PDA

View Full Version : Ridiculous, Absurd, Preposterous, Illogical, Huge, Silly -- Pick Your Adjective


Lowdown in Lodi
August 8th, 2006, 02:32 PM
GRANT ROBERTSON

Globe and Mail Update

It's been more than a month since Mel Karmazin poured some badly needed fuel
on the flickering flame known as satellite radio stocks by single-handedly
prompting takeover speculation within the industry. But the weeks since then
have not been kind to investors.

The outspoken chief executive officer of New York-based Sirius Satellite
Radio Inc. sparked a rally in June when he suggested a takeover involving XM
Satellite Radio Holdings Inc., his Washington-based rival, is possible.

“Would I like to buy them? Sure,” Mr. Karmazin told an industry conference
in New York as investors began piling into the shares that afternoon.

Such talk is nothing new for satellite radio, an industry that began five
years ago in the United States and launched last year in Canada. A fresh
rumour of an XM-Sirius alliance crops up at least once a year, creating a
stir in the markets when it percolates.
Related to this article

The Globe and Mail

XM shares gained 6.8 per cent in the hours after Mr. Karmazin spoke, while
Sirius surged 5.1 per cent on three times the company's average trading
volume.

The mini-euphoria appears to have spread north of the border as well, where
shares in Canadian Satellite Radio Holdings Inc., which operates the XM
franchise in Canada, rose 5 per cent in the following days.

But the rally was short-lived and the shares have fallen steadily since
then.

Aside from the temporary buzz created by such speculation, market watchers
say there are few reasons for investors to get excited about the industry
amid continuing losses.

“As an investor, the stocks have been slammed because the market wants them
to have continually accelerating growth,” said Steve Mather, an analyst with
Sanders Morris Harris in Los Angeles who tracks the industry. “And in the
real world you don't get continually accelerating growth.”

The U.S. operations of Sirius and XM both reported deep second-quarter
losses of $238-million (U.S.) and $230-million, respectively, in the past
two weeks as the companies spend aggressively in a heated battle for
subscribers.

In Canada, where Canadian Satellite Radio launched in late 2005, the company
remains in startup mode. However, losses associated with getting it off the
ground hit $20.4-million (Canadian) in the recent quarter and investors have
responded. The company's shares slipped to $8.50 last week, their lowest
point since December's initial public offering at $16 a share on the Toronto
Stock Exchange. (Sirius Canada is not publicly traded).

Despite rosy projections for the future, the satellite radio companies are
having a tough time convincing shareholders. Sirius increased its subscriber
projections for 2006 to 6.3 million last week, up slightly from previous
expectations of 6.2 million customers, but the news had little effect.

Sirius shares fell Monday to $3.81 (U.S.) on the Nasdaq Stock Market, less
than half their 52-week high in December.

If investors are looking for relief, Mr. Mather suggests they could be
waiting a while. Merger speculation may be the only thing lifting the
industry these days, but it's an unlikely saviour since a deal would face
too many hurdles, he said.

“It's ridiculous, absurd, preposterous, illogical — pick your adjective,”
Mr. Mather said. “They would never be allowed to go from two companies to
one.”

Beyond the obvious monopoly concerns from U.S. regulators, Mr. Mather
believes the biggest problem is justifying the price tag of a takeover.

“You've got to pay $6- or 7-billion if you want Sirius, and there isn't
$7-billion worth of synergy there,” he said. “And if you want XM, you're
going to pay $4-billion. And there isn't $4-billion worth of synergy there
either.”

That hasn't stopped investors from warming up to the idea, or at least
trading on the immediate jump the speculation creates.

“It was huge,” Mr. Mather said of the rally Mr. Karmazin's comments created.
“But it was silly.”

takeshi.kovachs@gmail.com
August 8th, 2006, 06:30 PM
Mel made a big bet that the outrageous spending on content started
by Clayton and continuing to this day by Sirius would bring massive
amounts of subscribers in. It's now obvious to Mel that it has
completely failed which is why he's out there pushing this idea to try
to buy XM. Why? Because XM has better technology and better OEM
contracts.

