks 20 \ % + on top of that is unfairly low.They 're probably looking to get a piece of the action .
A lawsuit like that might be able to hinder a takeover and there 's at least $ 2 billion involved .
Even if they just get $ 1 of every $ 1,000 in play , that 's $ 20 million .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A law firm is already investigating 'potential breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law in connection with an alleged unfair takeover.
' Basically seems to allege that should this deal go through, it would be unfair for current long time shareholders of Novell as Elliott's takeover would be underpaying and ripping them off.
I'm not sure if this is standard operating procedure or not but one would think that the stock market would offer a good estimate of Novell's true worth.
Apparently someone thinks 20\%+ on top of that is unfairly low.They're probably looking to get a piece of the action.
A lawsuit like that might be able to hinder a takeover and there's at least $2 billion involved.
Even if they just get $1 of every $1,000 in play, that's $20 million.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31372182</id>
	<title>Re:It's been a while, but...</title>
	<author>sglines</author>
	<datestamp>1267810200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anyone smell Microsoft here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone smell Microsoft here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone smell Microsoft here?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347556</id>
	<title>Re:I hope nothing substantial changes</title>
	<author>eggnoglatte</author>
	<datestamp>1267640220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A hedge fund taking a "hands-off approach"? Dream on.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A hedge fund taking a " hands-off approach " ?
Dream on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A hedge fund taking a "hands-off approach"?
Dream on.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345824</id>
	<title>mod 3own</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267633020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">ones in software bombShell hit</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>ones in software bombShell hit [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ones in software bombShell hit [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31348178</id>
	<title>Re:Value of a company...</title>
	<author>BigBlueOx</author>
	<datestamp>1267643340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><em>If I have 5000$ in the bank, I certainly hope that my 'value' is at least 10000$, whatever than means,</em> <br>
<br>
Let me take a semi-serious stab at this for ya. If you have $5000 "in the bank" that means that you're getting a return of, at *most*, 3\% per year. Someone who can do math might look at that and say "Hell, Paychex freakin common yields over 4\%, I can do a lot better with that money than this fool" and offer to buy you out to get his hands on the caysh.<br>
<br>
Ok, ok, I admit, it's not going to happen to you or me (and if someone did offer to buy me it probably wouldn't be Veronika Zemanova, it'd be Betty White's grandfather) but there are very, very large companies that are sitting on gobswallops of cash earning, essentially, zip. Some of them earn zip on all that cash while their core businesses print money. Apple and Microsoft come immediately to mind.<br>
<br>
Whether that business is sitting on non-performing cash out of deep-seated paranoia and inferiority complexes (Jobs) or just out of gross stupidity and lack of business sense (Ballmer), sooner or later someone who can do math is going to run the numbers and want access to that dragon's hoard of money that's sitting around and, presto, a buyout offer will appear.<br>
<br>
Novell is just the current one. Not the first. Not the last.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I have 5000 $ in the bank , I certainly hope that my 'value ' is at least 10000 $ , whatever than means , Let me take a semi-serious stab at this for ya .
If you have $ 5000 " in the bank " that means that you 're getting a return of , at * most * , 3 \ % per year .
Someone who can do math might look at that and say " Hell , Paychex freakin common yields over 4 \ % , I can do a lot better with that money than this fool " and offer to buy you out to get his hands on the caysh .
Ok , ok , I admit , it 's not going to happen to you or me ( and if someone did offer to buy me it probably would n't be Veronika Zemanova , it 'd be Betty White 's grandfather ) but there are very , very large companies that are sitting on gobswallops of cash earning , essentially , zip .
Some of them earn zip on all that cash while their core businesses print money .
Apple and Microsoft come immediately to mind .
Whether that business is sitting on non-performing cash out of deep-seated paranoia and inferiority complexes ( Jobs ) or just out of gross stupidity and lack of business sense ( Ballmer ) , sooner or later someone who can do math is going to run the numbers and want access to that dragon 's hoard of money that 's sitting around and , presto , a buyout offer will appear .
Novell is just the current one .
Not the first .
Not the last .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I have 5000$ in the bank, I certainly hope that my 'value' is at least 10000$, whatever than means, 

