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 : Sirius Satellite Radio (SIRI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (5393)	10/22/2006 9:19:44 PM
From: Sirius_Rich	Respond to of 8420

>>>I'm tired of arguing this with you. You are so obviously wrong about practically everything in your post that it is just disingenous and baiting. If you come up with a substantive argument for a position, fine. There is no reason for me to argue with someone who, once proven wrong, won't simply say, "Uh, yes, you got me on that one." It is never ending. LOL.....We all know what this means...another feeble attempt to bash Sirius that failed while being proven wrong. But you are entertaining (when I am bored watching baseball).

To: i-node who wrote (5393)	10/23/2006 12:24:54 AM
From: pcstel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 8420

I don't need a history of the HEO satellites. That is your opinion!! I believe that you are very highly uneducated on the orbital mechanics of the HEO design. What I've said, and I'm absolutely correct in saying, is that the satellite infrastructure for Sirius is not doing as good a job as XM's. Again, only your OPINON. Given you propensity to on only believe anti-SIRIUS antidotial data. I suspect your bias on user reports is tainted. Like I have said.. If their user experience was so poor.. I would expect to see higher CHURN figures. As it stands.. XM is the one that presents much higher CHURN metrics. You can BS about it all day long, but it is a known fact. Known by whom??? YOU?? Can you provide us any detail on any study which discredits the advantages of the HSO orbit scheme over GSO using unshared spectrum in the S Band??? Obviously Space Systems Loral nor the Federal Communications Commission have heard of it?? Blame the orbits. Blame the satellites. No need to blame the orbits.. The advantages of the HSO orbit scheme has been verified for decades, and the satellites are Loral birds.. Not those crappy Hughes 702 cans that XM Shareholders are having to pay to re-lauch.. Even XM figured out their errors and have ordered subsequent satellites from Loral. hey should have gone with GEO in the first place and they wouldn't have the problem. LOL!! What problem?? The only company I have seen replacing satellites because of power degregation is XM. The repeater network was designed as an adjunct to the satellites. Both companies claim the repeater network is there to "fill in" weak signal areas. Not to provide coverage for wide areas where there is no service due to insufficient satellite infrastructure. Exactly my point.. and by the shear number of XM repeaters.. It appears that XM has a lot more "fill in" weak signal areas, than SIRI does. Hence, the space segment is actually providing better coverage than that of the GSO based XM system. Let me break this down for you.. More repeaters, more areas need fill in Less repeaters, less areas need fill in. I mean if you opinion was correct.. We would expect SIRI to have MORE REPEATERS than XM has.. But, just the opposite is true. You see, this is exactly what the FCC talked about... XM's GSO based system requires MORE REPEATERS at HIGHER POWER LEVELS to provide fill in coverage. While SIRI's HSO system requires FEWER repeaters. This is exactly what the FCC talked about when granting SIRI's modification to their space segment. Not to provide coverage for wide areas where there is no service due to insufficient satellite infrastructure. You mean like you would have to use many, many more repeaters to provide coverage for these wide areas where there is no service due to insufficient satellite infrastructure. And Sirius has spent 73 Million and will increase it to well beyond $100M before finished Well, now, you see... Just like the FCC said... The HSO system would provide a superiour SDARS system requireing fewer repeaters. And you said that this was WRONG.. But, you have just provided the data to prove just the opposite... You see.. The FCC was RIGHT... And you were WRONG. I can't beleive we had to go through all of that denial on your part.. Only for you to actually provide the data in the end that shows you were WRONG. And so it goes, PCSTEL