# XM lets many PD, onair talent go...



## syphix

From DCRTV.com:



> *Confirmed: Axe Hits XMers *- _10/14_ - Early Tuesday, DCRTV told you that DC-based XM Satellite Radio was on the verge of making massing cuts following its summer merger with rival Sirius. On Tuesday evening, we got this from an XM source: "All the great people that are gone from XM radio, may we all RIP... Let's go back and take the terrestial world by storm... Gone but not forgotten: '50s Channel PD Ken Smith, '50s Channel MD Matt The Cat, '60s Channel PD Pat Clark, '80s Channel MD/afternooner Kandy Klutch, Cross-Country PD Jessie Scott, Decades Channel Senior PD Kurt Gilcrest, Cafe PD Bill Evans, all of XM Urban accept three people." Also among the 50-ish employees cut Tuesday: George Taylor Morris of Deep Tracks, '70s-On-7's John Clay; Billy Zero and Tobi from XMU, Ethel's Erik Range and Rick Lambert, and Bill Hutton of Lucy. And, another round of cuts could be coming in early November. The word is that Sirius XM suits have abandoned plans to continue separate line-ups for each service, and instead will feature one common channel line-up on both systems. With the Sirius music channel versions probably being offered on both. More soon.....


and from AllAccess:



> Sadly, the number of departures from SIRIUS XM SATELLITE RADIO keep growing. And yes, these are all from the XM side:
> 
> BONEYARD PD/air talent KEVIN KASH exits and is in search of his next opportunity.
> 
> Regional Mexican channel, XM-92 AGUILA PD THE MAD MEXICAN exits.
> 
> 70 ON 70s PD JOHN CLAY, XM PD BILLY ZERO and MD TOBI, New Wave FRED Channel PD RICK LAMBERT, Alternative Channel LUCY PD BILL HUTTON, and SOUL STREET PD BOBBY BENNETT all exit as well as SOUL STREET MD LEIGH HAMILTON.
> 
> Also leaving are CAFE CHANNEL MD BRIAN CHAMBERLAIN, and personality CATHY CARTER.


and DCRTV.com (today...updated):


> 10/15 - More cuts at DC's XM today. Soul Street's Bobby Bennett and Leigh Hamilton, Raw's Mz Kitti, The City's DJ Xclusive and Lisa Ivery, Viva's Karla Rodriguez, and Aguila's Mad Mexican. Plus Enlighten and '40s-On-4's Marlin Taylor, Ken Smith of '50s-On-5, Pat Clarke of '60s-On-6, XM America's Ray Knight, John Welch, and "Country Dan" Dixon, BK Kirkland of the Groove, plus Bill Evans, Brian Chamberlain, and Cathy Carter from XM Cafe. XM Gospel's Jay Bryant and Suite 62's Vic Clemens. Upwards of 80 have been led to the satrad unemployment gallows, so far, we hear. More soon.....


So, if you take it that the PD's/MD's (program directors, music directors) being fired indicates a "dropped" channel in the merger, that would mean...

- 50's on 5
- 60's on 6
- 70's on 7
- 80's on 8 
- 90's on 9*
- America
- Suite 62
- X-Country
- XM Cafe
- Lucy
- Deep Tracks*
- Ethel
- Raw
- XMU
- Soul Street
- The City
- Viva
- Aguila
- Boneyard
- Fred
- XMLM
- The Groove
- America
- Beyond Jazz...

...are gutted. 

*90's on 9 has no airstaff, but the PD, Kurt Gilchrist was let go. Deep Tracks has GTM retire "voluntarily", though some say he would have been let go eventually anyway.

#The latest update from DCRTV.com has Marlin Taylor's name removed from the list of those let go. So, perhaps 40's on 4, Escape and Enlighten (or something like them) are still safe. I've removed them from the list.

NOTE: George Taylor Morris is rumored to have left due to lung cancer (and perhaps the writing on the wall).


----------



## ThunderRoad

And it sounds like they could be reneging on offering ala carte (a big selling point to the FCC). According to Radio & Records:

Another date being tossed around is Nov. 5, when it's rumored that a new combined Sirius XM lineup will be rolled out -- rather than doing an a la carte/pick from both sides dealie like had been previously announced, it's looking like both will consolidate into a single channel lineup that will be beamed out over both Sirius' and XM's networks.


----------



## syphix

ThunderRoad said:


> And it sounds like they could be reneging on offering ala carte (a big selling point to the FCC). According to Radio & Records:
> 
> Another date being tossed around is Nov. 5, when it's rumored that a new combined Sirius XM lineup will be rolled out -- rather than doing an a la carte/pick from both sides dealie like had been previously announced, it's looking like both will consolidate into a single channel lineup that will be beamed out over both Sirius' and XM's networks.


They won't be reneging on offering a la carte...they simply will only allow picking from the new, merged lineup, and not "some from XM, some from SIRIUS". That's still, I believe, following the conditions of the merger...just not as hoped by most subscribers.


----------



## tonyd79

Some from XM, some from Sirius is not scheduled in November. Never was.

They need the multi-service radios to do that. The first thing we will see is the a la carte radios for each service.

Why can't people in the media keep this straight. First was the "Best of" then the a la carte *then* the single radio for both services. They haven't even announced the packages for the single radio yet.


----------



## bjflynn04

I was using the new xm2go music manager that I just downloaded from the xmradio site to manage the songs on my inno and noticed that on the xm content that songs I had recorded off 47- ethel the channel was listed as 47- ATN Radio and the songs recorded off 68- The Heat was listed as 68- Top 12.
View attachment 15984


----------



## syphix

Hmmm...just for the heck of it, I recorded a couple others...

159 - ATN Radio shows up as 159 - Sports Guide
143 - XM Sports Guide shows up as...143 - Sports Guide

...so, it stops there...so far...


----------



## tvjay

ThunderRoad said:


> And it sounds like they could be reneging on offering ala carte (a big selling point to the FCC). According to Radio & Records:
> 
> Another date being tossed around is Nov. 5, when it's rumored that a new combined Sirius XM lineup will be rolled out -- rather than doing an a la carte/pick from both sides dealie like had been previously announced, it's looking like both will consolidate into a single channel lineup that will be beamed out over both Sirius' and XM's networks.


I don't know what is going to happen or not happen, but did anyone actually think that Sirius was going to improve XM? Any corporate takeover means FEWER jobs. Always has and always will. The FCC had the regulation that said there were to be two licenses held by two individual companies. Well guess what that was there for a reason. COMPETITION! The fact that there is no longer competition for satellite radio will mean fewer offerings from satellite radio, PERIOD.

My theory: One music channel for each kind of music (I was actually hoping to have The Beat 36 and BPM but I guess I won't get that anytime soon). There will probably also be a couple less niche channels and a bunch more sports channels.


----------



## Dolly

I just felt all along we and the FCC were being lied to so the merger would pass. But being merged is not going to do Sirius/XM any good, if they both start to lose their customers because of line up changes that people don't like.


----------



## YKW06

Dolly said:


> I just felt all along we and the FCC were being lied to so the merger would pass. But being merged is not going to do Sirius/XM any good, if they both start to lose their customers because of line up changes that people don't like.


For that matter, it won't help if the FCC realizes that it was lied to; the FCC's approval of the merger was conditional, and the agency retains oversight over those conditions. Going down the road Mel seems to favor risks massive fines and/or a forced dissolution of the merger, neither of which would bode well for either the company/ies or the subscribers.


----------



## paulman182

They've lied before, so it is not much of a stretch to believe they would lie now.

And they'll probably get away with it.


----------



## syphix

Where has it been proven that SIRIUS/XM has "lied" to the FCC?? They said from the onset that "duplications" would be merged/deleted in order to cut costs... This is part of that.

As much I hate that Lucy & Deep Tracks look like they're gone, I knew it was possible and likely. And the released names was by accident on XM's side...we don't know who/how many got fired from SIRIUS (though I do doubt it's as many).


----------



## paulman182

syphix said:


> Where has it been proven that SIRIUS/XM has "lied" to the FCC?? They said from the onset that "duplications" would be merged/deleted in order to cut costs... This is part of that.
> 
> As much I hate that Lucy & Deep Tracks look like they're gone, I knew it was possible and likely. And the released names was by accident on XM's side...we don't know who/how many got fired from SIRIUS (though I do doubt it's as many).


They said that dual-format receivers would be available soon after the two services were originally launched. That was a lie.

They originally agreed to the stipulation that the two services would never merge.

Although not technically a "lie," they have been cited by the FCC for illegal power output from their FM modulators, and improper operation of the terrestrial XM translators.

These breaks would certainly have not been given to traditional broadcast radio or TV stations. And yet the satellite broadcasters still can't stay afloat.


----------



## syphix

paulman182 said:


> They said that dual-format receivers would be available soon after the two services were originally launched. That was a lie.


They said a la carte within three months. They just introduced that...almost a month ahead of schedule. They said dual-format receivers within 9 months. (PDF proof) They're on track to do that...some say by Christmas or mid-January.



> They originally agreed to the stipulation that the two services would never merge.


And they aren't...completely. Just the music channels. They ALWAYS said the music channels would probably merge soon after merger.
And they never said "never".



> Although not technically a "lie," they have been cited by the FCC for illegal power output from their FM modulators, and improper operation of the terrestrial XM translators.


...for which they paid a $20 million fine.


----------



## paulman182

The dual-service receivers were promised way back when XM and Sirius went on the air. I'd say they are a little behind schedule.

Yes, the two services have merged. That was the FCC holdup--the law had to be changed before they could do it. It is even starting to look like the channel lineups will be identical, although that has nothing to do with whether the two companies have become one or not--they obviously have.

The record is there for anyone to see ; it's not really debatable as to the past honesty of the two companies. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't argue on the forums, because what one other poster thinks is really not that important to me.


----------



## syphix

paulman182 said:


> The dual-service receivers were promised way back when XM and Sirius went on the air. I'd say they are a little behind schedule.


They never _promised_ one. They were required by the FCC to _develop_ one. Well, they did...they just both thought that there was no financial reason to sell it, since they couldn't subsidize such a receiver and possibly not get the subscription to fund it. BTW, why wasn't DirecTV/Dish Network required something similar?? Ah...the NAB...that's right...


> Yes, the two services have merged. That was the FCC holdup--the law had to be changed before they could do it. It is even starting to look like the channel lineups will be identical, although that has nothing to do with whether the two companies have become one or not--they obviously have.


SIRIUS & XM never said they wouldn't merge. But yes, there was a "rule" (not law) that forbid them to merge. But laws are not always perfect, and can always be repealed/changed.


> The record is there for anyone to see ; it's not really debatable as to the past honesty of the two companies. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't argue on the forums, because what one other poster thinks is really not that important to me.


Agreed. And don't get me wrong: I'm NOT a fan of what's happening, but I can't say I didn't see it coming. I just thought it would be more of a "merger" than a "takeover". I was wrong.


----------



## Lee L

Well, I expected this from the beginning, but I am still dissapointed to see it come to fruition. Given how Sirius has much shallower playlists, this will be bad for many XM listeners. I had help out a glimmer of hope that they would allow some of the goodness of XM to rub off onto Sirius, but I guess not.

