Jim Cramer on Imus Speculates on XM's future [Archive]

docgoblin

07-14-2006, 07:28 PM

Jim Cramer was on Imus Friday morning, and he offered some interesting predictions on the future of Satellite radio. Listen to this, and give your opinion on his comments, including how it would affect AFRO. Click the link and select the Cramer interview at top. The Satellite comments are about 2/3 the way through. You have to have Real Player to hear it. <a target="_blank" href="http://wfan.com/imusinstantreplay/">http://wfan.com/imusinstantreplay/ </a>

This message was edited by docgoblin on 7-15-06 @ 12:33 AM

Snoogans

07-14-2006, 08:01 PM

doesnt work

kdubya

07-14-2006, 08:03 PM

Who is Jim Cramer

Tall_James

07-14-2006, 08:07 PM

kdubya wrote: Who is Jim Cramer He's a financial analyst with Bell's Palsy.<img height="150" src="http://www.dvorak.org/blog/images/mad/mad4.jpg" width="157" border="0" />

kdubya

07-14-2006, 08:11 PM

Tall_James wrote: kdubya wrote: Who is Jim Cramer He's a financial analyst with Bell's Palsy.<img height="150" src="http://www.dvorak.org/blog/images/mad/mad4.jpg" width="157" border="0" />Ohhhhhhh, the yelling guy

tele7

07-14-2006, 08:17 PM

kdubya wrote: Tall_James wrote: kdubya wrote: Who is Jim Cramer He's a financial analyst with Bell's Palsy.<img height="150" src="http://www.dvorak.org/blog/images/mad/mad4.jpg" width="157" border="0" />Ohhhhhhh, the yelling guyI bought a Mark Maguire rookie card from that guy.

docgoblin

07-14-2006, 08:27 PM

I'm really sorry I screwed up the audio link. It originates in Real Audio format. If You Click this link:<a href="http://wfan.com/imusinstantreplay/" target="_self">http://wfan.com/imusinstantreplay/</a>You'll see the interview at the top of the page. The Satellite comments are about 2/3 through the clip. I'd really like to hear everyones feedback!

PapaBear

07-14-2006, 08:37 PM

kdubya wrote: Who is Jim Cramer He's the co-host of the The Hideout along with El Jefe.

FezPaul

07-14-2006, 08:47 PM

Sirius will buy XM. Mel Carmazine (sp.?) is a genius.Cramer must be wrong because he was speaking into a telephone, not a microphone.

FezPaul

07-14-2006, 09:11 PM

telecaster7 wrote: kdubya wrote: Tall_James wrote: kdubya wrote: Who is Jim Cramer He's a financial analyst with Bell's Palsy.<img height="150" src="http://www.dvorak.org/blog/images/mad/mad4.jpg" width="157" border="0" />Ohhhhhhh, the yelling guyI bought a Mark Maguire rookie card from that guy.Be dialing people, be dialing!

docgoblin

07-15-2006, 11:30 AM

FezPaul wrote: Sirius will buy XM. Mel Carmazine (sp.?) is a genius.Cramer must be wrong because he was speaking into a telephone, not a microphone.  I think it's Karmazin. The one thing to take from this is that, while Cramer is a genius at marketing himself and his style of show, he has been wrong predicting many of these speculations. I've heard a few market analysts say that merging XM and Sirius at this point would be extremely difficult. The whole monopoly thing would not sit right with alot of people in the Fed. There is also a serious (no pun intended) issue with the auto makers now because many of them are begining to offer either an XM or Sirius unit in their vehicles. Since the technology is not compatible it would take years for them to get past the current commitments. Even though Cramer talks like it could happen tomorrow, I can't see it occurring until at least 2010 or so.But then again, I could be wrong!

JimBeam

07-15-2006, 11:39 AM

I heard this interview as well.What I didnt understand is why he was so adimant that Sirius would buy XM.Why wouldn't it be the reverse ?XM has been around longer so are we to belive that just because Sirius is now getting better at the game that they'll be the best in the end ?That'd be like saying that Pepsi could buy Coke because they have Gatorade which cant be beat by Coke.He did make a point that it might be better if they did combine because right now they are each spending all of their money on content and not imporving other things. If they didnt have t oworry about outdoing each other the money could be spent on making the product better.Would it really violate anti-trust rules if there was only 1 ?I dont think so because its not like the remaining company could charge $50 for a subscription because for one nobody would pay it and another they wouldnt need to do so.I dont know if it was caught on the audio you posted but he had a rant abour Abercrombie & Fitch that was pretty funny.

Sleeves

07-15-2006, 12:13 PM

That was really interesting. It's cool to hear what at least seems like an objective outsiders opinion on XM and Sirius.  As an XM'er and RF'er, I have my little ingrown allegiance to XM - think its better etc cause I'm paying for it and it has something (R&F) that I really like.  But I don't really know anything about Sirius, except that maybe their Tech is not as sweet as XM's.  I always thought that XM was doing well/better than Sirius - but I was getting my news from O&A.  Cramer says different.  In this instance, I'd believe Cramer.   If, as he says, there is room only for one Satellite Radio service, then his idea of the dynamic figure of Mel. K swooping in to buy XM, seems possible/likely.  I guess I came away thinking that XM might be the SatRadio equivalent of Beta.  Better product, but no Jack Welch/Mel K. leader who's ready to do what it takes to dominate.  Anyway - thanks for the link. <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smile.gif" border="0" />

docgoblin

07-15-2006, 04:02 PM

That's exactly the key to all of this. The reason Sirius could take over XM is that Mel Karmazin is in charge. Even thought XM has been around longer, has better equipment, has more subs, and has a better stock price (3X better), many people feel that Sirius has better management and will lead the merged company down the path to gold. The question is... How would this affect O & A and especially R & F? would there be room for them in a merged environment? How could O & A deal with working for the same company as Stern given the bad blood that has just gotten worse over the last two years? At this point I really think I might take a chance on Sirius stock at 4.50 a share (and it may go lower still) as opposed to XM's at 14.00 a share. Even though XM's has dropped over 10.00 dollars in the last 6 months and is due for a rise.

