Fox back on?

[Marshall Karp]

So Fox News and Fox Talk are on, then off, now coming back on. Anyone know
what the story is?

[Admiral Grace Murray Hopper]

I can tell you the facts. The "story" was told by Karmizan (and his minions
on this thread) last week.

The facts are that Fox wanted a certain amount of money, which wasn't that
much, plus a demand that Sirius also carry the new Fox Talk channel. Sirius
refused to pay up OR carry the other programming.

In the 30 days ensuing, Sirius saw massive defections to XM because of their
having refused to pay the price. At which point, they crawled back and did
precisely what Fox demanded -- paid the price and ran the other channel,
too.

Karmizan claimed that after he crawled back to Fox they let him have it at
"his" price. Which, obviously, defies logic and did NOT happen.

It was a screwup that cost Sirius a lot of subscribers in a short period of
time, and resulted, IMO, from Sirius not being on top of their listener
demographics. Some will return, some were lost permanently.

I suspect this lack of awareness has also cost them money with other
blunders like the Martha Stewart channel.

"Marshall Karp" <marshallkarp@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:GiqKf.34445$6f2.13187@trnddc02...
> So Fox News and Fox Talk are on, then off, now coming back on. Anyone
know
> what the story is?
>
>

[Dr. Droo]

Frontmed is an Admiral now? Haha.. Priceless.

--D

[David]

On Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:36:49 GMT, "Admiral Grace Murray Hopper"
<grace@nomail.com> wrote:

>I can tell you the facts. The "story" was told by Karmizan (and his minions
>on this thread) last week.
>
>The facts are that Fox wanted a certain amount of money, which wasn't that
>much, plus a demand that Sirius also carry the new Fox Talk channel. Sirius
>refused to pay up OR carry the other programming.
>
>In the 30 days ensuing, Sirius saw massive defections to XM because of their
>having refused to pay the price. At which point, they crawled back and did
>precisely what Fox demanded -- paid the price and ran the other channel,
>too.
>
>Karmizan claimed that after he crawled back to Fox they let him have it at
>"his" price. Which, obviously, defies logic and did NOT happen.
>
>It was a screwup that cost Sirius a lot of subscribers in a short period of
>time, and resulted, IMO, from Sirius not being on top of their listener
>demographics. Some will return, some were lost permanently.
>
>I suspect this lack of awareness has also cost them money with other
>blunders like the Martha Stewart channel.
>
>"Marshall Karp" <marshallkarp@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:GiqKf.34445$6f2.13187@trnddc02...
>> So Fox News and Fox Talk are on, then off, now coming back on. Anyone
>know
>> what the story is?
>>
>>
You're calling Mel Karmazin a liar? From your doublewide?
>

[Brent Geery]

On 20 Feb 2006 13:52:10 -0800, "Dr. Droo" <drdroo@gmail.com> wrote:

>Frontmed is an Admiral now? Haha.. Priceless.

Most of the XM trolls are giving up the fight, so Frontmed has to
create as many sock-puppets as possible to bolster their numbers. Kind
of Like the 100K+ subs XM had to hand out List quarter to bolster
their numbers. XMs poor business decisions are a serious risk to the
entire industry.

--
BRENT - The Usenet typo king. :)
*** Free account sponsored by SecureIX.com ***
*** Encrypt your Internet usage with a free VPN account from http://www.SecureIX.com ***

[Bingo_17]

> You're calling Mel Karmazin a liar? From your doublewide?
>>
>
>


Don't forget the trailer house is next to the railroad tracks as well
as a swamp!

[John Doe]

"Marshall Karp" <marshallkarp@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:GiqKf.34445$6f2.13187@trnddc02...
> So Fox News and Fox Talk are on, then off, now coming back on. Anyone
> know what the story is?
>

what channel?

[Dr. Droo]

John Doe wrote:
> what channel?

FNC 131 and FNT 145 starting Mid-March (March 14th allegedly).

--D

[doberman007]

Frontmed.......