Let me take a semi-serious stab at this for ya.
If you have $5000 "in the bank" that means that you're getting a return of, at *most*, 3\% per year.
Someone who can do math might look at that and say "Hell, Paychex freakin common yields over 4\%, I can do a lot better with that money than this fool" and offer to buy you out to get his hands on the caysh.
Ok, ok, I admit, it's not going to happen to you or me (and if someone did offer to buy me it probably wouldn't be Veronika Zemanova, it'd be Betty White's grandfather) but there are very, very large companies that are sitting on gobswallops of cash earning, essentially, zip.
Some of them earn zip on all that cash while their core businesses print money.
Apple and Microsoft come immediately to mind.
Whether that business is sitting on non-performing cash out of deep-seated paranoia and inferiority complexes (Jobs) or just out of gross stupidity and lack of business sense (Ballmer), sooner or later someone who can do math is going to run the numbers and want access to that dragon's hoard of money that's sitting around and, presto, a buyout offer will appear.
Novell is just the current one.
Not the first.
Not the last.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347456</id>
	<title>Re:It's been a while, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267639740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your Calendar is not as bad as Oracle Calendar, Period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your Calendar is not as bad as Oracle Calendar , Period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your Calendar is not as bad as Oracle Calendar, Period.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345324</id>
	<title>I think I know what they're going to do with it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267631100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From a pure financial play I don't see how paying 2 billion for 990+ million cash makes sense. The rest of Novel isn't really worth anything UNLESS, they turn Novel into another FLOSS services firm like RedHat.</p><p>That's what I think is planned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From a pure financial play I do n't see how paying 2 billion for 990 + million cash makes sense .
The rest of Novel is n't really worth anything UNLESS , they turn Novel into another FLOSS services firm like RedHat.That 's what I think is planned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a pure financial play I don't see how paying 2 billion for 990+ million cash makes sense.
The rest of Novel isn't really worth anything UNLESS, they turn Novel into another FLOSS services firm like RedHat.That's what I think is planned.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345264</id>
	<title>I wish I had</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267630860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>a struggling cash rich enterprise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>a struggling cash rich enterprise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>a struggling cash rich enterprise.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346112</id>
	<title>Interesting how fortunes turn</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267634340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone who's been a systems administrator for many years has probably dealt with Novell at one point or another in their career. Before Windows NT came on the scene, NetWare was pretty much THE PC file-and-print server solution. I remember one of the good things about it was that it was lightweight - command line UI, simple admin tools. Microsoft brought back this idea of command-line-only server consoles with Windows Server Core in the last version. Novell also has some pretty neat tools like ZenWorks. That said, it's interesting to see this potential deal on the table. Even 10 years ago, you'd never see Novell ready to throw in the towel.</p><p>I wonder why their acquisition of SuSE and the interoperability initiative with Microsoft didn't change their fortunes...they had a good plan for migrating all their NetWare customers to Linux. I know NetWare is still heavily used in European companies and in the health care sector, so you would think they have a willing customer base to pay the bills with. I guess they couldn't compete with Red Hat for distirbutions and IBM for support services in the Linux world.</p><p>It's a good lesson though -- no matter how much of a market dominator you are, you're always a few steps away from being destroyed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone who 's been a systems administrator for many years has probably dealt with Novell at one point or another in their career .
Before Windows NT came on the scene , NetWare was pretty much THE PC file-and-print server solution .
I remember one of the good things about it was that it was lightweight - command line UI , simple admin tools .
Microsoft brought back this idea of command-line-only server consoles with Windows Server Core in the last version .
Novell also has some pretty neat tools like ZenWorks .
That said , it 's interesting to see this potential deal on the table .
Even 10 years ago , you 'd never see Novell ready to throw in the towel.I wonder why their acquisition of SuSE and the interoperability initiative with Microsoft did n't change their fortunes...they had a good plan for migrating all their NetWare customers to Linux .
I know NetWare is still heavily used in European companies and in the health care sector , so you would think they have a willing customer base to pay the bills with .
I guess they could n't compete with Red Hat for distirbutions and IBM for support services in the Linux world.It 's a good lesson though -- no matter how much of a market dominator you are , you 're always a few steps away from being destroyed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone who's been a systems administrator for many years has probably dealt with Novell at one point or another in their career.
Before Windows NT came on the scene, NetWare was pretty much THE PC file-and-print server solution.
I remember one of the good things about it was that it was lightweight - command line UI, simple admin tools.
Microsoft brought back this idea of command-line-only server consoles with Windows Server Core in the last version.
Novell also has some pretty neat tools like ZenWorks.
That said, it's interesting to see this potential deal on the table.
Even 10 years ago, you'd never see Novell ready to throw in the towel.I wonder why their acquisition of SuSE and the interoperability initiative with Microsoft didn't change their fortunes...they had a good plan for migrating all their NetWare customers to Linux.
I know NetWare is still heavily used in European companies and in the health care sector, so you would think they have a willing customer base to pay the bills with.
I guess they couldn't compete with Red Hat for distirbutions and IBM for support services in the Linux world.It's a good lesson though -- no matter how much of a market dominator you are, you're always a few steps away from being destroyed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346054</id>
	<title>they are going to rob Novell blind</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267634040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if they do the normal "private equity" deal what is going to happen is they will buy the company and then "lend" it money from another one of their legal entities along with declaring special dividends. that cash is going to leave Novell and go into the hedge fund. a lot of people will be fired to free up cash that will go to the hedge fund. Once the IPO market becomes better they will sell the company to someone else or if Novell goes belly up they will write it off for the tax benefits.</p><p>i just had a chat with a sales rep and the big thing to sell this year is services. everyone is trying to sell services. probably because there is no more profits in hardware since everything is commodity. Services are high margin products and very cash rich. you pay some guy $40 an hour and pimp him out for $200 an hour.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if they do the normal " private equity " deal what is going to happen is they will buy the company and then " lend " it money from another one of their legal entities along with declaring special dividends .
that cash is going to leave Novell and go into the hedge fund .
a lot of people will be fired to free up cash that will go to the hedge fund .
Once the IPO market becomes better they will sell the company to someone else or if Novell goes belly up they will write it off for the tax benefits.i just had a chat with a sales rep and the big thing to sell this year is services .
everyone is trying to sell services .
probably because there is no more profits in hardware since everything is commodity .
Services are high margin products and very cash rich .
you pay some guy $ 40 an hour and pimp him out for $ 200 an hour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if they do the normal "private equity" deal what is going to happen is they will buy the company and then "lend" it money from another one of their legal entities along with declaring special dividends.
that cash is going to leave Novell and go into the hedge fund.
a lot of people will be fired to free up cash that will go to the hedge fund.
Once the IPO market becomes better they will sell the company to someone else or if Novell goes belly up they will write it off for the tax benefits.i just had a chat with a sales rep and the big thing to sell this year is services.
everyone is trying to sell services.
probably because there is no more profits in hardware since everything is commodity.
Services are high margin products and very cash rich.
you pay some guy $40 an hour and pimp him out for $200 an hour.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345880</id>
	<title>Worth more in pieces than together</title>
	<author>sjbe</author>