FreshJ

07-15-2006, 06:32 PM

I do not forsee a merger going on in this space anytime soon, if you did then you would either have to offer 300 channels or risk losing subs to an Ipod alternative.  I mean most of the people who subscribe to one or the other due so for a reason.  I have had a siruis subscription and moved to xm when I got a new car.  Sirius seems to do really well with talk radio, I mean other then High Voltage, Xm does not have a large amount of orginal talk programming, while Xm tends to do better with music programming, a lot of this happens to do with who is in charge.  I think with all the money that Sirius is losing on Hoo hoo's contract they are in no position to go out and buy a company.

docgoblin

07-15-2006, 06:39 PM

Another thing I just thought of. There are people who subscribe on a multi-year basis. Unless you can guarantee they will get all their same programming choices the company will be paying back a fortune in subcription payments. This would cause another major stock hit. I can't see it happening.

SatCam

07-15-2006, 06:58 PM

Would the FCC allow one satellite radio service to buy out another one, making only one service left? They already have a problem with corporations snatching up terrestrial stations. I don't think they'd like it.

Don Stugots

07-15-2006, 06:58 PM

SatCam wrote: Would the FCC allow one satellite radio service to buy out another one, making only one service left? They already have a problem with corporations snatching up terrestrial stations. I don't think they'd like it. fuck them and what they think.

docgoblin

07-16-2006, 05:33 AM

SatCam wrote: Would the FCC allow one satellite radio service to buy out another one, making only one service left? They already have a problem with corporations snatching up terrestrial stations. I don't think they'd like it.  I don't think it would be the FCC as much as the SEC

Sleeves

07-16-2006, 06:13 AM

docgoblin wrote:  SatCam wrote: Would the FCC allow one satellite radio service to buy out another one, making only one service left? They already have a problem with corporations snatching up terrestrial stations. I don't think they'd like it.   I don't think it would be the FCC as much as the SEC Cramer suggested that this was an industry that could only have one big provider.  I don't think he'd say that Sirius should or might buy XM knowing that the SEC would block it. Sirius buying XM would create a single power in the pay-for-radio market, but free terrrestrial radio would still exist.  So...I don't think it's a question of possible monopoly.

Tenbatsuzen

07-16-2006, 06:14 AM

No, the FCC does play a hand in this.  There are only two SDARS licenses out there right now.  XM has one, Sirius has the other.  The FCC will not allow one entity to hold both licenses, unless a license is picked up by another company, which means a company would have to drop all the money for their OWN satellite setup.  Plus, neither company has the financial support to buy the either out, unless one fails so massively, the other company can buy everything for pennies on the dollar.  An outside company will buy out sirius, or an outside company will buy out XM, but mark my words - Sirius nor XM will buy the other satellite company. In this case, Cramer doesn't know what he's talking about.

Tenbatsuzen

07-16-2006, 06:18 AM

Sleeves wrote: Sirius buying XM would create a single power in the pay-for-radio market, but free terrrestrial radio would still exist. So...I don't think it's a question of possible monopoly.    It is a monopoly, hence why there's two and only two SDARS licenses.  The FCC may grant a third in the future, but as it stands right now, there's just two to avoid the monopoly. Free radio and satellite radio are two totally different entities.

Johnny4

07-16-2006, 07:59 AM

I just want to correct some inaccuracies in this thread.1)Sirius
isn't losing money paying Stern. The break even was 1 million subs.
They would have been out of business if Stern went to XM. Case closed.2)A built in XM car unit can be changed to a Sirius  for
about $50. Sirius developed a product to to switch the brain of an XM
to a Sirius after recieving so many requests for the product since
Stern's hire. The product is available right now( But backordered). Not
in a few years.

Sleeves

07-16-2006, 08:32 AM

<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060627/media_nm/media_sirius_xm_dc">http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060627/media_nm/media_sirius_xm_dc</a>After peaking around the web regarding monopolies and a possible merger between the two, it doesn't seem far-fetched, impossible, or illegal. Maybe hard.  But...anyway...All I know is:  I like Ron and Fez.  <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/smile.gif" border="0" />Tenbatsuzen wrote:  Sleeves wrote: Sirius buying XM would create a single power in the pay-for-radio market, but free terrrestrial radio would still exist. So...I don't think it's a question of possible monopoly.    It is a monopoly, hence why there's two and only two SDARS licenses.  The FCC may grant a third in the future, but as it stands right now, there's just two to avoid the monopoly. Free radio and satellite radio are two totally different entities.

