Sirius radio

[Buddha_Master]

Here's why sirius sucks: Even if rock and rio was being broadcast on Sirius there would be no way to record it because there recording unit holds about 40 minutes. My XM Myfi holds five hours! I will be recording. Sweet.

Um, you can just line-out from the headphone jack to your computer.

You succumed to a marketing gimmick - congratulations.

what marketing gimmick?? five hours of music withthe my fi is like having an ipod...

and the new XM units with Mp3/downloading capabilits....crazy...

XM is like? CD's while Sirius is like 8-track..

Sirius S50 holds 50 hours.

"And the Dee Dee Dee Award goes to BostonRose."

I will correct you again. XM is like CD's while Sirius is like MP3's. Howard and Sirius FTW

[jimb0]

Once again XM Sucks, yeah.

[Bostonrose]

I really don't care, I have both anyway..but I will be enjoying Guns N' Roses on XM Radio on Saturday, while you listen to Bubba the love sponge

[pilferk]

Yeah, Sirius is losing the NFL, and they best place to hear new music is XM

Stern's show is horrible.....

Besides Siruis is going out of buz,? ?check there stock down to 4 dollars?? HAHAHAHAHAHA

They are losing large amounts of cash, like 500 mill to Stern and the quality of radio's is just horrible..


I only have Sirius for the NBA, but perfer XM

1) Sirius is not losing the NFL.? That's an XM fanboi rumor.?They have an exclusivity deal through 2011, at least. What's NOT a rumor is that XM lost Nascar to Sirius.  AND that the NHL is going XM exclusive as of the '07 season.  Of course, the truth behind that move is that Sirius declined the NHL's offer  (100 mill/10 years of exclusivity) based on the response they'd had to carrying NHL games since '03.  After losing Nascar to Sirius, XM snapped up the offer from the NHL.

2) I prefer (and seemingly many agree) the depth of Rock music, at least, on Sirius. When rated by independant consumer publications, the 2 services get pretty equal marks on the music front

3) Stern's show is more entertaining than it has been in YEARS.? Again, that the show is "horrible" seems to mostly be the opinion of those with XM, or the O&A army.? It's not some people's cup of tea, and that's fine.? But to argue it's "horrible" is a tough case to make.

4) Sirius is not going out of business. In fact, quite the opposite.? It's revenue and profit/loss advisory was just adjusted to be ABOVE analyst expectations.? Their stock price has taken a hit lately, to be sure, but mostly over worries of pending litigation, ability to expand their production to meet new subscriber demand, and costs of content.? They're fiscally solvant, though, and their major investors have shown, on more than one occasion, that they are firmly in support of the company.? ? However, XM is facing more obstacles.? Their "cost per subscriber" is through the roof, subscribers have been abandoning the service in record numbers in q1 '06, they haven't seen the expansion of content (with the exception of Oprah) they had expected, they have some pending litigation that's MUCH more concerning than anything Sirius is facing, and their new subscriber numbers are less than their internal projections.? You really shouldn't comment on things you don't understand.....

5) Stern has paid for his deal 2x over just in new subscriptions alone since he announced his deal.? He needed to pull in about 1 million subs to pay for his 100 mill a year deal.? Even by conservative estimates he's pulled in twice that.? O&A, when they were "premium content" on XM, pulled in under 100,000, just for comparison's sake.? And when they went "standard", subscriptions did not jump above projections, either.? Hell, XM thought they were so valuable they let their "exclusive" content go broadcast on FM radio in desperate hopes people would remember who they are and might sign up to hear the last 2 hours of their show.? Because just having them be "exclusive" wasn't selling radios.

6) Yes, XM has better hardware.? They always have.? That's their big selling point.? Sirius has been playing catch up since day one in that department.? That being said...their radios aren't "horrible" either.? The two replay units are quite good, as is the S50.? XM's "live" portable is going to sell some units, but Sirius expects to have a similar unit out by the end of q3....giving XM only about a 6 month lead time...when traditionally they've had about a year on new hardware.? The gap is obviously shrinking.

