# Sirus XM in Talks with DirecTV



## Colby (Dec 8, 2008)

Looks like the debt purchasing talks have moved over from Dish over to DirecTV. Below is the url from Engadget that links to NY Times & Reuters.

http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/11/sirius-xm-in-bailout-talks-with-directv/


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Interesting...


----------



## jasper933 (May 4, 2008)

I think DirecTV and Sirius would work better together. I think one time DirecTV owned 30% of XM.

I do hope DirecTV and Sirius work something out.


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

jasper933 said:


> I think DirecTV and Sirius would work better together. I think one time DirecTV owned 30% of XM.
> 
> I do hope DirecTV and Sirius work something out.


The roots go way back to Hughes/General Motors.


----------



## denvertrakker (Feb 6, 2009)

Well, it just gets more and more interesting, doesn't it? Or perhaps, "curiouser and curiouser"?

I wish I lived closer to Denver so I could see the smoke coming out of Charlie's ears...

Or John Malone wringing his hands in glee over the possibility of one-upping his "old pal"....


----------



## merchione (Apr 28, 2008)

Now hopefully we can get 202 The Virus back on D* Frrrrunnkisss


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

From the linked article:



> Apparently *Smelly Melly* isn't as hot for EchoStar owner Charles Ergan to buy Sirius XM out as was previously rumored,


Looks like the boys at Engadget are bent that Mel won't deal with Chuck. :lol:


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

merchione said:


> Now hopefully we can get 202 The Virus back on D* Frrrrunnkisss


I don't see why not. It's not as if any significant number of people are paying to listen to them on satellite radio or even interested in listening for free on terrestrial radio. Have you seen their list of affiliate terrestrial radio stations lately? :eek2: Is it down to two, one or zero now? Whichever it is, it's a long way away from the 30 affiliates they had a little over a year ago. I guess viruses just aren't what they used to be. :lol: It looks like someone sprayed a little Bactine on the O&A Virus, and it quickly stopped spreading... we didn't even have to break out the Penicillin.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

I would love to see D* help out Sirius XM :sunsmile: If Sirius XM wants to go with a good company, they have to go with D* :sunsmile: But I don't know how interested D* is? As I have been reading stories it seems that Mel contacted D*--not D* contacting Mel.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

The question to be answered in all of this is pretty simple:

Can SR be profitable?

I'm not sure the answer to that is yes, and I don't think that DirecTV would be wise to risk itself finding out.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

AirRocker said:


> Interesting...


Interesting indeed. :grin:

I have to wonder where this is leading.

Mike


----------



## sarhaynes (Dec 10, 2006)

I also found this article here:

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=OBR&date=20090211&id=9602893

This would definately be an interesting buyout. From what I've been reading is that many of Sirius/XM issues are short-term with some notes coming due and the down-turn in automobile sales. However many analysts still beleive that the long-term growth potential for the Sirius/XM is high. Does Liberty/D* have the short-term cash (or the ability to secure credit) to be able to reap the long-term rewards?


----------



## ocrts (Mar 21, 2007)

I'd love for this to happen if it meant we could bundle Sirus/XM mobile with our D* package at a slight discount. I'd probably bite on a $7-$9/mo mobile add-on.


----------



## Albie (Jan 26, 2007)

SamC said:


> The question to be answered in all of this is pretty simple:
> 
> Can SR be profitable?
> 
> I'm not sure the answer to that is yes, and I don't think that DirecTV would be wise to risk itself finding out.


Actually, yes. Most of the problems right now are balance sheet issues not income statement problems. If whoever ends up with Sirius/XM can clean up the short term debt they will have a company that brings in approx $2 Billion a year in revenue. Also with only one company there won't be the the bidding wars for content (e.g. Howard, NFL, MLB, Martha, Oprah, etc). Not a bad play if you can wrangle down the short term debts.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

ocrts said:


> I'd love for this to happen if it meant we could bundle Sirus/XM mobile with our D* package at a slight discount. I'd probably bite on a $7-$9/mo mobile add-on.