	<datestamp>1267633260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>From a pure financial play I don't see how paying 2 billion for 990+ million cash makes sense.</p></div><p>Basically because the hedge fund is probably betting they can sell the assets of Novell for more than $1.1B.  Groupwise alone in the right hands (HP or Oracle maybe?) is basically an annuity that might be worth that much.  Novell has other products that are decent and probably worth something to the right party.  My guess is that the hedge fund will strip out the cash and then sell the assets of the company to the highest bidder on the theory that the assets are worth more than the whole company.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The rest of Novel isn't really worth anything UNLESS, they turn Novel into another FLOSS services firm like RedHat.</p></div><p>Doubtful.  Novell's value is in its installed base of software - not in their services.  I don't think it could turn itself into a successful service company - better to sell to a large service company (HP, Oracle, IBM).  I don't think they have the resources to transform themselves like that and if they tried I'd expect the shareholders to be pissed.  Selling the company is probably the right play - the only question is what price can they get?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From a pure financial play I do n't see how paying 2 billion for 990 + million cash makes sense.Basically because the hedge fund is probably betting they can sell the assets of Novell for more than $ 1.1B .
Groupwise alone in the right hands ( HP or Oracle maybe ?
) is basically an annuity that might be worth that much .
Novell has other products that are decent and probably worth something to the right party .
My guess is that the hedge fund will strip out the cash and then sell the assets of the company to the highest bidder on the theory that the assets are worth more than the whole company.The rest of Novel is n't really worth anything UNLESS , they turn Novel into another FLOSS services firm like RedHat.Doubtful .
Novell 's value is in its installed base of software - not in their services .
I do n't think it could turn itself into a successful service company - better to sell to a large service company ( HP , Oracle , IBM ) .
I do n't think they have the resources to transform themselves like that and if they tried I 'd expect the shareholders to be pissed .
Selling the company is probably the right play - the only question is what price can they get ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From a pure financial play I don't see how paying 2 billion for 990+ million cash makes sense.Basically because the hedge fund is probably betting they can sell the assets of Novell for more than $1.1B.
Groupwise alone in the right hands (HP or Oracle maybe?
) is basically an annuity that might be worth that much.
Novell has other products that are decent and probably worth something to the right party.
My guess is that the hedge fund will strip out the cash and then sell the assets of the company to the highest bidder on the theory that the assets are worth more than the whole company.The rest of Novel isn't really worth anything UNLESS, they turn Novel into another FLOSS services firm like RedHat.Doubtful.
Novell's value is in its installed base of software - not in their services.
I don't think it could turn itself into a successful service company - better to sell to a large service company (HP, Oracle, IBM).
I don't think they have the resources to transform themselves like that and if they tried I'd expect the shareholders to be pissed.
Selling the company is probably the right play - the only question is what price can they get?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346194</id>
	<title>Re:Already Under Investigation</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1267634700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All stock market prices are by their very definition imaginary and unrelated to the true value. That&rsquo;s the reason that we have a bursting bubble every 30 years. Scientifically it&rsquo;s even proven, that in a market that does not deal with physical goods, there <em>must</em> be a bursting bubble about every 30 years.</p><p>So the whole question is pointless.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All stock market prices are by their very definition imaginary and unrelated to the true value .
That    s the reason that we have a bursting bubble every 30 years .
Scientifically it    s even proven , that in a market that does not deal with physical goods , there must be a bursting bubble about every 30 years.So the whole question is pointless .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All stock market prices are by their very definition imaginary and unrelated to the true value.
That’s the reason that we have a bursting bubble every 30 years.
Scientifically it’s even proven, that in a market that does not deal with physical goods, there must be a bursting bubble about every 30 years.So the whole question is pointless.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347220</id>
	<title>Re:Sold!</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1267638900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there is an offer of $5.75 then this defines the minimum value of the stock.  Someone is definitely willing to pay $5.75 for it.  Other people may be willing to pay more, but there's no point selling to anyone who would pay less because you can definitely make more.  People buying at above this value think that the offer is too low and that there will eventually be an offer that is higher than the current trading price.  The initial offer was $1/share above the market price.  The market price then climbed 40/share above the offer price.  If the offer is increased by 50 then everyone who bought shares after the increase makes money.  If it isn't (and no one else makes a better offer), then they lose money as the share price returns towards its old value, unless they hold onto the shares for a long time and the value of the company grows (seems unlikely in Novell's case, but stranger things have happened).</p><p>
There's a reason that it's called 'speculation'...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there is an offer of $ 5.75 then this defines the minimum value of the stock .
Someone is definitely willing to pay $ 5.75 for it .
Other people may be willing to pay more , but there 's no point selling to anyone who would pay less because you can definitely make more .
People buying at above this value think that the offer is too low and that there will eventually be an offer that is higher than the current trading price .
The initial offer was $ 1/share above the market price .
The market price then climbed 40/share above the offer price .
If the offer is increased by 50 then everyone who bought shares after the increase makes money .
If it is n't ( and no one else makes a better offer ) , then they lose money as the share price returns towards its old value , unless they hold onto the shares for a long time and the value of the company grows ( seems unlikely in Novell 's case , but stranger things have happened ) .
There 's a reason that it 's called 'speculation'.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there is an offer of $5.75 then this defines the minimum value of the stock.
Someone is definitely willing to pay $5.75 for it.
Other people may be willing to pay more, but there's no point selling to anyone who would pay less because you can definitely make more.
People buying at above this value think that the offer is too low and that there will eventually be an offer that is higher than the current trading price.
The initial offer was $1/share above the market price.
The market price then climbed 40/share above the offer price.
If the offer is increased by 50 then everyone who bought shares after the increase makes money.
If it isn't (and no one else makes a better offer), then they lose money as the share price returns towards its old value, unless they hold onto the shares for a long time and the value of the company grows (seems unlikely in Novell's case, but stranger things have happened).
There's a reason that it's called 'speculation'...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345548</id>
	<title>$2 Billion?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267632000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where the hell did they get that kind of money? I guess that even during a recession people still need their hedges pruned and their bushes trimmed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where the hell did they get that kind of money ?
I guess that even during a recession people still need their hedges pruned and their bushes trimmed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where the hell did they get that kind of money?
I guess that even during a recession people still need their hedges pruned and their bushes trimmed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345990</id>
	<title>Short squeeze</title>
	<author>sjbe</author>
	<datestamp>1267633740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why would people be buying at above $6 when the buyout offer is $5.75?</p></div><p>Several reasons.  Some of it is very likely a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short\_squeeze" title="wikipedia.org">short squeeze</a> [wikipedia.org] which often happens when a stock suddenly appreciates significantly.  Also there probably is some speculation that the final price will be a bit higher.  I'd expect the price to quickly settle at just at or under the offer price.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would people be buying at above $ 6 when the buyout offer is $ 5.75 ? Several reasons .
Some of it is very likely a short squeeze [ wikipedia.org ] which often happens when a stock suddenly appreciates significantly .
Also there probably is some speculation that the final price will be a bit higher .
I 'd expect the price to quickly settle at just at or under the offer price .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would people be buying at above $6 when the buyout offer is $5.75?Several reasons.
Some of it is very likely a short squeeze [wikipedia.org] which often happens when a stock suddenly appreciates significantly.
Also there probably is some speculation that the final price will be a bit higher.
I'd expect the price to quickly settle at just at or under the offer price.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347188</id>
	<title>corporate-friendly Novell ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267638780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"<i>Novell has been taking good care of Suse Linux. Since Novell bought them, they continued working on what I think is the best Linux distro, without hindrance, boosted their marketshare and helped in giving Linux a corporate-friendly image. I hope the new owners of Novell (should such takeover really take place) will have a hands-off approach and let things chug along nicely, as they have been</i>"<br> <br>