Hopefully, they will at least keep Fred.

And we can argue till teh cows come home about the Dual radio thing. The SATRAD cos say they never needed to actually sell the thing, but why on earth would the FCC write that into the licenses if the intent was not to have it be available to the public. Congrats on their lawyering skills (and boo to the FCC for not making it more clear), but surely they do not expect the public to beleive that interpretation.


----------



## Steve Mehs

So when will it be announced that Madison and Kayla of Sirius will be gone? Oh yeah it probably won't, Sirius likes to have airhead on air personalities that babble about irrelevant stupidness. Since the merger was approved I dropped one XM subscription and Sirius Internet Radio Premium, keep pushing me, I'll be gone. If Trinity is released from Watercolors, another XM subscription will go.

Merger of equals, my ass.


----------



## syphix

Per AllAccess.com, XM Cafe's MD Brian Chamberlain and Cathy Carter are leaving...so, that sticks a fork in XM Cafe...


----------



## archer75

No point in keeping duplicate channels of the same music. We all expected such channels to get dropped which is fine. 

I GREATLY prefer Sirius over XM anyways. And the channels they are keeping are the various talk, news and sports which is about the only thing I want from XM. So it works out great.


----------



## jimmyv2000

i hope big tracks xm-49 and top tracks xm-46 stay i like my commercial free/dj free tunes!


----------



## Ken S

paulman182 said:


> The dual-service receivers were promised way back when XM and Sirius went on the air. I'd say they are a little behind schedule.
> 
> Yes, the two services have merged. That was the FCC holdup--the law had to be changed before they could do it. It is even starting to look like the channel lineups will be identical, although that has nothing to do with whether the two companies have become one or not--they obviously have.
> 
> The record is there for anyone to see ; it's not really debatable as to the past honesty of the two companies. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't argue on the forums, because what one other poster thinks is really not that important to me.


They promised them within nine months of the merger and are stating delivery early Q1 of 2009 so they'll easily hit their date.

The radios that allow you to receive the best of XM package on Sirius is already available.

Eventually the channel lineups will be identical because it is one company. There will be more offerings though because Sirius customers will be able to get unique XM offerings like baseball, Oprah, etc.

I don't think anyone should be shocked that they are only going to support one best of the 60s channel.


----------



## Ken S

paulman182 said:


> Yes, the two services have merged. That was the FCC holdup--the law had to be changed before they could do it. It is even starting to look like the channel lineups will be identical, although that has nothing to do with whether the two companies have become one or not--they obviously have.
> 
> The record is there for anyone to see ; it's not really debatable as to the past honesty of the two companies. We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't argue on the forums, because what one other poster thinks is really not that important to me.


The FCC rule was changed to allow the merger. Without it both would have failed...they may still fail. Rule changes to allow mergers happens all the time. The FCC changing rules to benefit broadcasters also happens all the time. DirecTV, Dish, Clear Channel, etc. have all been the beneficiary of rules changes. You remember little things like limitations on how many radio stations one company could own, etc.

SiriusXM is in a very, very competitive marketplace...between digitial music services/devices like the iPod, internet radio, terrestrial radio, HD Radio...they are in an uphill fight.


----------



## paja

Consolidating the music channels means that I will drop one of the two subs I have. Had one of each because of the different programming each service had. :nono2:


----------



## max1

This is too bad. I liked Kandy when she was on the 80's channel On xm. If they start messing with the Sirius music channels that I like I agree with Steve I may dump my subscription. I gotta have my Magic Matt show in the mornings on 70's. He keeps me going in the am. I do have an HD radio and get a lot of stations so will see.


----------



## iotp

it'll be interesting to see what will happen in the shake up. 

Personally speaking, my favorite XM stations are 6, 7, 8, 20, 23, 24, 26, 44, 49, and 54.

They will offer a merged channel select. When? Is the question we all have.


----------



## thefunks67

I have been on the bubble with regard to canceling my Sirius sub or not. 

We have XM at work and I enjoy the deep playlist that XM has with regard to the 60's, 70's and 80's. The Sirius play list is a bit shallow on those channels. 

I am inclined to cancel my Sirius sub and switch to XM, but given this news I am not sure if I should sub to XM.

Perhaps I should just kill my sub and go back to listening to my CD's and iPod in the car.

So much for this merger benefiting the consumer. It's confusing as hell now.

-Funk


----------



## TerpEE93

XMLM
XMU
Ethel
Lucy

That's pretty much my playlist (with some Squizz, Verge, and XM Classics mixed in). Some of the HD subchannels in the DC area play better music than I find on XM now. Maybe it's time to kill the satellite sub and go back to HD radio and iPod...

Thanks, XM and Sirius, for killing my satellite radio experience!


----------



## full moon

I will cancel. It is dying anyway...


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

Just leave XM76 alone.


----------



## Athlon646464

I just read the article here about the firings:

http://www.digitalhome.ca/content/view/2966/281/

As of today I subscribe to both.

It's sad for those people. As for me, I was hoping they would use the 60's format from XM, and dump the Sirius one. Now it looks like they will keep the Sirius one.

Although many will think they were the 'same', they were vastly different in many ways. XM's '60's on 6' recreated the 60's radio sound - with personality, jingles (PAMS) and actual tapes from the era. Sirius's version sounds like my I-Pod, just full of oldies playing jukebox style, and with a smaller playlist.

XM's playlist is much, much deeper than Sirius's - and I will miss that more than anything. Sirius's music channels can be very repetitive compared with XM's.


----------



## dhhaines

I dumped Sirius a couple year ago because I felt their playlists weren't as deep as XM. I guess it's time to go back to CD's and MP3's. Since it looks like they're dropping the station I listen to the most.
:nono2: 

No competition means the consumer gets crapped on again


----------



## Araxen

We can only hope internet based radio comes to cars soon. It looks like variety will be going out the window soon on sat radio. Soon as Stern retires I'm dropping Sat radio like a bad habit.


----------



## Lincoln6Echo

archer75 said:


> No point in keeping duplicate channels of the same music. We all expected such channels to get dropped which is fine.
> 
> I GREATLY prefer Sirius over XM anyways. And the channels they are keeping are the various talk, news and sports which is about the only thing I want from XM. So it works out great.


Yeah, same here...

We got a Honda Odyssey w/XM Radio over the summer and I hate the music channel line-up. I prefer the Sirius music channel line-up we see with E*. So this'll actually work out with me just fione.

Besides, the only channels I'm really interested in with XM's line-up are the news talk-type channels anyway.


----------



## Lee L

Athlon646464 said:


> I just read the article here about the firings:
> Although many will think they were the 'same', they were vastly different in many ways. XM's '60's on 6' recreated the 60's radio sound - with personality, jingles (PAMS) and actual tapes from the era. Sirius's version sounds like my I-Pod, just full of oldies playing jukebox style, and with a smaller playlist.
> 
> XM's playlist is much, much deeper than Sirius's - and I will miss that more than anything. Sirius's music channels can be very repetitive compared with XM's.


I agree wholeheartedly. I loved the little commrecials and info bits they did on the 80s on 8.


----------



## ChrisPC

80's on 8 has always been my favorite channel, especially the "Lost Hits" that they play. They're always cool, obscure songs that I haven't heard in 20 years. If I want to listen to the same 30 songs, I'll turn to the 2 or 3 "Mix" stations on FM.


----------



## uscboy

Is it just me or does anyone else not really recognize any of these people?

I mean, isn't that the freaking point? Music. I'm paying for music. Not to hear 
some people yapping. Just play a song, follow it with another song, then another 
song, so and on and so forth.

It's the biggest reason I left Sirius. Too much mindless yapping on their "Hits" 
channel. It was beyond ridculous... like I give a rat's ass about some loser DJ's 
life in NYC. JUST PLAY MUSIC. It's easy.

/rant


----------



## Athlon646464

uscboy said:


> Is it just me or does anyone else not really recognize any of these people?
> 
> I mean, isn't that the freaking point? Music. I'm paying for music. Not to hear
> some people yapping. Just play a song, follow it with another song, then another
> song, so and on and so forth.
> 
> It's the biggest reason I left Sirius. Too much mindless yapping on their "Hits"
> channel. It was beyond ridculous... like I give a rat's ass about some loser DJ's
> life in NYC. JUST PLAY MUSIC. It's easy.
> 
> /rant


That's why I like choice.

You like no talk, just music. I like the over-all sound with my music from radio.

When growing up near Hartford, we had 2 top 40 choices, WDRC or WPOP. They each had exactly the same play list. But each station had a different 'sound'. I preferred WPOP, and some liked the big 'D'.

XM's stations re-create the era - they 'sound' like radio from back then, and that's what I like.

If all I wanted was the music, I would not (and will not continue to) subscribe - I've got 30,000 songs on my computer/I-Pod.....

I guess 'the point' for me is that radio the way I liked it was dead until XM came along, and now it looks as though someone stuck a fork into them too.

:nono2:


----------



## pez2002

xm had cool events 


like 

it 
artist confidential
xm nation awards 
christmas music mostly 5 channels of it all different kinds of brands 
baseball confidential
terry motormouth youngs radio tributes on fridays 



all of this will be missed its what made me get xm


----------



## Athlon646464

pez2002 said:


> terry motormouth youngs radio tributes on fridays (


Never miss it!!

Gotta like the Wolfman on Sunday nights, too!!! Hell, even my 20 year old daughter likes Chickenman........:eek2:


----------



## mikey6719

Steve Mehs said:


> So when will it be announced that Madison and Kayla of Sirius will be gone? Oh yeah it probably won't, Sirius likes to have airhead on air personalities that babble about irrelevant stupidness. Since the merger was approved I dropped one XM subscription and Sirius Internet Radio Premium, keep pushing me, I'll be gone. If Trinity is released from Watercolors, another XM subscription will go.
> 
> Merger of equals, my ass.


Kayla is the only one on Octane that provides any sort of listen-able contribution!! I couldnt agree more with the others on there being unlistenable , but Kayla seems "up" on the rock news and has enthusiasm.....


----------



## gregjones

Lee L said:


> I agree wholeheartedly. I loved the little commrecials and info bits they did on the 80s on 8.


Then tell Sirius that you want them. Most of us knew (and many admitted to knowing) that they would never keep duplicate sets of channels post-merger. You had XM and now have Sirius/XM. As a new Sirius/XM subscriber, let them know what you want. As long as they still get your subscription money, make sure they earn it.


----------



## lovswr

What I want to know is as a former XM subscriber, with XM equipment in my two vehicles, now as a Sirus/XM sub will the NFL be offered to me going forward, with the equipment I have?


----------



## pez2002

thoughts and prayers to everyone who lost jobs @ xm


----------



## snowfan

lovswr said:


> What I want to know is as a former XM subscriber, with XM equipment in my two vehicles, now as a Sirus/XM sub will the NFL be offered to me going forward, with the equipment I have?


