XM Store has NO XM radios for sale this morning.

[Coyote]

http://www.xmradio.com/get_xm/index.jsp

[CodeMonkey]

Coyote wrote:
> http://www.xmradio.com/get_xm/index.jsp
>
>

How about going to the right link.

http://shop.xmradio.com/

The store has been offline. Doesn't mean they are not selling equipment
anymore.

[Coyote]

"CodeMonkey" <spammers@suck.com> wrote in message
news:Nzhfg.112130$F_3.102723@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
> Coyote wrote:
>> http://www.xmradio.com/get_xm/index.jsp
>
> How about going to the right link.
>
> http://shop.xmradio.com/
>
> The store has been offline. Doesn't mean they are not selling equipment
> anymore.

You can click on ANY XM radio and you get the working on site message.

NO FUCKIN RADIOS are for sale at this time. The working on link thing MAY
be a ploy

If XM uses the cigarette adaptor wire as a antenna...looks like trouble to
me.

"Further, we are implementing a series of actions involving various radios
to bring them into compliance, including requesting our manufacturers to
suspend shipments to retail of radios or accessories that may require
changes to operating or installation instructions, or modifications to
software or hardware, such as small attachments that reduce emissions
through the antenna or cigarette lighter adapter."

http://biz.yahoo.com/e/060530/xmsr8-k.html

[CodeMonkey]

Coyote wrote:
> "CodeMonkey" <spammers@suck.com> wrote in message
> news:Nzhfg.112130$F_3.102723@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>> Coyote wrote:
>>> http://www.xmradio.com/get_xm/index.jsp
>> How about going to the right link.
>>
>> http://shop.xmradio.com/
>>
>> The store has been offline. Doesn't mean they are not selling equipment
>> anymore.
>
> You can click on ANY XM radio and you get the working on site message.
>
> NO FUCKIN RADIOS are for sale at this time. The working on link thing MAY
> be a ploy
>
> If XM uses the cigarette adaptor wire as a antenna...looks like trouble to
> me.
>
> "Further, we are implementing a series of actions involving various radios
> to bring them into compliance, including requesting our manufacturers to
> suspend shipments to retail of radios or accessories that may require
> changes to operating or installation instructions, or modifications to
> software or hardware, such as small attachments that reduce emissions
> through the antenna or cigarette lighter adapter."
>
> http://biz.yahoo.com/e/060530/xmsr8-k.html
>

How about coming up with some new news on that situation? That's been
around since yesterday and is now common knowledge.

And news flash, radios are still for sell at every other retailer.
Doesn't change anything.

[Coyote]

"CodeMonkey" <spammers@suck.com> wrote in message
news:87ifg.112446$F_3.51885@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
> Coyote wrote:
>> "CodeMonkey" <spammers@suck.com> wrote in message
>> news:Nzhfg.112130$F_3.102723@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>>> Coyote wrote:
>>>> http://www.xmradio.com/get_xm/index.jsp
>>> How about going to the right link.
>>>
>>> http://shop.xmradio.com/
>>>
>>> The store has been offline. Doesn't mean they are not selling equipment
>>> anymore.
>>
>> You can click on ANY XM radio and you get the working on site message.
>>
>> NO FUCKIN RADIOS are for sale at this time. The working on link thing
>> MAY be a ploy
>>
>> If XM uses the cigarette adaptor wire as a antenna...looks like trouble
>> to me.
>>
>> "Further, we are implementing a series of actions involving various
>> radios to bring them into compliance, including requesting our
>> manufacturers to suspend shipments to retail of radios or accessories
>> that may require changes to operating or installation instructions, or
>> modifications to software or hardware, such as small attachments that
>> reduce emissions through the antenna or cigarette lighter adapter."
>>
>> http://biz.yahoo.com/e/060530/xmsr8-k.html
>>
>
> How about coming up with some new news on that situation? That's been
> around since yesterday and is now common knowledge.
>
> And news flash, radios are still for sell at every other retailer. Doesn't
> change anything.


BUTT! the newest XM products from XM the INNO and NEXUS were for sale
yesterday
at the XM store. They are missing today. I think XM could keep these new
devices in stock at their on store if they comply to FCC requirments?