Didn't a third party, some time back express 'intellelectual property' claims over all versions of Linux, signing an exclusive deal with Novell, wherein the third party would exchange 'vouchers' in exchange for Novell acknowledging that the third party IP claims had validity. In publications on it's website, Novell recommends Microsoft Windows and advises customers to use SuSE for <a href="http://www.novell.com/zh-cn/news/press/microsoft-and-novell-experience-increased-demand-from-customers-seeking-to-maximize-it-investments-through-greater-interoperability" title="novell.com" rel="nofollow">IP peace of mind</a> [novell.com]. And while Novell provides cross-platform interoperability, it only provides it with Windows and denies it with other Linux distros. In short, they have conspired with Microsofts in its IP extortion racket against the Open Source community.<br> <br>

"<i>Technical solutions spur continued success of joint effort to advance cross-platform interoperability and deliver IP peace of mind</i>"<br> <br>

Buy our stuff, or someone we don't know will sure your ass off !</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Novell has been taking good care of Suse Linux .
Since Novell bought them , they continued working on what I think is the best Linux distro , without hindrance , boosted their marketshare and helped in giving Linux a corporate-friendly image .
I hope the new owners of Novell ( should such takeover really take place ) will have a hands-off approach and let things chug along nicely , as they have been " Did n't a third party , some time back express 'intellelectual property ' claims over all versions of Linux , signing an exclusive deal with Novell , wherein the third party would exchange 'vouchers ' in exchange for Novell acknowledging that the third party IP claims had validity .
In publications on it 's website , Novell recommends Microsoft Windows and advises customers to use SuSE for IP peace of mind [ novell.com ] .
And while Novell provides cross-platform interoperability , it only provides it with Windows and denies it with other Linux distros .
In short , they have conspired with Microsofts in its IP extortion racket against the Open Source community .
" Technical solutions spur continued success of joint effort to advance cross-platform interoperability and deliver IP peace of mind " Buy our stuff , or someone we do n't know will sure your ass off !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Novell has been taking good care of Suse Linux.
Since Novell bought them, they continued working on what I think is the best Linux distro, without hindrance, boosted their marketshare and helped in giving Linux a corporate-friendly image.
I hope the new owners of Novell (should such takeover really take place) will have a hands-off approach and let things chug along nicely, as they have been" 

Didn't a third party, some time back express 'intellelectual property' claims over all versions of Linux, signing an exclusive deal with Novell, wherein the third party would exchange 'vouchers' in exchange for Novell acknowledging that the third party IP claims had validity.
In publications on it's website, Novell recommends Microsoft Windows and advises customers to use SuSE for IP peace of mind [novell.com].
And while Novell provides cross-platform interoperability, it only provides it with Windows and denies it with other Linux distros.
In short, they have conspired with Microsofts in its IP extortion racket against the Open Source community.
"Technical solutions spur continued success of joint effort to advance cross-platform interoperability and deliver IP peace of mind" 

Buy our stuff, or someone we don't know will sure your ass off !</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345974</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345604</id>
	<title>Nortel Pensioners Will Be All Over This</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267632180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I expect that this will be tied up in the Canadian court system for a bit as well. I work a few kms from the former Nortel campus here in Ottawa and Nortel has been in the news for the past few months as it pensioners are basically receiving nothing as the company short funded the pension and eventually claimed bankruptcy.

I fully expect that the legal team representing Nortel pensioners will do everything in their power to have a say in what happens to this company and should it be sold have existing pension liabilities settled.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I expect that this will be tied up in the Canadian court system for a bit as well .
I work a few kms from the former Nortel campus here in Ottawa and Nortel has been in the news for the past few months as it pensioners are basically receiving nothing as the company short funded the pension and eventually claimed bankruptcy .
I fully expect that the legal team representing Nortel pensioners will do everything in their power to have a say in what happens to this company and should it be sold have existing pension liabilities settled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I expect that this will be tied up in the Canadian court system for a bit as well.
I work a few kms from the former Nortel campus here in Ottawa and Nortel has been in the news for the past few months as it pensioners are basically receiving nothing as the company short funded the pension and eventually claimed bankruptcy.
I fully expect that the legal team representing Nortel pensioners will do everything in their power to have a say in what happens to this company and should it be sold have existing pension liabilities settled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31352176</id>
	<title>2 Billion?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267619160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345552</id>
	<title>Re:Value of a company...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267632000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depends. If there is Dargaud software, and if there are still people who deem it good software, i.e. if your name has a ring to it, you might well be worth 10k if you only have 5k.</p><p>Names have a value in the business world. People buy $item because it is of $brand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends .
If there is Dargaud software , and if there are still people who deem it good software , i.e .
if your name has a ring to it , you might well be worth 10k if you only have 5k.Names have a value in the business world .
People buy $ item because it is of $ brand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends.
If there is Dargaud software, and if there are still people who deem it good software, i.e.
if your name has a ring to it, you might well be worth 10k if you only have 5k.Names have a value in the business world.
People buy $item because it is of $brand.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345398</id>
	<title>Value of a company...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267631400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If I have 5000$ in the bank, I certainly hope that my 'value' is at least 10000$, whatever than means, not being a resalable slave...</htmltext>
<tokenext>If I have 5000 $ in the bank , I certainly hope that my 'value ' is at least 10000 $ , whatever than means , not being a resalable slave.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If I have 5000$ in the bank, I certainly hope that my 'value' is at least 10000$, whatever than means, not being a resalable slave...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346066</id>
	<title>That's funny...</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1267634100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just saw the Altiris agent pop up on my work machine this morning.  Our network weasels are busy virtualizing application installs.  Good for them.</p><p>But Novell ZenWorks was doing this via layered imaging 7-10 years ago.  Not to mention volatile Windows accounts, a Godsend in school environments. And other cool thing Novell did that Microsoft didn't.</p><p>But what caught my eye was that Altiris seems to have been gobbled up by Symantec.  How sad.  Now we fear the worst...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just saw the Altiris agent pop up on my work machine this morning .
Our network weasels are busy virtualizing application installs .
Good for them.But Novell ZenWorks was doing this via layered imaging 7-10 years ago .
Not to mention volatile Windows accounts , a Godsend in school environments .
And other cool thing Novell did that Microsoft did n't.But what caught my eye was that Altiris seems to have been gobbled up by Symantec .
How sad .
Now we fear the worst.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just saw the Altiris agent pop up on my work machine this morning.
Our network weasels are busy virtualizing application installs.
Good for them.But Novell ZenWorks was doing this via layered imaging 7-10 years ago.
Not to mention volatile Windows accounts, a Godsend in school environments.
And other cool thing Novell did that Microsoft didn't.But what caught my eye was that Altiris seems to have been gobbled up by Symantec.
How sad.
Now we fear the worst...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388</id>
	<title>Sold!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267631340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Novell's stock was up above $6 this morning, and I finally unloaded that sucker. Why would people be buying at above $6 when the buyout offer is $5.75? I guess people enjoy losing money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Novell 's stock was up above $ 6 this morning , and I finally unloaded that sucker .
Why would people be buying at above $ 6 when the buyout offer is $ 5.75 ?
I guess people enjoy losing money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Novell's stock was up above $6 this morning, and I finally unloaded that sucker.
Why would people be buying at above $6 when the buyout offer is $5.75?
I guess people enjoy losing money.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31349120</id>
	<title>Re:Already Under Investigation</title>
	<author>JTsyo</author>
	<datestamp>1267647960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It would be funny if the hedge just sold of it's shares for a 30\% profit. That would probably raise a few flags though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It would be funny if the hedge just sold of it 's shares for a 30 \ % profit .
That would probably raise a few flags though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It would be funny if the hedge just sold of it's shares for a 30\% profit.
That would probably raise a few flags though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346094</id>
	<title>Re:$2 Billion?!</title>
	<author>ottothecow</author>
	<datestamp>1267634280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am imagining (without looking at either financials) that they are planning to buy it wit a whole ton of leverage and then raid the available cash and future income streams to pay down their debt.<p>