On the original topic....we did discuss this in the original thread that disappeared.? Network Live, who owns the broadcast rights to RIR, is a partnership between AOL, XM, DirectTV, and AEG.? The fact it's going to be on XM, live, was sort of a no brainer.? It will also be broadcast, audio AND video, free on AOLmusic.? I'd expect to see some sort of PPV "chop up" on DirectTV over the next month or so, too.

[sjgotnitro]

Sirius will have a truly protable unit very soon.

Also Howard will be streaming within the next couple of months.

And When Nascar comes over at the end of the year that is going to bring a chunk of people also..

Join The Revolution!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Hey Now

[jimb0]

I really don't care, I have both anyway..but I will be enjoying Guns N' Roses on XM Radio on Saturday, while you listen to Bubba the love sponge

Fucking bubba rules.  And Ned's songs rule ass.  Bubba had a big brown finger motherfucker!

[Danny]

There are about a billion ways to record Sirius, XM, or any radio for that matter.

Eddie Trunks is going to start doing a show on Sirius (with Jim Bruer). Since him and Axl are seemingly becoming pretty good buddies, I'd say there's a good chance we'll hear Axl on Sirus soon enough.

[darknemus]

This is why I pay for both services.  That way, I miss nothing.  Same reason I just buy all the game consoles each generation.  I despise being told 'you can't do this because you don't have this'.  Oh well - I spend my money on stupid stuff.. que sera sera.

Instead of making it XM vs. Sirius - I like the concept of Satellite vs. Terrestrial - because Terrestrial truly does.. suck.

-darknemus

[pilferk]

This is why I pay for both services.? That way, I miss nothing.? Same reason I just buy all the game consoles each generation.? I despise being told 'you can't do this because you don't have this'.? Oh well - I spend my money on stupid stuff.. que sera sera.

Instead of making it XM vs. Sirius - I like the concept of Satellite vs. Terrestrial - because Terrestrial truly does.. suck.

-darknemus

Agreed on all fronts.

Though I think I'm going to hold off on the PS3 for a bit.  Even I can't see paying that much for a console....

And testical radio (well, with the possible exception of the Trunk show) does suck...

[jarmo]

Thanks for the radio info, but I think this has gone way off topic by now.....


/jarmo

[pilferk]

Thanks for the radio info, but I think this has gone way off topic by now.....


/jarmo

Heh heh...

Was it ever really ON topic?  I mean, even the OP was just a gloat that XM is better than Sirius.



Maybe move the whole thing to the Jungle...

[Buddha_Master]

I really don't care, I have both anyway..but I will be enjoying Guns N' Roses on XM Radio on Saturday, while you listen to Bubba the love sponge

Ok you go listen to it...while I watch it on AOL.

And yea ...Shocking the puss FTW!

[Bostonrose]

1) Sirius is not losing the NFL.? That's an XM fanboi rumor.?They have an exclusivity deal through 2011, at least. What's NOT a rumor is that XM lost Nascar to Sirius.? AND that the NHL is going XM exclusive as of the '07 season.? Of course, the truth behind that move is that Sirius declined the NHL's offer? (100 mill/10 years of exclusivity) based on the response they'd had to carrying NHL games since '03.? After losing Nascar to Sirius, XM snapped up the offer from the NHL.

2) I prefer (and seemingly many agree) the depth of Rock music, at least, on Sirius. When rated by independant consumer publications, the 2 services get pretty equal marks on the music front

3) Stern's show is more entertaining than it has been in YEARS.? Again, that the show is "horrible" seems to mostly be the opinion of those with XM, or the O&A army.? It's not some people's cup of tea, and that's fine.? But to argue it's "horrible" is a tough case to make.