It is now obvious to everyone that that bet has not paid. For all
their spending on content, Sirius added 276k net subscribers from
retail in the second quarter, half of what they did in the first
quarter.
The only content they had that has been proven to bring in
subscribers is Stern and that impact is now over. The numbers for
Sirius are absolutely atrocious and when Hyundai and Nissan start
producing XM equipped cars the #'s wil tilt further in XM's favor.


Hi Rich!!!!



Lowdown in Lodi wrote:
> GRANT ROBERTSON
>
> Globe and Mail Update
>
> It's been more than a month since Mel Karmazin poured some badly needed fuel
> on the flickering flame known as satellite radio stocks by single-handedly
> prompting takeover speculation within the industry. But the weeks since then
> have not been kind to investors.
>
> The outspoken chief executive officer of New York-based Sirius Satellite
> Radio Inc. sparked a rally in June when he suggested a takeover involving XM
> Satellite Radio Holdings Inc., his Washington-based rival, is possible.
>
> "Would I like to buy them? Sure," Mr. Karmazin told an industry conference
> in New York as investors began piling into the shares that afternoon.
>
> Such talk is nothing new for satellite radio, an industry that began five
> years ago in the United States and launched last year in Canada. A fresh
> rumour of an XM-Sirius alliance crops up at least once a year, creating a
> stir in the markets when it percolates.
> Related to this article
>
> The Globe and Mail
>
> XM shares gained 6.8 per cent in the hours after Mr. Karmazin spoke, while
> Sirius surged 5.1 per cent on three times the company's average trading
> volume.
>
> The mini-euphoria appears to have spread north of the border as well, where
> shares in Canadian Satellite Radio Holdings Inc., which operates the XM
> franchise in Canada, rose 5 per cent in the following days.
>
> But the rally was short-lived and the shares have fallen steadily since
> then.
>
> Aside from the temporary buzz created by such speculation, market watchers
> say there are few reasons for investors to get excited about the industry
> amid continuing losses.
>
> "As an investor, the stocks have been slammed because the market wants them
> to have continually accelerating growth," said Steve Mather, an analyst with
> Sanders Morris Harris in Los Angeles who tracks the industry. "And in the
> real world you don't get continually accelerating growth."
>
> The U.S. operations of Sirius and XM both reported deep second-quarter
> losses of $238-million (U.S.) and $230-million, respectively, in the past
> two weeks as the companies spend aggressively in a heated battle for
> subscribers.
>
> In Canada, where Canadian Satellite Radio launched in late 2005, the company
> remains in startup mode. However, losses associated with getting it off the
> ground hit $20.4-million (Canadian) in the recent quarter and investors have
> responded. The company's shares slipped to $8.50 last week, their lowest
> point since December's initial public offering at $16 a share on the Toronto
> Stock Exchange. (Sirius Canada is not publicly traded).
>
> Despite rosy projections for the future, the satellite radio companies are
> having a tough time convincing shareholders. Sirius increased its subscriber
> projections for 2006 to 6.3 million last week, up slightly from previous
> expectations of 6.2 million customers, but the news had little effect.
>
> Sirius shares fell Monday to $3.81 (U.S.) on the Nasdaq Stock Market, less
> than half their 52-week high in December.
>
> If investors are looking for relief, Mr. Mather suggests they could be
> waiting a while. Merger speculation may be the only thing lifting the
> industry these days, but it's an unlikely saviour since a deal would face
> too many hurdles, he said.
>
> "It's ridiculous, absurd, preposterous, illogical - pick your adjective,"
> Mr. Mather said. "They would never be allowed to go from two companies to
> one."
>
> Beyond the obvious monopoly concerns from U.S. regulators, Mr. Mather
> believes the biggest problem is justifying the price tag of a takeover.
>
> "You've got to pay $6- or 7-billion if you want Sirius, and there isn't
> $7-billion worth of synergy there," he said. "And if you want XM, you're
> going to pay $4-billion. And there isn't $4-billion worth of synergy there
> either."
>
> That hasn't stopped investors from warming up to the idea, or at least
> trading on the immediate jump the speculation creates.
>
> "It was huge," Mr. Mather said of the rally Mr. Karmazin's comments created.
> "But it was silly."

Lowdown in Lodi
August 8th, 2006, 06:30 PM
Takeshi

Your IP is 70.17.93.10.

