Digital Radio Central - Sponsored by TSS Radio
  DRC Home Page DRC Forums Contact Us  
 
SIRIUS Backstage Forum
 
 
 
  Sirius Satellite Radio XM Satellite Radio iTunes/iPod Slacker Pandora  
 
 
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read  
Go Back   SIRIUS Backstage Forum > >
Visit Digital Radio Central

Notices

The Street Converse with other investors about finance, economic and investment strategies. This is also the place to discuss SIRIUS XM company news and your favorite stocks.

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
 
Old 08-04-2005, 05:14 AM   #91
Satradioman
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Aug 26, 2003
Posts: 1,616
Satradioman is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
DirecTV was once much larger than Dish Network, but now Dish has easily surpassed them.

Tsk,Tsk tsk....Not true...
Satradioman is offline  
 
 
Old 08-04-2005, 08:21 AM   #92
jon galt
Loyal Listener
 
Join Date: Oct 02, 2002
Posts: 247
jon galt is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnesia
Sorry, but I can't avoid a semantic argument.

Let's say that your mother was 19 years old when you were born.

When you were 1, she was 20. You were 5% of her age.
When you were 2, she was 21. You were 10% of her age.
(...)
When you were 19, she was 38. You were 50% of her age.

Are you catching up? Do you think that you'll ever reach the same age as her?

I personally don't know whether or not Sirius will ever have the same number of subscribers as XM, but the fact that SIRI started the year with 11% market share and ended with 26% does not mean that they are catching up.

The only way that Sirius can catch up is to consistently sign up more subs per quarter than XM. And logically, that means that every quarter that they sign up fewer subs than XM they are falling farther behind.
Thank you Mr. Amnesia.
jon galt is offline  
 
 
Old 08-04-2005, 08:36 AM   #93
jon galt
Loyal Listener
 
Join Date: Oct 02, 2002
Posts: 247
jon galt is on a distinguished road
Default

Investing is done with the brain, not the heart.
Some folks here need to remember that.

Want to go to the mountains and scream how Sirius is the greatest company in the world - fine, knock yourself out.
But maybe take it somewhere else as their board is about investing and not how much we love the product.

As for % growth, its silly to scream about that at this point. When you base is zero or close to that, your gains will always be over 100%.
jon galt is offline  
 
 
Old 08-04-2005, 08:43 AM   #94
FrontMed
Loyal Listener
 
Join Date: May 15, 2005
Posts: 104
FrontMed is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Sirius 2Q-04 CPGA---234.00
Sirius 2Q-05 CPGA---160.00

XM 2Q-04 CPGA------101.00
XM 2Q-05 CPGA-------98.00


We see who has made much greater improvement in the last year.
It is obvious you don't konw the difference between CPGA and SACs.

The 10Q is out today. Go read it a couple times and you may start to get the idea.
FrontMed is offline  
 
 
Old 08-04-2005, 08:50 AM   #95
Amnesia
Sirius Star
 
Amnesia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 03, 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,035
Amnesia is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
I'm sorry you have to be such a negativist. Optimism is so much better.
Once again, I am not a negativist at all. My argument is based on logic, not personal preference or opinion.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renasissance Man
If a newcomer entered the personal computer manufacturing field today, and in three years managed to capture one third of the market, heads on Wall Street would indeed be turning.
Very true. Do you think it would be possible for a new company to manage to get 33% of the market while still selling fewer computers than all the other companies in the market?

Yes, you are correct that growth can be rapid, slow or constant. However, Sirius gets customers by selling subscriptions, not by measuring growth. Speed of growth is a by-product of selling subcriptions, not the other way around. Do you agree?

So if it's selling subscriptions that matters, then that's what you should pay attention to, not growth speed. To use your analogy, if a new PC company came along and managed to sell many more computers per year than established companies, I would be very impressed indeed...But that's not what's happened with XM and Sirius.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renasissance Man
Sirius is doing just fine. XM got out of the starting gate first, but that doesn't mean they will necessarily win the race.
What do you mean by "win the race"? The only race I see is in subscription count. Not growth rate. Sirius certainly has a higher growth rate, but as I hope you see from my earlier posts, that is only to be expected.

