''Stern Effect'' Just Beginning

[David]

Friday, Feb. 17, 2006
Mel Karmazin Touts Howard Stern's
Long-Term Benefits

While a lot of talk has focused on how many subscribers Sirius
signed up in the weeks surrounding Stern's January debut, CEO Karmazin
believes Stern's presence will attract customers for some time to
come. "The idea that he is only going to affect Q4 or Q1 is lame,"
Karmazin said during Sirius' Friday-morning earnings conference call.

"This is something that is going to continue throughout the five years
''at least'' of his contract. As people are going in to buy satellite
radio, they have a choice of companies, and one of the companies has
programming that includes Howard. We think that is going to
contribute, and we think that Howard is going to add subscribers every
singe day."

In fact, Karmazin said upcoming gift-giving occasions could generate
more sales. "The seasonality of the satellite radio business has been
such that January has always been a strong retail month," he said.
"People are going to be giving Sirius for Father's Day and graduation
in part because we have Howard Stern."

Karmazin is also counting on Stern's fans to generate word-of-mouth
sales for Sirius. "As we marshal Howard's audience, we can get them to
be our salespeople and sell to their friends and others." He added,
"Over the 20 years he was with his prior employer, he created value
for them every single year, and we fully expect that to continue."

— Joe Howard, R&R Washington Bureau Chief

randr

[NoDownTime@gmail.com]

This is precisely the reason they waited until after the XM CC -- so
they could attempt to counter XM's remarks about Stern being a
"one-quarter event". Of course, as we are seeing at retail, this is
precisely what has happened.

Or did anyone notice that Sirius hasn't come up with a 4 millionth
subscriber yet?

They ended the year with more than 3.3 million. Stern claimed they
activated almost 200K on the day he went live -- they only needed 500K
in the remaining 48 days -- 10K/day average. As we know, they beat
that in Q4 with nearly 13K/daily average for the ENTIRE QUARTER.

It is hard to argue that retail hasn't fallen off badly for Sirius.
They needed to have hit 4M by the end of January to be able to suggest
a steep decline in the "Stern Effect" hasn't already occurred.

[David]

On 18 Feb 2006 09:49:48 -0800, NoDownTime@gmail.com wrote:

>This is precisely the reason they waited until after the XM CC -- so
>they could attempt to counter XM's remarks about Stern being a
>"one-quarter event". Of course, as we are seeing at retail, this is
>precisely what has happened.
>
>Or did anyone notice that Sirius hasn't come up with a 4 millionth
>subscriber yet?
>
>They ended the year with more than 3.3 million. Stern claimed they
>activated almost 200K on the day he went live -- they only needed 500K
>in the remaining 48 days -- 10K/day average. As we know, they beat
>that in Q4 with nearly 13K/daily average for the ENTIRE QUARTER.
>
>It is hard to argue that retail hasn't fallen off badly for Sirius.
>They needed to have hit 4M by the end of January to be able to suggest
>a steep decline in the "Stern Effect" hasn't already occurred.
>
Poor baby...

[Rich]

>>> as we are seeing at retail, this is precisely what has happened.


What are WE seeing at retail Frontmed? Pardon me for doubting your
credibility, but you have none.

[yqf@my-deja.com]

Rich wrote:
>NoDownTime@gmail.com (an alias that frontmed uses) wrote:
> >>> as we are seeing at retail, this is precisely what has happened.
>
>
> What are WE seeing at retail Frontmed? Pardon me for doubting your
> credibility, but you have none.

Exactly. Frontmed knows he has ZERO credibility around here. That is
why he has resorted to using the aliases "NoDownTime" and "Don Knuth"
so much lately. You aren't fooling anybody frontmed. Forget the
aliases. We know that "NoDownTime" and "Don Knuth" have the same
credibility as "frontmed".... ZERO.

[Dr. Droo]

NoDownTime@gmail.com wrote:
> Or did anyone notice that Sirius hasn't come up with a 4 millionth
> subscriber yet?

Who's to say they haven't? Neither Sirius or XM declared subscriber
counts at the CC but will at Q1 CC. This doesn't mean it didn't
happen.

Just because XM is missing guidance and misleading shareholders doesn't
mean that Sirius isn't getting sales.