4) Sirius is not going out of business. In fact, quite the opposite.? It's revenue and profit/loss advisory was just adjusted to be ABOVE analyst expectations.? Their stock price has taken a hit lately, to be sure, but mostly over worries of pending litigation, ability to expand their production to meet new subscriber demand, and costs of content.? They're fiscally solvant, though, and their major investors have shown, on more than one occasion, that they are firmly in support of the company.? ? However, XM is facing more obstacles.? Their "cost per subscriber" is through the roof, subscribers have been abandoning the service in record numbers in q1 '06, they haven't seen the expansion of content (with the exception of Oprah) they had expected, they have some pending litigation that's MUCH more concerning than anything Sirius is facing, and their new subscriber numbers are less than their internal projections.? You really shouldn't comment on things you don't understand.....

5) Stern has paid for his deal 2x over just in new subscriptions alone since he announced his deal.? He needed to pull in about 1 million subs to pay for his 100 mill a year deal.? Even by conservative estimates he's pulled in twice that.? O&A, when they were "premium content" on XM, pulled in under 100,000, just for comparison's sake.? And when they went "standard", subscriptions did not jump above projections, either.? Hell, XM thought they were so valuable they let their "exclusive" content go broadcast on FM radio in desperate hopes people would remember who they are and might sign up to hear the last 2 hours of their show.? Because just having them be "exclusive" wasn't selling radios.

6) Yes, XM has better hardware.? They always have.? That's their big selling point.? Sirius has been playing catch up since day one in that department.? That being said...their radios aren't "horrible" either.? The two replay units are quite good, as is the S50.? XM's "live" portable is going to sell some units, but Sirius expects to have a similar unit out by the end of q3....giving XM only about a 6 month lead time...when traditionally they've had about a year on new hardware.? The gap is obviously shrinking.

On the original topic....we did discuss this in the original thread that disappeared.? Network Live, who owns the broadcast rights to RIR, is a partnership between AOL, XM, DirectTV, and AEG.? The fact it's going to be on XM, live, was sort of a no brainer.? It will also be broadcast, audio AND video, free on AOLmusic.? I'd expect to see some sort of PPV "chop up" on DirectTV over the next month or so, too.

1. The NFL has an out clause in that deal
2. They both play the same music, but Sirius is where you hear older stuff, ?XM has a better blend of new music
3. Stern's show, by not just my review but, Rolling Stone, Entertainment Weekly, Radio Inc., NY Post etc... has said that the Stern show is fading and fading very fast. ?The show doesn't have the same power it once had that is of course if you like listening to Stern cry about CBS, Les Moonvaes, O and A, the lawsuit, ?or perhaps you really find LISTENING to naked women entertaining....WOW that chick is naked and masterbating!! ?WOW, I must be 12...
4. Agree to disagree, but when you sign the most popular radio host EVER and your stock drops 2-3 points, ?that to me says investors aren't to secure about what's going on
5. O and A, unlike Stern, don;t have to pull in large amounts of subscriptions to pay for themselves, they are part of the service offered, where as Stern is the whole thing, if he fails ?Siruis fails... ? look at the sub numbers 9 mil to 3mil ?
XM, by every major marketing magazine including Radio Management and Marketing, are calling the FM/XM move the deal of the century (radio wise) ? Not only does XM get a 3 hour infomercial in the most important day part, FM gets a rating and revenue increase...... ?IT was such a good deal that 3 days after it was done, Stern had to say "Oh I got an offer too..." to which the stock plummeted even more....where is that deal Howard? ?There isn't one ?HOO HOO is there?
6. Xm has better units and always will because they have money going into research and development, not 500 million going into ?HOO HOO and his bullshit..

Again I have both and it is fun to argue about which is better, ? they are really both the same....

[sjgotnitro]

Man you really need to do better research.

Does Howard anger you that much.

The facts are the facts. Howard has already paid for his own salary from subscribers alone. million and growing.
Sirius new subscribers has out perfromed Xm new subscriber count with signs of xm slowing majorly from previous quarters.

Sirius will have 6mill plus subs till years end. I'm willing to bet on it.

In about 18 months when sirius as a whole is more stable there stocks will improve. Just wait and see.

Xm is on the decline. Yea they are the big dog in town now. But in 2 years they will be 2nd.