So if you expect Sirius to win the sub count race, the only solution (mathematically) is for Sirius to consistently sell more subs per quarter than XM. Unless they do this, they will never catch up, no matter what their growth rate is or their market share. Those two percentages are not the race. The race is sub count.

If XM sells more subs per quarter than Sirius, Sirius will only fall further and further behind in the sub count race. Even if, when Stern signs on, Sirius outsells XM for a quarter or two, that wouldn't be indicitive of a change of race position. As of the end of Q205, XM had more than twice as many subs as Sirius. It would take Sirius many quarters of consistently outselling XM before it could be reasonably suggested that Sirius is catching up, much less winning.

You mention that Sirius "isn't a one trick pony" and has lots of new programming coming along. My argument has nothing to do with XM and Sirius---my argument is mathematical/logical. It doesn't matter (for my argument) if we're talking about radio, cars or PCs.

I certainly think it's possible that Sirius could overtake XM someday. But the only indication will be SIRI outselling XM each quarter, not a large growth rate.
__________________
Amnesia is offline  
 
 
Old 08-04-2005, 09:01 AM   #96
FrontMed
Loyal Listener
 
Join Date: May 15, 2005
Posts: 104
FrontMed is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
both are good investments.
Perhaps. One is clearly far better than the other.

Quote:
i don't understand why someone who bashes sirius comes here other than the fact that he states that he has options and has reason to bash sirius.
Of course. You would like it far better if nobody ever presented an alternative view at all; let alone, one which is rationally based rather than rooted in emotion and hype.

Let's not have any THINKING around here.

Geez.
FrontMed is offline  
 
 
Old 08-05-2005, 04:16 PM   #97
Renaissance Man
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Jul 27, 2005
Posts: 1,190
Renaissance Man is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnesia
Once again, I am not a negativist at all. My argument is based on logic, not personal preference or opinion.

Very true. Do you think it would be possible for a new company to manage to get 33% of the market while still selling fewer computers than all the other companies in the market?

Yes, you are correct that growth can be rapid, slow or constant. However, Sirius gets customers by selling subscriptions, not by measuring growth. Speed of growth is a by-product of selling subcriptions, not the other way around. Do you agree?

So if it's selling subscriptions that matters, then that's what you should pay attention to, not growth speed. To use your analogy, if a new PC company came along and managed to sell many more computers per year than established companies, I would be very impressed indeed...But that's not what's happened with XM and Sirius.

What do you mean by "win the race"? The only race I see is in subscription count. Not growth rate. Sirius certainly has a higher growth rate, but as I hope you see from my earlier posts, that is only to be expected.

So if you expect Sirius to win the sub count race, the only solution (mathematically) is for Sirius to consistently sell more subs per quarter than XM. Unless they do this, they will never catch up, no matter what their growth rate is or their market share. Those two percentages are not the race. The race is sub count.

If XM sells more subs per quarter than Sirius, Sirius will only fall further and further behind in the sub count race. Even if, when Stern signs on, Sirius outsells XM for a quarter or two, that wouldn't be indicitive of a change of race position. As of the end of Q205, XM had more than twice as many subs as Sirius. It would take Sirius many quarters of consistently outselling XM before it could be reasonably suggested that Sirius is catching up, much less winning.

You mention that Sirius "isn't a one trick pony" and has lots of new programming coming along. My argument has nothing to do with XM and Sirius---my argument is mathematical/logical. It doesn't matter (for my argument) if we're talking about radio, cars or PCs.

I certainly think it's possible that Sirius could overtake XM someday. But the only indication will be SIRI outselling XM each quarter, not a large growth rate.
Your argument is based on faulty logic, not good logic.

Your alleged "mathematical/logical" argument makes about as much sense as a politician claiming victory because early returns have him in the lead. However, we all know the early leader doesn't always win.

You simply ignore arguments you are incapable of countering.

I repeat, for Sirius to gain 33% of market share in such a short time, after a year later start in the business, is indeed impressive. They are making RAPID gains in market share. Just to state that "Oh, they'd be making gains in market share anyway" is irrelevant. There's nothing in the world that guarantees they would gain as much market share as they have in such a short time.