Your "Story" disguised as facts is simple B.S.

1. You state that there was massive churn and defections to XM. Do
you have anything whatsoever to substantiate this? The answer is no

2. You say that Karmizan went "crawling back" to Fox. The fact is
that the negotiations never stopped. In fact Karmizan stated a few
times that they were still talking to Fox during the "blackout"

3. You are posting these assertions under yet another alias. Why is
it that you feel this need to hide from your opinions?

Marshall.....

The real facts follow:

1. Sirius and Fox were in talks regarding extending their
relationship.

2. Fox wanted what Mewl K considered to be to much money, and in
addition wanted Sirius to carry other Fox shows. fox was asking for
more money than they had received in the XM deal.

3. Mel and Fox continued negotiations through the end of the year, at
which point Fox was taken off of Sirius. Mel and fox continued talks
throughout the time when fox was not on the air.

4. Mel was then able to get a deal that actually cost less than what
was on the table in December. Because Sirius now had a lower rate, XM
also got the same rate.

5. According to Sirius, while there were some complaints relating to
Fox being off, the churn was not substantial. Sirius used the figures
as part of their negotiations with Fox.

Bottom line is that Fox will be back on sirius, and will be back on at
a price that was far more attractive than what was previously on the
table.

Marshall.....

You can take what I am telling you and confer with investor relations
at both fox and Sirius......or you can take the word of someone who
creates new aliases all the time in an effort to hide from their
opinion. Admiral, is frontmed, as are several other aliases

[Admiral Grace Murray Hopper]

> 1. You state that there was massive churn and defections to XM. Do
> you have anything whatsoever to substantiate this? The answer is no

I have more than you do to substantiate the converse.

a) The deal was made, and it is obvious that *FOX* didn't cave;

b) The posts at SBS certainly indicated a subsantial anger (amongst
died-in-the-wool Siriots) over the loss of the programming -- and more than
1/3 of the several hundred who voted said they would leave the service over
it. Of those, there were numerous accounts of individuals who claimed to
have actually left over it.

> 2. You say that Karmizan went "crawling back" to Fox. The fact is
> that the negotiations never stopped. In fact Karmizan stated a few
> times that they were still talking to Fox during the "blackout"

What Karmizan stated is totally without credibility.

>
> 3. You are posting these assertions under yet another alias. Why is
> it that you feel this need to hide from your opinions?

Everyone knows who I am. What's it to you? Why do you care what aliases I
use? If it bothers you, don't reply to me. My posts speak for themselves;
I don't need some Internet "persona" to support the reasoning in my posts.


> 1. Sirius and Fox were in talks regarding extending their
> relationship.

Sure. After people started bailing, Sirius damned sure started talking.

> 2. Fox wanted what Mewl K considered to be to much money, and in
> addition wanted Sirius to carry other Fox shows. fox was asking for
> more money than they had received in the XM deal.

While you are right in the first sentence, you are wrong in the second. You
can understand that XM has a much wider reaching agreement with Fox/DirecTV.
Remember, Fox/DirecTV are in the video business, and Sirius can't do video
and XM is.

> 3. Mel and Fox continued negotiations through the end of the year, at
> which point Fox was taken off of Sirius. Mel and fox continued talks
> throughout the time when fox was not on the air.

The negotiations continued only when Mel figured out he had made a mistake.

> 4. Mel was then able to get a deal that actually cost less than what
> was on the table in December. Because Sirius now had a lower rate, XM
> also got the same rate.

You're confused. The rate differential was due to an exclusivity provision.
If XM had it exclusively, the price is higher. If exclusivity was forgone,
XM got a better deal. There was no "lower rate".

> 5. According to Sirius, while there were some complaints relating to
> Fox being off, the churn was not substantial. Sirius used the figures
> as part of their negotiations with Fox.

Bull----.

> Bottom line is that Fox will be back on sirius, and will be back on at
> a price that was far more attractive than what was previously on the
> table.
>

Bull----.