Howard / Bubba / NFL / NASCAR will make sirius #1.

[pilferk]

1. The NFL has an out clause in that deal
2. They both play the same music, but Sirius is where you hear older stuff, ?XM has a better blend of new music
3. Stern's show, by not just my review but, Rolling Stone, Entertainment Weekly, Radio Inc., NY Post etc... has said that the Stern show is fading and fading very fast. ?The show doesn't have the same power it once had that is of course if you like listening to Stern cry about CBS, Les Moonvaes, O and A, the lawsuit, ?or perhaps you really find LISTENING to naked women entertaining....WOW that chick is naked and masterbating!! ?WOW, I must be 12...
4. Agree to disagree, but when you sign the most popular radio host EVER and your stock drops 2-3 points, ?that to me says investors aren't to secure about what's going on
5. O and A, unlike Stern, don;t have to pull in large amounts of subscriptions to pay for themselves, they are part of the service offered, where as Stern is the whole thing, if he fails ?Siruis fails... ? look at the sub numbers 9 mil to 3mil ?
XM, by every major marketing magazine including Radio Management and Marketing, are calling the FM/XM move the deal of the century (radio wise) ? Not only does XM get a 3 hour infomercial in the most important day part, FM gets a rating and revenue increase...... ?IT was such a good deal that 3 days after it was done, Stern had to say "Oh I got an offer too..." to which the stock plummeted even more....where is that deal Howard? ?There isn't one ?HOO HOO is there?
6. Xm has better units and always will because they have money going into research and development, not 500 million going into ?HOO HOO and his bullshit..

Again I have both and it is fun to argue about which is better, ? they are really both the same....

1) Source? ?If they do, they haven't indicated they're going to use it...but the "out clause" has been an XM fanboi rumor for awhile. ?The NFL is staying put, at least through 2011.

2) I see "new music" plastered across my scroll constantly. ?So, unless you have statistics to back up your claim.....I'll stand by my claim they play similar playlists, with Sirius's Rock play list being a bit deeper (which is what I primarily listen to).

3) Strangely, I've read enormously positive reviews from many sources. ?It's interesting that you "interpret" the reviews the way you do.... ?As for stern "whining" about anything...well, you've described about 5 hours of the last 100..maybe. ?As for the naked women...again, maybe 8 hours of the last 100. ?But it's a pretty predictable XM/O&A fanboi reaction from people who don't listen to the show but take it's "content" 2nd hand.

4) ?Again, you can disagree. ?But the reputable stock analysts say otherwise. ?Sirius has cash in the bank, their sub rate is growing faster than XM's, and their cost per subscriber is significantly less. Stock price is a reflection of LOTS of things, and business stability isn't the only one. ?From a pure business perspective, they are quite strong. ?Those SAME analysts, when XM released their financials a month or so ago, were not so happy. ?Both firms are facing similar hurdles when it comes to being profitable, but current analysts estimates are that Sirius is going to beat XM to that mark by a good bit. ? ?You shouldn't talk about things you don't really understand. ?Seriously.

5) O and A were billed as "premium" content, to increase revenue, when they debuted. ?It bombed so completely, XM quickly switched them over to standard content. ?Again, they failed to drive subscription rates ?as XM hoped. ?So they whored them out to FM to GET that informercial. ?See, XM needs it...Sirius, as yet, doesn't. ?Their sub rates continue to grow at a rate faster than XM's. ?Oh, and your sub rates are overinflated on the XM side (their last number was 6.5 million as of April 14th) and understated on the Sirrius side (4.5 million as of their last announcement). ?Keep in mind, as of Dec 31, 2004, XM started with a 2.8 million subscriber "lead" on Sirius. ?That's shrunk by almost 33%. ?