Their rapid growth in market share shows strength. And the fact that several XM fanboys feel the need to come to this site to attack Sirius, shows the XM crowd is nervous about the "Sirius Surge".

The race is a long way from over. The company that has the early lead does not always win the race.

Apple had the early lead in the computer race, where do they stand today?

Sony had the early lead in the VCR race, with their technologically superior BetaMax VCR. Where is Sony and the BetaMax today?

DirecTV had a huge early lead in the SatTV race. Dish Network has now blown them off the map, and would have bought Direc out a while back if the FCC hadn't interfered.

The XM fanboys are counting their chickens before they're hatched. This race is really just starting. The XM hare is ridiculing the Sirius tortoise. But we all know who ultimately won that race.
Renaissance Man is offline  
 
 
Old 08-05-2005, 04:56 PM   #98
Amnesia
Sirius Star
 
Amnesia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 03, 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,035
Amnesia is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
Your alleged "mathematical/logical" argument makes about as much sense as a politician claiming victory because early returns have him in the lead. However, we all know the early leader doesn't always win.
That's true. And why is that? Why doesn't an early leader in the vote count always win?

It's because an opponent gets more votes than the leader. It doesn't matter how quickly the opponent gets votes---all that matters is the number of votes. Right? Politicans don't get elected based on vote growth rate, they get elected based on number of votes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
They are making RAPID gains in market share.
OK, so you're impressed that Sirius has been gaining market share. Why? What does that mean to you?

Do think it's indicitive that Sirius will soon catch up to XM and perhaps even pass them in sub count? Do you think that it's possible for Sirius to do that while still selling fewer subs each quarter than XM?

(Once again, I must point out that I'm not stating a preference for the "winner" one way or another. )
__________________
Amnesia is offline  
 
 
Old 08-05-2005, 05:34 PM   #99
Renaissance Man
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Jul 27, 2005
Posts: 1,190
Renaissance Man is on a distinguished road
Default

[quote="Satradioman"]
Quote:
Tsk,Tsk tsk....Not true...
DirectTV had a net loss of 1.94 BILLION dollars in 2004.

Dish Network turned a nice profit the same year.

Dish was poised to buy Direc in 2002, but the deal was axed by the FCC.

So it's rather obvious that Dish is doing much better, though they started out as the distinct underdog in their early days.
Renaissance Man is offline  
 
 
Old 08-05-2005, 06:04 PM   #100
Renaissance Man
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Jul 27, 2005
Posts: 1,190
Renaissance Man is on a distinguished road
Default

"That's true. And why is that? Why doesn't an early leader in the vote count always win? It's because an opponent gets more votes than the leader. It doesn't matter how quickly the opponent gets votes---all that matters is the number of votes. Right? Politicans don't get elected based on vote growth rate, they get elected based on number of votes."

>>Your lack of logic is both astounding and amusing. You are unable to realize that the race for satellite radio supremacy is still in its early stages. Your ASSumption is based on the faulty premise that XM will continue to sell more subs every quarter from here on out.

>>An ultimate winner may not be decided for several years. So you are basing your ASSumption on early returns.

"OK, so you're impressed that Sirius has been gaining market share. Why? What does that mean to you?" Do think it's indicitive that Sirius will soon catch up to XM and perhaps even pass them in sub count? Do you think that it's possible for Sirius to do that while still selling fewer subs each quarter than XM?"

>>The rapidity with which they've established such a significant portion of market share is impressive. They are certainly moving in the right direction as far as catching XM. It's not a given that Sirius will continue to sell fewer subs per quarter.

>>The hard fact is that Sirius is rapidly gaining market share. Which is a very positive sign, considering they haven't even released any portable receivers, Stern isn't here yet, and the NFL season hasn't started up yet.

>>And when Sirius gets up and going in Canada, their exclusive NHL coverage will be a significant plus. Hockey and football are both considerably more popular than baseball in Canada. So it's rather obvious which choice most Canadian sports fans will be making regarding SatRadio companies.