Tenbatsuzen

07-16-2006, 09:19 AM

Johnny4 wrote: 2)A built in XM car unit can be changed to a Sirius for
about $50. Sirius developed a product to to switch the brain of an XM
to a Sirius after recieving so many requests for the product since
Stern's hire. The product is available right now( But backordered). Not
in a few years. 
   Cite?

JimBeam

07-16-2006, 11:14 AM

Johnny4 : Imus had asked Krammer that question, if either one would be able to use the others equipment in cases of a merger, and Krammer said the 2 technologies were not compatible.If there's a product only a few months from the market that would do this why wouldnt he mention it ?You're forgetting that Sirius had paid 500MM for Stern but also another 500MM for MLB.Surely they did not make back the Stern advance by selling 1MM subscriptions unless nobody else at the entire company, including the customer service reps and all, is receiving a salary.

Recyclerz

07-16-2006, 08:47 PM

Cramer, while a really smart guy, comes at these questions with a trader's short-term view of things.  Karmazin is a cult figure to some on Wall St. because he knows how to "make his numbers" through business acumen and by managing expectations.  If he can increase Sirius' cash flow by finding some way to sell some sort of advertising on Sirius without people bailing on the service he will have polished up his "genius" trophy.I think Tenbatsuzen is right in that both companies will get swallowed by bigger media conglomerates eventually.

GlassJoe

07-16-2006, 09:27 PM

Tall_James wrote: kdubya wrote: Who is Jim Cramer He's a financial analyst with Bell's Palsy.<img width="157" height="150" border="0" src="http://www.dvorak.org/blog/images/mad/mad4.jpg" />He's a cowboy hat away from being the play-by-play man on Monday Night Raw.

Don Stugots

07-17-2006, 02:17 AM

Recyclerz wrote: Cramer, while a really smart guy, comes at these questions with a trader's short-term view of things.  Karmazin is a cult figure to some on Wall St. because he knows how to "make his numbers" through business acumen and by managing expectations.  If he can increase Sirius' cash flow by finding some way to sell some sort of advertising on Sirius without people bailing on the service he will have polished up his "genius" trophy.I think Tenbatsuzen is right in that both companies will get swallowed by bigger media conglomerates eventually.Yeah, Matty is going to look like a seer one day on this one.  I can see a company like Time Warner or Viacom taking over one of the companies.  Even Clear Channel.  I shutter to think of what would happen to content if that happened.

Johnny4

07-17-2006, 01:05 PM

Tenbatsuzen wrote: Johnny4 wrote: 2)A built in XM car unit can be changed to a Sirius for
about $50. Sirius developed a product to to switch the brain of an XM
to a Sirius after recieving so many requests for the product since
Stern's hire. The product is available right now( But backordered). Not
in a few years. 
 Cite?Logjam.com (stargate makes the product)

Johnny4

07-17-2006, 01:11 PM

docgoblin

07-17-2006, 04:44 PM

I don't really care whether they merge as long O&A and R&F have a home and my three units can be made compatible or at least replaced. It just doesn't seem like a possibility very soon. The red tape would have to be insane (there are many subs who have multi-year contracts that have to be honored).I still don't get the numbers. How does Sirius break even on Stern's deal with 1 Million subs when there is no way of knowing how long each sub is committed to. 1 million subs at a 1 year commitment is $156,000,000.00 with no discount for the yearly agreement. This would obviously knock off a good percentage of the deal. However, there's no way that every sub is a yearly, so I can't see these numbers working out. Plus they just grabbed the NASCAR account away from XM for next season which couldn't have been cheap. Like Johnny4 said, there are much smarter financial people than us working on this stuff, but it just seems unlikely that 1 Million subs can cover a 500 million dollar payout, plus whatever the NASCAR deal cost. 

This message was edited by docgoblin on 7-17-06 @ 9:07 PM

Tenbatsuzen

07-17-2006, 06:27 PM

Johnny4 wrote: Tenbatsuzen wrote: Johnny4 wrote: 2)A built in XM car unit can be changed to a Sirius for
about $50. Sirius developed a product to to switch the brain of an XM
to a Sirius after recieving so many requests for the product since
Stern's hire. The product is available right now( But backordered). Not
in a few years. 
 Cite? Logjam.com (stargate makes the product) 
    Logjam.com goes to a bad webdesign company in Portland.  Stargate is the name of a Sirius receiver.  A google search for Stargate XM and Sirius doesn't turn up much.Try again.

JimBeam

07-18-2006, 11:56 AM

I work in contractual funding and I know that a $500MM isn't earned back at 1MM @ $12.Even if you got 1MM subscribers to pay for a year it'd still only be $ 144MM and if Stern gets 100MM ( I think the 500MM was for 5 years ) you'd only have 44MM to pay for every other things that the company does including advertising, programming, etc ..Surely the NFL contract ( my bad I thought it was MLB ) is gotta be worth at least 200MM a year no ?

AKA

07-18-2006, 12:45 PM

1 - The "$100 million" is not for Stern - it's for 3 channels of Stern produced content, including Stern2 - Stern is not earning his money just on the subs - it's the advertising. He does 6-8 minutes an hour, for 6 hours, which (not counting the replays and Bubba) is bringing in about $300k per week. While that's a lot less than what he got for terestrial, it will all combined still translate to about $50 million a year. Add that to the subs that they can attribute to him, it is still a risky gamble, but was really their only choice - if Howard had gone to XM, Sirius would be dead and gone by now. 3 - Matty is only brilliant for parrotting back something I wrote late last year about another company eventually gobbling up the satrads - something I'm sure I puked up from someone else.