As for "only having Howard"..well, that's a load of bullocks, and you know it. ?Everyone pretty much agrees that Sirius has the better non-music content. ?More news, more talk, more comedy, more sports, etc, etc, etc, etc. ?The fact that Howard managed to pay for his deal 2x over, as quickly as he did, was a shock to pretty much everybody. ?XM and Sirius brass included. ?What's even more amusing, though, is how quickly the XM fanboi opinion of Howard changed....from mid '04 when it looked like XM had him locked up, and the XM boards were filled with subs singing his praises, to late '04 when Sirius sealed his deal and they started heralding O&A as the second coming. ?It was hilarious.

As for Howard's "deal"...well, the offer(s) were confirmed by multiple news agencies, so you know they existed. ?And Howard, himself, was pretty vocal on the subject: He doesn't WANT to go back to FM radio. ?Why would he? ?He's happy without the constraints of the FCC (and so are his listeners). ?In addition, Sirius has a goldmine on their hands...why would they want him to go broadcast somewhere else, for free? ?Why would you give up exclusive content, for free? ? And in a very limited (if enormously populace) number of markets? ?Unless you realized their value to the company was such that they were more valuable shilling (and possibly reminding people they exist) than they were at actually drawing. ? Howards still a big enough draw it would be assinine to let him go to FM radio, even if he wanted to. ?Just look at Sirius's narrowing of the gap...

And of COURSE the stock plummeted.? That's one of the reasons Howard put the kabosh on the "rumor".? Rumors of giving away exclusive content that's driving your subs is going to do that....

6) ?The FACT is, XM had a 1 year "lead" in the hardware department/R&D going into mid '05. ?Now the lead has shrunk to about 6 months (meaning Sirius is seeing comparable hardware 6 months after XM). ?Sirius has, over the past year, sunk tons of money into R&D, and their units are becoming more and more competitive. ?And THAT should make XM nervous....because it's really the ONLY advantage they have on Sirius as of now

[Booker Floyd]

5) O and A were billed as "premium" content, to increase revenue, when they debuted.  It bombed so completely, XM quickly switched them over to standard content.  Again, they failed to drive subscription rates  as XM hoped.  So they whored them out to FM to GET that informercial.

This is now a Jungle discussion, but I think I should respond:

Wheres your source on the reason they were on the premium channel?

The real reason they were put on the premium is because XM was nervous about them on the general platform.  It was something O&A themselves fought against from the beginning.  Now even assuming the premium subscriptions were "low" (hard to gauge what constitutes low) and you think that reasoning is O&A spin (unlike the Stern spin youre buying), look at it logically: Even if its 100,000 people paying $2 a month, isnt that more revenue than none?  If XM only did it to increase revenue, why would they choose no revenue.  It just doesnt make sense.  When they debuted on the premium channel, they were failures.  They were added to the general platform and were failures.  Now theyre speaking to more listeners than ever and theyre failures.  Thats spin my friend.

Also, O&As contracts are annual, meaning they signed between August and October 2004.  If they were such utter failures, why would XM renew them in 2005 (before the CBS deal, mind you).

And youre again assuming it was XM that pushed for the CBS deal - wrong.  It was O&A themselves that sought the deal.  In fact, they included such an option in their contract upon signing with XM.  They pursued it, not XM.  XM allowed it for the stated reasons. 

Now O&A are on the verge of expanding through CBS and syndicating through Citadel as well.  Im sure youll somehow spin that as indicative of their failure. 

As for Howard's "deal"...well, the offer(s) were confirmed by multiple news agencies, so you know they existed.

 

No, Howards claim was confirmed.  Every report Ive seen has covered what Howard said.  I still havent heard what company made these offers.

And Howard, himself, was pretty vocal on the subject: He doesn't WANT to go back to FM radio.  Why would he?

Do you think Sirius would even allow him to go back if he wanted to?  For $500 million, you dont think Sirius is keeping him exclusive whether he wants to go back or not?

Code:

And of COURSE the stock plummeted.  That's one of the reasons Howard put the kabosh on the "rumor".  Giving away exclusive content that's driving your subs is going to do that....

The rumor didnt start, and the stocks didnt fall, until after Howard announced the offers on-air.  He had to "put the kabosh" on it the following day.

