SI
SI
discoversearch

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 (2957)10/17/2006 8:03:01 PM
From: i-node  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 3386
 
>>> 1) Stern numbers were almost 2x as high NY and Boston during his final year.

That's true. And he had been on 20 years, while O&A have been on 6 months or less.

>>> 2) You left out this part - XMSR may totally lose any value of O&A, as little as that might be for subscription growth, it continues the pattern of "non-exclusive" content and more commercials on music stations.

This is just part of the Howard Stern == Sirius mentality -- this notion that these shows have to be exclusive is absurd. While exclusivity may have its benefits, it also has some pretty big negatives (as MelK has figured out) -- notably, that selling the talent to terrestrial radio may be an excellent way of making money. Karmazin would LOVE to have Stern back on terrestrial right now, but Howard's big mouth has boxed him into Sirius with now way out.

XM should be turning a healthy profit on O&A (even if they didn't bring a single subscriber to XM), and the higher those ratings go, the higher that profit goes and the more demand there is for O&A on terrestrial. O&A have 4 years left on their contract, just like Stern.

XM badly mishandled O&A last year, but they have recovered nicely from that error since Stern walked away from a huge audience and left it for them to take. Which is precisely what they've done. Today, O&A's total audience is several times the size of Stern's.