I'll second this


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

There's no love lost between Mel and Charlie. This move has one of two motives (or maybe both): to drive up the cost of the company if Charlie wants to buy them outright, OR an attempt to keep the company independent. Malone at Liberty would probably be more willing to buy the company or at least invest in the company and allow them to operate independently. You can take it to the bank that if Charlie gets his hands on the company, all the management will be gone and it will be fully integrated into either Echostar or Dish. Malone might not have such a plan with regards to DirecTV.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

SamC said:


> The question to be answered in all of this is pretty simple:
> 
> Can SR be profitable?
> 
> I'm not sure the answer to that is yes, and I don't think that DirecTV would be wise to risk itself finding out.


This is the part that concerns me. Which could hurt D* worse--Charlie geting Sirius XM or having D*'s parent company get Sirius XM? But actually what I have read the writers seem to think the Liberty move is just an attempt to jack up the price on Charlie.


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

I would rather not see DIRECTV bleed red ($millions and millions) - whether short term or long term. Me thinks it would end up affecting the satellite TV part of the business.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

l8er said:


> I would rather not see DIRECTV bleed red ($millions and millions) - whether short term or long term. Me thinks it would end up affecting the satellite TV part of the business.


Absolutely, satellite radio for whatever reason seems to be a turd of a business. Music Choice or one of the other music services would be a much better solution for music services.


----------



## homebase (Sep 4, 2007)

SXM could file for bankruptcy as early as Tuesday:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090213/D96AVBV00.html


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> Absolutely, satellite radio for whatever reason seems to be a turd of a business. Music Choice or one of the other music services would be a much better solution for music services.


But if that is the case why does Charlie want Sirius XM so much  He must think it can help Dish or why would he be interested? And anything that helps Dish IMHO is going to hurt D* at some point.


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

Dolly said:


> But if that is the case why does Charlie want Sirius XM so much ....


 The egos of people with boatloads of money are hard to contain. (Charlie Ergen and Mel Karmazin have had disputes in the not so distant past. Charlie heads Echostar while Mel is the top dog at Sirius/XM.)


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

Yea, but Mel apparently has issues with any other "media mogul"

John Malone is just as much of one as Charlie Ergen is...


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

CJTE said:


> .... John Malone is just as much of one as Charlie Ergen is...


 Yeah, but John Malone didn't have a squabble with Mel over the carriage of Viacom channels on DishNetwork.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

Dolly said:


> But if that is the case why does Charlie want Sirius XM so much  He must think it can help Dish or why would he be interested? And anything that helps Dish IMHO is going to hurt D* at some point.


Just because he thinks it can help doesn't mean it really will. A business that can't turn a profit when given an absolute monopoly (Sirrius/XM merger) is a complete turd in my book. What will be bad for US (DirecTV subs) is if he gets it and DISH's value is degraded even further. Without DISH as a competitor, DirecTV will be free to really start turning the screws on pricing.


----------



## scr (Feb 5, 2008)

"John Malone's Liberty Media is offering Sirius XM a bridge loan of several hundred million dollars to help the nearly insolvent satellite-radio company pay off debt that matures Tuesday....."

Full story => http://www.nypost.com/seven/02132009/business/malone_offers_liberty_to_sirius_155024.htm


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> Just because he thinks it can help doesn't mean it really will. A business that can't turn a profit when given an absolute monopoly (Sirrius/XM merger) is a complete turd in my book. What will be bad for US (DirecTV subs) is if he gets it and DISH's value is degraded even further. Without DISH as a competitor, DirecTV will be free to really start turning the screws on pricing.