Perhaps other retailers may get cold feet in regard to XM devices....lots of
lawyers
out there looking for work.

[CodeMonkey]

Coyote wrote:
> "CodeMonkey" <spammers@suck.com> wrote in message
> news:87ifg.112446$F_3.51885@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>> Coyote wrote:
>>> "CodeMonkey" <spammers@suck.com> wrote in message
>>> news:Nzhfg.112130$F_3.102723@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>>>> Coyote wrote:
>>>>> http://www.xmradio.com/get_xm/index.jsp
>>>> How about going to the right link.
>>>>
>>>> http://shop.xmradio.com/
>>>>
>>>> The store has been offline. Doesn't mean they are not selling equipment
>>>> anymore.
>>> You can click on ANY XM radio and you get the working on site message.
>>>
>>> NO FUCKIN RADIOS are for sale at this time. The working on link thing
>>> MAY be a ploy
>>>
>>> If XM uses the cigarette adaptor wire as a antenna...looks like trouble
>>> to me.
>>>
>>> "Further, we are implementing a series of actions involving various
>>> radios to bring them into compliance, including requesting our
>>> manufacturers to suspend shipments to retail of radios or accessories
>>> that may require changes to operating or installation instructions, or
>>> modifications to software or hardware, such as small attachments that
>>> reduce emissions through the antenna or cigarette lighter adapter."
>>>
>>> http://biz.yahoo.com/e/060530/xmsr8-k.html
>>>
>> How about coming up with some new news on that situation? That's been
>> around since yesterday and is now common knowledge.
>>
>> And news flash, radios are still for sell at every other retailer. Doesn't
>> change anything.
>
>
> BUTT! the newest XM products from XM the INNO and NEXUS were for sale
> yesterday
> at the XM store. They are missing today. I think XM could keep these new
> devices in stock at their on store if they comply to FCC requirments?
>
>
>
> Perhaps other retailers may get cold feet in regard to XM devices....lots of
> lawyers
> out there looking for work.
>
>

It's doubtful that anyone will stop selling radios because of this.
Especially since the retailers are not liable for any non-compliance
with the FCC. The manufacturers are directly responsible, no one else.

Now, let's look at the impact of the xm store being down for
maintenance. Who cares? The last time I ordered a radio from them, I
waited 2 weeks to get it. Why? Because the company XM uses for that
store sucks. Even during non-holidays they are slow. Most people don't
order from them anyway, they can get better deals off other retailers.

[Coyote]

>
> Now, let's look at the impact of the xm store being down for maintenance.
> Who cares? The last time I ordered a radio from them, I waited 2 weeks to
> get it. Why? Because the company XM uses for that store sucks. Even during
> non-holidays they are slow. Most people don't order from them anyway, they
> can get better deals off other retailers.

GOLLY I'm glad you said that. XM store sucks, no different than XM
management
as I see it.

[CodeMonkey]

Coyote wrote:
>> Now, let's look at the impact of the xm store being down for maintenance.
>> Who cares? The last time I ordered a radio from them, I waited 2 weeks to
>> get it. Why? Because the company XM uses for that store sucks. Even during
>> non-holidays they are slow. Most people don't order from them anyway, they
>> can get better deals off other retailers.
>
> GOLLY I'm glad you said that. XM store sucks, no different than XM
> management
> as I see it.
>
>

The XM store is not run by XM... So I'm not sure what you are really
trying to point out... And I see nothing wrong with the way XM has
managed the company. In fact, a lot of financial professionals agree
that XM has been run way better than it's rival.

[Coyote]

>
> The XM store is not run by XM... So I'm not sure what you are really
> trying to point out... And I see nothing wrong with the way XM has managed
> the company. In fact, a lot of financial professionals agree that XM has
> been run way better than it's rival.

Are you saying XM is not responsible for action at the XM store...BULL ----

If you think Jockaby is correct your dumber than I thought. He may have
fewer brains than
Cramer....LOL.....

As for XM I see them as a has been with a clouded future.

