Sirius XM Radio (SIRI)

Hoodoojr (< 20) Submitted: 6/17/07 10:58 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

It is difficult to understand an assessment made without knowledge of the product. Satellite radio is still relatively unknown to Americans so the room for growth is fairly expansive

Report this Post Reply

HatchingPlans (99.89) Submitted: 6/19/07 1:37 AM

Recs: 2 | Rec This

i think there is some merit in the fact that he doesn't know much about satellite radio. neither do i, and neither do most americans. this is a big deal because satellite radio has been out for years, and people have talked about it here and there, but it's never really sparked enough interest for anyone i know to actually subscribe to it. rent, insurance, car payments, credit card statements, cell phones, cable tv, high-speed internet, pre-paid legal, porn, and world of warcraft seem like much higher priorities for people to pay monthly fees on, and this falls into the "straw that broke the camel's back" category.

Report this Post Reply

billyf14 (< 20) Submitted: 6/21/07 7:13 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

All your technical data I can't argue with but you've missed the key points of satellite radio. 1) The music is commercial free. 2) It's targeting drivers and with over 200 million licensed drivers on the road today, that's a substantial market. I drive 45 minutes one way every day and I got fed up with the endless talk and commercials of regular radio. I bought SIRIUS and haven't turned to commercial radio since. Ever drive cross country and have your signals fade every 25-30 miles? Not with satellite radio.
If I can't watch the game (i.e. while I'm driving), at least I can hear it and the beauty of it is, all the games of my favorite team that I can't even get where I'm living, I can still hear via my satellite radio subscription. It's a beautiful thing. I've tried using my Creative Zen, which holds all my music but it's a pain to operate while driving as well. You'd have more credibility if you tried it first and then decided you didn't like it, but I respect your opinion.
You need to contact the FCC and help them realize that satellite radio is competing with regular radio and ipods so they can stop the monopoly BS and get on with the merger.

Report this Post Reply

bbw52 (50.07) Submitted: 6/23/07 5:50 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

Thank you Sirius!!!....I started my subscription about a year and a half ago and when it came up for renewal....I signed up for the lifetime contract!!! I haven't listened to "free" radio, which contains ENDLESS talk and commercials since I got my satellite radio. AND I have been pricing the market for my second!!!!

Just ask ANY satellite radio subscriber (it doessn't matter if it's Sirius "or the other guys") and they will tell you....forget "free" radio....forget HD radio (which fades out every 40 miles or so just like "free" radio)...forget your ipod in the car....just set your Sirius to the channel you like and foget it....at home....at work....or whereever you travel....(I recently took a trip to the LA area and took my Sirius with me just so I could have it on the various drives I would have to take for work [and EVERYONE KNOWS what kind of drives you have there])...so like I said before....THANK you Sirius!!!!

Report this Post Reply

Madmykl (99.33) Submitted: 7/24/07 10:14 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

I actually caught all of your key points billy, I just don't think they are strong enough to save a company that is losing money (and will continue losing money whether they merge with XM or not) in an industry that would be a nightmare to run.

Like I said, I've never used the system and it may be great. My point is... It doesn't matter whether Sirius is great... what matters to investors is whether it can survive.

Report this Post Reply

freunddoggy (99.94) Submitted: 8/31/07 11:26 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

Satellite radio sucks. Everytime I've listened to it, the music selection just sucks. I would rather hook up my ipod to my car radio or listen to a CD than listen to music that I don't want to hear. The only way satellite radio can take off is through its content (other than music). That's the only way.

Report this Post Reply

billblattner (25.90) Submitted: 9/08/07 6:37 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

Some people must be living in a cave.
I have both radios and would not be with out.
Everyone I know has either one or the other, in cars trucks and home.
Have one in my motor hame as well.
Try finding a station when you travel, course SOME people don' travel.
30 dollar stock in less then 5 years.

Report this Post Reply

SavvyCaveman (99.80) Submitted: 9/12/07 4:14 PM

Recs: 1 | Rec This

me no need no radio. it tells the dinosaurs where i am.

Report this Post Reply

Madmykl (99.33) Submitted: 9/14/07 4:13 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

The smartest of investors live in caves (just ask Warren Buffett). Sorry bub, this is a $0 stock in less than 5 years barring a bailout. If you are in doubt, take a good long look at your caps score (ouch... sorry, couldn't resist).

Report this Post Reply

runthetable1 (< 20) Submitted: 10/03/07 2:08 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

you have got to be kidding me right??? first off, car manufacturers are putting these in cars as a standard. i could give a crap about the caps rating. mabey you don't travel, or enjoy hearing endless buzzing sounds commercials losing your stations traveling outside your area.....satellite radio allows you to listen to any damn thing you want, with great clarity and once you have satellite you will not go back.. its not like we are going to move back in time once you have a great technology.. it will be out there, and people love this product. i can listen to bloomberg, howard, or damn martha stewart if i want, and then i get my seek alert when my favorite song comes on....give me a break dinosaur...