HBox

07-18-2006, 01:01 PM

1 - The "$100 million" is not for Stern - it's for 3 channels of Stern produced content, including SternOh, well that changes everything.Don't forget this either: The $250 million Stern received as a bonus in january was not included in his announced $500 million deal. So make that $750 million.Guys much smarter than you or I figured that at 1 million subs that Stern was a break even. This is why we have accountantsAre these the same guys who decided that they would count Sirius units sitting in unsold cars in parking lots as subscribers? And if so, how many of them do they need for Stern to break even?

Tenbatsuzen

07-18-2006, 01:20 PM

AKA wrote: 1 - The "$100 million" is not for Stern - it's for 3 channels of Stern produced content, including Stern2 - Stern is not earning his money just on the subs - it's the advertising. He does 6-8 minutes an hour, for 6 hours, which (not counting the replays and Bubba) is bringing in about $300k per week. While that's a lot less than what he got for terestrial, it will all combined still translate to about $50 million a year. Add that to the subs that they can attribute to him, it is still a risky gamble, but was really their only choice - if Howard had gone to XM, Sirius would be dead and gone by now. 3 - Matty is only brilliant for parrotting back something I wrote late last year about another company eventually gobbling up the satrads - something I'm sure I puked up from someone else.    Even the 100 million being for "everything stern" - His payroll to everyone employed by the station - including Howard 100 News, Robin, Gary, etc - can in no way shape or form equate any more than 5 to 10 million dollars a year.  I can see the full-time on-air talent - Robin and Artie - pulling in a few million, Gary makes a million - MAYBE - and then everyone down the poll makes mid-to-high five figures. That 300K a week number is about 1700 bucks a minute.  While that can MAYBE be believeable, Howard is NOT seeing all of that money.Third, I never said that another company WAS going to buy out XM or Sirius.  I said IF it would happen.

JimBeam

07-20-2006, 07:35 AM

My g/f and I had this discussion a while back.How much do you think Robin and Artie make a year ( just from the show and nor their other deals ) ?I say there's now way Robin is making 1MM and I'd doubt that Artie clears more than 200K.

HeyGuy

07-20-2006, 08:26 AM

JimBeam wrote: Johnny4 : Imus had asked Krammer that question, if either one would be able to use the others equipment in cases of a merger, and Krammer said the 2 technologies were not compatible.If there's a product only a few months from the market that would do this why wouldnt he mention it ?You're forgetting that Sirius had paid 500MM for Stern but also another 500MM for MLB.Surely they did not make back the Stern advance by selling 1MM subscriptions unless nobody else at the entire company, including the customer service reps and all, is receiving a salary.1 million subscritions brongs in $145 million a year. Stern makes $100 million a year thats $45 million left over for everything else your talking about so yes I do think that is correct. Plus I beleive sirius has over 2+ million subscritions already. It maybe even as high as 5 million right now. (anyone know for sure or were to find out) I had sirius for a year and a half. I sold my car with the unit in it. I recently bought xm but only kept it for a month and then cancelled it. I like sirius myself. But it all depends on  what you like better.I have discussed this for awhile with my cousin and I have been telling him that sirius will buy xm purely based on that fact sirius has more money backing the company. So I would'nt  mind seeing this happen.I just dont see why anyone would pay for XM if your only paying for O&A? With them going to 92.3 in NY they are free for 3 hours a day and then you get 2 more hours on the satelite. I would be pissed if I paid for something and 60% of the time its free. But now if you buy XM because of R&F then I would understand.

This message was edited by CampoNJ on 7-20-06 @ 12:33 PM

JimBeam

07-20-2006, 08:35 AM

To be honest I dont think satelite radio is gonna be as big as people think.I mean with other options for music by genre, the MuchMusic channels on cable and internet radio, you really only need it for talk shows.I currently have Sirius but I'd only get XM for R&F which is why I havent " wasted " the money.In all honesty I have 20 presets for Sirius and don;t ever go outside of those.I have 10 music ones ( Current country, 90's country, 80's music, 90's music, Jimmy Buffet channel, Old School Rap, etc .. ) and 10 talk show ( a few sports ones including both ESPN channels, Sirius Right, 2 Stern channels, etc .. ).That means there's 100+ channels I never even go near.

JustJon

07-20-2006, 09:24 AM

JimBeam wrote: I mean with other options for music by genre, the MuchMusic channels on cable and internet radio, you really only need it for talk shows.   I know what you mean.  I ran a tv cable to my car so I can take my MuchMusic channels with me.

Johnny4

07-20-2006, 03:53 PM

JimBeam wrote: My g/f and I had this discussion a while back.How much do you think Robin and Artie make a year ( just from the show and nor their other deals ) ?I say there's now way Robin is making 1MM and I'd doubt that Artie clears more than 200K.  Artie's
KRock salary was $450K. He stated he makes much more now so he won't go
on the road as much. Robin makesw well over 1Mill. Howard has stated
that the show wouldn't work without her. She owns over  7 mill. in
real estate.

FreshJ

07-20-2006, 04:49 PM

JustJon wrote: JimBeam wrote: I mean with other options for music by genre, the MuchMusic channels on cable and internet radio, you really only need it for talk shows. I know what you mean. I ran a tv cable to my car so I can take my MuchMusic channels with me.   What is your cars range then, and what happens when you go outside the area, or does it just pull the house along?