And THAT should make XM nervous....because it's really the ONLY advantage they have on Sirius as of now

In your opinion.  Id certainly consider MLB a pretty big advantage. 

[pilferk]

This is now a Jungle discussion, but I think I should respond:

Wheres your source on the reason they were on the premium channel?

Why else charge more?? You COULD restrict the channel, as part of the standard line up, and only "activate it" for subs that ask for it to be activated (witness The Playboy Channel on Sirius).? There has to be a REASON to charge more money for content...and the only business reason to charge a fee is to increase your revenue.

The real reason they were put on the premium is because XM was nervous about them on the general platform.? It was something O&A themselves fought against from the beginning.? Now even assuming the premium subscriptions were "low" (hard to gauge what constitutes low) and you think that reasoning is O&A spin (unlike the Stern spin youre buying), look at it logically: Even if its 100,000 people paying $2 a month, isnt that more revenue than none?? If XM only did it to increase revenue, why would they choose no revenue.? It just doesnt make sense.? When they debuted on the premium channel, they were failures.? They were added to the general platform, they were failures.? Now theyre speaking to more listeners than ever and theyre failures.? Thats spin my friend.

Where'd you hear that reasoning for making them premium?? Because every single explanation I've heard for making them "premium" content was about revenue first and "being uncomfortable" a distant second. It sounds like YOU'RE the one buying into spin.

As for your calculation, you're ignoring the obvious reasoning.? If they could only bring in 200k/month as premium content, if you could pull in about 15000 new subs if they were standard content, you'd offset the lost 200k/month and start adding even more revenue.

100,000 * (2 * 12) = 2.4 million
15000*(12.99 *12) =? 2.35 million

It's an economy of scale, and a rather obvious one.

But it didn't work as well as they had hoped.? They expected an increase over their internal projections when O&A went standard (check their stock filings for their projections, and then check their actual numbers to see the fact that they hit their initial projections, but didn't surpass them by much).? That didn't happen.? I'm sure it happened "enough" (with enough being pretty small) to offset the lost premium revenue, but not enough to really make as big of a difference as they would have liked.

So, XM has once again found a way to "use them" effectively.? O&A were approached by CBS, that's true.? And I'm not commenting on that aspect.? I'm saying that by agreeing to let your exclusive content broadcast elsewhere, and give that content away for free, you're whoring them out.? Whether by O&A's choice or not, it's still whoring them out.? And the only reason possibly for XM to do that is in hopes it will increase sub rates...because O&A's exclusivity, alone, hasn't done it, in and of itself.? Witness the reason Sirius has said it has no interest, at this time, for a similar deal for Howard's content.

And I've not called O&A failures.? At all.? I've said they've not done for XM what XM hoped they'd do.? That's entirely different.? And obviously true.? This deal may, or may not, change that.? We'll have to see.? It could have the exact opposite effect XM hopes...subs in the markets that O&A are broadcasting to via CBS may just leave.

Also, O&As contracts are annual, meaning they signed between August and October 2004.? If they were such utter failures, why would XM renew then in 2005 (before the CBS deal, mind you).

Just becuase they didn't meet XM's expectations doesn't mean they didn't see SOME value in having them as exclusive content.

And youre again assuming it was XM that pushed for the CBS deal - wrong.? Again, it was O&A themselves that sought the deal.? In fact, they included such an option in their contract upon signing with XM.? They pursued it, not XM.? XM allowed it for the stated reasons.?

I assumed no such thing.? I simply stated that for XM to approve such a deal is whoring out O&A.? They're the pimps.? All business has to go through them.? O&A could seek out any deal they want..but without XM approval, it doesn't happen.

Now O&A are on the verge of expanding through CBS and syndicating through Citadel as well.? Im sure youll somehow spin that as indicative of their failure.?