Report this Post Reply

Madmykl (99.33) Submitted: 10/09/07 8:13 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

I love these people :P

okay mr. runthetable1
Perhaps you didnt read any of my posts up to this point, but I never said that satellite radios aren't nice. Its your money, throw it on a terrible company just because they have what some people consider a good product. Go for it. Put your money where your house is... go ahead and take out a big fat mortgage and put it all into a long play on SIRI.

But, if I am to succeed in caps and keep my score in the top 1%, i dont have the luxury of betting on such factors as whether a product is cool or fun or even if its quality... commercials or no (oh there's an idea... maybe they can start running commercials to make back all their losses ROFL). You see, I need to base my decisions on things like profit margins, return on equity, net income, PEG ratio, operating cashflow, free cashflow and total debt... things which I see nowhere at all in that fancy argument of yours. Look at that stuff and you'll immediately see that Sirius is doomed to die a horrific death without a major overhaul. its chances of survival are like those of a mosquito 3 inches from a nuke detonation site. XM radio ALSO is doomed without an overhaul. The merger is like trying to make 2 wrongs a right... (which just doesnt work, in case you've tried). I dont even know whether it happened or if its going to happen, but it doesnt matter.


look. check out this direct quote from the sirius CEO.
"Q: If you're allowed to merge, will you use the monopoly power to raise monthly fees above the current $12.95?

A: If we want to get more than the 10% of the population currently subscribing, we have to make it financially attractive, and there are still so many people that haven't been convinced that it's worth their while to pay for radio. If we can't get more subscribers at $12.95, what would make us think that we can get more at $15.95? "

So they are currently losing money by the fistful, they cant raise prices and are worried about not getting enough new subscribers. Even with a merger they cant raise prices or lower costs. for example how can they persuade the NFL to lower prices on the audio broadcasts to save Sirius some money? Sirius has NO leverage... what will they say- "lower what you charge us or we just wont play your games on the air"???? No. The NFL has all the leverage in that negotiation. They couldnt give a crap whether their games are on satellite radio. They can charge SIRI whatever they want just for the privilege of allowing SIRI to play the games. So you say they will get a lot more subscribers with the merger? actually they also inherit all of the operating costs plus all the brand new administrative costs of coordinating the two empires.

SIRI is doomed.
sorry.

Report this Post Reply

natemoney3 (64.80) Submitted: 10/14/07 9:29 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

well if a merger does happen, which in my opinion, very well could, how do see this stock to be overvalued. They will basically have a monopoly on the satelitte radio industry and can cut 7.2 billion dollars of cost anuaully. In the event of a merger, how could you be bearish?

Report this Post Reply

Madmykl (99.33) Submitted: 10/21/07 2:14 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

because they're just THAT bad.

Chew on this... they have a NEGATIVE 86% profit margin. That means... for every $10 they charge a customer they spend ~$18. that gives them zero profit plus an $8 loan they'll have to pay off later. In other words more customers will HURT their bottom line.

They have negative earnings, negative earnings growth even as they add more subscribers, and a negative book value. Your shares in SIRI are worth less than zero. If you can sell them for more than zero I'd move on it now.

Sirius will be buying XM- another company worth less than zero and losing money... and they'll be paying a lot of money for it, further hurting their bottom line.

I have no idea where that fool from citibank is getting his 7 billion dollars figure in savings. It looks like Sirius's total revinue is 700 million per year and their cost of total operations is close to 1.4 billion. Almost NONE of their operating costs have ANYTHING to do with competition from XM. its all those expensive satellites, pricy contracts with car dealers and high content prices... MAYBE they could negotiate better contracts with their content providers, but what leverage do they really have? Nobody cares whether their content is on satellite radio. Only 10% of people use it... whats the point? put your content on regular radio or TV where it will be heard or seen by most of the population (the only people with a forced hand will be the howard sterns of the world- and how much revinue do they really generate anyway?).

The CEO of sirius himself said they couldnt charge more per customer after a merger. This is BAD news for longs. You can bet their bottom line wont change by enough to make them profitable... and NOW they get to manage all of XM as well as themselves. Do you think any of this will make them more profitable or even less? do you have any idea what kind of politics and bureocracy will be faced as the Sirius takeover team fires staff and puts in their people and get to tell the remaining XM people what to do?