Johnny4

07-21-2006, 08:29 AM

Tenbatsuzen wrote: Johnny4 wrote: Tenbatsuzen wrote: Johnny4 wrote: 2)A built in XM car unit can be changed to a Sirius for
about $50. Sirius developed a product to to switch the brain of an XM
to a Sirius after recieving so many requests for the product since
Stern's hire. The product is available right now( But backordered). Not
in a few years. 
 Cite?     Logjam.com (stargate makes the product) 
 Logjam.com
goes to a bad webdesign company in Portland. Stargate is the name of a
Sirius receiver. A google search for Stargate XM and Sirius doesn't
turn up much.Try again. Sorry. I rushed through it. Try this. Soundgate.com

libbyzibby

07-21-2006, 10:34 PM

docgoblin wrote: That's exactly the key to all of this. The reason Sirius could take over XM is that Mel Karmazin is in charge. Even thought XM has been around longer, has better equipment, has more subs, and has a better stock price (3X better), many people feel that Sirius has better management and will lead the merged company down the path to gold. The question is... How would this affect O & A and especially R & F? would there be room for them in a merged environment? How could O & A deal with working for the same company as Stern given the bad blood that has just gotten worse over the last two years? At this point I really think I might take a chance on Sirius stock at 4.50 a share (and it may go lower still) as opposed to XM's at 14.00 a share. Even though XM's has dropped over 10.00 dollars in the last 6 months and is due for a rise. x/m right now can only dream of 14 a share..and its been about 3 months.it is at 11 something right now, if it was at 14 on 7-14 when u wrote that...yikes Sirius....fter months of increses has now also hit a snag and is dropping too....who will recover first?

Bulldogcakes

07-27-2006, 03:22 PM

<a title="XM Radio Widens Loss; Losing Subscribers" target="_self" href="http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/27/D8J4BG600.html">XM Radio Widens Loss; Losing Subscribers</a>  

 XM Satellite Radio Holdings
Inc. reported a wider loss for its second quarter Thursday as it
absorbed charges for restructuring its debt. The company again lowered
its estimates for full-year subscriber counts. 
XM, which is based in Washington, D.C., lost $231.7 million or 87 cents
per share in the three months ending June 30, versus a loss of $148.8
million or 70 cents per share in the comparable period a year ago. Revenue nearly doubled to $227.9 million from $125.4 million a year ago. 
The company said it now expects to end the year with a customer base
between 7.7 million and 8.2 million, and that it would refine that
range at the end of the third quarter. The company cited "current
marketplace dynamics" and regulatory uncertainty regarding certain of
its radio models for the change. 
The news is sure to disappoint investors, who punished XM's stock in
May when it lowered its previous forecast for year-end subscribers to
8.5 million from 9 million, blaming problems with product availability
and soft retail sales.    I haven't seen a company this healthy since somebody thought it was a good idea to sell dog food on the internet. When you double your revenues and double your losses, your business model sucks. And you need a new one, and fast. They're restructuring debt, which means they cant pay their bills. They're also LOSING MORE MONEY THAN THEYRE TAKING IN, which is almost impossible if you have a clue about how to run a business. When the banks stop giving them money, they're finished. Expect Sirius to buy them in bankruptcy court for pennies on the dollar.     

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-27-06 @ 7:23 PM

narc

07-27-2006, 03:35 PM

<hr color="cococo" align="left">JimBeam wrote: To be honest I dont think satelite radio is gonna be as big as people think.I mean with other options for music by genre, the MuchMusic channels on cable and internet radio, you really only need it for talk shows.I currently have Sirius but I'd only get XM for R&F which is why I havent " wasted " the money.In all honesty I have 20 presets for Sirius and don;t ever go outside of those.I have 10 music ones ( Current country, 90's country, 80's music, 90's music, Jimmy Buffet channel, Old School Rap, etc .. ) and 10 talk show ( a few sports ones including both ESPN channels, Sirius Right, 2 Stern channels, etc .. ).That means there's 100+ channels I never even go near.<hr color="cococo" align="left">
I kind of agree. I think people have oversold how big it is, and how many people are actually willing to pay for satellite. I still don't understand why Ron and Fez went to satellite. I can understand why O&A did.

HBox

07-27-2006, 03:41 PM

Bulldogcakes wrote: <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/07/27/D8J4BG600.html" target="_self" title="XM Radio Widens Loss; Losing Subscribers">XM Radio Widens Loss; Losing Subscribers</a> 

 XM Satellite Radio Holdings
Inc. reported a wider loss for its second quarter Thursday as it
absorbed charges for restructuring its debt. The company again lowered
its estimates for full-year subscriber counts. 
XM, which is based in Washington, D.C., lost $231.7 million or 87 cents
per share in the three months ending June 30, versus a loss of $148.8
million or 70 cents per share in the comparable period a year ago. Revenue nearly doubled to $227.9 million from $125.4 million a year ago. 
The company said it now expects to end the year with a customer base
between 7.7 million and 8.2 million, and that it would refine that
range at the end of the third quarter. The company cited "current
marketplace dynamics" and regulatory uncertainty regarding certain of
its radio models for the change. 
The news is sure to disappoint investors, who punished XM's stock in
May when it lowered its previous forecast for year-end subscribers to
8.5 million from 9 million, blaming problems with product availability
and soft retail sales. I haven't seen a company this healthy since somebody thought it was a good idea to sell dog food on the internet. When you double your revenues and double your losses, your business model sucks. And you need a new one, and fast. They're restructuring debt, which means they cant pay their bills. They're also LOSING MORE MONEY THAN THEYRE TAKING IN, which is almost impossible if you have a clue about how to run a business. When the banks stop giving them money, they're finished. Expect Sirius to buy them in bankruptcy court for pennies on the dollar. 