On the contrary.? I wish them well.? I don't find them all that funny, but I don't have any problem with them being on Terrestrial radio, or XM for that matter.? I don't listen to Terrestrial radio.? And I doubt I'll ever go back.? Howard in the AM, with 1 tenth of the commercials and NO commercial music on my way home makes Satellite a great deal for me (I have an hour and 15 min commute, one way, to work), and FM radio completely obsolete.? I don't need weather or traffic...so...? So for me, their personal succes doesn't realy matter.? And really, neither does their success at XM, other than being and interesting point of discussion.

I think, for them, it's a great deal.? They expand their audience which, it seems, is really important to them.? They make more money, which is always nice.? And they get to "inherit" Howard's old stomping grounds which, for them and their listeners, seems to matter.? Good for them.

But the fact remains, their performance at XM, from a purely business perspective, has been lackluster.

No, Howards claim was confirmed.? Every report Ive seen has covered what Howard said.? I still havent heard what company made these offers.

The New York post confirmed that one of the offers came from Citadel (other publications confirmed this as well).? In addition, there has been rumblings that Clear Channel was one of the other offers, but I've not seen that confirmed in print.

Do you think Sirius would even allow him to go back if he wanted to?? For $500 million, you dont think Sirius is keeping him exclusive whether he wants to go back or not?

I said exactly that just 2 sentences past your extracted quote.? But, first and foremost, Howard has said that even if Sirius approached him with the idea, he wouldn't want to do it unless he absolutely had no choice.? And he'd NEVER listen to the FM broadcast because the edits would disgust him.

The rumor didnt start, and the stocks didnt fall, until after Howard announced the offers on-air.? He had to "put the kabosh" on it the following day.

That was my point.? He brought it up sort of casually during the show...it was a throw away 2 sentence discussion.? And all hell broke loose.? So he had to put the kabosh on it..not the following day, but 2 days after he said it the first time.

In your opinion.? Id certainly consider MLB a pretty big advantage.?

Again, point for point, Sirius has a counter to MLB: the NFL.

And NASCAR.? And the NBA.

Their (edit: meaning XM's) biggest advantage is, by far at this point, their hardware.? ?And that advantage, like their sub lead, is shrinking rapidly.

edit: Actually, they do have one other advantage...or at least potentially: Oprah.  And that advantage can't be understated, to be sure.  It's just a matter of whether it will play out to be as big an advantage as it has the potential to be.

[Buddha_Master]

I just want to add that as a long time fan of Howards Show (I am talking almost 15 years now), the show has never ever been funnier and cooler then it is right now on Sirius. I feel sorry for those who don't get it.

And Meatballs with Big Pussy for that matter.

[Booker Floyd]

Where'd you hear that reasoning for making them premium?  Because every single explanation I've heard for making them "premium" content was about revenue first and "being uncomfortable" a distant second. It sounds like YOU'RE the one buying into spin.

O&A have discussed it, and I believe Eric Logan (VP of Programming) has been part of those discussions.  Where have you seen your explanations?  I know Ive heard Howard Stern use them, but I havent seen them anywhere else.

As for your calculation, you're ignoring the obvious reasoning.  If they could only bring in 200k/month as premium content, if you could pull in about 15000 new subs if they were standard content, you'd offset the lost 200k/month and start adding even more revenue.

100,000 * (2 * 12) = 2.4 million
15000*(12.99 *12) =  2.35 million

It's an economy of scale, and a rather obvious one.

Where are you getting any of these numbers?  It only makes sense when you invent numbers to make it make sense.  150,000 people are going to jump on board because the $2 surcharge was dropped?  You also credited Howard for 3.5 million subscriptions, which seems unlikely.

So, XM has once again found a way to "use them" effectively.  O&A were approached by CBS, that's true.

 

I dont think thats even true.  I believe O&A reached out to CBS.  O&A wanted the deal to happen more than anyone.  They pressured Logan on-air to make it happen weeks before it did.

I'm saying that by agreeing to let your exclusive content broadcast elsewhere, and give that content away for free, you're whoring them out.  Whether by O&A's choice or not, it's still whoring them out.

Its a business deal thats meant to benefit both the show and the company - youre choosing to use charged language to reflect your own bias.  Theyre airing part of the show for free and airing the last half exclusively. 