The only reason Sirius XM isn't making a profit is because when there was Sirius AND XM they were in a battle to get sports and personalities. And both made the mistake of paying way too much money out in contracts. And then when the companies combined all it really gave them was double debt--debt from XM and debt from Sirius. The companies also made a mistake in trying to grab on to each other. They should have stayed apart and each should have tried to get help from other companies that were making money. Two sinking companies joined together just makes the sinking quicker. Then, of course, there was that long merger wait which hurt both companies again. When the merger started to drag on either Sirius or XM should have said forget the merger and looked for help elsewhere. But it is easy to see all the mistakes looking back on the situation, but obviously no one was seeing all these mistakes at the time  And Charlie has to be thinking that somehow Sirius XM will make Dish stronger not weaker. Right now Dish needs a "edge" over D* how Sirius XM would give it to them I don't understand enough about these things to know that myself. But I'm sure Charlie is up to something and I don't like the thought of that myself. Sorry for the book :blush:


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

Look what I just found http://siriusbuzz.com/sirius-xm-to-avoid-chapter-11.php What do you think?
Has Malone saved the day for Sirius XM?


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

Dolly said:


> Look what I just found


see post #26.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

dcowboy7 said:


> see post #26.


That post is about the offer. My link is saying that the offer was accepted. Of course, I know you have to be careful about all the things that have been written about the Sirius XM situation. But since the story came from SiriusBuzz I hope it is the truth.


----------



## fredandbetty (Jan 28, 2007)

ocrts said:


> I'd love for this to happen if it meant we could bundle Sirus/XM mobile with our D* package at a slight discount. I'd probably bite on a $7-$9/mo mobile add-on.


Oh in a heartbeat! I would be all over this!


----------



## Christopher Gould (Jan 14, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> Just because he thinks it can help doesn't mean it really will. A business that can't turn a profit when given an absolute monopoly (Sirrius/XM merger) is a complete turd in my book. What will be bad for US (DirecTV subs) is if he gets it and DISH's value is degraded even further. Without DISH as a competitor, DirecTV will be free to really start turning the screws on pricing.


lets see 20 million subs X a mini of 13 a month = 260,000,000 X 12 months = 3,120,000,000 billion a year. There only problem is debt. Not making money.

Do you realize it took D* and E* something like 5 to 7 years to become profitable and get out of there debt and they had a pretty easy ride.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

Christopher Gould said:


> lets see 20 million subs X a mini of 13 a month = 260,000,000 X 12 months = 3,120,000,000 billion a year. There only problem is debt. Not making money.
> 
> Do you realize it took D* and E* something like 5 to 7 years to become profitable and get out of there debt and they had a pretty easy ride.


Companies around the world carry debt all the time. The problem isn't debt itself, it's when the debt can't be paid back. The reason the debt can't be paid back? Not enough money, so YES their problem is not making enough money.
Do you realize that XM started in 2001 and Sirius in 2002? Are they on the "brink of profitability" today at 7 years later? No, they are the brink of bankruptcy.
Blame it on talent wars, poor management, whatever you want. Individually, they were 2 turds. Collectively they make one giant smelly turd.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

BattleScott said:


> Collectively they make one giant smelly turd.


Malone likes turds. He bought the original _turd bird _from Murdoch.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

Herdfan said:


> Malone likes turds. He bought the original _turd bird _from Murdoch.


Yes and I have seen stories that claim Murdoch now wishes he hadn't let Malone take the "turd bird"


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

Sirius and XM were a good idea in 1990. One problem was that it took more than 10 years before they became reality. It's outdated technology - as in "a day late and a dollar short".


----------



## denvertrakker (Feb 6, 2009)

l8er said:


> Sirius and XM were a good idea in 1990. One problem was that it took more than 10 years before they became reality. It's outdated technology - as in "a day late and a dollar short".


And what better technology has replaced it, by the way? Oh, before you answer, take a ride with me through the middle of Wyoming, where you can't even get televangelists on terrestrial radio, but XM comes in loud and clear.


----------



## ddpoohndave (Sep 18, 2007)

I know I LOVE my sirius radio


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

denvertrakker said:


> And what better technology has replaced it, by the way? Oh, before you answer, take a ride with me through the middle of Wyoming, where you can't even get televangelists on terrestrial radio, but XM comes in loud and clear.