That is usually about how this works and an example of reasons why having a big pile of cash (vs investing in capital or paying dividends) can be risky for a company small enough to be picked up easily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am imagining ( without looking at either financials ) that they are planning to buy it wit a whole ton of leverage and then raid the available cash and future income streams to pay down their debt .
That is usually about how this works and an example of reasons why having a big pile of cash ( vs investing in capital or paying dividends ) can be risky for a company small enough to be picked up easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am imagining (without looking at either financials) that they are planning to buy it wit a whole ton of leverage and then raid the available cash and future income streams to pay down their debt.
That is usually about how this works and an example of reasons why having a big pile of cash (vs investing in capital or paying dividends) can be risky for a company small enough to be picked up easily.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345820</id>
	<title>Re:Sold!</title>
	<author>larry bagina</author>
	<datestamp>1267633020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>same thing happened when MS did a bid for yahoo.  I'm not sure who was the bigger biden -- new shareholders that bought at the top or old shareholders that didn't cash out when they had a chance.</htmltext>
<tokenext>same thing happened when MS did a bid for yahoo .
I 'm not sure who was the bigger biden -- new shareholders that bought at the top or old shareholders that did n't cash out when they had a chance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>same thing happened when MS did a bid for yahoo.
I'm not sure who was the bigger biden -- new shareholders that bought at the top or old shareholders that didn't cash out when they had a chance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31348746</id>
	<title>Re:they are going to rob Novell blind</title>
	<author>swillden</author>
	<datestamp>1267645980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Services are high margin products and very cash rich. you pay some guy $40 an hour and pimp him out for $200 an hour.</p></div><p>Interesting perspective.

</p><p>From my perspective, services are a moderate-margin business at best.  Your 40/200 example is extremely optimistic.  For $40 per hour it's pretty tough to find people who have the technical skills to do the job, the people skills to work effectively with customers and are willing to do the required travel.  Don't forget about benefits, either.  Then there's overhead.  You need salespeople to sell the services contracts, deployment managers to staff them, administrative staff to handle all of the details and managers to manage everyone else.  Depending on your strategy, marketing can be a huge expense as well.  And don't forget some "cushion" to cover contracts that go bad.  Even if you're working strictly time and materials (no fixed price), you can still end up with a dissatisfied customer who drags you into court -- or who you need to give a lot of free services because it's cheaper than the court battle.  All of that adds significantly to your costs.

</p><p>In my experience, services is more of a 30\% margin business than an 80\% margin business, and that's if you know how to manage a services business.  I suppose if you're coming from the perspective of selling commodity hardware, 30\% margin probably sounds really good.  But in many companies, 30\% is barely adequate.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Services are high margin products and very cash rich .
you pay some guy $ 40 an hour and pimp him out for $ 200 an hour.Interesting perspective .
From my perspective , services are a moderate-margin business at best .
Your 40/200 example is extremely optimistic .
For $ 40 per hour it 's pretty tough to find people who have the technical skills to do the job , the people skills to work effectively with customers and are willing to do the required travel .
Do n't forget about benefits , either .
Then there 's overhead .
You need salespeople to sell the services contracts , deployment managers to staff them , administrative staff to handle all of the details and managers to manage everyone else .
Depending on your strategy , marketing can be a huge expense as well .
And do n't forget some " cushion " to cover contracts that go bad .
Even if you 're working strictly time and materials ( no fixed price ) , you can still end up with a dissatisfied customer who drags you into court -- or who you need to give a lot of free services because it 's cheaper than the court battle .
All of that adds significantly to your costs .
In my experience , services is more of a 30 \ % margin business than an 80 \ % margin business , and that 's if you know how to manage a services business .
I suppose if you 're coming from the perspective of selling commodity hardware , 30 \ % margin probably sounds really good .
But in many companies , 30 \ % is barely adequate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Services are high margin products and very cash rich.
you pay some guy $40 an hour and pimp him out for $200 an hour.Interesting perspective.
From my perspective, services are a moderate-margin business at best.
Your 40/200 example is extremely optimistic.
For $40 per hour it's pretty tough to find people who have the technical skills to do the job, the people skills to work effectively with customers and are willing to do the required travel.
Don't forget about benefits, either.
Then there's overhead.
You need salespeople to sell the services contracts, deployment managers to staff them, administrative staff to handle all of the details and managers to manage everyone else.
Depending on your strategy, marketing can be a huge expense as well.
And don't forget some "cushion" to cover contracts that go bad.
Even if you're working strictly time and materials (no fixed price), you can still end up with a dissatisfied customer who drags you into court -- or who you need to give a lot of free services because it's cheaper than the court battle.
All of that adds significantly to your costs.
In my experience, services is more of a 30\% margin business than an 80\% margin business, and that's if you know how to manage a services business.
I suppose if you're coming from the perspective of selling commodity hardware, 30\% margin probably sounds really good.
But in many companies, 30\% is barely adequate.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346054</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31409402</id>
	<title>UNIX IP play?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268064600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What if this private equity group then bought SCO, or SCO's "Unix IP" whatever that might be, and then went back to the better-license-or-we'll-sue business with the "Unified System V intellectual property"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What if this private equity group then bought SCO , or SCO 's " Unix IP " whatever that might be , and then went back to the better-license-or-we 'll-sue business with the " Unified System V intellectual property " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if this private equity group then bought SCO, or SCO's "Unix IP" whatever that might be, and then went back to the better-license-or-we'll-sue business with the "Unified System V intellectual property"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345946</id>
	<title>Re:Already Under Investigation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267633560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>$4.75 is the price to buy a small (relatively) number of shares. If instead, you went on the market and started buying up all the shares you can get, you would drive the price way up, so the price for all the shares may be much more than 5.75 each.</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 4.75 is the price to buy a small ( relatively ) number of shares .
If instead , you went on the market and started buying up all the shares you can get , you would drive the price way up , so the price for all the shares may be much more than 5.75 each .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$4.75 is the price to buy a small (relatively) number of shares.
If instead, you went on the market and started buying up all the shares you can get, you would drive the price way up, so the price for all the shares may be much more than 5.75 each.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346574</id>
	<title>Re:$2 Billion?!</title>
	<author>introspekt.i</author>
	<datestamp>1267636440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Money doesn't grow on trees, after all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Money does n't grow on trees , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Money doesn't grow on trees, after all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347764</id>
	<title>Strip down costs and resell</title>
	<author>GargamelSpaceman</author>
	<datestamp>1267641300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I heard a story on NPR about companies that use leverage to buy out companies with a good name, and somehow have the company they are buying go deeply into debt to finance it.  The company cuts costs like mad to quickly come up with the cash to pay off their huge debt, cutting things that were substantial to what earned them a good name.  ( the example was matress companies moving to one sided matresses which don't last as long to cut costs, destroying their reputation for producing products that last.   But the company is then resold before the impact of it's cost cutting causes it to lose value.  Novell is cash rich, so maybe it could use that cash to pay for much of it's own aquisition cost, but then it loses it's ability to think in the long term ( need to make money NOW ).