--D

[Herman Hollerith]

> Who's to say they haven't? Neither Sirius or XM declared subscriber
> counts at the CC but will at Q1 CC. This doesn't mean it didn't
> happen.

Sirius has never missed an opportunity to make noise about a subscriber
milestone. If they were at 4M last week, we'd have known it.

> Just because XM is missing guidance and misleading shareholders doesn't
mean that Sirius isn't getting sales.

I've been following both companies longer than probably anyone on this
thread. I defy you or anyone else to point to a bonafide incidence of XM
misleading its shareholders.

In fact, news articles since last week have specifically referred to the
forthrightness with which XM spoke about the resignation of the director.

It hasn't been that long since Merrill's Marc Nabi, infuriated by SIRI's
lying, openly, and publicly, refused to participate in SIRI's "analyst day",
commenting that, "If they aren't going to be more up front, why bother...."
You have never heard anything like that about XM. From anyone.

[Dr. Droo]

Herman Hollerith wrote:
> Sirius has never missed an opportunity to make noise about a subscriber
> milestone. If they were at 4M last week, we'd have known it.

Nice flawed logic there Frontmed. If that's the case why didn't XM
announce any subscribers at their CC? They must not be that far over 6
million then. Heck, maybe they fell below 6 million because of all of
these deacts and are bowing their heads in shame? You do realize how
ridiculous this sounds right?

I'd say it's more likely both companies are keeping their hand of cards
close to the chest until the end of the quarter. Clayton used to
report often, times have changed. XM doesn't really want Sirius to
know their subscriber flow any more than Sirius wants XM to know. They
may announce ahead of the conference call again, but I'm not going to
be surprised if they wait until the quarter actually ends, positive or
not.

> I've been following both companies longer than probably anyone on this
> thread. I defy you or anyone else to point to a bonafide incidence of XM
> misleading its shareholders.

I think it was clear when Parsons was saying they'd make guidance and
other execs were selling their stock.

> In fact, news articles since last week have specifically referred to the
> forthrightness with which XM spoke about the resignation of the director.

They didn't have much of a choice really. I think what that guy said
on his way out the door was pretty damning.

> It hasn't been that long since Merrill's Marc Nabi, infuriated by SIRI's
> lying, openly, and publicly, refused to participate in SIRI's "analyst day",
> commenting that, "If they aren't going to be more up front, why bother...."
> You have never heard anything like that about XM. From anyone.

Maybe the tide is changing. We shall see. SIRI has never had a
Director basically say he had no confidence in the board and company
going in a proper direction for the near future either. Yet XM did.

XM managed to tank over 10% in 2 days THROUGH their 52 week low. I
figure you must be short over there or you'd probably be
hyperventilating instead of just trying to do damage control. I hope
you're getting paid overtime, Frontmed, Herman, whoever you want to be
this moment in time.

You're acting very daft. Perhaps it can be chalked up to that
ass-handing you're receiving over on Silicon Investor though. No
wonder you hide behind various aliases and auto-expire your posts now.


--D

[David]

On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 02:39:45 GMT, "Herman Hollerith"
<herman@nomail.com> wrote:

>> Who's to say they haven't? Neither Sirius or XM declared subscriber
>> counts at the CC but will at Q1 CC. This doesn't mean it didn't
>> happen.
>
>Sirius has never missed an opportunity to make noise about a subscriber
>milestone. If they were at 4M last week, we'd have known it.
>
>> Just because XM is missing guidance and misleading shareholders doesn't
>mean that Sirius isn't getting sales.
>
>I've been following both companies longer than probably anyone on this
>thread. I defy you or anyone else to point to a bonafide incidence of XM
>misleading its shareholders.
>
>In fact, news articles since last week have specifically referred to the
>forthrightness with which XM spoke about the resignation of the director.
>
>It hasn't been that long since Merrill's Marc Nabi, infuriated by SIRI's
>lying, openly, and publicly, refused to participate in SIRI's "analyst day",
>commenting that, "If they aren't going to be more up front, why bother...."
>You have never heard anything like that about XM. From anyone.
>
>
What about the fake''enhanced capabilities'' of XM-3? That wasn't
misleading?

