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: pcstel who wrote (6081)	1/26/2007 12:48:57 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 8420

My Opinions keept coming true.. While you Opinions presented as FACTS keep resulting in totally "blown calls" I'll be the first to admit that XM and SIRI are dealing with a difficult challenge with churn, and this is something you predicted long ago. So, you got that right, and for that you receive some credit. Nevermind that your rationale supporting your "prediction" was all wrong. My view, and it is my opinion, that you essentially stumbled into the right answer on churn. It is also my view that the "right answer" may only be right temporarily. Yet, even in your so called "comfortable fields.. You have constantly demonstrated that your Opinions on even these subjects have turned out to be "dead Wrong" I don't think so. I believe that you are talking about a "spectrum analyzer". While I haven't looked at either of these systems, I doubt very highly that you could see the effects of HM in a commercially available spectrum analyzer. Or a commerically available "Modultion Analyzer". Say what you want. The guy I talked to is an expert (not a self-designated expert) in satellite communications. He told me that was the device he used and I wouldn't know one if it bit me on the ass. I'll take his word for it. But were to think about it for a moment, you would realize intuitively that Sirius is not running HM yet. Their receivers can't decode it. What would be the point? So while you claim that your data is a FACT. It is indeed just the opinion of both you, which you have claimed this technology is admittedly well beyond you expertise, and your "in your opinion, competent individual" with a "modulation analyzer". It is a fact. And you have not presented a DAMNED THING to make your case. As usual. You make remarks about "statistical multiplexing" and PAC which clearly reflect your lack of knowledge of these subject areas and indicate a propensity for you to speak about about subjects you aren't familiar with. While I've been wrong about a few things (churn being higher than expected, for example) I'm glad to admit it and move forward. When you are wrong, you simply run away from the question and hide out like a wimp. I claim no special expertise in the areas, merely that I have talked to people that do have. You shout loudly. But your message is weak like a little puppy.