For the MAJORITY of the population, the better technology is a decent broadband connection (even 3G cellular will work) and Pandora Radio.


----------



## denvertrakker (Feb 6, 2009)

LameLefty said:


> For the MAJORITY of the population, the better technology is a decent broadband connection (even 3G cellular will work) and Pandora Radio.


Ah, so the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? Good thing Mister Spock doesn't live in someplace like Pikeville, Kentucky. I do listen to Pandora at home....not so much in my car.[/sarcasm]


----------



## dcowboy7 (May 23, 2008)

denvertrakker said:


> Ah, so the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?


or the 1.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Shirley this can't all be Sirius....


----------



## I WANT MORE (Oct 3, 2006)

LameLefty said:


> For the MAJORITY of the population, the better technology is a decent broadband connection (even 3G cellular will work) and Pandora Radio.


Lefty, I respect the hell out of ya but it's pretty difficult to listen to your favorite NFL or college team w/ Pandora. :grin:


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

John Malone’s Liberty Media would buy it, not Directv. I doubt that they would be integrated. Malone is a buyer and seller. He may well get Sirius XM totally integrated into one platform then sell it again for a good profit. He would sell Directv for the right price.


----------



## fredandbetty (Jan 28, 2007)

ddpoohndave said:


> I know I LOVE my sirius radio


+1!!!


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

lwilli201 said:


> John Malone's Liberty Media would buy it, not Directv. I doubt that they would be integrated.


But the synergy they could create together would be great. Many time companies will merge and talk about synergy, but these two could do it.

Think of the marketing strategy of 1)Adding satellite radio to your DirecTV account like an extra receiver or 2) Add DirecTV to your Sirius account or 3) making all the Sirius stations available to D* subs.

They could actually do alot as a combined company. Plus D* could actually absorb most of the Sirius debt and not doo too much damage to its financials.


----------



## denvertrakker (Feb 6, 2009)

From what I've been reading in the Denver papers, the thinking is that the synergy has already been realized in the merger between Sirius and XM. The thinking is, the merger would have worked just fine (financially, that is) had it not been for the credit crunch.

Most opinion seems to be that Liberty Media could buy SiriusXM (or take control, which amounts to the same thing) and keep it as a sister company to DirecTV. All of the local pundits (essentially the financial people at the Denver Post and the Rocky Mountain News) seem to think this is essentially a battle between Malone and Ergen. I'm sure Karmazin would prefer his company end up with Liberty Media rather than E* - it seems to have more chance of surviving as a separate company that way - not to mention doing an end run around Charlie. Either way, Karmazin ends up with someone over him - something I'm sure he'd rather not have.


----------



## eandras (Feb 16, 2007)

Dish would want Sirius/XM radio for the satellites. Currently doesn't Sirius run Back seat TV? Dish could covert some of the Satellite capacity from Radio to TV for SD channels since they now have the XM Satellite Rock and Rythm as I believe Roll is not a functioning satellite that has an insurance claim for the malfunction.


----------



## SamC (Jan 20, 2003)

The "synergy" problems with XM/SSR are several:

- The two systems are totally incompatable, and a "compatable" receiver will be little more than two receivers in one box. This forces the company to feed two feeds of each channel (and, more importantly to maintian both sat fleets into the indefinate future). Fixing this involves swapping out ever receiver in existance today. Not fixing it will eventually involve launching twice as many new sats as necessary.

- The XM deal with Premiere means that each system still has seperate talk channels.

- The Canadian companies are not merged, providing yet another road block to bandwidth recycling.