[Rich]

>>>What about the fake''enhanced capabilities'' of XM-3? That wasn't misleading?

What about the Roady2 recall? Wasn't that a little mis-leading?

[Admiral Grace Murray Hopper]

"Dr. Droo" <drdroo@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1140411801.081945.305940@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Herman Hollerith wrote:
> > Sirius has never missed an opportunity to make noise about a subscriber
> > milestone. If they were at 4M last week, we'd have known it.
>
> Nice flawed logic there Frontmed. If that's the case why didn't XM
> announce any subscribers at their CC? They must not be that far over 6
> million then. Heck, maybe they fell below 6 million because of all of
> these deacts and are bowing their heads in shame? You do realize how
> ridiculous this sounds right?

Neither company has typically announced subscriber figures at their CC.
However, both have traditionally announced 1 million subscriber milestones,
regardless of when they occurred. Sirius even announced 100K milestones for
a while late in '04.

One could rationally have thought that Sirius was putting off the 4M
announcement with the CC coming up shortly. But if they had been there, we
would have gotten it then, at the latest.

> I'd say it's more likely both companies are keeping their hand of cards
> close to the chest until the end of the quarter. Clayton used to
> report often, times have changed. XM doesn't really want Sirius to
> know their subscriber flow any more than Sirius wants XM to know. They
> may announce ahead of the conference call again, but I'm not going to
> be surprised if they wait until the quarter actually ends, positive or
> not.
>

Sirius has never, once, failed to make the million subscriber milestone
announcement within a day or two of when it occurred. Given the horrible
financial mess they reported last week, they absolutely would have announced
4M if they had it.

> > I've been following both companies longer than probably anyone on this
> > thread. I defy you or anyone else to point to a bonafide incidence of
XM
> > misleading its shareholders.
>
> I think it was clear when Parsons was saying they'd make guidance and
> other execs were selling their stock.
>

They made their guidance for all intents and purposes. Only Siriots have
made noise about this.

> > In fact, news articles since last week have specifically referred to the
> > forthrightness with which XM spoke about the resignation of the
director.
>
> They didn't have much of a choice really. I think what that guy said
> on his way out the door was pretty damning.

It was one opinion out of 12.

> > It hasn't been that long since Merrill's Marc Nabi, infuriated by SIRI's
> > lying, openly, and publicly, refused to participate in SIRI's "analyst
day",
> > commenting that, "If they aren't going to be more up front, why
bother...."
> > You have never heard anything like that about XM. From anyone.
>
> Maybe the tide is changing. We shall see. SIRI has never had a
> Director basically say he had no confidence in the board and company
> going in a proper direction for the near future either. Yet XM did.
>

One director can do anything. That director's behavior was bizarre, and
there was some untold history behind it. Meaningless, basically. If more
leave, then I'll be worried.

> XM managed to tank over 10% in 2 days THROUGH their 52 week low. I
> figure you must be short over there or you'd probably be
> hyperventilating instead of just trying to do damage control. I hope
> you're getting paid overtime, Frontmed, Herman, whoever you want to be
> this moment in time.

Sirius tanked, too. I always expect XM to tank harder than Sirius because
Sirius has, well, Siriots -- who always overreact to good news and
underreact to bad news.

> You're acting very daft. Perhaps it can be chalked up to that
> ass-handing you're receiving over on Silicon Investor though. No
> wonder you hide behind various aliases and auto-expire your posts now.
>

What "ass-handing"? I've been kicking PCSTEL's ass at SI since he shorted
XM at 9 and never got to cover.

[Admiral Grace Murray Hopper]

>
> What about the fake''enhanced capabilities'' of XM-3? That wasn't
> misleading?

I don't know of any "fake enhanced capabilites". I do know that XM3 was
modified prior to launch. I do know that XM4 is being further modified
prior to launch.

[David]

On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 19:56:46 GMT, "Admiral Grace Murray Hopper"
<grace@nomail.com> wrote:

>
>>
>> What about the fake''enhanced capabilities'' of XM-3? That wasn't
>> misleading?
>
>I don't know of any "fake enhanced capabilites". I do know that XM3 was
>modified prior to launch. I do know that XM4 is being further modified
>prior to launch.
>
>
The PV concentrators were removed.