[CodeMonkey]

Coyote wrote:
>> The XM store is not run by XM... So I'm not sure what you are really
>> trying to point out... And I see nothing wrong with the way XM has managed
>> the company. In fact, a lot of financial professionals agree that XM has
>> been run way better than it's rival.
>
> Are you saying XM is not responsible for action at the XM store...BULL ----
>
> If you think Jockaby is correct your dumber than I thought. He may have
> fewer brains than
> Cramer....LOL.....
>
> As for XM I see them as a has been with a clouded future.
>
>
>
>
>

I wouldn't expect you to understand any of it.

[Coyote]

"CodeMonkey" <spammers@suck.com> wrote in message
news:E7jfg.36446$4L1.19528@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
> Coyote wrote:
>>> The XM store is not run by XM... So I'm not sure what you are really
>>> trying to point out... And I see nothing wrong with the way XM has
>>> managed the company. In fact, a lot of financial professionals agree
>>> that XM has been run way better than it's rival.
>>
>> Are you saying XM is not responsible for action at the XM store...BULL
>> ----
>>
>> If you think Jockaby is correct your dumber than I thought. He may have
>> fewer brains than
>> Cramer....LOL.....
>>
>> As for XM I see them as a has been with a clouded future.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> I wouldn't expect you to understand any of it.


IDIOT!

[CodeMonkey]

Coyote wrote:
> "CodeMonkey" <spammers@suck.com> wrote in message
> news:E7jfg.36446$4L1.19528@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
>> Coyote wrote:
>>>> The XM store is not run by XM... So I'm not sure what you are really
>>>> trying to point out... And I see nothing wrong with the way XM has
>>>> managed the company. In fact, a lot of financial professionals agree
>>>> that XM has been run way better than it's rival.
>>> Are you saying XM is not responsible for action at the XM store...BULL
>>> ----
>>>
>>> If you think Jockaby is correct your dumber than I thought. He may have
>>> fewer brains than
>>> Cramer....LOL.....
>>>
>>> As for XM I see them as a has been with a clouded future.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I wouldn't expect you to understand any of it.
>
>
> IDIOT!
>
>

You really shouldn't call yourself names in public. You lose credibility
that way.

[All My Shrimp Was Dead and Gone]

>
> BUTT! the newest XM products from XM the INNO and NEXUS were for sale
> yesterday
> at the XM store. They are missing today. I think XM could keep these new
> devices in stock at their on store if they comply to FCC requirments?

The XM store has been down since Friday. The new products were not there
then, either. When it comes back, it will have only the new items that are
known to be FCC compliant.

The new products are not part of XM's voluntary investigation of FCC
complaints. XM is acting with absolute prudence by saying, "Hey, we'll
cooperate with FCC to solve the problem". Sirius, OTOH, is still denying
they have the problem, even though their manufacturers have the same issues
underway and have been contacted by FCC.

Perhaps SIRI is trying to get thru fathers day before it addresses the
problem, while XM is trying to get it handled beforehand.

[Dr. Droo]

All My Shrimp Was Dead and Gone wrote:
> Sirius, OTOH, is still denying
> they have the problem, even though their manufacturers have the same issues
> underway and have been contacted by FCC.

I have not seen where the FCC has come out and said that the power
levels were amiss like they did with the Skyfi2. I have however seen
that groups commented to the FCC on questions regarding the power
levels and out-of-band use of Sirius receivers. The FCC did go back to
Kiryung and ask for confirmation on the Sportster4 modulator data and
it was attached to the FCC paperwork for this unit.

However - These products all passed testing and the FCC signed off on
their tests. Sirius probably would like justification for why this
happened.

--D

[All My Shrimp Was Dead and Gone]

>
> I have not seen where the FCC has come out and said that the power
> levels were amiss like they did with the Skyfi2. I have however seen
> that groups commented to the FCC on questions regarding the power
> levels and out-of-band use of Sirius receivers. The FCC did go back to
> Kiryung and ask for confirmation on the Sportster4 modulator data and
> it was attached to the FCC paperwork for this unit.

Sirius manufacturers have received letters just as Audiovox did and just as
XM did. Sirius has carefully avoided admission that they have any problem
with this; but SIRI's problem is just as big as XM's, if not bigger.