</p><p>It was too bad since suse linux is really nice. Way better than redhat.

</p><p>Still I don't know if that is what's going on here.  It just seems suspiciously like it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I heard a story on NPR about companies that use leverage to buy out companies with a good name , and somehow have the company they are buying go deeply into debt to finance it .
The company cuts costs like mad to quickly come up with the cash to pay off their huge debt , cutting things that were substantial to what earned them a good name .
( the example was matress companies moving to one sided matresses which do n't last as long to cut costs , destroying their reputation for producing products that last .
But the company is then resold before the impact of it 's cost cutting causes it to lose value .
Novell is cash rich , so maybe it could use that cash to pay for much of it 's own aquisition cost , but then it loses it 's ability to think in the long term ( need to make money NOW ) .
It was too bad since suse linux is really nice .
Way better than redhat .
Still I do n't know if that is what 's going on here .
It just seems suspiciously like it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I heard a story on NPR about companies that use leverage to buy out companies with a good name, and somehow have the company they are buying go deeply into debt to finance it.
The company cuts costs like mad to quickly come up with the cash to pay off their huge debt, cutting things that were substantial to what earned them a good name.
( the example was matress companies moving to one sided matresses which don't last as long to cut costs, destroying their reputation for producing products that last.
But the company is then resold before the impact of it's cost cutting causes it to lose value.
Novell is cash rich, so maybe it could use that cash to pay for much of it's own aquisition cost, but then it loses it's ability to think in the long term ( need to make money NOW ).
It was too bad since suse linux is really nice.
Way better than redhat.
Still I don't know if that is what's going on here.
It just seems suspiciously like it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346304</id>
	<title>Re:It's been a while, but...</title>
	<author>jayhawk88</author>
	<datestamp>1267635180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Working for a medical university that still uses Novell:</p><p>It's a mixed bag, honestly. Groupwise is still pretty great as a messaging/collaboration platform, but for some reason Novell seems bound and determined to ignore it as much as possible. The latest Webmail version is pretty nice, but conversely, the Groupwise Mobile component is floundering, after trying to implement a version of Intellisync and getting cut off at the knees by Nokia. Novell has been moving the file system/server stuff to SUSE for some time now, but on the other hand, no one seems to really know exactly what to do with all those damn Windows clients long term. As for eDirectory, it's great and all, but if no one's using Groupwise or moving to SUSE, what future does it really have?</p><p>If I live a thousand years I'll never understand why Novell didn't open source Groupwise several years ago, and in one move come to dominate the Linux Groupware market. Perhaps smarter people than me at Novell foresaw the move to online services, but I doubt it; at the very least they could have spun it off to another company and made some bucks on it. It would arguably still be a good idea, as I could see it filling a niche, but probably the real opportunity has been lost.</p><p>We're moving away from almost all things Novell. Investigated the possibility of both Outlook and Outlook@EDU, and while those stalled, the writing is on the wall. NDS client will probably be off all workstations within a couple years, file sharing/password management will be moved to Windows servers. eDirectory/Novell Services may linger on for a while, as we've got a semi-complicated identity management system going on it, and we've rolled out some SUSE as necessary, but we're almost being forced to move things Windows-way out of necessity/attrition.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Working for a medical university that still uses Novell : It 's a mixed bag , honestly .
Groupwise is still pretty great as a messaging/collaboration platform , but for some reason Novell seems bound and determined to ignore it as much as possible .
The latest Webmail version is pretty nice , but conversely , the Groupwise Mobile component is floundering , after trying to implement a version of Intellisync and getting cut off at the knees by Nokia .
Novell has been moving the file system/server stuff to SUSE for some time now , but on the other hand , no one seems to really know exactly what to do with all those damn Windows clients long term .
As for eDirectory , it 's great and all , but if no one 's using Groupwise or moving to SUSE , what future does it really have ? If I live a thousand years I 'll never understand why Novell did n't open source Groupwise several years ago , and in one move come to dominate the Linux Groupware market .
Perhaps smarter people than me at Novell foresaw the move to online services , but I doubt it ; at the very least they could have spun it off to another company and made some bucks on it .
It would arguably still be a good idea , as I could see it filling a niche , but probably the real opportunity has been lost.We 're moving away from almost all things Novell .
Investigated the possibility of both Outlook and Outlook @ EDU , and while those stalled , the writing is on the wall .
NDS client will probably be off all workstations within a couple years , file sharing/password management will be moved to Windows servers .
eDirectory/Novell Services may linger on for a while , as we 've got a semi-complicated identity management system going on it , and we 've rolled out some SUSE as necessary , but we 're almost being forced to move things Windows-way out of necessity/attrition .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Working for a medical university that still uses Novell:It's a mixed bag, honestly.
Groupwise is still pretty great as a messaging/collaboration platform, but for some reason Novell seems bound and determined to ignore it as much as possible.
The latest Webmail version is pretty nice, but conversely, the Groupwise Mobile component is floundering, after trying to implement a version of Intellisync and getting cut off at the knees by Nokia.
Novell has been moving the file system/server stuff to SUSE for some time now, but on the other hand, no one seems to really know exactly what to do with all those damn Windows clients long term.
As for eDirectory, it's great and all, but if no one's using Groupwise or moving to SUSE, what future does it really have?If I live a thousand years I'll never understand why Novell didn't open source Groupwise several years ago, and in one move come to dominate the Linux Groupware market.
Perhaps smarter people than me at Novell foresaw the move to online services, but I doubt it; at the very least they could have spun it off to another company and made some bucks on it.
It would arguably still be a good idea, as I could see it filling a niche, but probably the real opportunity has been lost.We're moving away from almost all things Novell.
Investigated the possibility of both Outlook and Outlook@EDU, and while those stalled, the writing is on the wall.
NDS client will probably be off all workstations within a couple years, file sharing/password management will be moved to Windows servers.
eDirectory/Novell Services may linger on for a while, as we've got a semi-complicated identity management system going on it, and we've rolled out some SUSE as necessary, but we're almost being forced to move things Windows-way out of necessity/attrition.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346910</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting how fortunes turn</title>
	<author>Acer500</author>
	<datestamp>1267637760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Anyone who's been a systems administrator for many years has probably dealt with Novell at one point or another in their career.</p> </div><p>And Novell NetWare was ROCK SOLID as a file server. I have good memories of that. OTOH, it was basically not very flexible, and GroupWise sucked when last I saw it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone who 's been a systems administrator for many years has probably dealt with Novell at one point or another in their career .
And Novell NetWare was ROCK SOLID as a file server .
I have good memories of that .
OTOH , it was basically not very flexible , and GroupWise sucked when last I saw it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone who's been a systems administrator for many years has probably dealt with Novell at one point or another in their career.
And Novell NetWare was ROCK SOLID as a file server.
I have good memories of that.
OTOH, it was basically not very flexible, and GroupWise sucked when last I saw it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31353798</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting how fortunes turn</title>
	<author>jonadab</author>
	<datestamp>1267630800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; Before Windows NT came on the scene, NetWare was<br>&gt; pretty much THE PC file-and-print server solution.<br><br>Yes, I remember.  And it sucked horse pooh.  Through a straw.<br><br>In fairness, I assume that Novell's software has improved over the last seventeen years.  I mean, other software has improved rather considerably, so it seems logical that theirs would as well.<br><br>But, personally, if I never see a running copy of NetWare again, I'm not going to shed any tears over it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Before Windows NT came on the scene , NetWare was &gt; pretty much THE PC file-and-print server solution.Yes , I remember .
And it sucked horse pooh .
Through a straw.In fairness , I assume that Novell 's software has improved over the last seventeen years .
I mean , other software has improved rather considerably , so it seems logical that theirs would as well.But , personally , if I never see a running copy of NetWare again , I 'm not going to shed any tears over it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Before Windows NT came on the scene, NetWare was&gt; pretty much THE PC file-and-print server solution.Yes, I remember.
And it sucked horse pooh.
Through a straw.In fairness, I assume that Novell's software has improved over the last seventeen years.
I mean, other software has improved rather considerably, so it seems logical that theirs would as well.But, personally, if I never see a running copy of NetWare again, I'm not going to shed any tears over it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345424</id>
	<title>Re:Already Under Investigation</title>
	<author>N3tRunner</author>
	<datestamp>1267631520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, the offer isn't ripping anyone off. Novell is worth practically nothing as a company, they don't really have products that anyone is interested in purchasing anymore. Maybe for headhunting purposes their programmers are worth something?</p><p>That lawsuit seems way off base though. I've owned Novell stock for years and this buyout is a real blessing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , the offer is n't ripping anyone off .
Novell is worth practically nothing as a company , they do n't really have products that anyone is interested in purchasing anymore .
Maybe for headhunting purposes their programmers are worth something ? That lawsuit seems way off base though .
I 've owned Novell stock for years and this buyout is a real blessing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, the offer isn't ripping anyone off.
Novell is worth practically nothing as a company, they don't really have products that anyone is interested in purchasing anymore.
Maybe for headhunting purposes their programmers are worth something?That lawsuit seems way off base though.
I've owned Novell stock for years and this buyout is a real blessing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282</id>
	<title>Already Under Investigation</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1267630920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>A <a href="http://www.prlog.org/10556630-novell-inc-investor-alert-offer-under-investigation.html" title="prlog.org">law firm is already investigating</a> [prlog.org] 'potential breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law in connection with an alleged unfair takeover.'  Basically seems to allege that should this deal go through, it would be unfair for current long time shareholders of Novell as Elliott's takeover would be underpaying and ripping them off.  I'm not sure if this is standard operating procedure or not but one would think that the stock market would offer a good estimate of Novell's true worth.  Apparently someone thinks 20\%+ on top of that is unfairly low.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A law firm is already investigating [ prlog.org ] 'potential breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law in connection with an alleged unfair takeover .
' Basically seems to allege that should this deal go through , it would be unfair for current long time shareholders of Novell as Elliott 's takeover would be underpaying and ripping them off .
I 'm not sure if this is standard operating procedure or not but one would think that the stock market would offer a good estimate of Novell 's true worth .
Apparently someone thinks 20 \ % + on top of that is unfairly low .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A law firm is already investigating [prlog.org] 'potential breaches of fiduciary duty and other violations of state law in connection with an alleged unfair takeover.
'  Basically seems to allege that should this deal go through, it would be unfair for current long time shareholders of Novell as Elliott's takeover would be underpaying and ripping them off.
I'm not sure if this is standard operating procedure or not but one would think that the stock market would offer a good estimate of Novell's true worth.
Apparently someone thinks 20\%+ on top of that is unfairly low.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31348758</id>
	<title>WHAT THE HELL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267646100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>DOES THIS MEAN!?!? WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO SUSE?</p><p>(Filter error: Don't use so many caps. Filter error: Don't use so many caps.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>DOES THIS MEAN ! ? ! ?
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO SUSE ?
( Filter error : Do n't use so many caps .
Filter error : Do n't use so many caps .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DOES THIS MEAN!?!?
WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO SUSE?
(Filter error: Don't use so many caps.
Filter error: Don't use so many caps.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345472</id>
	<title>Re:It's been a while, but...</title>
	<author>poetmatt</author>
	<datestamp>1267631700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>beyond that norton is not novell, novell actually has a pretty strong enterprise presence. A hedge fund buying novell is a really bad sign, to be honest. Novell is doing fine.  Them trying to label Novell as unsuccessful is basically a flat out BS.</p><p>What I suspect this means is that someone's trying to stop Novell before the Novell v. SCO case comes around. They're trying to see if the Novell board is greedy enough to do it, and I suspect they aren't and neither are the shareholders.</p><p>A hedge taking over a company if that hedge has no experience managing in the sector of the company they're taking basically means they're going to tack on association/management fees onto novell and dump them to someone else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>beyond that norton is not novell , novell actually has a pretty strong enterprise presence .
A hedge fund buying novell is a really bad sign , to be honest .
Novell is doing fine .
Them trying to label Novell as unsuccessful is basically a flat out BS.What I suspect this means is that someone 's trying to stop Novell before the Novell v. SCO case comes around .
They 're trying to see if the Novell board is greedy enough to do it , and I suspect they are n't and neither are the shareholders.A hedge taking over a company if that hedge has no experience managing in the sector of the company they 're taking basically means they 're going to tack on association/management fees onto novell and dump them to someone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>beyond that norton is not novell, novell actually has a pretty strong enterprise presence.
A hedge fund buying novell is a really bad sign, to be honest.
Novell is doing fine.
Them trying to label Novell as unsuccessful is basically a flat out BS.What I suspect this means is that someone's trying to stop Novell before the Novell v. SCO case comes around.
They're trying to see if the Novell board is greedy enough to do it, and I suspect they aren't and neither are the shareholders.A hedge taking over a company if that hedge has no experience managing in the sector of the company they're taking basically means they're going to tack on association/management fees onto novell and dump them to someone else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31350972</id>
	<title>Making money from Novell?</title>
	<author>rathaven</author>
	<datestamp>1267613460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unfortunately I suspect the only way to achieve this is to change the name and dump half the company in favour of marketing.<br> <br>