>>When the above things happen, look for Sirius to grow even faster.
Renaissance Man is offline  
 
 
Old 08-05-2005, 09:17 PM   #101
FrontMed
Loyal Listener
 
Join Date: May 15, 2005
Posts: 104
FrontMed is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
"That's true. And why is that? Why doesn't an early leader in the vote count always win? It's because an opponent gets more votes than the leader. It doesn't matter how quickly the opponent gets votes---all that matters is the number of votes. Right? Politicans don't get elected based on vote growth rate, they get elected based on number of votes."
This is a really, really wimpy argument in support of Sirius (or against XM).

It isn't a popularity contest. It is about running a business, hopefully, to turn a profit some day.

XM could have 10 million subs today, had it wanted to give radios away. Just look at last XMAS, when Sirius was throwing everything it had at the wall hoping a million subs would stick. Sirius was rebating and price cutting and advertising extensively. And, they got their million plus. But at the expense of 262 million dollars in Q4 loss -- real money taken from real shareholders.

XM management has always made it about getting to breakeven. SIrius has been unable to even APPROACH the concept of breakeven; if they missed their 1 mln subs last year they had a huge problem. And if they were to miss 3 mln subs this year, they would have a huge problem. They won't. But you may be looking at a quarter billion or bigger loss in Q4. Sirius could well end 2005 having lost 900 million dollars of shareholders' money, in an effort to acquire 3 million subscribers.

XM's current position is due to one thing only: SUPERB MANAGEMENT in the face of a competitor with LOUSY management. Period, end of story. It isn't because XM got a "head start" (they didn't). It is because XM management knows what they're doing and Sirius' management sucked. Today, it is better, but they're still learning.
FrontMed is offline  
 
 
Old 08-05-2005, 09:31 PM   #102
Sirius_Rich
Top Dog Member

NO 2 Million??
 
Sirius_Rich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 28, 2003
Location: Houston
Posts: 4,364
Sirius_Rich has a spectacular aura aboutSirius_Rich has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via AIM to Sirius_Rich Send a message via Yahoo to Sirius_Rich NO 2 Million??
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrontMed
bla ...bla... bla
__________________

LISTENING 100% COMMERCIAL FREE SINCE '03
Sirius_Rich is offline  
 
 
Old 08-05-2005, 10:14 PM   #103
Amnesia
Sirius Star
 
Amnesia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 03, 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,035
Amnesia is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
You are unable to realize that the race for satellite radio supremacy is still in its early stages. Your ASSumption is based on the faulty premise that XM will continue to sell more subs every quarter from here on out.
I made no such assumption. Never once did I claim that XM will always have more subs. Please find where you think I said that. All I said was that in order for Sirius to pass XM, they need to consistently sell more subs than XM each quarter. A high growth rate is irrelevant if XM continues to sell more subscriptions.

This is not an assumption. It is a mathematical fact. It has nothing to do with personal preference or opinions about Sirius's future outlook or anything like that. It's not subjective; it's objective. I'll say it again so that we're clear:

In order for Sirius to pass XM, they need to consistently sell more subs than XM each quarter. A high growth rate is irrelevant if XM continues to sell more subscriptions.

Note that not once did I express a personal opinion about XM vs. Sirius, management styles, content choices, etc. I am talking about math and logic. The argument is the same for any two companies in any two industries:

If you have two companies, X and S, and X starts out with more customers than S, then the only way for S to surpass company X's number of customers is to sign up more customers per quarter/year/whatever than company X. That's all that matters. Number of customers signed. That's it.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
An ultimate winner may not be decided for several years. So you are basing your ASSumption on early returns.
Again, I have made no assumptions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
When the above things happen, look for Sirius to grow even faster.
Do I even have to say it?
__________________
Amnesia is offline  
 
 
Old 08-05-2005, 11:20 PM   #104
Renaissance Man
Sirius Star
 
Join Date: Jul 27, 2005
Posts: 1,190
Renaissance Man is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amnesia
All I said was that in order for Sirius to pass XM, they need to consistently sell more subs than XM each quarter. A high growth rate is irrelevant if XM continues to sell more subscriptions....In order for Sirius to pass XM, they need to consistently sell more subs than XM each quarter. A high growth rate is irrelevant if XM continues to sell more subscriptions.
No, they don't have to consistently sell more subs each quarter. They could have a few great quarters, and XM could have a few lousy ones.