> However - These products all passed testing and the FCC signed off on
> their tests. Sirius probably would like justification for why this
> happened.
>

I believe that XM has said that FCC clarified its testing procedure over the
last 2 months.

The bottom line is that it is one more example of XM being up front with its
shareholders while Sirius attempts to hide material issues from its
shareholders. Nothing new there.

[Dr. Droo]

All My Shrimp Was Dead and Gone wrote:
> Sirius manufacturers have received letters just as Audiovox did and just as
> XM did. Sirius has carefully avoided admission that they have any problem
> with this; but SIRI's problem is just as big as XM's, if not bigger.

Do you have a link that shows this?

> I believe that XM has said that FCC clarified its testing procedure over the
> last 2 months.

XM uses different testing companies than Sirius does.

The requirements for Part 15 compliance didn't suddenly change as far
as I know. Several different companies are used for testing Sirius
receivers. I have a curiosity as to how all of these test labs could
be testing incorrectly. Especially seeing as a couple of them have
tested several devices that have FM Modulators, not related to
satellite radio.

> The bottom line is that it is one more example of XM being up front with its
> shareholders while Sirius attempts to hide material issues from its
> shareholders. Nothing new there.

Again, I have not seen it proven anywhere that the FCC's internal
testing revealed Sirius modulators to be out of whack with testing
procedures. I have, however, seen articles that note some groups have
brought concerns to the FCC. I haven't seen the FCC come out against
any particular Sirius product either, like they have with the Skyfi2.

If you have a link that shows otherwise, by all means.

--D

[All My Shrimp Was Dead and Gone]

>
> Do you have a link that shows this?
>

No, my entire complaint is that XM has been transparent on the matter while
Sirius has refused to "return phone calls". But my awareness comes from a
source I believe to be reliable.

>
> XM uses different testing companies than Sirius does.
>
> The requirements for Part 15 compliance didn't suddenly change as far
> as I know. Several different companies are used for testing Sirius
> receivers. I have a curiosity as to how all of these test labs could
> be testing incorrectly. Especially seeing as a couple of them have
> tested several devices that have FM Modulators, not related to
> satellite radio.

Yeah, this is way outside my area of expertise. I just know what XM has
stated publicly.

> Again, I have not seen it proven anywhere that the FCC's internal
> testing revealed Sirius modulators to be out of whack with testing
> procedures. I have, however, seen articles that note some groups have
> brought concerns to the FCC. I haven't seen the FCC come out against
> any particular Sirius product either, like they have with the Skyfi2.
>

Actually, FCC hasn't "come out against" any particular product. It is up to
the manufacturer to disclose what problems they're facing. XM disclosed the
SF2 was under investigation, not the FCC.

Perhaps someone will ask Frear a direct question that he is forced to answer
this afternoon.

[Dr. Droo]

All My Shrimp Was Dead and Gone wrote:
> No, my entire complaint is that XM has been transparent on the matter while
> Sirius has refused to "return phone calls". But my awareness comes from a
> source I believe to be reliable.

You'd think someone would've tried to contact Directed, KiRyung or
Wistron. Sirius has never registered a device with the OET ever nor
have they been responsible for getting units tested for compliance.
Sirius can pass the buck, they're not in the hardware business.

I'm not saying Sirius shouldn't have SOMETHING to say on the topic,
they certainly should. Heck, they should because their responsibility
in the matter could be less than XM's. XM's hands are very much
involved in the development and testing of their devices.

> Yeah, this is way outside my area of expertise. I just know what XM has
> stated publicly.

These companies should dump the problem back to the test labs really.
I haven't seen that to be the case. The people that are writing
articles haven't done this either, instead dumped it into XM's lap. XM
did the right thing and had the products tested.

I don't see why they were relatively quick to pull equipment off their
shelves for that reason.

> Actually, FCC hasn't "come out against" any particular product. It is up to
> the manufacturer to disclose what problems they're facing. XM disclosed the
> SF2 was under investigation, not the FCC.

I went back and looked, I stand corrected.

> Perhaps someone will ask Frear a direct question that he is forced to answer
> this afternoon.