- The deal is burdened with long term contracts set up with there were two companies bidding against each other with what have turned out to be talent or sports that do not bring value to the merged system.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

Well one point to make is Malone is not trying to buy Sirius XM. He is only going to give them a loan to help them meet their upcoming debt and help them to work on lowering the debt coming due later in the year. Charlie on the other hand is actually out to get the company one way or another. And Mel  what in the world is wrong with that man??????? He and Charlie have a long bad history together. How can Mel think he can now work for Charlie? The only other choice I know of is Chapter 11. Mel owns stock in the company himself so why would he want Chapter 11? Either there are other offers we don't know about which with the way this situation has been covered I would have to doubt or may be Mel has millions stuffed in his mattress and he is not letting this be known :lol: The decision seems to be a no brainer to me, but apparently Mel is having trouble making the decision


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

Before any new sats are launched, I'm sure they will work out a strategy on integrating the two services. There are even more synergies that could be achieved if they were merged fully into DirecTV or Echostar. First of all you could probably eliminate all of the standard back office stuff such as HR, finance, payroll, IT. Both organizations could use the uplink facilities and merge the satellite operations. Liberty would be more likely to allow Sirius XM to operate independently. It's pretty clear Charlie would merge them into either Echostar or Dish completely, but that doesn't mean he'd shut down satellite radio. I'm sure he'd probably expand mobile TV, but the satellite radio market is larger than the mobile video market. I doubt he'd shut down the cash cow of the company.


----------



## denvertrakker (Feb 6, 2009)

Dolly said:


> And Mel  what in the world is wrong with that man???????


You're certainly not the first to ask THAT question.To me, it seems like he's the perfect example of The Peter Principle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle


----------



## lwilli201 (Dec 22, 2006)

Malone could be just pushing up the price so Charlie will not be able to get them for a song.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

denvertrakker said:


> You're certainly not the first to ask THAT question.To me, it seems like he's the perfect example of The Peter Principle.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle


Yes indeed I know all about the Peter Principle :lol: However, I just saw it scrolled across my TV screen on a business new show that Liberty and Sirius XM were close to a deal. That information was credited to a story from the Wall St. Journal. May be the light bulb FINALLY turned on in Mel's head. I couldn't understand it--MEL CALLED MALONE FOR HELP-- so Malone gets his white hat and gets on his white horse and comes riding in to save Mel. But I guess Mel had to look at Malone's white hat and white horse for some time to decide if he liked them  :lol:


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

From bloomberg.com:
Liberty Media near major stake in Sirius XM.
More info at the following link.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=a0D3XTPq2jbw


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

Thanks for finding a link to post so people wouldn't just have my word on the story :sunsmile:


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

Dolly said:


> Thanks for finding a link to post so people wouldn't just have my word on the story :sunsmile:


You're welcome Dolly.


----------



## SDizzle (Jan 1, 2007)

Would this really create a noticable ownership change? Or would it simply be that Liberty "owns" the majority of the stake behind the scenes?!?


----------



## wilbur_the_goose (Aug 16, 2006)

Just fire Sirius' Mel K. - First thing, please.

Mel totally ruined the wonderful product that XM was.


----------



## DCSholtis (Aug 7, 2002)

Steve615 said:


> From bloomberg.com:
> Liberty Media near major stake in Sirius XM.
> More info at the following link.
> 
> http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=a0D3XTPq2jbw


Additional info:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5ba89940-fc73-11dd-aed8-000077b07658.html


----------



## Steve615 (Feb 5, 2006)

DCSholtis said:


> Additional info:
> 
> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5ba89940-fc73-11dd-aed8-000077b07658.html


Thanks for the link Dan.


----------



## denvertrakker (Feb 6, 2009)

wilbur_the_goose said:


> Just fire Sirius' Mel K. - First thing, please.
> 
> Mel totally ruined the wonderful product that XM was.