You should be able to get it now with best of sirius package.

http://www.xmradio.com/bestofsirius...ECAR&utm_medium=Banner&utm_campaign=BOSUPSELL


----------



## lovswr

snowfan said:


> You should be able to get it now with best of sirius package.
> 
> http://www.xmradio.com/bestofsirius...ECAR&utm_medium=Banner&utm_campaign=BOSUPSELL


Thanks


----------



## WillieWildcat

I can't figure out how XM had more listeners/subscribers, yet were in a much worse financial status.

Sirius seems to have a larger overhead with Howard and the NFL, but yet they are much stronger financially.

That said, I have had Sirius for 4 years and have no complaints. I do miss Tawn Mastrey from Sirius Hair Nation...


----------



## pez2002

never thought id see the day sirius takeover xm  

its a sad day in america


----------



## wilsonc

Ken S said:


> SiriusXM is in a very, very competitive marketplace...between digitial music services/devices like the iPod, internet radio, terrestrial radio, HD Radio...they are in an uphill fight.


I am the only who thinks that argument is BS?


----------



## Athlon646464

Originally Posted by Ken S:
'SiriusXM is in a very, very competitive marketplace...between digitial music services/devices like the iPod, internet radio, terrestrial radio, HD Radio...they are in an uphill fight.'



wilsonc said:


> I am the only who thinks that argument is BS?


Well...........

I can tell you that all of those things compete for my time & entertainment dollar, so perhaps he has a point. I guess it depends on how you look at it.

I know that the FCC & Justice department agree also...........


----------



## syphix

I emailed Jon Zellner, who email back VERY quickly. Here's my email, with his response:



> *ME:* Is the channel restructuring only in the music channels, or are talk/news channels in the works for November, too? Otherwise, wouldn't the need for production of a "dual-band" radio (as required by the FCC) be negated?
> 
> *JON:* It's platform wide but there are fewer duplicated channels outside of music.


So, it sounds like a COMPLETE restructuring of the channels, with (perhaps) "unique" channels in a specific channel range. (?) i.e., Fox News on the same channel number on each, but OutQ unique to SIRIUS, and The Power (or a similar talk channel) unique to XM?

I also asked about specific music channels, and received a "cryptic" response:


> *ME:* Can you shed any light on this for the many XM fans who are biting their fingernails with anticipation over the pending channel changes?
> 
> - What channels from the XM lineup will remain? Cinemagic? The 40's? The 90's? Audio Visions? Deep Tracks? Others?
> 
> - Are you designing/reimaging the channels with new names and numbers? A "complete" renumbering of the channels?
> 
> - Will the music lineups be identical on both services (XM & SIRIUS)? Or will there be "unique" channels for each service?
> 
> Any insight would assuage the fears of those of us who love XM, and are anxious about its "future".
> 
> *JON: * Thanks, Nathan. We will issue a new channel line-up next month. I think you'll be happy. Thanks for being an XM subscriber. Promise we'll get you the information as soon as we can. I'm as passionate about XM as you are.


----------



## pez2002

im really going to miss the 60s on 6 and suite 62 they allways played songs i have not heard in a million years that joy of my day will be gone i wish this merger would have gotten blocked mabye one day someone will buy xm and we will have our service back the way it was :nono2: 

ps a year ago yesterday was the start of it


----------



## inourgrave

Lincoln6Echo said:


> Yeah, same here...
> 
> We got a Honda Odyssey w/XM Radio over the summer and I hate the music channel line-up. I prefer the Sirius music channel line-up we see with E*. So this'll actually work out with me just fione.
> 
> Besides, the only channels I'm really interested in with XM's line-up are the news talk-type channels anyway.


Have D* and Sirius for Stern, like the XM music better, so it sucks they are dumping some of the XM stations. Glad to be getting baseball though.


----------



## cliffbig

Like some others here, I grow weary of the high ratio of blather to music on XM's 60s on 6, so I'm looking forward to any sort of a change that puts more music into the mix. After all, it was that endless talk that made me abandon radio in the 1960s to begin with!...


----------



## Dolly

syphix said:


> I emailed Jon Zellner, who email back VERY quickly. Here's my email, with his response:
> 
> So, it sounds like a COMPLETE restructuring of the channels, with (perhaps) "unique" channels in a specific channel range. (?) i.e., Fox News on the same channel number on each, but OutQ unique to SIRIUS, and The Power (or a similar talk channel) unique to XM?
> 
> I also asked about specific music channels, and received a "cryptic" response:


Mel passionate about XM :lol: And I bet he expects us to believe him  They will ruin XM, but in the end that will be the ruin of Sirius so it will all balance out. The merger was NOT a good idea :nono: Thank goodness D* and E* were not allowed to merge.


----------



## waynenm

My 3 favorite XM channels are 40, 45 and 50. Bill Evans is an old friend and colleague. 
If the hatchet continues in favor of Sirius programming, I'll be listening to Radio Paradise and hundreds more via my iPhone, jacked into my car on a more regular basis.
This reminds me of *real* radio, not satellite radio.


----------



## Lee L

Over at XMFan, there has been a post for a week or so saying Cinemagic is as good as gone. Of course, it could be complete BS, but the way things are going, it seems more plausible.


----------



## djlong

In the entire history of XM, they've only ever gotten rid of one 'favorite channel' of mine and that was Music Lab. Cinemagic is a true gem for 'something different'. What's next? Ditching the popular comedy channels?

And, FTR, Xm was much healthier, financially speaking, than Sirius. They had smaller debt, more subscribers and lower costs along with better OEM deals. Sirius had their stock shares diluted to vapor, bond issues in the stratosphere, fewer customers and slower growth until Howard jumped. Sirius was most likely to fail if nothing happened - the merger was their survival strategy. 

That's not as unusual as you might think. I worked for a company that bought it's bigger competition when they realized they weren't going to make it on their own. In fact, when Chrysler was riding high in the 1980s after they 'invented' the minivan, according to Lee Iaccoca, they considered doing a leveraged buyout of General Motors at a time when GM was several times larger than Chrysler.


----------



## Lord Vader

thefunks67 said:


> I have been on the bubble with regard to canceling my Sirius sub or not.
> 
> We have XM at work and I enjoy the deep playlist that XM has with regard to the 60's, 70's and 80's. The Sirius play list is a bit shallow on those channels.
> 
> I am inclined to cancel my Sirius sub and switch to XM, but given this news I am not sure if I should sub to XM.
> 
> Perhaps I should just kill my sub and go back to listening to my CD's and iPod in the car.
> 
> So much for this merger benefiting the consumer. It's confusing as hell now.
> 
> -Funk


I agree with your comments about XM's playlists, particularly the 60's, 70's, and 80's channels. I've heard both, and especially on the 70's and 80's channels, XM blows away Sirius. The former goes deeper into those decades' music, whereas Sirius doesn't offer as much classic stuff from those times.


----------



## reddice

Sirius sucks. Always has. This is why I am dead set against the merger. Now it looks like we will be getting the crappy Sirius channels on XM with its endless annoying babbling DJ's and shallow repeative playlists. I listened to the Big 80's and I can't keep it on more than five minutes because they play the same freaking 20 songs over and over again. The only time I can actually listen to it is during the Nina Blackwood Top 40 countdown when they actually play lesser known but good tunes. Plus even though the 90's channel is not that great it is still better than The Pulse which has annoying DJ's and they play too much junk from today. Don't get me started on how bad the dance channels are on Sirius. The beat is terrible compared to BPM. Area 38 sucks compared to The System. The System actually plays familiar trance tunes as what I hear during Area 38 mixes is tunes I never heard before. They don't have ASOT, Trance around the World, Lost Episode etc. Luckily I can get my fix of that music on my premium subscription to Di.fm. However it does me no good when I go somewhere without an internet connection.

I will still subscribe as long as I can but it if really gets stale and we get more freaking one artist channels then I will be canceling my subscription I had since 2002.

If they ax Enlightening then I will cancel my uncles subscription since that is the only channel he listens too.


----------



## pez2002

what happends if sirius-xm goes under ?


----------



## djlong

Unlikely for a company that gets over $150M in fees per month.


----------



## xmguy

I hate it that America and Country Dan is getting axed.


----------



## ischmidt

I preferred XM's super-deep playlists and on-air personalities because it reminded me of radio before Clear Channel ruined it. I'll give our new dog overlords a fair shake, but I have a feeling I'll be using my car's iPod hookup a lot more in the future.


----------



## Ken S

djlong said:


> In the entire history of XM, they've only ever gotten rid of one 'favorite channel' of mine and that was Music Lab. Cinemagic is a true gem for 'something different'. What's next? Ditching the popular comedy channels?
> 
> And, FTR, Xm was much healthier, financially speaking, than Sirius. They had smaller debt, more subscribers and lower costs along with better OEM deals. Sirius had their stock shares diluted to vapor, bond issues in the stratosphere, fewer customers and slower growth until Howard jumped. Sirius was most likely to fail if nothing happened - the merger was their survival strategy.
> 
> That's not as unusual as you might think. I worked for a company that bought it's bigger competition when they realized they weren't going to make it on their own. In fact, when Chrysler was riding high in the 1980s after they 'invented' the minivan, according to Lee Iaccoca, they considered doing a leveraged buyout of General Motors at a time when GM was several times larger than Chrysler.


XM was in deep trouble. They had lost momentum. Neither company was doing great, both carried over 4.5B in debt, but Sirius was growing at a much, much faster rate than XM. Sirius would have probably survived only because XM wouldn't have.

The FCC delay may make the whole discussion moot anyway....that also caused a slowing of growth and consumer confusion. It was government at its worst.


----------



## Steve Mehs

The rage is flying at XMFan. I hope all the pro merger people are happy with what they got and will have. It is taking everything I have inside of me not to cancel it all.


----------



## Dolly

Lee L said:


> Over at XMFan, there has been a post for a week or so saying Cinemagic is as good as gone. Of course, it could be complete BS, but the way things are going, it seems more plausible.


I think that was a Forum I made the mistake of joining when I got my car with XM in it. The posters there were totally out of touch with the way things were going to end up with the merger. For some reason they thought XM was in the driver's seat. When I tried to point out to them the reality of XM's situation it got to be very unpleasant there.
One poster really gave me a terrible time :eek2: Needless to say that is one Forum I haven't been back to. I do wonder what that poster now thinks about the merger


----------



## Athlon646464

Ken S said:


> XM was in deep trouble. They had lost momentum. Neither company was doing great, both carried over 4.5B in debt, but Sirius was growing at a much, much faster rate than XM. Sirius would have probably survived only because XM wouldn't have.
> 
> The FCC delay may make the whole discussion moot anyway....that also caused a slowing of growth and consumer confusion. It was government at its worst.


Agreed, merger or not - XM was not going to survive. One look at their financials said that, hence their eagerness to merge.

Too bad, as I prefer XM'x music channels because of their deeper playlists and 'era' type sound.

:nono:


----------



## WillieWildcat

You will find those that defend Sirius' playlists vehemently (like me).

1st Wave, Hard Attack, AC/DC Radio, Coffeehouse and Pure Jazz have made life much more entertaining for me. If XM had taken over Sirius, I would feel the same way as those that have experienced the opposite.