They expand their audience which, it seems, is really important to them.

 

I think its really important to every broadcaster. 

But the fact remains, their performance at XM, from a purely business perspective, has been lackluster.

Again, can you provide any real evidence of this?

The New York post confirmed that one of the offers came from Citadel (other publications confirmed this as well).  In addition, there has been rumblings that Clear Channel was one of the other offers, but I've not seen that confirmed in print.

I might be wrong, but didnt Stern say there were three offers?

The Post threw Citadel out but didnt confirm anything.

[pilferk]

O&A have discussed it, and I believe Eric Logan (VP of Programming) has been part of those discussions.? Where have you seen your explanations?? I know Ive heard Howard Stern use them, but I havent seen them anywhere else.

Various business and stock analysts when the announcement was made. Edit: Actually, to my knowledge, I've NEVER heard Stern say it was to increase revenue for XM.....? And I believe them over O&A who are not going to cop to "yeah, this is a way to bilk our listeners out of a couple of extra bucks a month".

Where are you getting any of these numbers?? It only makes sense when you invent numbers to make it make sense.? 150,000 people are going to jump on board because the $2 surcharge was dropped?? You also credited Howard for 3.5 million subscriptions.

The number of premium subs to get O&A as being less than 100k?? Various sources.? Howard says 75k, O&A said 150k, other places I've seen about 95K.? I took the middle number.

And not 150,000.? 15,000.? Do the math yourself.? You don't think the difference between a 14.99 a month sub and a 12.99 a month sub might compel 15,000 people to jump on board?? With the addition of the price drops in receiver hardware?

And I didn't credit Howard with 3.5 million subs.? I said that since he signed his deal, Sirius brought in 3.5 million subs, mostly on Howards back.? Looking at Sirius' own projections....he can be pretty much credited with 2 to 2.5 million of those subs.? I'd say that's "mostly".? Not to mention that every major media outlet and analyst credits him with the boost....Edit: And so does Sirius...hence Howard's prepayment for hitting that target number.

I dont think thats even true.? I believe O&A reached out to CBS.

Not according to the published reports.? They all say CBS approached O&A.? I think even O&A said as much in the PR.

Edit: FYI, if O&A made the overture, while DLR was under contract, they could be sued for tampering, I think.? That makes me almost positive CBS would have to have started the conversations.....

Its a business deal thats meant to benefit both the show and the company - youre choosing to use charged language to reflect your own bias.? Theyre airing part of the show for free and airing the last half exclusively.?

It's whoring them out in hopes to increase subscription rates.? That's what it is.? You can paint it in whatever language you feel most comfortable with, but it is what it is.? It's giving away what was ONCE entirely exclusive to you,? to someone else for your profit.? That's the very definition of whoring, for gods sake!

So, essentially, you're not saying it's not true.? You just have issue with the semantics?

I think its really important to every broadcaster.?

But it's not important to me, the consumer.?

And, seemingly, not really that important to other broadcasters who prefer to
a) make more money
b) not have to broadcast within the constraints of the FCC
c) Have better working conditions
d) have a more high profile gig
and/or
e) create more and better content.

And I'm not just talking about Stern, either.? There's other broadcasters sacrificing a wider audience for the above.? It's all about priorities, and which ones you, personally, find more compelling than others.

Again, can you provide any real evidence of this?

I already have.? Can you provide evidence to the contrary?

I might be wrong, but didnt Stern say there were three offers?

The Post threw Citadel out but didnt confirm anything.

Sure.? And then said he wouldn't out them due to personal business ethics (and I wouldn't either).

Then the post confirmed Citedel.? And there have been other rumblings that CC was the 2nd, but nothing like reputable print media confirmation.

? Howard, when confronted with that particular offering, chuckled and said he just couldn't comment, as much as he'd like to.?

But, really, it doesn't matter, does it?? There's been confirmation that at least ONE offer was made, right?? Which pretty much blows away any assertion that they weren't, that they were fabricated, or that the claims were made to "hitch a post" to O&A.