They have some of the best software in their fields in Suse, IDM, Zenworks, Platespin and a good vision but not the resource to support it properly.  They market themselves worse than anyone in the market and always have.  Worse, the shame of it is that every time you hear about Novell people think about a company from the 1980s that had Netware which, whilst great in its hey day became a turd when they tried to pretend it could do something other than file serve.  The bugs have been thick and fast ever since.<br> <br>

Open Enterprise Server is another turd - take a good linux and make it run like Netware.  Forget it,  eDirectory spat on AD but wasn't compatible enough with Windows services (I wonder why MS prevented that?)...  These technologies are dead and I think even Novell recognises it (Zenworks now uses Oracle/Microsoft SQL Server instead of eDirectory and the like).<br> <br>

After being a long time user of Novell products I have to say, their Linux is great, their Desktop Management and Virtualisation Management is really very good (as it manages Hyper-V, VMware and Xen heterogeneously - including, with platespin all the conversion capabilities), their Identity Management talks to a ton of things and works unlike everyone else's that I've used but their old core (Netware, NCP) and associated technologies needs dropping like the steaming turds they are.  Then they need to be able to sell in competition with the rivals which they've never managed.<br> <br>

I have to say that this might be the best thing that has ever happened to them if it acts to focus them...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately I suspect the only way to achieve this is to change the name and dump half the company in favour of marketing .
They have some of the best software in their fields in Suse , IDM , Zenworks , Platespin and a good vision but not the resource to support it properly .
They market themselves worse than anyone in the market and always have .
Worse , the shame of it is that every time you hear about Novell people think about a company from the 1980s that had Netware which , whilst great in its hey day became a turd when they tried to pretend it could do something other than file serve .
The bugs have been thick and fast ever since .
Open Enterprise Server is another turd - take a good linux and make it run like Netware .
Forget it , eDirectory spat on AD but was n't compatible enough with Windows services ( I wonder why MS prevented that ? ) .. .
These technologies are dead and I think even Novell recognises it ( Zenworks now uses Oracle/Microsoft SQL Server instead of eDirectory and the like ) .
After being a long time user of Novell products I have to say , their Linux is great , their Desktop Management and Virtualisation Management is really very good ( as it manages Hyper-V , VMware and Xen heterogeneously - including , with platespin all the conversion capabilities ) , their Identity Management talks to a ton of things and works unlike everyone else 's that I 've used but their old core ( Netware , NCP ) and associated technologies needs dropping like the steaming turds they are .
Then they need to be able to sell in competition with the rivals which they 've never managed .
I have to say that this might be the best thing that has ever happened to them if it acts to focus them.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately I suspect the only way to achieve this is to change the name and dump half the company in favour of marketing.
They have some of the best software in their fields in Suse, IDM, Zenworks, Platespin and a good vision but not the resource to support it properly.
They market themselves worse than anyone in the market and always have.
Worse, the shame of it is that every time you hear about Novell people think about a company from the 1980s that had Netware which, whilst great in its hey day became a turd when they tried to pretend it could do something other than file serve.
The bugs have been thick and fast ever since.
Open Enterprise Server is another turd - take a good linux and make it run like Netware.
Forget it,  eDirectory spat on AD but wasn't compatible enough with Windows services (I wonder why MS prevented that?)...
These technologies are dead and I think even Novell recognises it (Zenworks now uses Oracle/Microsoft SQL Server instead of eDirectory and the like).
After being a long time user of Novell products I have to say, their Linux is great, their Desktop Management and Virtualisation Management is really very good (as it manages Hyper-V, VMware and Xen heterogeneously - including, with platespin all the conversion capabilities), their Identity Management talks to a ton of things and works unlike everyone else's that I've used but their old core (Netware, NCP) and associated technologies needs dropping like the steaming turds they are.
Then they need to be able to sell in competition with the rivals which they've never managed.
I have to say that this might be the best thing that has ever happened to them if it acts to focus them...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31353344</id>
	<title>Re:Already Under Investigation</title>
	<author>jonadab</author>
	<datestamp>1267627560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; Basically seems to allege that should this deal<br>&gt; go through, it would be unfair for current long<br>&gt; time shareholders of Novell as Elliott's takeover<br>&gt; would be underpaying and ripping them off<br><br>The market trading seems to agree with this, although it remains to be seen whether the share price will stay up.  If the share price does stay up, obviously, the deal won't go through at the quoted figure.  $5.75 per share doesn't look so generous when the current share trading price is over $6.  If the share price stays up for about a day and a half and then sinks rapidly back toward its former level once the news goes stale, then that would be an argument for the opposite view.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Basically seems to allege that should this deal &gt; go through , it would be unfair for current long &gt; time shareholders of Novell as Elliott 's takeover &gt; would be underpaying and ripping them offThe market trading seems to agree with this , although it remains to be seen whether the share price will stay up .
If the share price does stay up , obviously , the deal wo n't go through at the quoted figure .
$ 5.75 per share does n't look so generous when the current share trading price is over $ 6 .
If the share price stays up for about a day and a half and then sinks rapidly back toward its former level once the news goes stale , then that would be an argument for the opposite view .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Basically seems to allege that should this deal&gt; go through, it would be unfair for current long&gt; time shareholders of Novell as Elliott's takeover&gt; would be underpaying and ripping them offThe market trading seems to agree with this, although it remains to be seen whether the share price will stay up.
If the share price does stay up, obviously, the deal won't go through at the quoted figure.
$5.75 per share doesn't look so generous when the current share trading price is over $6.
If the share price stays up for about a day and a half and then sinks rapidly back toward its former level once the news goes stale, then that would be an argument for the opposite view.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346476</id>
	<title>another view?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267635900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>with china being the biggest debt buyer, chances are pretty good that<br>most of the money in this hedge fund belongs to china.<br>so buying the "novell-cow" and chopping it up is probably a pretty<br>good way to make "more" money and the american internet less secure<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...<br>i hope that chameleon can blend</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>with china being the biggest debt buyer , chances are pretty good thatmost of the money in this hedge fund belongs to china.so buying the " novell-cow " and chopping it up is probably a prettygood way to make " more " money and the american internet less secure ...i hope that chameleon can blend</tokentext>
<sentencetext>with china being the biggest debt buyer, chances are pretty good thatmost of the money in this hedge fund belongs to china.so buying the "novell-cow" and chopping it up is probably a prettygood way to make "more" money and the american internet less secure ...i hope that chameleon can blend</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345908</id>
	<title>Re:$2 Billion?!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267633440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Where the hell did they get that kind of money? I guess that even during a recession people still need their hedges pruned and their bushes trimmed.</p><p>If they got their hedges pruned and bushes trimmed then they may end up like the couple in the other article who got sued for various yardwork.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Where the hell did they get that kind of money ?
I guess that even during a recession people still need their hedges pruned and their bushes trimmed.If they got their hedges pruned and bushes trimmed then they may end up like the couple in the other article who got sued for various yardwork .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Where the hell did they get that kind of money?
I guess that even during a recession people still need their hedges pruned and their bushes trimmed.If they got their hedges pruned and bushes trimmed then they may end up like the couple in the other article who got sued for various yardwork.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346198</id>
	<title>Re:It's been a while, but...</title>
	<author>castironpigeon</author>
	<datestamp>1267634760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm forced to use Novell enterprise software at work and while I'm not sure how it compares to other enterprise email/scheduling bundles I can tell you that it is far inferior to Google's offerings. The calendar is excessively clicky and unintuitive with an interface that looks like it hasn't been updated since the 80s. Contacts are equally strange. Email... I'm really not sure what a cabinet is supposed to be, why there is a separate folder for documents, and why sending emails into an archive throws them into a bottomless pit whence they rarely return. I'm reasonably sure that if companies weren't locked into Novell software and had more competent management so as not to get sucked into using Novell in the first place that Novell would be out of business.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm forced to use Novell enterprise software at work and while I 'm not sure how it compares to other enterprise email/scheduling bundles I can tell you that it is far inferior to Google 's offerings .
The calendar is excessively clicky and unintuitive with an interface that looks like it has n't been updated since the 80s .
Contacts are equally strange .
Email... I 'm really not sure what a cabinet is supposed to be , why there is a separate folder for documents , and why sending emails into an archive throws them into a bottomless pit whence they rarely return .
I 'm reasonably sure that if companies were n't locked into Novell software and had more competent management so as not to get sucked into using Novell in the first place that Novell would be out of business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm forced to use Novell enterprise software at work and while I'm not sure how it compares to other enterprise email/scheduling bundles I can tell you that it is far inferior to Google's offerings.
The calendar is excessively clicky and unintuitive with an interface that looks like it hasn't been updated since the 80s.
Contacts are equally strange.
Email... I'm really not sure what a cabinet is supposed to be, why there is a separate folder for documents, and why sending emails into an archive throws them into a bottomless pit whence they rarely return.
I'm reasonably sure that if companies weren't locked into Novell software and had more competent management so as not to get sucked into using Novell in the first place that Novell would be out of business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31348260</id>
	<title>I heard...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267643700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>J.K. Rowling is raking in the bucks, but this is ridiculous!</htmltext>
<tokenext>J.K. Rowling is raking in the bucks , but this is ridiculous !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>J.K. Rowling is raking in the bucks, but this is ridiculous!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345280</id>
	<title>Re:It's been a while, but...</title>
	<author>Pojut</author>
	<datestamp>1267630920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OMFG I'm stupid.  Got confused with Symantec<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OMFG I 'm stupid .
Got confused with Symantec : -/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OMFG I'm stupid.
Got confused with Symantec :-/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248</id>
	<title>It's been a while, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267630800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...are Novell products still well thought of in the enterprise sector?  I know Norton became a bloated piece of crapware a while ago (just like most of their products), but I haven't really paid attention to them in...shit, almost 5 years.</p><p>Are they still producing bloated piles of crap, or have the leaned their products down and made them worthwhile again?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...are Novell products still well thought of in the enterprise sector ?
I know Norton became a bloated piece of crapware a while ago ( just like most of their products ) , but I have n't really paid attention to them in...shit , almost 5 years.Are they still producing bloated piles of crap , or have the leaned their products down and made them worthwhile again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...are Novell products still well thought of in the enterprise sector?
I know Norton became a bloated piece of crapware a while ago (just like most of their products), but I haven't really paid attention to them in...shit, almost 5 years.Are they still producing bloated piles of crap, or have the leaned their products down and made them worthwhile again?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346736</id>
	<title>back to the future ..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267637040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"<i>I wonder why their acquisition of SuSE and the interoperability initiative with Microsoft didn't change their fortunes...</i>"<br> <br>

Because Microsoft stole Novells customer base from Windows95 onwards. Basically by duplicating Netware functionality and being <a href="http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/2000/PX02250.pdf" title="edge-op.org" rel="nofollow">less</a> [edge-op.org] <a href="http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/2000/PX02350.pdf" title="edge-op.org" rel="nofollow">than</a> [edge-op.org] <a href="http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/2000/PX02365.pdf" title="edge-op.org" rel="nofollow">co-operative</a> [edge-op.org] in <a href="http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/2000/PX02369.pdf" title="edge-op.org" rel="nofollow">giving</a> [edge-op.org] Novell access to <a href="http://edge-op.org/iowa/www.iowaconsumercase.org/011607/2000/PX02685.pdf" title="edge-op.org" rel="nofollow">technical</a> [edge-op.org] information. That they failed to suceed with SuSE owes a lot to bad management. The Microsoft deal being the end game as far as Novell ever becoming a serious player again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" I wonder why their acquisition of SuSE and the interoperability initiative with Microsoft did n't change their fortunes... " Because Microsoft stole Novells customer base from Windows95 onwards .
Basically by duplicating Netware functionality and being less [ edge-op.org ] than [ edge-op.org ] co-operative [ edge-op.org ] in giving [ edge-op.org ] Novell access to technical [ edge-op.org ] information .
That they failed to suceed with SuSE owes a lot to bad management .
The Microsoft deal being the end game as far as Novell ever becoming a serious player again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I wonder why their acquisition of SuSE and the interoperability initiative with Microsoft didn't change their fortunes..." 