XM has no one to blame but themselves however because they were completely mismanaged. There is no way they should have been as weak financially with twice the subscribers as Sirius.


----------



## Athlon646464

WillieWildcat said:


> You will find those that defend Sirius' playlists vehemently (like me).


With widely varying musical tastes, that fine.

I think we're referring to the channels that go head to head, like 5, 6, 7, & 8 for example. The differences are huge, with 2 main differences.

1) much deeper play list on XM
2) the 'sound' (the 'era' programming rather than jukebox style)

Granted, some may prefer the jukebox style of Sirius, but it is difficult to dispute the play list issue on the channels that compete head to head.........


----------



## pez2002

60s
80s 
xm hitlist 
ethel 
lucy 
suite 62 
the groove
the city 
the heat 
watercolors 
BPM 


i listend to these channels everyday they have become part of my life now i have to live without them :nono2:


----------



## djlong

I have a hard time seeing how people thought that XM was the one that wouldn't have survived.

XM had more subscriubers, FAR fewer debt, was NOT diluting shareholder equity like Sirius when Sirius was printing up new shares like monopoly money (which, it looks like, they're going to do again). Sirius was doing better in percentage of new subscribers (about 55% to 45% for a while) but XM had better OEM agreements.

Sirius also called someone as a "subscriber" when it was a new car sitting on a lot, unsold. XM waited until a subscriber actually subscribed - they didn't even count the three-month 'freebies' until they signed up for real.

I was against this merger but for different reasons - simply because the hardware was not compatible.


----------



## deadrody

Two things. First, does anyone else see the irony in losing "radio talent" ? I thought the music was the "talent". If I'm not listening to Howard Stern, I would prefer that all the "DJs", or at least many of them, be fired. Just shut up and play the music. The two worst offenders on Sirius are Spyder Harrison on Hits 1 (my 9 yo daughter likes it) and Michael Tearson on Classic Vinyl. Horrible.

Second, we bought a Honda about 16 months ago and it came with a free subscription to XM. We tried it. It sucked out loud. Sirius music channels are vastly superior to XM. Deep playlist ? The term "deep playlist" is nothing but code for "plays lots of music nobody wants to hear". And they proved it to me over and over again when I tried to find a single channel on XM that played music I consistently wanted to hear. Even half the time would have been a marked improvement.


----------



## Steve Mehs

> The term "deep playlist" is nothing but code for "plays lots of music nobody wants to hear


You forgot to add, IMO, after that. You'll find quite a bit of people who want more than just hits. I've discovered a lot of artists thanks to XM, and I discovered a lot of songs by artists I like thanks to XM that O never knew about. Sometime I want that crap nobody wants to hear, and sometimes I want to hear the same old crap. You know why? Because I like variety, hence why I've had both services for years.

And last time I checked, it was Sirius Satellite Radio and XM Satellite Radio, radio has on air personalities, and the ones XM had really enhanced the station and gave each one a unique personality and feel. Overall Sirius' DJs are babbling idiots, not as bad as what terrestrial radio hires, but not the high caliber that XM had.


----------



## Lee L

pez2002 said:


> 60s
> 80s
> xm hitlist
> ethel
> lucy
> suite 62
> the groove
> the city
> the heat
> watercolors
> BPM
> 
> i listend to these channels everyday they have become part of my life now i have to live without them :nono2:


So far, it looks like the Dance from XM might survive. I sure hope so.


----------



## djlong

If I wanted only songs I've heard of, I would stick to my iPod. That's why I lament the passing of XM's Music Lab. I found more new music there in the first 24 hours I listened than I had in the previous DECADE of terrestrial radio-listening.

I *like* deep playlists. I like the surprise and discovering something new, even if it's something old.


----------



## Athlon646464

djlong said:


> If I wanted only songs I've heard of, I would stick to my iPod. That's why I lament the passing of XM's Music Lab. I found more new music there in the first 24 hours I listened than I had in the previous DECADE of terrestrial radio-listening.
> 
> I *like* deep playlists. I like the surprise and discovering something new, even if it's something old.


+1


----------



## pfueri

They should fire all XM people and just keep the sports on XM. That is the only thing on XM of any value.XM went belly up with the bad deals they made to try to keep up with Sirius.So Sirius had to buy them out and get rid of all the lame programing they had.Nobody wants the best of XM.


----------



## Steve Mehs

It's very convenient how all the Sirius fan boys keep forgetting Sirius was ready to bite the dust until October 6, 2004. Anyhow, things on XM I found of value over the years:

Liquid Metal, Enlighten, Bone Yard, America Right, The Virus, NHL Home Ice, Big Tracks, The 60s, BPM, The System, Flight 26, Lucy, Watercolors, the Christmas programming, the various Microchannels on 120, The Message, Squizz, Fox News & Talk, The John and Jeff Third Shift Show, Leo LaPorte, Rolleye James, Art Bell, IT, Artist Confidential, defunct channels like On The Rock and Special X and much much more.


----------



## djlong

XM did not go "belly up". No matter how often you say it, it's just not true. Yes, they got bought more than they merged (at least in my opinion) but now you have the same financial disaster decision makers now in charge of both.

Sirius is the company that laid out HALF A BILLION dollars in stock to Howard stern (and that stock is now worth 80% less than when they paid for it). They went with vastly more experimental technology in their satellites (the inclined orbit making it more expensive for tracking stations to maintain a fix for the uplink). They have and are apparently going to CONTINUE to dilute shareholder interests by printing MORE shares - I wonder who's going to buy them - at the same time they're talking about a FIFTY TO ONE reverse stock split.

On the other side, what was XM's most expensive layout? Just over 1/5 the Stern money for ELEVEN YEARS of MLB.

What Sirius *did* do better than XM was the PR game. No question there. Xm dropped the ball on their technological advantage (first true portables, replay features on the SkyFi2, etc) the way some old computer companies depended on the technology to "sell itself".


----------



## 9730ld

Sure hope they keep "enLIGHTen" channel 34 and channels 4 and 78 from XM line up. They all have value, Marlin Taylor and Dan Dixon Have done an excellant job ofn programming and developing these channels.

Steelemercer


----------



## gregjones

djlong said:


> XM did not go "belly up". No matter how often you say it, it's just not true. Yes, they got bought more than they merged (at least in my opinion) but now you have the same financial disaster decision makers now in charge of both.
> 
> Sirius is the company that laid out HALF A BILLION dollars in stock to Howard stern (and that stock is now worth 80% less than when they paid for it). They went with vastly more experimental technology in their satellites (the inclined orbit making it more expensive for tracking stations to maintain a fix for the uplink). They have and are apparently going to CONTINUE to dilute shareholder interests by printing MORE shares - I wonder who's going to buy them - at the same time they're talking about a FIFTY TO ONE reverse stock split.
> 
> On the other side, what was XM's most expensive layout? Just over 1/5 the Stern money for ELEVEN YEARS of MLB.
> 
> What Sirius *did* do better than XM was the PR game. No question there. Xm dropped the ball on their technological advantage (first true portables, replay features on the SkyFi2, etc) the way some old computer companies depended on the technology to "sell itself".


You are correct. The only battle that Sirius ever won was the PR battle. They overpaid for a number of their contracts and have been on the brink of disappearing more often than not. XM had less stock-market flash but also a lot less debt. XM needed Sirius for the PR mojo, and Sirius needed a way to stop getting in bidding wars. Sirius had one play: Howard Stern. That one play helped them win a PR war but virtually broke the company. Their questionable subscriber counting methods made it even worse.

So let's move on from the whining about how Sirius saved XM and discuss the new merged company.


----------



## pez2002

it is now being reported that flight 26 will allegedly be replaced with sirius hits 1 via orbitcast.com


----------



## Steve Mehs

I wish they would rename the company to just Sirius, as to not further the XM brand name. I called up earlier and canceled another XM subscription and a Sirius subscription, I'm now down to only one of each. The XM Minituner for my Sony Home Theater Receiver, and my Starmate 4 are the only ones that remain active now.


----------



## pez2002

the churn level of xm is going to be high 

the shareholders may have to vote mel out if that happens and it wont look pretty


----------



## Dolly

pez2002 said:


> the churn level of xm is going to be high
> 
> the shareholders may have to vote mel out if that happens and it wont look pretty


I knew this would happen to XM if the merger took place. And I tried to warn people about it, but no one listened. They thought the merger was a great idea--wonder what they are thinking now  If Flight 26 goes--I go :wave:


----------



## Dolly

pez2002 said:


> it is now being reported that flight 26 will allegedly be replaced with sirius hits 1 via orbitcast.com


Thanks for the information  But in the future could you please provide a link to where you got your information?


----------



## Steve Mehs

He said orbitcast.com.


----------



## reddice

The merger sucks the big one. Now thanks to Mel the Antichrist they are really gutting XM programming. Sunday Chrome did not have their Freestyle and Beyond Chrome programming. The System has no mix shows on anymore either. How many times do I have to say that Sirius programming sucks. Although I do like Cousin Brucey on 60's Vibrations I don't like many of the jocks on Sirius to begin with. Looks like come next month I will most likely cancel my subscribtion I had since 2002. However I have a question. I was just renewed for a year before I knew this jerk Mel was going to butcher the XM programming. Can I get a refund for the year because I was already charged on my credit card.


----------



## Dolly

I know it said obitcast.com. But when I went there it said the DJ for Flight 26 still works for Sirius XM. The writer said he was sorry for the mistake. And I never did find where it said Flight 26 was going to be replaced by another station. I had never been to that site before so I'm just asking for additional information.


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

I just bought the iPod adaptor for my car.

I'm getting ready to fire XM.

Damn - XM was such a great product! I'm missing it already.


----------



## uscboy

So when does all this happen anyway? 

All the XM channels I listen to are still there and still the same, including Lucy and Flight 26.

Also, it's odd that Hits 1 would replace Flight 26 since Hits 1 is really more like XM Hitlist I would think... Flight 26 isn't just new music. Then again, neither is Hitlist, but Flight 26 goes back much further on hits.

Anyway, the funny thing is after having Sirius for a couple years and now having XM for over a year XM was really better at both Hits and a deep playlist. Their less popular channels have much deeper playlists and their Hits channels are great because they don't have the babbling idiot DJs that Sirius has.

Plus, there were three "Hits" channels on XM.... Hitlist, 20 on 20, and Flight 26.

Sirius only had two, Hits 1 and The Pulse. And Hits 1 makes me want to barf.


----------



## dhhaines

uscboy said:


> So when does all this happen anyway?
> 
> All the XM channels I listen to are still there and still the same, including Lucy and Flight 26.


 That is my question also. I'm thinking when/if Lucy and flight 26 disappear, so will my XM sub. I'll just get a setup for an iPod dock. I gave up on OTA radio 3 years ago. It won't hurt my wallet to give up sat radio too.


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

uscboy - the folks at xm411.com are reporting November 5 is the day XM dies.


----------



## dhhaines

wilbur_the_goose said:


> uscboy - the folks at xm411.com are reporting November 5 is the day XM dies.


 So anyone interested in 2 XM receivers on November 6th?