Rich has been caught in one more tall tale.

David
August 8th, 2006, 08:30 PM
On 8 Aug 2006 16:50:28 -0700, takeshi.kovachs@gmail.com wrote:

> Mel made a big bet that the outrageous spending on content started
>by Clayton and continuing to this day by Sirius would bring massive
>amounts of subscribers in. It's now obvious to Mel that it has
>completely failed which is why he's out there pushing this idea to try
>to buy XM. Why? Because XM has better technology and better OEM
>contracts.
>
> It is now obvious to everyone that that bet has not paid. For all
>their spending on content, Sirius added 276k net subscribers from
>retail in the second quarter, half of what they did in the first
>quarter.
> The only content they had that has been proven to bring in
>subscribers is Stern and that impact is now over. The numbers for
>Sirius are absolutely atrocious and when Hyundai and Nissan start
>producing XM equipped cars the #'s wil tilt further in XM's favor.
>
>
So why are you bothering to put so much effort into this ridiculous
corporate sibling rivalry?

Dr. Droo
August 8th, 2006, 11:30 PM
David wrote:
> So why are you bothering to put so much effort into this ridiculous
> corporate sibling rivalry?

Because these folks don't have a day job.

--D

takeshi.kovachs@gmail.com
August 9th, 2006, 07:00 AM
Because I still think XM has a chance at becoming a reasonably
profitable business. That chance seems to be slipping away though.
Plus I like to see what the inmates in the asylum are saying every once
in a while.



David wrote:
> On 8 Aug 2006 16:50:28 -0700, takeshi.kovachs@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Mel made a big bet that the outrageous spending on content started
> >by Clayton and continuing to this day by Sirius would bring massive
> >amounts of subscribers in. It's now obvious to Mel that it has
> >completely failed which is why he's out there pushing this idea to try
> >to buy XM. Why? Because XM has better technology and better OEM
> >contracts.
> >
> > It is now obvious to everyone that that bet has not paid. For all
> >their spending on content, Sirius added 276k net subscribers from
> >retail in the second quarter, half of what they did in the first
> >quarter.
> > The only content they had that has been proven to bring in
> >subscribers is Stern and that impact is now over. The numbers for
> >Sirius are absolutely atrocious and when Hyundai and Nissan start
> >producing XM equipped cars the #'s wil tilt further in XM's favor.
> >
> >
> So why are you bothering to put so much effort into this ridiculous
> corporate sibling rivalry?

David
August 9th, 2006, 08:30 AM
On 9 Aug 2006 05:48:10 -0700, takeshi.kovachs@gmail.com wrote:

>Because I still think XM has a chance at becoming a reasonably
>profitable business. That chance seems to be slipping away though.
>Plus I like to see what the inmates in the asylum are saying every once
>in a while.
>
XM will never prosper unless they quit worrying less about Sirius and
more about their own mediocre programming.

fafaflunky
August 11th, 2006, 05:31 AM
takeshi.kovachs@gmail.com wrote:
> Because I still think XM has a chance at becoming a reasonably
> profitable business. That chance seems to be slipping away though.
> Plus I like to see what the inmates in the asylum are saying every once
> in a while.
>
>
>


XM is done. It

fafaflunky
August 11th, 2006, 05:31 AM
takeshi.kovachs@gmail.com wrote:
> Because I still think XM has a chance at becoming a reasonably
> profitable business. That chance seems to be slipping away though.
> Plus I like to see what the inmates in the asylum are saying every once
> in a while.
>
>
>


XM is done. It

fafaflunky
August 11th, 2006, 05:31 AM
takeshi.kovachs@gmail.com wrote:
> Because I still think XM has a chance at becoming a reasonably
> profitable business. That chance seems to be slipping away though.
> Plus I like to see what the inmates in the asylum are saying every once
> in a while.
>
>
>


XM is done. It

Capricorne
August 11th, 2006, 04:30 PM
fafaflunky asked :
> takeshi.kovachs@gmail.com wrote:
>> Because I still think XM has a chance at becoming a
>> reasonably profitable business. That chance seems to be
>> slipping away though. Plus I like to see what the inmates in
>> the asylum are saying every once in a while.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> XM is done. It

It what ??? 8-o