+1. But don't hold your breath.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

No Mel is safe because Liberty isn't buying Sirius XM outright it is just loaning it money and will end up with a stake in the company.
However, If I were the company that was going to give Sirius XM a lot of money, you can be sure I would be watching Mel and trying to help him. Obviously he needs all the help he can get because the deal STILL isn't FINAL yet :eek2: Can Mel not find his pen or does he not know how to take the cap off it


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> Companies around the world carry debt all the time. The problem isn't debt itself, it's when the debt can't be paid back. The reason the debt can't be paid back? Not enough money, so YES their problem is not making enough money.
> Do you realize that XM started in 2001 and Sirius in 2002? Are they on the "brink of profitability" today at 7 years later? No, they are the brink of bankruptcy.
> Blame it on talent wars, poor management, whatever you want. Individually, they were 2 turds. Collectively they make one giant smelly turd.


I hate to contradict your keen understanding of the satellite radio industry by pointing out that there is a reason that two people who are a lot smarter and a lot richer than you are fighting to get a controling interest of some or all of this "turd", and I'd suggest that it's not because Ergen and/or Malone are looking to throw hundreds of millions of dollars down a bottomless pit.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

cartrivision said:


> I hate to contradict your keen understanding of the satellite radio industry by pointing out that there is a reason that two people who are a lot smarter and a lot richer than you are fighting to get a controling interest of some or all of this "turd", and I'd suggest that it's not because Ergen and/or Malone are looking to throw hundreds of millions of dollars down a bottomless pit.


I don't understand a lot of this myself, but apparently there are things that can be done if a company has both Sat. TV and Sat. Radio. And I agree with you Ergen and Malone wouldn't be going at it, if it wasn't important.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

LameLefty said:


> For the MAJORITY of the population, the better technology is a decent broadband connection (even 3G cellular will work) and Pandora Radio.


That explains all the mobile radios in cars and trucks that are competing with Sirius XM and providing their programming to those radios via that "decent broadband connection".... oh wait..... :nono:


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

denvertrakker said:


> You're certainly not the first to ask THAT question.To me, it seems like he's the perfect example of The Peter Principle.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle


Cute, but there are actually very few men who (even when you include his current Sirius XM problems) on the whole of their career have been more successful in the broadcast industry than Karmazin has been. Karmazin didn't do anything wrong that put satellite radio in the position it is in now, he's just trying to deal with a lot of debt and other factors that he didn't cause and has little control over.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

cartrivision said:


> Cute, but there are actually very few men who (even when you include his current Sirius XM problems) on the whole of their career have been more successful in the broadcast industry than Karmazin has been. Karmazin didn't do anything wrong that put satellite radio in the position it is in now, he's just trying to deal with a lot of debt and other factors that he didn't cause and has little control over.


I made the post that was being responded to and what I was talking about was why hadn't Mel signed the deal with Malone yet? When Mel was the one who asked Malone to help him. And Mel still HASN'T signed the deal!!!!!!!!! The papers have the words down to "expected to before the stock market opens today". 
Gee there isn't a lot of time left now. I don't see how Mel can do anything else except take the offer from Malone. So take it Mel  I'm getting tired of :beatdeadhorse: already.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

cartrivision said:


> I hate to contradict your keen understanding of the satellite radio industry by pointing out that there is a reason that two people who are a lot smarter and a lot richer than you are fighting to get a controling interest of some or all of this "turd", and I'd suggest that it's not because Ergen and/or Malone are looking to throw hundreds of millions of dollars down a bottomless pit.


Although it is a reasonable assumption that these guys have more money than any of us forum members, I don't recall you testing us for intelligence.

The two men referenced are obviously not smart enough to be happy with the vast fortunes they have already amassed, so your point is debatable.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Dolly said:


> I made the post that was being responded to and what I was talking about was why hadn't Mel signed the deal with Malone yet? When Mel was the one who asked Malone to help him. And Mel still HASN'T signed the deal!!!!!!!!! The papers have the words down to "expected to before the stock market opens today".
> Gee there isn't a lot of time left now. I don't see how Mel can do anything else except take the offer from Malone. So take it Mel  I'm getting tired of :beatdeadhorse: already.


With two interested parties, maybe he's watching the bidding war progress and trying to decide where the threshold is going to be before signing a deal. 