These companies have ugly written all over them- individually and combined. anything is possible of course... and I have been wrong before. Time will tell us the truth of the matter, but I'd strongly caution anyone against going long on this monster. Very high risk and very low reward.

Report this Post Reply

Madmykl (99.33) Submitted: 10/24/07 7:18 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

let me make an edit: the howard sterns of the world DO make a lot of money, I think howard stern himself is probably responsible for half the sirius audience. This is actually a bad thing because this means that he could do them a lot of damage by moving to a different medium (cable tv for example). I was thinking that they might at least have him in their pocket but I dont think so... even he would have leverage in the negotiation with sirius after the merger.

Report this Post Reply

moefuzz (81.51) Submitted: 11/29/07 1:38 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

You sound like my father, may he rest in peace. He was very smart man and a CPA. He wouldn't let us get cable back in 1983 when I was screaming for my MTV. He couldn't imagine PAYING for something he could get for free or watch on a VCR at his liesure. We finally did get basic service by the end of that year. Implementing a cable system was a very expensive propostion as well back then. The expesive part of satellite is over now. They're built, and they are in orbit doing their thing already. The gravy is on the way.

Also please forward your iPod argument to the DOJ and the FCC it will help refute the monopoly argument and expedite the merger and bring me closer the that Audi R8 I've been salivating over.

Report this Post Reply

Madmykl (99.33) Submitted: 12/02/07 7:41 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

It looks like the merger will happen, so I wont need to forward my argument to the FCC. Perhaps thats my argument is the reason they are letting it through. As i see it the one hope satellite radio has is if they can begin to integrate satellite video and have it built into car models standard. This MAY happen, but even if it does these companies are a long way from profitability- even combined. No offense moefuzz but as I said before a good product does not equal a good company. Even if you love satellite radio they are not making money and are actually losing it. Until they make money they will NOT be a good investment.

Report this Post Reply

rippledo (< 20) Submitted: 12/20/07 7:14 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

This is a merger of equals, no one is paying a premium for anything. This service appeals to people who spend alot of time in their cars. The programming is what people pay for, not 23 minutes of commercials an hour.

Report this Post Reply

erikburke (77.71) Submitted: 12/22/07 6:13 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

I have read all of the above arguements and I think the one thing that has failed to get mentioned is the true economies of scale that will be gained in a merger. Both XM and Sirius have very similar programming in the radio and talk segments. They do differ in the sports subject but that is negligable.



Once these two companies merge they are going to drastically cut if not eliminate the negative profit margin that Mr Madmykl thinks the satellite industry will never overcome. By eliminating duplicate programming and management even if they do not add one single customer they profitability will improve. But the worry of not adding new subscribers is the least of worries to the satellite industry.



Here is my personal testimonial on the product. I have been a customer of this product for almost 3 years and have convinced many friends to subscribe as well. My father was a pessimiss on the industry as well until he purchased a new jeep with a factory installed system and within a week had one in all three of his cars.



Think what you want on my pick because i am down about 25% on this one but i feel very strongly that the risk will be worth the reward in the long term

Report this Post Reply

zygnoda (< 20) Submitted: 12/30/07 11:16 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

You raised some good points erikburke. Moefuzz, your comments made me think of bottled water.
I also wanted to say that it was a lot of fun to read everyone's comments.

Report this Post Reply

HS100HS101 (< 20) Submitted: 1/09/08 11:45 AM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

Sirius is on the way IN. In January 2006, when Howard Stern started his show on satellite, Sirius had 400.00 subscribers. Today, January 9,2008, there are 8.3 million subscribers.
As soon as the merger Sirius/XM is approved, Sirius/XM will reach the skies (no pun intended).

Report this Post Reply

HatchingPlans (99.89) Submitted: 1/18/08 7:15 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

The only way SIRI can climb back is if they can get subscribers. As the market continues to slide, people simply won't have the money to invest in satellite radio when they've already put it into a redundant resource... an iPod... which is WAY more universally supported by cars than SIRI. Merger or not, it's a lot of energy and money to accomplish a feat which in the long run means... nothing.

Report this Post Reply

moefuzz (81.51) Submitted: 2/14/08 1:31 PM

Recs: 0 | Rec This

8.3 mil subscribers recently announced far surpassed expectations and the merger is very close. There are even rumors that it has already been approved but not announced. I think the synergry will reduce operating costs and Mel will run a combined operation very well. I may sell off half my load on the merger and hold the rest for the long haul. If the company looks healthy or at least on the way to it in the 4th quarter, don't rule out a purchase in 2009 buy an old guard looking to invest in the future. Newscorp? Viacom? Am I crazy, my broker thinks so, but then again she tried to talk me out of TIVO at $5.60

Report this Post Reply