"Nothing to see here. Just move along."
"No, we can't explain it, and even if we could, you just couldn't possibly understand."
"Any more questions? What was that? Oh, THAT. ... No comment!"
I hope someone from the DOJ is investigating this as it might relate to the settlement with Microsoft.
"We believe the e-mail was simply a misunderstanding of the facts by an outside consultant who was working on a specific unrelated project to the BayStar transaction, and he was told at the time of his misunderstanding," Stowell said, reading from a statement.with:
Chris:
I know you were going totalk to Bob later Friday, but I figured I would outline the issues.
1) Baystar is easy as they were just a Microsoft referral and would be 2%
2) Any licensing deal would be at 5%
3) Much of the other work would go from 2% to 3% as I have engaged in direct, but this would require according to Bob either Darl or you signing off on the fact that this ane was not a referral.
The statements are inconsistent. It appears that Anderer knows all about BayStar and is discussing the fees, which just happen to match up perfectly with the compensation schedule in the Independent Contractor Agreement between SCO and Anderer's consulting firm. Anderer certainly seems to be on-board with what's going on, but is just missing some of the details.
So perhaps the "misunderstanding" is simply... we do NOT mention Microsoft and BayStar in the same sentence!
Or maybe just another SCO deflection.