Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. (XMSR) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (2716)	7/25/2006 9:40:51 AM
From: HEXonX	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 3386

FrontMed Time for XM to tank below 11? Soon the single digits? I can't predict that far but if August has it's usual moments, you never know. :-)

To: i-node who wrote (2716)	7/25/2006 11:40:08 AM
From: pcstel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3386

Talk about drinking the Koolaid! To mention XM and SIRI in the same breath as Iridium reeks of nonsense. Actually, Iridium's business plan was much more solid than that of the SDAR companies. At least Iridiums ARPU and CPGA expenses were in line. Don't forget! Iridium didn't die. Only the shareholders got wiped out. Iridium's business plan failure is the same failure that hit's many satellite based service providers. These business require large amounts of up front capital to build space based infrastructure that takes YEARS to plan, construct, and launch. As an investor in these companies. You have to believe that technology and competition will be "stone walled" until you can get your business plan out of the "development stage". In Iridium's case. Almost 10 years passed from concept to deployment. In 1989. The Cellular world was Analog Based, with expensive equipment, and small coverage areas. Even with the advent of Digital Based systems such as GSM. The ability to Roam to a foreign country was either not possible, or very expensive. Then in the mid 1990's. The explosion in the build out of terrestrial wireless networks around the world was nothing short of amazing. Even then, the ability to roam from country to country was a very expensive proposition. Roaming charges were measured in multiple dollars per minute. The future of GMPCS based systems looked secure. Then just weeks, "and I do mean weeks" before the commercial launch of Iridium. The GSM Association which represented GSM operators from around the world announced sweeping roaming agreements between operators. Suddenly that cost of international roaming plummeted. The business executive could carry his small GSM user terminal from country to country and pay roaming costs that were a fraction of an Iridium based call. Iridium's business plan was dead. Killed by the "time to market" of deploying a "space based" solution. The competition had used the 10 years "time to market" disadvantage for Iridium to "kill their business plan". So Iridium's business plan actually made financial sense. As the projected ARPU and CPGA expenses were in line. Something that the SDAR business models have never achieved. When either files for reorganization then you can proclaim yourself to have been "right". Until then, you've been wrong about more than you've been right about. LOL!! OK! If it makes you feel better, Then I am WRONG! However, I'm not the one who has made statements like... The churn is just fine -- about where it was to begin with -- 1.3-1.5%. As I told you back then, you don't comprehend the power of the business model. You can always find naysayers -- but the fact remains that XM's annual losses have peaked and for '05 the loss will be greatly reduced over '04 (by at least $150 M) and for '06 it is likely to be reduced by more than that. At the time, you were sure SACs and churn would destroy XM; yet, SACs have been well-controlled as has churn. I'm not sure why this is so difficult for some people. Message 22079641 Hmmm.. Lets read that again You can always find naysayers -- but the fact remains that XM's annual losses have peaked and for '05 the loss will be greatly reduced over '04 (by at least $150 M) And when the company reported... YOU WERE WAY, WAY, WAY off. XM's net loss for the fourth quarter of 2005 was ($268.3) million as compared to a net loss of ($188.2) million in the fourth quarter of 2004. For the full year 2005, XM's net loss was ($666.7) million, compared to a net loss of ($642.4) million in 2004. xmradio.com ROTFLMAO!! Close Mr. Ray.. Very Close.. Let's see. XM's full year net loss was HIGHER than in 2004. Not LOWER as you claimed it would be. And you were only off by about.... 175 MILLION DOLLARS!! But like you kept telling us.. As I told you back then, you don't comprehend the power of the business model...... I'm not sure why this is so difficult for some people. And so it goes, PCSTEL