Billion dollar deals don't happen over night&#8230;I don't think&#8230;:scratchin

Mike


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

cartrivision said:


> Cute, but there are actually very few men who (even when you include his current Sirius XM problems) on the whole of their career have been more successful in the broadcast industry than Karmazin has been. Karmazin didn't do anything wrong that put satellite radio in the position it is in now, he's just trying to deal with a lot of debt and other factors that he didn't cause and has little control over.





paulman182 said:


> Although it is a reasonable assumption that these guys have more money than any of us forum members, I don't recall you testing us for intelligence.
> 
> The two men referenced are obviously not smart enough to be happy with the vast fortunes they have already amassed, so your point is debatable.


I think it makes perfect sense.

Neither is going to take on all that extra debt without some probability of a payoff.

If I assume the size of any bonuses they receive is contingent on company performance then wouldn't that imply that they would want to make sure the performance is good a possible.

Notice I'm not saying anything about their ability to do this. 

It would seem to me that sat radio could make a good addition to sat TV service.

Get some basic stations and, for an additional fee, some further packages. This could increase sat radios listenership (is that a word) which could increase revenue

The question is what could sat radio offer and how is it to be delivered. Will a DirecTV receiver be limited to watching TV or listening to Sirius-XM? Could there be an add-on (USB) module that would allow radio and TV viewing at the same time.

Will this be a service that will produce revenue and keep prices under control or will it be a money pit?

There's a whole lot going on here that might necessitate changes to the typical sat radio business model.

Now I've gone and confused myself. :scratchin :grin:

Mike


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

Well, this is good news for Mel and bad news for anyone who hoped the programming on Sirius XM would improve. This will fend off Charlie, but it will leave Sirius XM as an independent company with Mel Karmazin as the CEO. IMO he has ruined the product, though the company would probably be profitable if it weren't for the current state of the credit markets & the automobile markets. 

I seriously hope that they come up with a plan to integrate the two services soon, and I would really hope that they get someone to program the channels other than the apparent Clear Channel rejects they have in there now. Malone is in this purely to make money and maybe to piss off Charlie. He doesn't really have a grand vision of a vast satellite empire. Look for him to sell off this stake eventually, it'll never be integrated into DirecTV as it really should.

Charlie on the other hand would have integrated it into Echostar, slashed most of the costs out of the system, and gotten both services onto a unified platform of some kind. I'm sure there would have been programming changes but who knows if they would have been for better or worse. I still wouldn't be surprised if he picks up Muzak and still makes attempts to buy Sirius XM. At this point if I were him I'd start buying stock, since it's obvious his bonds are going to pay off.


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> I think it makes perfect sense.
> 
> Neither is going to take on all that extra debt without some probability of a payoff.
> 
> ...


Based on the perfromance of satelite radio so far, I am betting on the money pit option.


----------



## JosephB (Nov 14, 2005)

BattleScott said:


> Based on the perfromance of satelite radio so far, I am betting on the money pit option.


Satellite radio actually makes a ton of cash. The problem is they saddled themselves with huge talent costs. The satellites and uplink centers weren't cheap either, though it's widely thought that the content costs are what killed them.

If they could integrate with DirecTV or Echostar then they could share the operational costs of the satellites, uplinks, IT, HR, other back office, etc because those uplink centers can be reused for the TV side as well as the radio side. That, along with negotiating a more sane content cost structure would really help. Now that they're the only game in town, when it comes time to negotiate with the NFL, NASCAR, etc. they won't be bidding against each other. They can also tell Howard Stern to take a hike if he doesn't like the pay cut.


----------



## LameLefty (Sep 29, 2006)

cartrivision said:


> That explains all the mobile radios in cars and trucks that are competing with Sirius XM and providing their programming to those radios via that "decent broadband connection".... oh wait..... :nono:


They're called "iPhones" and "Blackberries" . . . Perhaps you've never heard of them? :lol:


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

cartrivision said:


> I hate to contradict your keen understanding of the satellite radio industry by pointing out that there is a reason that two people who are a lot smarter and a lot richer than you are fighting to get a controling interest of some or all of this "turd", and I'd suggest that it's not because Ergen and/or Malone are looking to throw hundreds of millions of dollars down a bottomless pit.