Because Microsoft stole Novells customer base from Windows95 onwards.
Basically by duplicating Netware functionality and being less [edge-op.org] than [edge-op.org] co-operative [edge-op.org] in giving [edge-op.org] Novell access to technical [edge-op.org] information.
That they failed to suceed with SuSE owes a lot to bad management.
The Microsoft deal being the end game as far as Novell ever becoming a serious player again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346112</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345326</id>
	<title>Re:It's been a while, but...</title>
	<author>idontgno</author>
	<datestamp>1267631100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Novell is widely admired and lauded for having nothing whatsoever to do with products from Symantec. And also for being secretly run by Chuck Norris.</p><p>Oops, I guess it's not secret any more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Novell is widely admired and lauded for having nothing whatsoever to do with products from Symantec .
And also for being secretly run by Chuck Norris.Oops , I guess it 's not secret any more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Novell is widely admired and lauded for having nothing whatsoever to do with products from Symantec.
And also for being secretly run by Chuck Norris.Oops, I guess it's not secret any more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345974</id>
	<title>I hope nothing substantial changes</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1267633680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Novell has been taking good care of Suse Linux. Since Novell bought them, they continued working on what I think is the best Linux distro, without hindrance, boosted their marketshare and helped in giving Linux a corporate-friendly image. I hope the new owners of Novell (should such takeover really take place) will have a hands-off approach and let things chug along nicely, as they have been.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Novell has been taking good care of Suse Linux .
Since Novell bought them , they continued working on what I think is the best Linux distro , without hindrance , boosted their marketshare and helped in giving Linux a corporate-friendly image .
I hope the new owners of Novell ( should such takeover really take place ) will have a hands-off approach and let things chug along nicely , as they have been .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Novell has been taking good care of Suse Linux.
Since Novell bought them, they continued working on what I think is the best Linux distro, without hindrance, boosted their marketshare and helped in giving Linux a corporate-friendly image.
I hope the new owners of Novell (should such takeover really take place) will have a hands-off approach and let things chug along nicely, as they have been.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345914</id>
	<title>Re:$2 Billion?!</title>
	<author>larry bagina</author>
	<datestamp>1267633440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I, for one, welcome our trimmed bush ladies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I , for one , welcome our trimmed bush ladies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I, for one, welcome our trimmed bush ladies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345732</id>
	<title>Re:Sold!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267632660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sometimes after a bid, negotiations start and the bid is sweetened. Some in the market must have been hoping for that to happen in this case (still may)...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sometimes after a bid , negotiations start and the bid is sweetened .
Some in the market must have been hoping for that to happen in this case ( still may ) .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sometimes after a bid, negotiations start and the bid is sweetened.
Some in the market must have been hoping for that to happen in this case (still may)...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345442</id>
	<title>Re:Already Under Investigation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267631640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The share price jumped *because* of the takeover offer.  The market valued the company at less than the takeover offer until the offer came in.  There's nothing inherently wrong with a fund offering to buy out the minority shareholders if they think they can see a way to make the company worth more by owning it all themselves (perhaps they intend to break it up and sell the products off to people who would value them more highly in their enterprises, perhaps they just think management sucks and the best way to replace them is to take over the firm in its entirely, then flip it to a private equity firm or strategic buyer).</p><p>The point is the market was already saying the enterprise value of Novell was less than $1B.  Some guy who runs a fund thinks that's overly pessimistic and made an offer to buy out the firm.</p><p>The fact that the market price for the shares jumped higher than the offer price only means that the market, on average, thinks this is the first offer in a potential bidding war and the price is likely to go higher than that before a deal closes.  That is also very common in the case of an unsolicited offer when nobody was thinking "this company is for sale" prior to that offer coming in.</p><p>BTW, nobody in the finance industry really thinks the market always offers a fair estimate of a company's worth to all potential owners.  Even believers in the weak-form efficient market hypothesis wouldn't state that - they would acknowledge that the value to a private market buyer might be higher than the public market value, which more likely represents the market's estimate of future discounted cash flows to equity owners of the company.  Actually, to be more accurate, the public market value represents a consensus estimate of what people think *other* people would estimate the future discounted cash flows to equity owners of the company would be.</p><p>If you find that confusing, welcome to the science and art of valuation.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The share price jumped * because * of the takeover offer .
The market valued the company at less than the takeover offer until the offer came in .
There 's nothing inherently wrong with a fund offering to buy out the minority shareholders if they think they can see a way to make the company worth more by owning it all themselves ( perhaps they intend to break it up and sell the products off to people who would value them more highly in their enterprises , perhaps they just think management sucks and the best way to replace them is to take over the firm in its entirely , then flip it to a private equity firm or strategic buyer ) .The point is the market was already saying the enterprise value of Novell was less than $ 1B .
Some guy who runs a fund thinks that 's overly pessimistic and made an offer to buy out the firm.The fact that the market price for the shares jumped higher than the offer price only means that the market , on average , thinks this is the first offer in a potential bidding war and the price is likely to go higher than that before a deal closes .
That is also very common in the case of an unsolicited offer when nobody was thinking " this company is for sale " prior to that offer coming in.BTW , nobody in the finance industry really thinks the market always offers a fair estimate of a company 's worth to all potential owners .
Even believers in the weak-form efficient market hypothesis would n't state that - they would acknowledge that the value to a private market buyer might be higher than the public market value , which more likely represents the market 's estimate of future discounted cash flows to equity owners of the company .
Actually , to be more accurate , the public market value represents a consensus estimate of what people think * other * people would estimate the future discounted cash flows to equity owners of the company would be.If you find that confusing , welcome to the science and art of valuation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The share price jumped *because* of the takeover offer.
The market valued the company at less than the takeover offer until the offer came in.
There's nothing inherently wrong with a fund offering to buy out the minority shareholders if they think they can see a way to make the company worth more by owning it all themselves (perhaps they intend to break it up and sell the products off to people who would value them more highly in their enterprises, perhaps they just think management sucks and the best way to replace them is to take over the firm in its entirely, then flip it to a private equity firm or strategic buyer).The point is the market was already saying the enterprise value of Novell was less than $1B.
Some guy who runs a fund thinks that's overly pessimistic and made an offer to buy out the firm.The fact that the market price for the shares jumped higher than the offer price only means that the market, on average, thinks this is the first offer in a potential bidding war and the price is likely to go higher than that before a deal closes.
That is also very common in the case of an unsolicited offer when nobody was thinking "this company is for sale" prior to that offer coming in.BTW, nobody in the finance industry really thinks the market always offers a fair estimate of a company's worth to all potential owners.
Even believers in the weak-form efficient market hypothesis wouldn't state that - they would acknowledge that the value to a private market buyer might be higher than the public market value, which more likely represents the market's estimate of future discounted cash flows to equity owners of the company.
Actually, to be more accurate, the public market value represents a consensus estimate of what people think *other* people would estimate the future discounted cash flows to equity owners of the company would be.If you find that confusing, welcome to the science and art of valuation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31350590</id>
	<title>Re:Already Under Investigation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267611720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you find that confusing, welcome to the science and art of valuation.</p></div></blockquote><p>
More like magic and voodoo</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you find that confusing , welcome to the science and art of valuation .
More like magic and voodoo</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you find that confusing, welcome to the science and art of valuation.
More like magic and voodoo
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345442</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345940</id>
	<title>Re:Sold!</title>
	<author>supremebob</author>
	<datestamp>1267633560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're hoping for a bidding war with another software company to drive up the price of the shares further.</p><p>I'm curious who would want to buy them, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're hoping for a bidding war with another software company to drive up the price of the shares further.I 'm curious who would want to buy them , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're hoping for a bidding war with another software company to drive up the price of the shares further.I'm curious who would want to buy them, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31372182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31349120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31353344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346194
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345280
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31350590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345442
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345974
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31348178
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31353798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345908
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346066
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_03_138200_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31348746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345880
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31348260
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31348178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345552
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345974
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347556
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346194
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345590
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345442
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31350590
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31349120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31353344
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345548
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346574
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345908
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31348746
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345990
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345264
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31353798
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_03_138200.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345248
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346198
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31347456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31346066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345472
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31372182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345280
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_03_138200.31345326
</commentlist>
</conversation>