----------



## pez2002

im not gonna cancel just yet im watting to see what goes down


everyone relax


----------



## Virus

I don't see the churn rate increasing significantly over the long haul. Let's face it, what's the alternative?


----------



## dhhaines

Virus said:


> I don't see the churn rate increasing significantly over the long haul. Let's face it, what's the alternative?


 30g MP3 player


----------



## pez2002

Virus said:


> I don't see the churn rate increasing significantly over the long haul. Let's face it, what's the alternative?[/QUOTE
> 
> i beg to differ


----------



## Dolly

Well I finally found where on orbitcast.com they were talking about Flight 26 being replaced. But all the information gave a Yahoo link. Since I don't belong to Yahoo I can't see what was said there. But I'm already down to a 3 month sub. waiting to see officially if Flight 26 will be axed and if it is I'm gone :wave:


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

Virus said:


> I don't see the churn rate increasing significantly over the long haul. Let's face it, what's the alternative?


Easy - Zune Pass and a 80Gb Zune.


----------



## lflorack

pez2002 said:


> it is now being reported that flight 26 will allegedly be replaced with sirius hits 1 via orbitcast.com


Damn! I really like Flight 26!


----------



## Dolly

lflorack said:


> Damn! I really like Flight 26!


So do I, but I pulled the plug on XM. I called trying to find out some information on Flight 26. Well they said they didn't have any new information yet. That part might be true, however, when I mentioned that a lot of DJs had been fired. I was told that the DJs sometime leave when their contract is up for a better position :lol: How dumb does XM think I am  It was all over the news that the DJs had been fired. The Reps at XM are either big on lies or totally out of touch with reality :eek2: They act in the same way those posters did on that XM Forum--like XM is in charge when it is Sirius that is in the driver's seat :raspberry


----------



## djlong

This is the real test for XM fans. Will the service still be good enough to pay for or will it become apparent that the company is run by people who think nonstop swearing and farting is "good entertainment"?


----------



## dhhaines

djlong said:


> This is the real test for XM fans. Will the service still be good enough to pay for or will it become apparent that the company is run by people who think nonstop swearing and farting is "good entertainment"?


 Now what(who) on earth could you be talking about???


----------



## Lord Vader

djlong said:


> This is the real test for XM fans. Will the service still be good enough to pay for or will it become apparent that the company is run by people who think nonstop swearing and farting is "good entertainment"?


Do you have something against farting?


----------



## bakerfall

I'm kind of on the opposite end of the spectrum from most of you. I rarely use my XM for music, mainly for talk/comedy/sports. From that standpoint, the merger has been nothing but great news. MLB/NFL/NBA all covered, Stern is nice all though I can only take small doses, and all the talk that I listen to isn't going anywhere.

I think the real question is will the Sirius channels that replace the XM ones take queues from XM fans/program directors to make the station the best possible? I don't think this is all inherently bad, but we'll see.


----------



## Lee L

bakerfall said:


> I think the real question is will the Sirius channels that replace the XM ones take queues from XM fans/program directors to make the station the best possible? I don't think this is all inherently bad, but we'll see.


IMO, if they wanted to take queues from the XM people, they would not have fired so many of them.


----------



## bakerfall

Lee L said:


> IMO, if they wanted to take queues from the XM people, they would not have fired so many of them.


Not really true. People are complaining because they want less of a certain genre, or deeper playlists. Anyone can put such changes into place.


----------



## Nick

bakerfall said:


> ...I think the real question is will the Sirius channels that replace the XM ones take queues from XM fans/program directors to make the station the best possible? I don't think this is all inherently bad, but we'll see.


In the interest of accuracy of usage and clarity, please permit me to point out that it is 'take_ cues_', not _"queues_".


----------



## Lee L

Nick said:


> In the interest of accuracy of usage and clarity, please permit me to point out that it is 'take_ cues_', not _"queues_".


Dangit and I copied him too without even realizing it.



bakerfall said:


> Not really true. People are complaining because they want less of a certain genre, or deeper playlists. Anyone can put such changes into place.


Once Again, I say if they are so anxious to put such changes into place, why have they not until now? Why get rid of the people who were alredy programming that way to take the people who were doing the shallow playlists start doing deeper ones? Clearly, the Sirius management beleives that the way forward is a more mainstream, shallower service. They may well be right, but I can pretty much guarantee I will not like it.


----------



## Dolly

djlong said:


> This is the real test for XM fans. Will the service still be good enough to pay for or will it become apparent that the company is run by people who think nonstop swearing and farting is "good entertainment"?


My friend XM is dead. Mel is running the company and he was never interested in XM it was always Sirius. And the company coming out of this merger is Sirius. They just left the XM in the name, but the XM isn't in the business. All Sirius really wanted was the sports from XM and now they have them. So I suggest you leave now and save yourself some money. I really wish they would take XM out of the company name. It is now totally misleading.


----------



## Christopher Gould

I find it funny how many hot heads there are running around here dropping there subs even before there changes have happened. Dolly says she wants Flight 26, its still on the air, and the last i heard it wasn't going anywhere. I would think if anybody liked sat radio they would have atleast waited to see what the changes are really are and see how the playlist work out.


----------



## Steve Mehs

I'd rather remember XM the way it was, not Melvin's version of it. XM was perfect, the way it was. Channels were programmed with feeling and a human touch, humans who knew their music. Now a good portion of those same humans are unemployed, current and past subscribers will never regain what they lost, and future subscribers will never knew what they missed.


----------



## joebbaseball

I know a lot of people on here have signed up with which ever company they felt was the best at the time. For me it was Sirius. About 5 years ago. As a baseball fan I was quite upset when xm got that. Luckily as a Stern fan, I was quite happy with his signing. I also listen to a lot of NFL on sirius. However, living in Syracuse, which has in my opinion, has the worst fm radio stations in the entire country. I have completely enjoyed the music offerings from Sirius. And even though i never bought xm, I have gone on a couple week long trips and had it in the rental car. In my opinion I felt the music on there was brutal. This is just my opinion, and i totally understand why xm folks are upset if there were some good people that they enjoyed who recently got fired. However, I also feel those people should at least give sirius music a chance. At least as far as alternative music, they have two quite good channels. That not only play popular music, but some deep tracks as well. Not to mention up and coming artists as well. Look at it this way, at least if you like sports you can get all 4 major ones! It seems my decision to pick sirius in the hopes they get baseball is never going to happen. 
j


----------



## Steve Mehs

This past Tuesday, 10/21, was my four year anniversary with Sirius. I have listened quite a bit over the years, I have nothing against Sirius other then they have pretty much killed XM. Both XM and Sirius had two unique styles, and sometimes I was in the mood for familiar favorites, sometimes I was in the mood for something new and different, it all depended on what I wanted at any given moment. I love sports, but could care less about having all four on one service, I could care less about having one receiver, what I do care about is content and choice and that appears to have diminished. I have no problems having 138 commercial free music channels, another 60 unique talk channels, and NFL, NHL, NBA, MLB and NASCAR coverage spread across two service and two receivers, been doing that for years.

Having XM for 5 years, Sirius for 4 years, in terms of depths and niche programming, it's not even close, XM wins hands down.


----------



## Dolly

Steve Mehs said:


> I'd rather remember XM the way it was, not Melvin's version of it. XM was perfect, the way it was. Channels were programmed with feeling and a human touch, humans who knew their music. Now a good portion of those same humans are unemployed, current and past subscribers will never regain what they lost, and future subscribers will never knew what they missed.


Steve this is a beautiful post and is exactly the way I feel. You and I may disagree on DirecTV, but sadly you were a 100% right about the merger  And to the poster that questioned why I left early it is because the Reps at XM haven't a clue as to what is really going on or if they do have a clue they sure don't act like it. To hear them you would think the company name is XM Sirius. They think XM will still have input into what goes on with the company. Mel is running the show now, but they don't seem to know or understand that :eek2: It is almost creepy talking to them. Like a horror movie where the viewer knows what is going to happen, but the characters in the film have no idea :girlscrea I spoke with a Rep who either didn't know (which I fine hard to believe) or lied about the DJs situation. He said DJs leave when their contracts are up to go on to other positions. It was all over the news that the DJs were fired. This Rep also didn't know until I told him that XM no longer had a phone survey. And why should XM still have a customer survey-- they are no longer a company any more  I had XM in my car and Mel even said just recently it would be 15 years until the Technology of the companies could be joined in a car. But I'm betting there will be no need for new Technology because if the company is still around it will be all Sirius anyway :raspberry
EDIT: I'm sorry I forgot to put in the link where Mel talks about the Technology and cars. It is http://www.fmqb.com/Article.asp?id=945063 
At the time of the Merger and before the Merger was approved the information that it would take so long wasn't mentioned at all!


----------



## TerpEE93

I've been an XM sub for over 4 years now. Loved it when I got it, because it turned me on to a bunch of bands I never heard on good ol' FM, and each channel had a real identity. Now it seems like the channels bleed over, and they've definitely become more mainstream. I'm not ditching XM because of the merger, but I'm definitely hedging my bets. Some of the HD subchannels available in the Batl/DC area are every bit as good as anything XM has ever offered, and my iPod playlist is a whole lot bigger now.

I'll miss the listen anywhere and ACC sports goodness that XM has brought me, but I'm not sure it's really worth the annual cost anymore...


----------



## mitchelljd

djlong said:


> This is the real test for XM fans. Will the service still be good enough to pay for or will it become apparent that the company is run by people who think nonstop swearing and farting is "good entertainment"?


oh please. Sirius is widely known for having better music programming than XM. the playlists on XM were at times very Clear Channel like. also had commercials.

honestly, its sad to see so many people getting fired. but... my bet is they are going to move away from DC and centralize in NY and LA for broadcast centers.

lets see how the dust settles, my bet is the new company will provide excellent programming to make many people happy.


----------



## Richard King

mitchelljd said:


> oh please. Sirius is widely known for having better music programming than XM. the playlists on XM were at times very Clear Channel like. also had commercials.


A very few channels had commercials, and those channels were, in fact, programmed by Clear Channel. I don't know the number, but I believe it was under 5 music channels that had this arrangement. All others are commercial free. Clear Channel got these channels by making an investment in XM when they were searching for cash before they went on the air. I do miss "Underground Garage" since I went from Sirius to XM quite some time ago.


----------



## Lee L

mitchelljd said:


> oh please. Sirius is widely known for having better music programming than XM. the playlists on XM were at times very Clear Channel like. also had commercials.


I am sure I am not going to convince you, but according to most every objective review I have read from people with both services, XM has much deeper play lists that Sirius. If you only read Siriusbackstage or XMfan, you get half the story.

Also, there were no commercials on 95% of the XM music channels. Clear Channel took them to court over the right to play commercials on 5 channels that they were programming and they won, but all the other music channels had no commercials. They did have the occaisional sounder for another XM station, but they were generally only a few seconds and many people liked them since they found out about new things. If you want to complain about that, then I am nost sure what to say.


----------



## dhhaines

mitchelljd said:


> oh please. Sirius is widely known for having better music programming than XM. the playlists on XM were at times very Clear Channel like. also had commercials.
> 
> honestly, its sad to see so many people getting fired. but... my bet is they are going to move away from DC and centralize in NY and LA for broadcast centers.
> 
> lets see how the dust settles, my bet is the new company will provide excellent programming to make many people happy.