>
> You can take what I am telling you and confer with investor relations
> at both fox and Sirius......or you can take the word of someone who
> creates new aliases all the time in an effort to hide from their
> opinion. Admiral, is frontmed, as are several other aliases

Please. Give me a break. Do you honestly think either company's IR is
going to give YOU or ME, pissant shareholders, more information than they
will give professional analysts? You are so full of yourself it is not even
funny.

[doberman007]

Frontmed....err admiral....err timecalc....er Don Knuth......err Hermin
Hollerith....err trucky.....err bolo....

Please state how you think it is that Fox did not cave, and in what way
you feel that Sirius did.

Please explain how investor relations at XM verifies that XM is now
paying less to Fox than they were before?

Fowler may take exception to you saying several hundred were expressing
angst about it at SBS. Further, how many of the aliases were yours?

You say Karmizan said something without credibility.....I beg to
differ. Perhaps you should make a call to Dana Klinghoffer. You will
see that what Mel stated was accurate......1. The amount Sirius paid
was less than what was on the table previously and 2. That because of
Mels superior negotiating skills, XM now pays less than they did
before.

Your hiding behind new aliases for some reason. Your fear of posting
your reason is telling. You have even gone so far as to answer your
own posts under a different alias. Why try to prentend you are someone
else? Does it bother me????? Only to the extent that you are trying
to fool people into thinking that there are 17 other people that agree
with you.

You say that Sirius continued talks "only after people started
bailig"....1. There were many reports to the fact that negotation
NEVER stopped. You can verify this with statements from Sirius
management, as well as Fox, as well as several reports to the fact from
news sources.....2. People were not "bailing" as you seem to think.

Your assertion regarding video is simple BS. XM's deal with Fox was
announced well prior to their deal with Direct TV. You are aware that
Sirius can indeed do video I hope. It was only a couple of years ago
that under the Frontmed Alias you stated that XM legal nixed the chase
for video because it would cause accidents.

Just because you can't get squat out of IR does not mean that no -one
else can......Further, you should try speaking with a few analysts.
I do suggest that you call XM IR (please, just call once for all
aliases and not once for each alias) and have them verify for you that
XM is indeed paying less than they were before.

[David]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 03:30:40 GMT, "Admiral Grace Murray Hopper"
<grace@nomail.com> wrote:


>b) The posts at SBS certainly indicated a subsantial anger (amongst
>died-in-the-wool Siriots) over the loss of the programming -- and more than
>1/3 of the several hundred who voted said they would leave the service over
>it. Of those, there were numerous accounts of individuals who claimed to
>have actually left over it.
>
Sirius Back Stab is a right wing fundamentalist website populated by
mouth-breathing pinheads.

[Admiral Grace Murray Hopper]

> Please state how you think it is that Fox did not cave, and in what way
> you feel that Sirius did.

Fox got precisely what they originally demanded. The same money. And for
Sirius to carry the additional programming they wanted. Fox had specific
demands and Sirius refused to comply so Fox said, "Fine, you will meet our
demands or you will not be carrying our programming." Sirius said, "Fine,
we're not going to meet your demands, and we're putting CNN Headline News
on".

After that, large numbers of subscribers demanded Fox News Channel. And it
was easy to see that would happen. I'd wager even YOU did but obviously
can't prove it. Many dropped subscriptions clearly stating their reasonng.

FNC, in an effort to force Sirius to comply, began promoting that FNC was
available only on XM, which Sirius could see was going to hurt them even
more badly. And they called Rupert up and said, "Okay, we'll do what you
say".

There is no other way this story could have unfolded. FNC did NOT go to
Sirius and say, "Nevermind. We want to you to carry our programming so
badly we'll cut our price". That did not happen, and I don't care what Mel
says.

I don't know if you know anything about negotiating. But when you're
winning, you don't cave.

> Please explain how investor relations at XM verifies that XM is now
> paying less to Fox than they were before?