This message was edited by Bulldogcakes on 7-27-06 @ 7:23 PM  XM's stock was up 53 cents for the day. I guess people actually though it was going to be worse.

Tenbatsuzen

07-27-2006, 04:09 PM

Bulldogcakes wrote: I haven't seen a company this healthy since somebody thought it was a good idea to sell dog food on the internet. When you double your revenues and double your losses, your business model sucks. And you need a new one, and fast. They're restructuring debt, which means they cant pay their bills. They're also LOSING MORE MONEY THAN THEYRE TAKING IN, which is almost impossible if you have a clue about how to run a business. When the banks stop giving them money, they're finished.  Expect Sirius to buy them in bankruptcy court for pennies on the dollar. 

    Everything in your post made great sense until that last statement.  The SEC and the FCC will not allow a Sirius Merger. Clear Channel will buy XM before Sirius will.

Don Stugots

07-27-2006, 04:15 PM

Tenbatsuzen wrote:  Bulldogcakes wrote:   I haven't seen a company this healthy since somebody thought it was a good idea to sell dog food on the internet. When you double your revenues and double your losses, your business model sucks. And you need a new one, and fast. They're restructuring debt, which means they cant pay their bills. They're also LOSING MORE MONEY THAN THEYRE TAKING IN, which is almost impossible if you have a clue about how to run a business. When the banks stop giving them money, they're finished.  Expect Sirius to buy them in bankruptcy court for pennies on the dollar.         Everything in your post made great sense until that last statement.  The SEC and the FCC will not allow a Sirius Merger. Clear Channel will buy XM before Sirius will. now matty's is making a great point.  i can see CC or CBS buying one of the companies.  that makes much more sense than one sat. company buying the other.

FezPaul

07-27-2006, 04:22 PM

narc wrote: JimBeam wrote: To be honest I dont think satelite radio is gonna be as big as people think.  I still don't understand why Ron and Fez went to satellite. So us hillbillies in the boonies could hear them.  <img src="http://www.ronfez.net/messageboard/tiny_mce/plugins/emotions/images/bye.gif" border="0" />

Reephdweller

07-27-2006, 06:26 PM

A lot of analysts dismissed Pierce Roberts concerns about XM's financial future back in Feburary, though it seems that he was well founded in his feelings about things to come for XM. So far it seems that he is right on.The Washington, D.C.-based company also disclosed in a regulatory filing that <a href="javascript:siteSearch('Pierce%20Roberts%20Jr.');">Pierce Roberts Jr.</a> has stepped down as a director, citing strategic differences with other board members over the company's direction.Roberts, a former chief telecom investment banker with Bear Stearns, had served as a director for five years and sat on all of the board's major committees.In a letter to board chairman Gary Parsons, Roberts said he was "troubled" by the company's current path. "Given current course and speed there is, in my view, a significant chance of a crisis on the horizon," Roberts wrote. "Even absent a crisis, I believe that XM will inevitably serve its shareholders poorly without major changes now."The company said in a statement accompanying the letter that its management and other directors disagreed with Roberts over how to balance growth versus cash flow, believing that it was important for the long term to keep up its rapid growth rate.<a href="http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185093,00.html">http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,185093,00.html</a>

HBox

08-01-2006, 03:30 PM

Sirius released their quarterly report today. SIRIUS Satellite Radio announced that its 2Q06 revenue has increased to
$150.1 million (beating analsyst expections of $147 million). SIRIUS
also increased their guidance for total year-end revenue to $615
million and subscriber count to 6.3 million (from 6.2 million). 
During the second quarter SIRIUS added 600,460 net subscribers,
bringing their total to 4,678,207 subscribers (that's a 158% YoY
increase from 2005). Of those subscribers, 276,294 net subscribers came
from retail (13% YoY improvement), and 324,574 net subscriber additions
came from the OEM channel (16% YoY improvement). SIRIUS'
monthly ARPU was $11.16 in 2Q06, up from $10.50 from the same period in
2005. Part of cause for the increase is from net advertising revenue,
which was $0.62 contribution - as compared to the $0.22 advertising
contribution a year ago. Average monthly subscriber churn was at 1.8%,
and SAC per gross subscriber was $131 (down from a $160 SAC a year ago). 
SIRIUS posted a wider net loss of $237.8 million, or $0.17 per share
for 2Q06, a wider loss than $0.13 per share for the same period last
year. That's a wider loss than analysts expected who estimated a $0.15
loss per share. The adjusted net loss per share (excluding the
impairment loss and equity charges) was $0.11 for the 2Q06 compared
with an adjusted net loss per share of $0.10 for 2Q05. XM total revenues: $227 million. XM loss: $231.7 million. Sirius total revenues: $150.1 million. Sirius loss: $237.8 million.Keep this in mind before saying either of these guys are going to be buying anything in the future.XM should be more worried about number like this right now:  SIRIUS Gross Subscribers: 830,571 XM Gross Subscribers: 926,281 SIRIUS Net Subscribers: 600,460 XM Net Subscribers: 398,012 So even though XM added more subscriptions in the second quarter, they lost so many subscribers that Sirius increased their total subscriber number more in the quarter. XM attributed it to their price increase last year, where they allowed people to buy a year subscription at the old price, and then when that subscription ended they decided not to renew at the new, higher rate. That seems like a weak excuse.