 How are they "widely known" for having better programming? This may be your opinion but it's not a"widely known" fact. I've had both and in my opinion XM has better music programming.

Please don't confuse opinion with fact.


----------



## Steve Mehs

mitchelljd said:


> oh please. Sirius is widely known for having better music programming than XM. the playlists on XM were at times very Clear Channel like. also had commercials.
> 
> honestly, its sad to see so many people getting fired. but... my bet is they are going to move away from DC and centralize in NY and LA for broadcast centers.
> 
> lets see how the dust settles, my bet is the new company will provide excellent programming to make many people happy.


You're confused, Sirius = FM without commercials for the most part.


----------



## kirthew

Wow.. people really have some head strong opinions about there Provider... dang ola... I was happy to see the merger since I just bought a toyota that had XM in it and I could not get Sirius... I kept my Sirius subscription for a few extra months so that I could listen to Howard online... Then the Best of Sirius was offered.. I jumped.. and now have one subscription...

I guess I am different from the people here.. I listen for the talk.. I don't really pay attention to the music... but my first week with XM without Howard, I turned to the country channel... and every song was interupted by someone speaking... or some blurb... I want my music to be talk free.. I just want music... I don't care about Mile Marker 15 on my Hwy of Hits... just give me music...

And Sirius gave that to me... now I have the best of both worlds... and soon with one company... it will be seemless... hopefully they will start turning a profit and get the stock out of the toliet... so the company will be around for a much longer time...


----------



## Steve Mehs

> Wow.. people really have some head strong opinions about there Provider.


What most people fail to realize is that XM and Sirius had their own unique personalities, and small minded fanboys of either service state that their chosen SDARS provider is king and the other one sucks. Well of course both services are going to be different to appeal to different people., what fun would it be if both were carbon copies of each other?

Anyone who clams one service is vastly superior than the other overall, has no idea what they are talking about. More than likely they never had both or never gave both a fair shot.


----------



## Ken S

Steve Mehs said:


> What most people fail to realize is that XM and Sirius had their own unique personalities, and small minded fanboys of either service state that their chosen SDARS provider is king and the other one sucks. Well of course both services are going to be different to appeal to different people., what fun would it be if both were carbon copies of each other?
> 
> Anyone who clams one service is vastly superior than the other overall, has no idea what they are talking about. More than likely they never had both or never gave both a fair shot.


Sirius has Howard Stern...XM didn't. Sirius was far superior to XM.


----------



## Lord Vader

Ken S said:


> Sirius has Howard Stern...XM didn't. Sirius was far superior to XM.


XM had Major League Baseball. XM was far superior to Sirius.


----------



## dhhaines

Ken S said:


> Sirius has Howard Stern...XM didn't. Sirius was far superior to XM.


 To each his own ! Howard Stern hasn't had an original idea in 10 years and Sirius payed way too much for his "talent", whatever that may be.


----------



## lflorack

Ken S said:


> Sirius has Howard Stern...XM didn't. Sirius was far superior to XM.


Just goes to show that people view different things as superior or important than I certainly would. To each their own to be sure -- and that's certainly a good thing.


----------



## djlong

Oddly enough, one could make the argument that Howard is worth what his isrius stock is worth - but that Sirius paid too much for that stock.

[Sirius is down some 90% since they issued Howard the stock as compensation instead of salary]


----------



## Ken S

djlong said:


> Oddly enough, one could make the argument that Howard is worth what his isrius stock is worth - but that Sirius paid too much for that stock.
> 
> [Sirius is down some 90% since they issued Howard the stock as compensation instead of salary]


Yes, but the vast majority of that stock drop relates directly to the FCC sitting on the merger agreement and the subsequent offering they made to cover some XM debt. The NAB did a great job of decimating the value of the combined companies...and the FCC, Congress and the Justice Department played right along.

When they signed Howard they stated they would need 1,000,000 additional subscribers to make money on the deal...I'd say they've done quite a bit better than that.

Hopefully, Mel Karmizan can pull Sirius out of this mess and get the company somewhere near profitability before we're all using our satellite radios for paperweights.


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

I figure I'll know by Jan 1 if I'm going to drop XM. 

I'm already thinking about how to retrofit my 05 BMW to accept my Zune.

This is like losing your best friend because he/she moved out of the country and was never going to come back.


----------



## pez2002

i was thinking back to 2002 when i was @ a friends and i heard the 60s on 6 for the first time i fell in love with that channel i did not have a job @ that time so i could not buy xm i know during that time xm was all i ever wanted 
i got xm on december 31st 2005 on a saturday afternoon and i never looked back now i have howard 100 and nfl radio all i need now is shade 45 and im set dont touch my 60s on 6 mel :nono2:


----------



## Steve Mehs

Ken S said:


> Sirius has Howard Stern...XM didn't. Sirius was far superior to XM.


Satellite radio is much more then poodle head you know...Tell 'em Fred


----------



## Dolly

Steve Mehs said:


> Satellite radio is much more then poodle head you know...Tell 'em Fred


Sorry since Sirius killed XM I want Sirius to go down !pusht!


----------



## Greg Bimson

Ken S said:


> When they signed Howard they stated they would need 1,000,000 additional subscribers to make money on the deal...I'd say they've done quite a bit better than that.


But Sirius never did "make money" over the long-haul.


Ken S said:


> Yes, but the vast majority of that stock drop relates directly to the FCC sitting on the merger agreement and the subsequent offering they made to cover some XM debt. The NAB did a great job of decimating the value of the combined companies...and the FCC, Congress and the Justice Department played right along.


The only decimation in the value of the combined companies was, well, the combined companies. That was bound to happen...

XM and Sirius each have debt repayment due over the next fourteen months, without a merger. It is expected that CEO Karmazin will need to refinance the $1.05 billion of debt in 2009. Any idea which investment bank will be a taker? That is what has changed over the past four to six months, and that is the drag on the SIRI stock.

Besides, the day before one announces a proposed merger with their rival is not the time to dilute the stock. The dilutions and lack of profitability are single-handedly killing the stock price. The fact that debt repayment will need to be refinanced has dragged on the stock price even more.


----------



## Steve Mehs

Dolly said:


> Sorry since Sirius killed XM I want Sirius to go down !pusht!


Why? While I lack a lot of confidence, I'd be interested in seeing what Sirius will do with the combined company and how it will turn out. It's better then no satellite radio at all, while I may not continue to subscribe, I don't want to see the company go under.


----------



## Dolly

Steve Mehs said:


> Why? While I lack a lot of confidence, I'd be interested in seeing what Sirius will do with the combined company and how it will turn out. It's better then no satellite radio at all, while I may not continue to subscribe, I don't want to see the company go under.


If you may not continue to subscribe, why would you care if the company went under  And I said why I wanted Sirius to go down--they killed XM. Unlike you I never liked both companies, however, like you I didn't want the merger to take place. And the merger has even been worse than I thought it would be :eek2: I think the sun will continue to come up if Sat. Radio dies.


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

stock closed at 35 cents/share today. Doesn't NASDAQ delist if they're <$1 for a certain period of time?


----------



## syphix

wilbur_the_goose said:


> stock closed at 35 cents/share today. Doesn't NASDAQ delist if they're <$1 for a certain period of time?


They stopped enforcing that rule recently....luckily for SIRIUS XM.


----------



## Steve Mehs

Dolly said:


> If you may not continue to subscribe, why would you care if the company went under  And I said why I wanted Sirius to go down--they killed XM. Unlike you I never liked both companies, however, like you I didn't want the merger to take place. And the merger has even been worse than I thought it would be :eek2: I think the sun will continue to come up if Sat. Radio dies.


I care because it's not just about me. I don't want to see anyone else at the company lose their jobs and even though I may not like the final outcome (or the present outcome), I'm sure others will. I've said many times in speaking against the merger, I don't want to lose my favorite stations and I don't want others to lose their favorites, likewise, I don't want anyone to lose the service if they get enjoyment out of it. No matter what happens I will always have a soft spot for SDARS, and while I love both XM and Sirius equally, XM was the more unique service of the two and I'm sad to see it go, but will hope for the best on Nov 15.


----------



## Ken S

Steve Mehs said:


> I care because it's not just about me. I don't want to see anyone else at the company lose their jobs and even though I may not like the final outcome (or the present outcome), I'm sure others will. I've said many times in speaking against the merger, I don't want to lose my favorite stations and I don't want others to lose their favorites, likewise, I don't want anyone to lose the service if they get enjoyment out of it. No matter what happens I will always have a soft spot for SDARS, and while I love both XM and Sirius equally, XM was the more unique service of the two and I'm sad to see it go, but will hope for the best on Nov 15.


Steve,

Unfortunately without the merger it's likely you would have lost a lot of (all) those stations as well. Time and funding was running out for both companies with XM in the more precarious situation. Unfortunately, the NAB may have won anyway...the delay in the decision on the merger that the NAB was able to "buy" caused both companies to lose momentum and get distracted. Whether SiriusXM can recover is very much in question. They've got to continue to borrow money in a very tight credit market to cover operating/capital expenses. Let's just say they're not getting great interest rates from their lenders.

They have no choice but to cut costs anywhere they possibly can.


----------



## gregjones

Ken S said:


> Steve,
> 
> Unfortunately without the merger it's likely you would have lost a lot of (all) those stations as well. Time and funding was running out for both companies with XM in the more precarious situation.


I don't see where making comments about XM vs Sirius helps the argument here. XM had less external funding but Sirius paid far too much for "talent." They each had issues or they wouldn't have pursued the merger. One had less debt and funding. The other had more funding and far more expenses. Let's move on from the "mine is better than yours" discussion and talk about what is here now.


----------



## Greg Bimson

gregjones said:


> I don't see where making comments about XM vs Sirius helps the argument here. XM had less external funding but Sirius paid far too much for "talent." They each had issues or they wouldn't have pursued the merger. One had less debt and funding. The other had more funding and far more expenses.


Good point.

XM could have always pulled a Sirius and issued debt-convertable stock and dilute share price. It isn't like XM had no options.


----------



## dhhaines

gregjones said:


> I don't see where making comments about XM vs Sirius helps the argument here. XM had less external funding but Sirius paid far too much for "talent." They each had issues or they wouldn't have pursued the merger. One had less debt and funding. The other had more funding and far more expenses. Let's move on from the "mine is better than yours" discussion and talk about what is here now.


 So we now have one company that is more in debt and less funded paying too much for talent. 

Does that about sum it up?


----------



## djlong

Ken S: Can SOMEone please explain to me how XM was "the more precarious" of the two when the following facts say otherwise:

- XM had more subscribers, meaning more revenue.
- XM has less debt, meaning less debt payments.
- XM's biggest ticket cost them $11M/year (MLB) for over 2500 events (games) per year, versus Howards amortized $100M/year for two channels.
- XM had more and better OEM deals. 

Sirius (Mel) was better at PR, that's a no-brainer. Perhaps that's why so many think that XM was in worse financial shape.