I believe this has been explained. There was an exclusivity provision that
entitled FNC to more money if the programming was carried on an exclusive
basis. When Sirius starts carrying it, it is no longer exclusive to XM.

> Fowler may take exception to you saying several hundred were expressing
> angst about it at SBS. Further, how many of the aliases were yours?

I voted one time. I don't remember what the numbers were, but several
hundred voted and last time I looked 36% said they would cancel one or more
subscriptions over it. Were the number inflated? Perhaps -- but they are
the best indication we have. I will say from the early hours of the vote
until the end the percentage remained in the 1/3 range, which suggests a
fairly consistent voting -- of course, we know the voters were biased, but
one would expect the bias would be toward KEEPING Sirius.

> You say Karmizan said something without credibility.....I beg to
> differ. Perhaps you should make a call to Dana Klinghoffer. You will
> see that what Mel stated was accurate......1. The amount Sirius paid
> was less than what was on the table previously and 2. That because of
> Mels superior negotiating skills, XM now pays less than they did
> before.


"Mels superior negotiating skills"??? LOL.

Mels superior negotiating skills got a price cut for XM?? Idiocy abounds.


> Your hiding behind new aliases for some reason. Your fear of posting
> your reason is telling. You have even gone so far as to answer your
> own posts under a different alias. Why try to prentend you are someone
> else? Does it bother me????? Only to the extent that you are trying
> to fool people into thinking that there are 17 other people that agree
> with you.

As far as I'm aware, a person is allowed to use as many aliases as he wants.
I intend to avail myself of that capability. If you have a problem, simply
don't respond to my posts.

> You say that Sirius continued talks "only after people started
> bailig"....1. There were many reports to the fact that negotation
> NEVER stopped. You can verify this with statements from Sirius
> management, as well as Fox, as well as several reports to the fact from
> news sources.....2. People were not "bailing" as you seem to think.

1. That's possible. These deals, as I've told you for years, take a very
long time to resolve. I'm sure as people were bailing Sirius was trying to
figure out how much they could take.

2. "People weren't bailing?" I've shown you how I know they were. You tell
me how you know they weren't.

> Your assertion regarding video is simple BS. XM's deal with Fox was
> announced well prior to their deal with Direct TV. You are aware that
> Sirius can indeed do video I hope. It was only a couple of years ago
> that under the Frontmed Alias you stated that XM legal nixed the chase
> for video because it would cause accidents.

I believe it has become painfully obvious just how far behind Sirius is in
its video initiative. I believe XM has developed a business model that
works, although I've not seen it, and video is on the way. Sirius can
deliver three channels of grainy cartoons, XM can deliver 8-10 channels of
high-resolution video plus TIVO-caching.

My remarks at RB were totally speculative and were written as such, and
based on other remarks I had heard at the time.

> Just because you can't get squat out of IR does not mean that no -one
> else can......Further, you should try speaking with a few analysts.
> I do suggest that you call XM IR (please, just call once for all
> aliases and not once for each alias) and have them verify for you that
> XM is indeed paying less than they were before.

I haven't contacted IR in ages; little useful information can come from it,
legally. Nor would I contact analysts other than to correct them about
something which I have done a few times.

[David]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 15:14:57 GMT, "Admiral Grace Murray Hopper"
<grace@nomail.com> wrote:

>[rantings of a lunatic in an advanced state of dementia]

Are you calling the most succesful CEO in the history of broadcasting
a liar?

[Bingo_17]

"David" <rickets@knac.com> wrote in message
news:lbcmv19ecffsa2po23tbltrpdcr4i2utvj@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 15:14:57 GMT, "Admiral Grace Murray Hopper"
> <grace@nomail.com> wrote:
>
>>[rantings of a lunatic in an advanced state of dementia]
>
> Are you calling the most succesful CEO in the history of broadcasting
> a liar?
>

Frontmed is proving how big an idiot he is by spewing via his multi alias
his personal opinions as fact.

Frontmeds opinions are "clueless" "inane" witn no merit to most who
visit the boards.