This message was edited by HBox on 8-1-06 @ 7:49 PM

Johnny4

08-02-2006, 06:28 PM

HBox wrote: Sirius released their quarterly report today. SIRIUS Satellite Radio announced that its 2Q06 revenue has increased to
$150.1 million (beating analsyst expections of $147 million). SIRIUS
also increased their guidance for total year-end revenue to $615
million and subscriber count to 6.3 million (from 6.2 million). 
During the second quarter SIRIUS added 600,460 net subscribers,
bringing their total to 4,678,207 subscribers (that's a 158% YoY
increase from 2005). Of those subscribers, 276,294 net subscribers came
from retail (13% YoY improvement), and 324,574 net subscriber additions
came from the OEM channel (16% YoY improvement). SIRIUS'
monthly ARPU was $11.16 in 2Q06, up from $10.50 from the same period in
2005. Part of cause for the increase is from net advertising revenue,
which was $0.62 contribution - as compared to the $0.22 advertising
contribution a year ago. Average monthly subscriber churn was at 1.8%,
and SAC per gross subscriber was $131 (down from a $160 SAC a year ago). 
SIRIUS posted a wider net loss of $237.8 million, or $0.17 per share
for 2Q06, a wider loss than $0.13 per share for the same period last
year. That's a wider loss than analysts expected who estimated a $0.15
loss per share. The adjusted net loss per share (excluding the
impairment loss and equity charges) was $0.11 for the 2Q06 compared
with an adjusted net loss per share of $0.10 for 2Q05. XM total revenues: $227 million. XM loss: $231.7 million. Sirius total revenues: $150.1 million. Sirius loss: $237.8 million.Keep this in mind before saying either of these guys are going to be buying anything in the future.XM should be more worried about number like this right now:  SIRIUS Gross Subscribers: 830,571 XM Gross Subscribers: 926,281 SIRIUS Net Subscribers: 600,460 XM Net Subscribers: 398,012 So
even though XM added more subscriptions in the second quarter, they
lost so many subscribers that Sirius increased their total subscriber
number more in the quarter. XM attributed it to their price increase
last year, where they allowed people to buy a year subscription at the
old price, and then when that subscription ended they decided not to
renew at the new, higher rate. That seems like a weak excuse.

This message was edited by HBox on 8-1-06 @ 7:49 PM   Well, they can't say "Its because Stern went to Sirius so as a counter-measure we decided to put O and A on free radio." They would just sound stupid, even though that's what happened.

HBox

08-02-2006, 06:30 PM

Well, they can't say "Its because
Stern went to Sirius so as a counter-measure we decided to put O and A
on free radio." They would just sound stupid, even though that's what
happened.No, that would sound stupid, because is it stupid.

Johnny4

08-03-2006, 12:50 PM

I agree. It is stupid and exactly what happened.

Tenbatsuzen

08-03-2006, 12:56 PM

Johnny4 wrote: I agree. It is stupid and exactly what happened. 
   You are really one of the wackiest board characters ever.  Very subversive.

HBox

08-03-2006, 01:12 PM

Johnny4 wrote: I agree. It is stupid and exactly what happened. 
  Yeah, because when I'm gettin 5 hours of a great uncensored radio show, the only thing I can think of better than that is 3 hours of a censored radio show. I'd kill my parents for that opportunity.BTW, I guess you are now admitting that O&A are a huge draw. When O&A were on premium they were a failure, when they were taken off they were a failure, when they were put on CBA they were a failure, and now that XM has a rough quarter it's because it's because they are so fucking huge that they were put on free radio and in two mere months a fraction of their audience bailed on XM and that equals 600,000 dropped subscribers? HOLY SHIT! Their audience must be fucking HUGE! That has to be at least comparable to Howard. Hell, I'd bet their audience is even bigger!But I know you won't think that, because your line of thinking begins and ends at "If it makes O&A look bad, it must be true."

SinA

08-03-2006, 01:19 PM

What if XM sold subscriptions in packages or tiers, like cable?  Even better (and same for cable tv) would be true "a la carte" channel selection, where we would only pay for the channels we wanted.