You're obviously not a business man, or at least not much of one, or you'd realize that a rapid growth rate in business is very important.

To gain 33% of market share in only a few years, when the other company started selling subs about a year earlier, shows that Sirius is making significant headway.

A gain in market share each year is not a given. Some companies lose market share some years, or even most years. The fact that Sirius has gained significant market share each year they've been in business, speaks well of them.

Which is why we will continue to see people like FrontMed attack Sirius. If Sirius was the good for nothing company people like FrontMed try to portray it as, why do they spend so much of their time trying so hard to convince us of it?

The hard fact is, the XM lapdogs know that Sirius is becoming a bigger threat each year. So they launch propaganda attacks on Sirius, in an attempt to undermine the company.

The battle will eventually be won by content, and even many who don't like Sirius have to admit Sirius is currently the leader in that regard.
Renaissance Man is offline  
 
 
Old 08-06-2005, 09:30 AM   #105
Amnesia
Sirius Star
 
Amnesia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 03, 2004
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,035
Amnesia is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
No, they don't have to consistently sell more subs each quarter. They could have a few great quarters, and XM could have a few lousy ones.
A few quarters isn't going to offset a 2 million subscriber deficit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
You're obviously not a business man, or at least not much of one, or you'd realize that a rapid growth rate in business is very important.
It's too bad that you feel that you must resort to personal attacks (in several of your recent messages). I've only been courteous to you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
To gain 33% of market share in only a few years, when the other company started selling subs about a year earlier, shows that Sirius is making significant headway.
When you say "significant headway" it sounds like you're talking about the competition for more subscribers.

I think you may have lost track of the fact that satrad is a duopoly.
A duopoly is like my child/parent example. It is very possible to gain market share while still falling further and further behind in terms of number of subscribers---in fact, this is exactly what XM and Sirius have done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
A gain in market share each year is not a given. Some companies lose market share some years, or even most years. The fact that Sirius has gained significant market share each year they've been in business, speaks well of them.
Now you're ignoring the math again. Sirius is a company in the early stage of its development. It started from a very small number of subscribers. With a small number to start from, any change in subscriber numbers constitutes a large swing percentage-wise.

If Sirius hadn't gained large market share each quarter, it wouldn't exist any more.

This is the EOY data for XM and Sirius:
Code:
Date         XMSR            SIRI        XM%   SIRI%
====================================================
Q401       27,733               0       100%      0%
----------------------------------------------------
- adds    319,426          29,947          
----------------------------------------------------
Q402      347,159          29,947        92%      8%
----------------------------------------------------
- adds  1,013,069         231,114         
----------------------------------------------------
Q403    1,360,228         261,061        84%     16%
----------------------------------------------------
- adds  1,868,896         882,197         
----------------------------------------------------
Q404    3,229,124       1,143,258        74%     26%
Since SIRI started 2002 with no subscribers, I hope you realize that signing up any subs would increase their market share.

OK, but what it they had stayed at the same 8% market share that they had at the end of 2002? Well, if they ended 2004 with 8% market share, then they would have had only 281,111 subs.

A quick back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that in this scenario, Sirius would have lost about $175 million more than they did in real life. How viable of a company do you think Sirius would be if they had less than 300K subs at the end of 2004 + an even larger debt?

My point is that if a company starts with nothing or very little, growth is not only to be expected, but critical from a business standpoint for a company in a duopoly. It's not something to be amazed at.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renaissance Man
The battle will eventually be won by content, and even many who don't like Sirius have to admit Sirius is currently the leader in that regard.
This is clearly subjective. There are those who prefer Sirius and their choices in content and those who prefer XM's choices.
__________________
Amnesia is offline  
 
 
 

Go Back   SIRIUS Backstage Forum > >


Digitalradiocentral.com




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:25 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO v2.0.39 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
All Content Copyright SIRIUS Backstage. All Rights Reserved. SIRIUS and registered trademarks are the property of SIRIUS Satellite Radio, Inc. The opinions posted on SIRIUS Backstage website and forums are those of the individual posters and/or this website and are not necessarily the opinions or positions of SIRIUS Satellite Radio, Inc.