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: rrufff who wrote (2778)	8/20/2006 5:29:33 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3386

Your argument comes down to this - If it's on XM, it's good content that will lead to success down the road. If it's on SIRI, it's not good content or it's too costly to allow for success. I have stated innumerable times that Stern is great content -- at 1/4 the price, maybe. But there is little doubt Sirius has dramtically overpaid for its content; as a result, they will be years digging out. There is a reason that as of the end of this year, Sirius will have a retained earnings deficit of 1.5 Billion MORE than XM's (it is worse than that, if you take into account 1/4 billion gain they had on their refinancing). XM has overpaid for some, too -- but not like Sirius. Most see how bogus the argument is. Further, SIRI performance in overtaking XMSR in subs (will XMSR cut projection again) speaks for itself. When you say "most", who are you referring to? Let's keep in mind that there are 900,000 Sirius shareholders, and only a few thousand XM shareholders. You talk about the cost of Stern. Yet, he met every projection and then some. The deal has already paid for itself. Thanks, you made my argument for me. If Stern brought all these subscribers, then the NFL was a waste. As was Martha, and as is NASCAR. It is all Stern. As for Oprah, the amount paid for essentially a 1/2 hour show is just absurd. XM didn't buy Oprah's appearances. XM bought her name and the appearances of those people her audience adores. And they paid well below 10% of what Sirius paid for Stern. It will likely turn out to be a damned good deal for XM; but we'll have to see. I'm much more comfortable with 18M/year for access to Oprah's viewership than I am with $120M/year plus for Stern. Yes, Strn brought in a million listeners off the top, and Oprah surely won't -- but for the money, Oprah looks like a better deal to me. All these little sidelight channels are good for particular fans but none have the Stern effect. SIRI has rolling stones. It had Bruce. Yes, XM has Nash. This will continue by both bringing in a few fans here and there. But, you've been wrong, dead wrong, on the Stern effect, from the day he announced. Dead wrong, as dead as the share price of XMSR. No. Sirius has channels that play Elvis, the Stones, Buffett, and Springsteen -- basically, allocating a huge amount of its bandwidth to playing a fairly limited supply of music. It is insane. Nobody wants to listen to the Stones, Bruce, Buffett or Elvis 24/7. Then you have a Stern channel, then another Stern channel that is just a narrative RECAP of the Stern show. Where is the diversity in SIRI's content? And now they're planning on consuming even more of the bandwidth with a couple of channels of realtime CARTOONS? It is freaking stupid. Stern brought Sirius a great deal of publicity and a temporary spike. But you just can't fool people on a consistent basis. The Stern Effect has died down hugely, and will continue to do so, just as predicted. But, you've been wrong, dead wrong, on the Stern effect, from the day he announced. I don't think so. There was a huge spike in Sirius subscriber adds in Q4/1, the Q2 numbers were not great by any means, and Q3 is apt to be worse yet. The ONLY thing that may make Sirius' subscriber numbers look good in Q4 is if they are able to get a large number of OEM-equipped SIRI vehicles on dealer lots -- since Sirius counts them at the time of manufacture (to bolster their numbers) instead of the time they actually become a subscriber. A good indicator of what to expect for Q3 may be SIRI's announcement of 5M subscribers. They needed 321K to get there, the quarter is approaching 60% over, suggesting they may not exceed 535K for the quarter. XM is not without its problems, but there are some pretty clear signs they are taking action to solve them. Xm's problems are not systemic; I believe SIRI's are. *Look at the bottom line. XMSR is suffering.* You're kidding, right? Sirius will lose between 1.2 and 1.3 billion this year -- twice or more what XM is apt to lose. If you want to talk about the "bottom line", it is insane to talk about "XM" suffering without mentioning that Sirius is suffering at least twice as badly.