Johnny4

08-04-2006, 04:16 PM

HBox wrote: Johnny4 wrote: I agree. It is stupid and exactly what happened. 
 Yeah,
because when I'm gettin 5 hours of a great uncensored radio show, the
only thing I can think of better than that is 3 hours of a censored
radio show. I'd kill my parents for that opportunity.BTW,
I guess you are now admitting that O&A are a huge draw. When
O&A were on premium they were a failure, when they were taken off
they were a failure, when they were put on CBA they were a failure, and
now that XM has a rough quarter it's because it's because they are so
fucking huge that they were put on free radio and in two mere months a
fraction of their audience bailed on XM and that equals 600,000 dropped
subscribers? HOLY SHIT! Their audience must be fucking HUGE! That has
to be at least comparable to Howard. Hell, I'd bet their audience is
even bigger!But
I know you won't think that, because your line of thinking begins and
ends at "If it makes O&A look bad, it must be true." XM didn't have a rough quarter, they
have had 3 in a row. Not a coincidence. Their roughest quarter yet came
in the Q that they went to FREE FM. Not a coincidence either. O and A
were an XM draw. Just not near the level of the guy they bash. I bet
they had a good  million listeners on XM. But if they were the
sole reason you have XM, your an idiot if you pay for it. If anything
good happens on the XM only show, you know they will repeat it for the
FREE show. Just like I'm sure they did with the Whoopie thing. For the
record I don't hate O and A. I just like to unspin their bs.

scottinnj

08-17-2006, 04:37 PM

It would never happen.  The FTC wouldn't allow such a blatant monopoly occur out of the buyout, for XM and Sirius are the ONLY two companies offering satellite radio.  The FTC got away with the cellphone "mergers" because when the dust settled, we consumers still have choices left in our cellphone service provider.  Same thing with Big Oil, we still have a "choice" of companies we can choose from to get assraped by.  This?  If the FTC allowed it, there would be so many lawsuits from stockholders and consumer protection advocacy groups, the buyout would be delayed for years and cost Sirius more money then what XM is worth paying for.

scottinnj

08-17-2006, 04:52 PM

Johnny4 wrote: I just want to correct some inaccuracies in this thread.1)Sirius isn't losing money paying Stern. The break even was 1 million subs. They would have been out of business if Stern went to XM. Case closed.Hate to clue you in on something, but the cost per subscription Sirius is reporting is over 300 dollars a unit.  That means they are hemmoraging cash.2)A built in XM car unit can be changed to a Sirius  for about $50. Sirius developed a product to to switch the brain of an XM to a Sirius after recieving so many requests for the product since Stern's hire. The product is available right now( But backordered). Not in a few years. Where did you get this information?  It is impossible. The XM units built into GM cars and trucks are built by Delphi, and the only satellite service provider Delphi manufactures for is XM.  It is impossible to "switch the brain" of a DELPHI radio to recieve the Sirius frequency.  It would be cheaper for GM to install head units from Chryslers then open up the DELPHI radio and "switch the brain"The only explanation to be fair to you is that this massive request for Sirius by GM car owners is only resulting in XM subs being turned off in the car and having a Sirius Toaster Oven glued to the dash and a FM Modulator installed under the seat.But even then I feel like calling Bravo Sierra on your post because even Hoo Hoo is complaining that not enough of his fans are subscribing to Sirius.

scottinnj

08-17-2006, 05:07 PM

Tenbatsuzen wrote:  Johnny4 wrote: Tenbatsuzen wrote:      Logjam.com (stargate makes the product) I don't know who is quoting who or who is citing Logjam.com, but I just went to the site.  Where is this Magical Machine of Sirius Listening Ectasy?  Logjam.com goes to a bad webdesign company in Portland.  Stargate is the name of a Sirius receiver.  A google search for Stargate XM and Sirius doesn't turn up much.Try again.

FezPaul

08-17-2006, 05:12 PM

scottinnj wrote: I don't know who's quoting whom. Tenbatsuzen wrote: Who said that?Johnny4 wrote: This is confusing. Tenbatsuzen wrote: I didn't say that!WTF?Who?   Logjam.com (stargate makes the product) I don't know who is quoting who or who is citing Logjam.com, but I just went to the site.  Where is this Magical Machine of Sirius Listening Ectasy?It wasn't me. Logjam.com goes to a bad webdesign company in Portland.  Stargate is the name of a Sirius receiver.  A google search for Stargate XM and Sirius doesn't turn up much.Try again. Where will it end? Say what?Where will it end?

scottinnj

08-17-2006, 05:17 PM

I know I fucked it up, but I really tried.  REALLY I TRIED!!!

UnknownPD

08-17-2006, 05:41 PM

The FTC wouldn't allow such a blatant monopoly occur out of the buyoutThis is an FCC issue not an FTC one. The merger approval would need the FCC, SEC and a pass by the justice department. As I've said in earlier threads I don;t think the government would be above apporving the merger if it thought both companies were going belly up.

scottinnj

08-17-2006, 05:51 PM

I can see where the FCC would get involved, being it is the only government bureaucracy that governs radio waves, whether it is from space or here on earth.  But that is all it does, and the FTC and SEC are the bureaucracies that take care of the business aspects of all that makes money in this country, so that is where you and I disagree.  Aren't we silly gooses for that?  After all, we all agree that Sirius stinks and XM rules, right?              .................right?                                       .................................................. ................................right?(help me out here E-Lo)

Bulldogcakes

11-30-2006, 05:43 PM

<a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/business/story/475867p-400162c.html" title="Radio exec gets Sirius">Radio exec gets Sirius again about XM merger</a> XM spokesman Chance Patterson said, "We do not comment on rumors and speculation, and this is clearly just that." Karmazin has talked about a possible merger before, noting it could eliminate a lot of duplicate operating costs - not to mention, skeptics say, a lot of programming choice. Specifically, Karmazin told Smart Money magazine that "mergers often lead to creating shareholder value" and he has "always been open to that." He also said he would be less concerned now about regulatory approval for a merger, which has been cited as a major hurdle in the past. He didn't specify what might be different now.