Regardless of who wants it, how smart they are or how rich they are, satelite radio has proven through results to be a "turd". It simply cannot compete with terrestrial radio. IMO, it will do nothing but harm to the business that tries to take it on. In the case of DirecTV, it would not increase the subscriber base appreciably and the incurred costs would have to be passed on the enitre customer base. The same woud apply to DISH, but their balance sheet is not nearly as strong as DirecTV's so it would have the potential to severely impact the long term viability.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> Based on the perfromance of satelite radio so far, I am betting on the money pit option.


That's a definite possibility.

I'm hoping for a better outcome. :grin:

IMO, there is some serious potential here and if done right can work rather well.

Mike


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

JosephB said:


> Satellite radio actually makes a ton of cash. The problem is they saddled themselves with huge talent costs. The satellites and uplink centers weren't cheap either, though it's widely thought that the content costs are what killed them.
> 
> If they could integrate with DirecTV or Echostar then they could share the operational costs of the satellites, uplinks, IT, HR, other back office, etc because those uplink centers can be reused for the TV side as well as the radio side. That, along with negotiating a more sane content cost structure would really help. Now that they're the only game in town, when it comes time to negotiate with the NFL, NASCAR, etc. they won't be bidding against each other. They can also tell Howard Stern to take a hike if he doesn't like the pay cut.


1) GM, Ford and Chrysler all make a "ton of cash" too, that doesn't make them viable.

2) The only thing common between satelite radio and satelite tv is the use of satelites. The technologies are completey seperate. There would be no sharing of infrastructure.

3) Those are all "Pay subscription" packages that would have to be negotiated for carriage. They would not be available on sat radio just because they are on sat tv.


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

If Malone isn't serious or should I say Sirius about Sat. Radio why was part of the deal that Liberty Media would have 4 members on the Board of Sirius XM? May be to keep their eyes on Mel


----------



## Paul A (Jul 12, 2007)

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/b...iberty-media-reach-530-million-agreement.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=awUwuRiHY1JA&refer=home

Done Deal!


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Paul A said:


> http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/b...iberty-media-reach-530-million-agreement.html
> 
> Done Deal!


Now, how will this effect us?

Mike


----------



## Dolly (Jan 30, 2007)

Well it will extent the life of my lifetime sub which I had thought was on life support. I'm not a shareholder so I had no worries there.
Other than that I don't know what effect it will have :shrug:


----------



## Mavrick (Feb 1, 2006)

I sure bet that Charlie is chapped!


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

At first I thought this was a dumb investment by Malone...but at a 15% interest rate....


----------



## MRinDenver (Feb 3, 2003)

My hope is that now a way can be found for DirecTV to offer all the channels, including talk, sports, etc.


----------



## syphix (Jun 23, 2004)

That's a mighty big hope: SIRIUS XM's sports will NEVER be on DirecTV, IMO. I'm hoping for a few more music channels that are missing, but not holding my breath.

Question is: will Liberty allow Dish to continue feeding SIRIUS (XM) to their subscribers? I guess if the money's right, why not?


----------



## MRinDenver (Feb 3, 2003)

syphix said:


> That's a mighty big hope: SIRIUS XM's sports will NEVER be on DirecTV, IMO. I'm hoping for a few more music channels that are missing, but not holding my breath.
> 
> Question is: will Liberty allow Dish to continue feeding SIRIUS (XM) to their subscribers? I guess if the money's right, why not?


You may be right, however, Malone has been known to find a way or two around tougher obstacles.

Just another service he can bundle.

I have been thinking about dropping my XM sub, but now I may not.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Let's continue discussion here:

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=152567

unless there is a specific DIRECTV angle to the story (as opposed to a Liberty Media one.)


----------