It's possible. I'm not sure what'll be said. We should know in about
an hour or so. I think it'll be more reiteration of the same stuff
thats been said for the last month or so though.

--D

[All My Shrimp Was Dead and Gone]

The question has now been answered.

SIRI had the problem with "a couple of manufacturers" and they have
implemented changes to solve it.

Same as XM; but XM was up front and disclosed the problem to investors
beforehand, Sirius didn't.

Typical.

[Dr. Droo]

All My Shrimp Was Dead and Gone wrote:
> The question has now been answered.
>
> SIRI had the problem with "a couple of manufacturers" and they have
> implemented changes to solve it.
>
> Same as XM; but XM was up front and disclosed the problem to investors
> beforehand, Sirius didn't.

Sirius had no real need to disclose anything. As far as we're
concerned it's not going to drastically affect the supply chain (it's
not expected to for XM either) and business goes on as usual.

Sirius isn't responsible for the evolving of their products in the same
manner that XM is. They hold no registrations for products with OET,
never have. It's a different situation for them than with XM, which is
responsible for evolving most of their receivers.

To be honest - I'd be more concerned if Sirius failed to make an
earnings warning knowing that their counter-marketing costs were going
to be out of whack for the quarter.

--D

[J. Fowler]

Dr. Droo wrote:
> I'm not saying Sirius shouldn't have SOMETHING to say on the topic,
> they certainly should. Heck, they should because their responsibility
> in the matter could be less than XM's. XM's hands are very much
> involved in the development and testing of their devices.

Sirius lists the following under risks:

"Among the significant factors that could cause our actual results to
differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking
statements are:
....
our dependence upon third parties, including manufacturers of SIRIUS
radios, retailers, automakers and programming providers;
.... "

So by qualifying this as a risk and not being part of the hardware
design process, they can legally skirt disclosing specific details of
FCC probes and the impact they could have on their business?

[Dr. Droo]

J. Fowler wrote:
> So by qualifying this as a risk and not being part of the hardware
> design process, they can legally skirt disclosing specific details of
> FCC probes and the impact they could have on their business?

A probe is one thing, a recall or a prohibition of selling the product
is another. Heck, it won't really have a material impact for XM either
and they stopped selling units.

Kiryung had to provide further testing info to the FCC becuase it was
requested for the Sportster 4. I don't consider this something that
Sirius should have to announce either.

--D

[Coyote]

"J. Fowler" <user@example.invalid> wrote in message
news:ePmfg.307$B4.694623@nntp.csufresno.edu...
> Dr. Droo wrote:
>> I'm not saying Sirius shouldn't have SOMETHING to say on the topic,
>> they certainly should. Heck, they should because their responsibility
>> in the matter could be less than XM's. XM's hands are very much
>> involved in the development and testing of their devices.
>
> Sirius lists the following under risks:
>
> "Among the significant factors that could cause our actual results to
> differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking
> statements are:
> ...
> our dependence upon third parties, including manufacturers of SIRIUS
> radios, retailers, automakers and programming providers;
> ... "
>
> So by qualifying this as a risk and not being part of the hardware design
> process, they can legally skirt disclosing specific details of FCC probes
> and the impact they could have on their busine

Looks to me like sirius took care of the problem unlike XM that still has
the problem

David Frear (Executive VP and CFO) today talked at the Sanford C. Bernstein
& Co. Strategic Decisions Conference about Sirius' radios and their
complaince with FCC guidelines. Frear stated that the FCC sent letters to
their manufacturers several weeks ago asking for test results of the radios
FM transmitter range. The manufacturers sent the results to the FCC and it
turns out that some Sirius radios (he did not name specifics) did not comply
with FM transmitter guidelines. These radios have now been fixed however.


http://www.siriusbackstage.com/

[BaJoRi]

"CodeMonkey" <spammers@suck.com> wrote in message
news:Nzhfg.112130$F_3.102723@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
> Coyote wrote:
>> http://www.xmradio.com/get_xm/index.jsp
>
> How about going to the right link.
>
> http://shop.xmradio.com/
>
> The store has been offline. Doesn't mean they are not selling equipment
> anymore.

I would pretty much gaurantee that you cannot buy product from a website
that isn't there.