----------



## Athlon646464

djlong said:


> Ken S: Can SOMEone please explain to me how XM was "the more precarious" of the two when the following facts say otherwise:
> 
> - XM had more subscribers, meaning more revenue.
> - XM has less debt, meaning less debt payments.
> - XM's biggest ticket cost them $11M/year (MLB) for over 2500 events (games) per year, versus Howards amortized $100M/year for two channels.
> - XM had more and better OEM deals.
> 
> Sirius (Mel) was better at PR, that's a no-brainer. Perhaps that's why so many think that XM was in worse financial shape.


Here is an excerpt from an analysis of the two companies written pre-merger by Bear Stearns. The article was *pro-merger*, by the way.......

..............

* Subscribers: We think this is probably the most important metric to compare the 2 companies and the ultimate gauge for the health of the industry. We believe that some investors see Sirius surpassing XM based on the strength of retail for Sirius&#8230;We look for both companies to experience similar subscriber growth trends with XM maintaining a small lead over Sirius. In the outer years, however, given the increasing contribution from the OEM channel and the expectation that XM's partners likely will continue to gain market share, XM's sub lead will grow, in our view.

* Conversion and churn: Some investors believe that Sirius' all-in total churn gap to XM will remain constant. We believe that conversion rates will fall somewhat over time for all OEMs as the radio product gets more widely dispersed in the vehicle lines and reaches less inclined potential subscribers. Because OEM's all in churn is higher than retail churn and Sirius is growing its OEM base, we think Sirius' churn will increase proportionately over time. However, since XM is beginning with a higher OEM mix in its sub base, this is less impactful. We think the gap will narrow somewhat over time.

* ARPU (ex ads): Some investors believe Sirius' average revenue per subscriber should outpace XM's. We believe that many investors have baked in Sirius' ARPU (ex Ads) growing faster than XM's. As of 3Q 2006, XM's ARPU (ex Ads) was higher that Sirius' at $10.96 vs $10.89. We think many investors believe that Sirius will raise its rate and have therefore increased this item. While this may be the case in the future, we would think XM would be apt to match any raise or investors should assume some impact on market share if price points are not equivalent. Therefore we assume similar ARPUs (ex ads) in the future.

* Subscriber Acquisition Costs: Some investors believe that Sirius' SAC should mirror XM's in the near future. While we believe that the SACs of both companies should become asymptotic, we think that it will take just a little longer, as Sirius continues to process through older chip sets on its OEM side. We note that we believe Sirius' retail SAC is relatively equivalent to XM's (particularly ex-RadioShack, which is only a small portion of retail). Therefore, we see SACs becoming more similar, but over a little longer time frame.

* EBITDA margins: Many investors model Sirius with higher adjusted EBITDA margins than XM's. We think that based on the assumptions above, that the businesses are more similar EBITDA margins should trend closer to each other over the longer term around 30%.

* Cap Ex and Free Cash Flow: Based on anticipated 4Q results, some investors see Sirius hitting free cash flow earlier than XM. We believe that based on Sirius needing to augment and replace its satellite system, that about $750 million in cap ex will be needed to build a new spare (or geo) and 2 replacement satellites. It should be noted that Sirius' satellite have been in orbit since 2000 and have experienced some solar array anomalies, which could hasten their replacement to a degree.

..............

Here is the link to the entire article: http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2007/02/16/satellite-radio-xm-and-sirius-should-stop-squabbling-and-merge-already-advises-bear-stearns/


----------



## Ken S

gregjones said:


> I don't see where making comments about XM vs Sirius helps the argument here. XM had less external funding but Sirius paid far too much for "talent." They each had issues or they wouldn't have pursued the merger. One had less debt and funding. The other had more funding and far more expenses. Let's move on from the "mine is better than yours" discussion and talk about what is here now.


Greg,

It wasn't a Sirius vs. XM comment it was a financial point that both were in trouble, but XM was in serious trouble and probably wouldn't have lasted much longer. That has nothing to do whatsoever with mine is better than your's. For all I care they could have kept all the XM music and dumped Sirius music channels. Actually, they could dump everything other than Stern and baseball and maybe Russo and I'd be fine with it. If not for Stern I doubt I'd have satellite radio at all. Baseball would be nice, but I wouldn't pay for it when I can get it for less at mlb.com.

Many thought Sirius could have waited XM out and gotten them cheaper, but they too were stretched already and Karmizan made the right move in getting a deal done. He needed to stop the fight between the two for talent and marketing expenditures. Unfortuately, as I said earlier...the approval delay couldn't possibly have been expected and may have been a deathblow.


----------



## Ken S

djlong said:


> Ken S: Can SOMEone please explain to me how XM was "the more precarious" of the two when the following facts say otherwise:
> 
> - XM had more subscribers, meaning more revenue.
> - XM has less debt, meaning less debt payments.
> - XM's biggest ticket cost them $11M/year (MLB) for over 2500 events (games) per year, versus Howards amortized $100M/year for two channels.
> - XM had more and better OEM deals.
> 
> Sirius (Mel) was better at PR, that's a no-brainer. Perhaps that's why so many think that XM was in worse financial shape.


Simple...

Both were losing money...projections had Sirius getting to cash flow positive quicker. Sirius had better access to additional capital. Some of XM's investors had already bailed and others wanted out.
Was either healthy...no...but it's more likely that Sirius would have lasted longer and was experiencing far greater growth than XM.


----------



## Ken S

Athlon646464 said:


> Here is an excerpt from an analysis of the two companies written pre-merger by Bear Stearns. The article was *pro-merger*, by the way.......
> 
> ..............
> 
> * Subscribers: We think this is probably the most important metric to compare the 2 companies and the ultimate gauge for the health of the industry. We believe that some investors see Sirius surpassing XM based on the strength of retail for Sirius&#8230;We look for both companies to experience similar subscriber growth trends with XM maintaining a small lead over Sirius. In the outer years, however, given the increasing contribution from the OEM channel and the expectation that XM's partners likely will continue to gain market share, XM's sub lead will grow, in our view.
> 
> * Conversion and churn: Some investors believe that Sirius' all-in total churn gap to XM will remain constant. We believe that conversion rates will fall somewhat over time for all OEMs as the radio product gets more widely dispersed in the vehicle lines and reaches less inclined potential subscribers. Because OEM's all in churn is higher than retail churn and Sirius is growing its OEM base, we think Sirius' churn will increase proportionately over time. However, since XM is beginning with a higher OEM mix in its sub base, this is less impactful. We think the gap will narrow somewhat over time.
> 
> * ARPU (ex ads): Some investors believe Sirius' average revenue per subscriber should outpace XM's. We believe that many investors have baked in Sirius' ARPU (ex Ads) growing faster than XM's. As of 3Q 2006, XM's ARPU (ex Ads) was higher that Sirius' at $10.96 vs $10.89. We think many investors believe that Sirius will raise its rate and have therefore increased this item. While this may be the case in the future, we would think XM would be apt to match any raise or investors should assume some impact on market share if price points are not equivalent. Therefore we assume similar ARPUs (ex ads) in the future.
> 
> * Subscriber Acquisition Costs: Some investors believe that Sirius' SAC should mirror XM's in the near future. While we believe that the SACs of both companies should become asymptotic, we think that it will take just a little longer, as Sirius continues to process through older chip sets on its OEM side. We note that we believe Sirius' retail SAC is relatively equivalent to XM's (particularly ex-RadioShack, which is only a small portion of retail). Therefore, we see SACs becoming more similar, but over a little longer time frame.
> 
> * EBITDA margins: Many investors model Sirius with higher adjusted EBITDA margins than XM's. We think that based on the assumptions above, that the businesses are more similar EBITDA margins should trend closer to each other over the longer term around 30%.
> 
> * Cap Ex and Free Cash Flow: Based on anticipated 4Q results, some investors see Sirius hitting free cash flow earlier than XM. We believe that based on Sirius needing to augment and replace its satellite system, that about $750 million in cap ex will be needed to build a new spare (or geo) and 2 replacement satellites. It should be noted that Sirius' satellite have been in orbit since 2000 and have experienced some solar array anomalies, which could hasten their replacement to a degree.
> 
> ..............
> 
> Here is the link to the entire article: http://blogs.barrons.com/techtraderdaily/2007/02/16/satellite-radio-xm-and-sirius-should-stop-squabbling-and-merge-already-advises-bear-stearns/


Yes, and like my posts and anyone else's analyst opinions should be taken with a grain of salt. Especially from companies that are invested in the businesses. I think we've all seen just what a fine job Goldman Sachs has done lately.


----------



## WillieWildcat

Wow, Sirius/XM is now a penny stock......


----------



## djlong

Regardless of which service, the bread and butter of satellite radio is in THE CAR. You have a LOT of options at home, including, as one previous poster put it, internet streaming. But mlb.com doesn't do you much good for 2 hours worth of commuting (round trip) each day.

Now before anyone thinks I'm totally pro-XM and anti-Sirius, I should mention that I had a chance to sample Sirius when I rented a car on a vacation and Sirius was FAR better than terrestrial radio. On a scale of 1-10, back then, I put XM at a '9', Sirius at a '7' and terrestrial radio at "-5"


----------



## Ken S

djlong said:


> Regardless of which service, the bread and butter of satellite radio is in THE CAR. You have a LOT of options at home, including, as one previous poster put it, internet streaming. But mlb.com doesn't do you much good for 2 hours worth of commuting (round trip) each day.
> 
> Now before anyone thinks I'm totally pro-XM and anti-Sirius, I should mention that I had a chance to sample Sirius when I rented a car on a vacation and Sirius was FAR better than terrestrial radio. On a scale of 1-10, back then, I put XM at a '9', Sirius at a '7' and terrestrial radio at "-5"


Umm...my cellphone receives the internet in my car and can pump that signal into my audio system. Then again...the internet is probably just a fad . I can also watch SprintTV, Slingbox and Hava Monsoon...although not while driving.

As for terrestrial radio...I can't rate it that low only because some of the same programs that are on satellite are also on terrestrial. Things like ESPN, sporting events, etc. It's also the only way to get local news, talk, sports other than the local stations that stream over the internet.

Music listeners I'm sure feel differently.


----------



## Ken S

WillieWildcat said:


> Wow, Sirius/XM is now a penny stock......


Yes, NASDAQ has actually relaxed its rules for a number of companies (including SiriusXM) allowing them to remain listed even though they are under $1.00. SiriusXM has mentioned that they would do a reverse stock split in order to get the price over $1 if necessary.


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

you know things are bad when companies are talking about reverse stock splits!


----------



## Dolly

wilbur_the_goose said:


> you know things are bad when companies are talking about reverse stock splits!


I hope the death of Sat. Radio is quicker than the merger was :kickbutt: I know I'm evil :blush:


----------



## Ken S

Dolly said:


> I hope the death of Sat. Radio is quicker than the merger was :kickbutt: I know I'm evil :blush:


Why would you want that? Is satellite radio hurting you?


----------



## djlong

Maybe he owns stock in Clear Channel or works for the NAB..


----------



## Steve Mehs

Dolly said:


> I hope the death of Sat. Radio is quicker than the merger was :kickbutt: I know I'm evil :blush:


That is no doubt the stupidist and one of the most selfish things I've ever read.


----------



## paulman182

Steve Mehs said:


> That is no doubt the stupidist and one of the most selfish things I've ever read.


Kinda like people who wish for the death of terrestrial broadcast radio.


----------



## Steve Mehs

So did Clear Channel pay you to say that? Dinosaur radio is different. Wishing for dinosaur radio to die is like wishing for that guy who raped and murdered an elderly women to die. They deserve it. Wishing for satellite radio to die is like wishing for that guy who donates a few paychecks a year to the needy children's fund to die. It's a terrible thing to do. Satellite Radio>Terrestrial Radio no matter what happens.

I know you're in love with your terrestrial radio, but keep discussion of that slop out of this thread, this is about a superior form of audio entertainment that can run circles around that ancient crap. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.


----------



## pez2002

nah steve he must work for an fm station 

i dont miss fm radio all i listen too is xm and im not turning back


----------



## Greg Bimson

Steve Mehs said:


> I know you're in love with your terrestrial radio, but keep discussion of that slop out of this thread, this is about a superior form of audio entertainment that can run circles around that ancient crap.


But I'm not done with this yet...

The CEO for the newly-combined Sirius XM Radio was CEO of Infinity Broadcasting Group during the 1990's. This is the same guy that pioneered national syndication of radio shows. This is one of the guys that made "that ancient crap" what it is today.

So as someone without much skin in this game (just XM on DirecTV), I am just as concerned with seeing the consolidation of Sirius XM radio, which is exactly the cookie cutter effect that happened to local radio in the 1990's, thanks to Clear Channel and _Infinity Broadcasting_.


----------



## Lee L

Greg Bimson said:


> But I'm not done with this yet...
> 
> The CEO for the newly-combined Sirius XM Radio was CEO of Infinity Broadcasting Group during the 1990's. This is the same guy that pioneered national syndication of radio shows. This is one of the guys that made "that ancient crap" what it is today.
> 
> So as someone without much skin in this game (just XM on DirecTV), I am just as concerned with seeing the consolidation of Sirius XM radio, which is exactly the cookie cutter effect that happened to local radio in the 1990's, thanks to Clear Channel and _Infinity Broadcasting_.


I agree 100% and that is why I was against this merger all along. Heck, I was already thinking XM had practically sold out compared to teh early days prgramming-wise. In their dash to get the mass market, SiriusXM will most likely become a national version of what they supposedly were created to compete against, just with cursing allowed on some channels. How sad.


----------



## Steve Mehs

Greg Bimson said:


> But I'm not done with this yet...
> 
> The CEO for the newly-combined Sirius XM Radio was CEO of Infinity Broadcasting Group during the 1990's. This is the same guy that pioneered national syndication of radio shows. This is one of the guys that made "that ancient crap" what it is today.
> 
> So as someone without much skin in this game (just XM on DirecTV), I am just as concerned with seeing the consolidation of Sirius XM radio, which is exactly the cookie cutter effect that happened to local radio in the 1990's, thanks to Clear Channel and _Infinity Broadcasting_.


Many people that are/were involved with XM and Sirius are former terrestrial radio execs and emplyees that jumped ship as the industry started to sink. That is nothing new.


----------



## Greg Bimson

It may not be anything new, but it also may be that those same executives were the cause of the hole in the hull of the ship.

The people that are passionate about the music are the DJ's and the PD's; the people running the business of music are the VP$ and CEO$. And it was their running the business of radio that created the unhitching of local radio.


----------



## gregjones

Greg Bimson said:


> It may not be anything new, but it also may be that those same executives were the cause of the hole in the hull of the ship.
> 
> The people that are passionate about the music are the DJ's and the PD's; the people running the business of music are the VP$ and CEO$. And it was their running the business of radio that created the unhitching of local radio.


What better talent pool do you expect to populate management of a satellite radio company. DJs and PDs often lack any financial experience. They can't run a company. By this reasoning, the Department of Transportation should be run by the guy that does the best job painting the yellow line down the middle of the road by your house.


----------



## Greg Bimson

gregjones said:


> What better talent pool do you expect to populate management of a satellite radio company. DJs and PDs often lack any financial experience.


But you are now arguing that the people that destroyed the offerings of terrestrial radio (while making immense profits) are good enough to "save" satellite radio, when the track record says no...

Mel Karmazin obliterated local terrestrial radio by replicating and syndicating stations across the US. That cookie-cutter format was despised by many of the people here extolling the virtues of satellite radio. The guy now in charge of the only satellite company was the guy that helped create the downfall of content in local radio. There is a silver-threaded lining, from fundinguniverse.com:


> Karmazin's penchant for efficiency started at the top; Infinity's entire corporate staff in the early 1990s consisted of six people: Karmazin, a chief financial officer, an administrative assistant, and a three-person accounting office.
> 
> Infinity's spartan corporate staff was made possible by the autonomy that Karmazin afforded his local radio affiliates as long as their ratings continued to rise. An important element of Karmazin's strategy was decentralized local management. Infinity relied on a system of performance-based financial incentives to motivate its workers and attract high-quality personnel, who were well-compensated by industry standards. General managers earned money for increasing cash flow, for example, and program directors were rewarded for higher ratings. Karmazin was particularly proud of Infinity's pay scale for advertising salespeople, which was a straight 6 percent commission with no limit on total earnings. Many salespeople earned more than $100,000 annually, with a few topping the $300,000 mark. "If a salesperson is going to get rich on a six percent commission," Karmazin stated in a Broadcasting article, "the company is going to get very rich on the other 94 percent."


The good news is that advertising on the medium was the key to making a profitable radio group. The bad news is that advertising is hardly sold in satellite radio. Yet.

EDIT: The reality is that someone in the pay TV industry would have been a bit better suited for the job. Mel took over in November 2004 and the stock was between $6 to $8 a share. Now, 100 stamps cost more than 100 shares of Sirius' stock.


----------



## gregjones

Greg Bimson said:


> But you are now arguing that the people that destroyed the offerings of terrestrial radio (while making immense profits) are good enough to "save" satellite radio, when the track record says no...


No, you can't have it both ways. If the DJs and PDs are responsible for good radio, they are responsible for bad radio. Radio is a business. When it fails to make money it goes off the air. Some radio is better than other radio, obviously. But DJs and PDs are not charged with returning shareholder value. While they are the experts (hopefully) at what should be on air, they aren't the experts at making it profitable.

Many of us would love to decide what's played on a channel and would end up with an audience of 1 (or less). While you may not like Mel (who does?), what are the other options?

DJs and PDs are not able to make decisions on a public company level. This leaves you with bringing someone in from a completely unrelated area or finding someone with at least some area in the field of radio. Either way, you're looking for someone that can run a company, not someone that picks out your favorite songs.


----------



## Greg Bimson

gregjones said:


> No, you can't have it both ways. If the DJs and PDs are responsible for good radio, they are responsible for bad radio. Radio is a business. When it fails to make money it goes off the air.





gregjones said:


> DJs and PDs are not able to make decisions on a public company level. This leaves you with bringing someone in from a completely unrelated area or finding someone with at least some area in the field of radio. Either way, you're looking for someone that can run a company, not someone that picks out your favorite songs.


Again, my point. What made Infinity Broadcasting was the removal of local radio by becoming a nationally syndicated behemoth led by Howard Stern.

Is what makes Sirius XM a national behemoth led by expletive Howard Stern and cost cutter Mel Karmazin? Or is it the deeper playlists of music that drew many to XM to begin?

Sirius XM won't be everything to everyone. The reailty is the merger is to combine operational synergies and reduce the cost of duplication, making the company more cost efficient and effective. However, by slashing the XM staff, which grew their subscription base on the strength of music and sports, leaves the people of Sirius in charge. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, growth at Sirius was only accomplished by giving Howard Stern half a billion dollars, not by music choices.

Not that I mind, but I did just want to throw it out there. It isn't going to be music choices that drive Sirius XM going forward.


----------



## Ken S

Greg Bimson said:


> Again, my point. What made Infinity Broadcasting was the removal of local radio by becoming a nationally syndicated behemoth led by Howard Stern.
> 
> Is what makes Sirius XM a national behemoth led by expletive Howard Stern and cost cutter Mel Karmazin? Or is it the deeper playlists of music that drew many to XM to begin?
> 
> Sirius XM won't be everything to everyone. The reailty is the merger is to combine operational synergies and reduce the cost of duplication, making the company more cost efficient and effective. However, by slashing the XM staff, which grew their subscription base on the strength of music and sports, leaves the people of Sirius in charge. As was mentioned earlier in this thread, growth at Sirius was only accomplished by giving Howard Stern half a billion dollars, not by music choices.
> 
> Not that I mind, but I did just want to throw it out there. It isn't going to be music choices that drive Sirius XM going forward.


I think to grow satellite radio is going to have to develop more exclusive talent on the talk show side. Music is just too competitive with digital music players easily interfaced into new cars. Not saying music isn't going to be a substantial piece of the satellite market, but with the state of the music industry and the competitive nature of that area it's unlikely it will drive the type of growth they want.

Chris Russo and developing his sports talk channel was a step in the development direction.

One other possibility...if they can free up enough bandwidth would be to go back to some local/regional programming. Perhaps covering each of the top 100 DMAs with a local channel...this would also give them a basis to generate local ad revenue.

They do have a serious issue coming up...what happens at the end of Stern's five-year contract? If he chooses to leave/retire there could be huge financial ramifications.


----------



## Lee L

The problem is they would never get anything local past the NAB.


----------



## Greg Bimson

Lee L said:


> The problem is they would never get anything local past the NAB.


Didn't Sirius and XM have local traffic reporting? As long as they didn't use their repeater network to broadcast only locally, the NAB had no pull.


Ken S said:


> I think to grow satellite radio is going to have to develop more exclusive talent on the talk show side. Music is just too competitive with digital music players easily interfaced into new cars. Not saying music isn't going to be a substantial piece of the satellite market, but with the state of the music industry and the competitive nature of that area it's unlikely it will drive the type of growth they want.


That is where I believe where Sirius XM is headed.

Think the development of MTV over the past 15 years. Now MTV only has programs and no videos.

Sirius XM needs to find that "unfair advantage" that Denis Leary shouts on those Ford F-150 commercials.


----------



## Ken S

Lee L said:


> The problem is they would never get anything local past the NAB.


They're not disallowed from doing local/regional shows. They have local weather and traffic.

When I say local, they could be broadcast nationally, but have a local regional focus. So, there would be a NY Metro Station, Philly Station, Baltimore/DC, and so on. Might not be able to do school closings, but could at least cover more locally oriented news/events/sports than the national stations do.


----------



## Lee L

I thought about mentioning the traffic thing, but did not. The NAB desperately wants them to not do that and I thought they threatened to sue at some point. But you are right, they were not able to stop it. However, I would expect that to change if SiriusXM was to do anything more local than that. Didn;t they try or suceed in getting the FCC to make no local part of the merger agreement?


----------

