# Stern's threat to quit Sirius could be empty talk



## Richard King

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9CNSOH80&show_article=1



> Howard Stern is threatening to leave Sirius XM Radio Inc. now that the shock jock and the satellite radio provider are getting set to enter contract talks in 2010.
> 
> That threat probably seems less daunting to Sirius than it once would have. Sirius originally wanted Stern so badly that it gave him the most lucrative radio contract ever, a five-year deal that started in 2006 and paid him $500 million in cash and stock.


More....


----------



## Nick

Cya Howie! :hi:


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

I'd love to see him leave.


----------



## rudeney

Wouldn't hurt feelings - I've not once listened to his show.


----------



## farmerdave4

I hope he retires, the world does not need his trash.


----------



## SteveHas

I originally got Sirius in my new car 4 + years ago because I was a habitual; Stern listener.
As I got used to Sirius I listened to him less and less, and enjoyed Sirius more and more.
Now in my new car with XM, and no Stern, I could care less.

...and I love my XM even more.


----------



## MikeW

The guy turns 56 next month. I think it is time for him to cut his hair and retire.


----------



## Mark Walters

You all be nice. Sirius would be dead in the water without Howard. Obviously XM wasn't so great and powerful after he went to Sirius because Sirius acquired XM and not vice-versa. The XM headquarters have been practically shut down and New York is the main hub. Without Howard and the growth he brought in subscribers this whole satellite experiment might be awash. It would have been the other way around if XM picked up Howard but the suits over there were arrogant and stupid. Incidentally, the XM suits are all out on their asses out of work. Wasn't XM destroying Sirius before Howard signed? What happened? Many subscribers will leave if Howard quits. It's a deal Mel Karmazin wants to get done. He knows the value of Howard. Rush Limbaugh got a $400 million dollar deal in his latest contract. Let's see how many people are buying satellite subscriptions if he jumps to satellite. What Howard has done is, frankly, amazing.


----------



## elaclair

Howard who?.....


----------



## rudeney

farmerdave4 said:


> I hope he retires, the world does not need his trash.


I have to say that most of his material does not appeal to me, but it does to others as there seems to be a good number of people who have subscribed to Sirius in order to listen to his program. You know what they say - one man's trash is another man's treasure.


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

Mark,
Without Howard, my XM would've probably survived. I hope Stern is dropped!


----------



## SamC

Stern may be the most over-hyped thing of the previous decade.

In a nation of 300M, he found 0.01% were actually entertained by his saying "F***" on the radio. This was translated by his cult-like following into being "the king of all media". Then he tried to translate this into pay radio, and did not significantly affect the medium, either in terms of XM vs. SSR or in terms of acceptance of the medium generally.

Now the latest publicity stunt.

Meanwhile 99.99999999999% of people say "Howard who?"


----------



## eudoxia

SamC said:


> Stern may be the most over-hyped thing of the previous decade.
> 
> In a nation of 300M, he found 0.01% were actually entertained by his saying "F***" on the radio. This was translated by his cult-like following into being "the king of all media". Then he tried to translate this into pay radio, and did not significantly affect the medium, either in terms of XM vs. SSR or in terms of acceptance of the medium generally.
> 
> Now the latest publicity stunt.
> 
> Meanwhile 99.99999999999% of people say "Howard who?"


Obviously an emotionally (not factually) post from someone who doesn't like Stern. His show is not as good as 10 or 15 years ago, but I really enjoyed the history of Howard Stern. He did put Sirius on the map, but not sure if they would survive without him. They spent way too much on names like Oprah and Martha Stewart. They don't translate to radio and for the millions they paid her Oprah contributes very little to her station and never promotes it. Whoever Mel Karmizan put in charge of programming is a bonehead.

Without Howard satellite could be like "HD radio". Good technology but no good programming for the consumer.


----------



## Dolly

Howard has to stay with Sat. Radio, if he wants to work. He can't do what he does anywhere else! I personally don't care for him, but I realize a lot of people do.


----------



## Hoxxx

with NO Stern maybe the cost would come back down to Earth. No one is worth the money he demands. I never listen to his same ole crap anyway.


----------



## SamC

Leaving Stern out of it, the whole "celebrity driven" XM-SSR marketing scheme seems, to me, to be wrongheaded. Do any of these people (Stern, Oprah, Stewert, etc, etc, etc, bring enough subscribers to the medium to justify their costs? 

It would seem to me that the ticket would be to have good music in every genre and niche; a good mix of news talk, sports talk, and female talk; and play-by-play of the four major sports. Other than the afformentioned Stern-cult, which is probably 200K in the whole country, I have never heard anybody say they bought SR for a celebrity's channel.


----------



## eudoxia

SamC said:


> Leaving Stern out of it, the whole "celebrity driven" XM-SSR marketing scheme seems, to me, to be wrongheaded. Do any of these people (Stern, Oprah, Stewert, etc, etc, etc, bring enough subscribers to the medium to justify their costs?
> 
> It would seem to me that the ticket would be to have good music in every genre and niche; a good mix of news talk, sports talk, and female talk; and play-by-play of the four major sports. Other than the afformentioned Stern-cult, which is probably 200K in the whole country, I have never heard anybody say they bought SR for a celebrity's channel.


Whether you like him or hate him you can't make up numbers like that. He brought 1 million subscribers with him when he signed with Sirius.
Stern is a radio guy, Oprah and Martha Stewart are not. Your formula for what you'd like to see in satellite radio is a good one. Sports is very important and so is a large variety of music genres. But many like the "non-censured" satellite radio where you can listen to Stern interview a celebrity and they will say what they want or Rawdog comedy is funny as hell. Different strokes for different folks, but throwing millions at daytime TV hosts to bring more female listeners is idiotic. (I only say this as a female, I will watch Oprah if I want to hear her, but I like my raunchy satellite radio that I can't get anywhere)


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

Howard needs to get a leather Fonzie jacket soon. He's about ready to jump the shark (if he hasn't already). 

Good riddance, Mr. Slob!


----------



## mutelight

Clearly a lot of Stern haters but I will be canceling my subscription if he leaves. Tuning in for some funny, brainless humor every now and then is entertaining for me when I have lulls at work or going to bed at night. I never actively sit down and listen to his stations by any means but then again I never even use the music stations to listen to when I have access to Pandora and many GBs of much higher quality music everywhere I go.


----------



## SamC

ex post facto hoc, ergo proctor hoc.

(x follows y, therefore y caused x)

In other words, the article cited attributes a standard growth in subscribers to signing Stern. The same article could attribute it to any event that happened in the same period of time, with the same logical invalidity. 

SSR's growth curve, in reality, seems to be unaffected by Stern, in gross terms and in terms of relative to XM at the time. 

XMSSR seems to still be selling the idea, at least to itself, that this "king of all media" has more followers than could be accomodated in an average NFL stadium. It just did not work out.


----------



## JJJBBB

They have a rough road ahead without Howard as most would say the real hard core subs are Howard and Bubba fans. I really only listen to them and a little classic rewind when they are not live. I don't think it would be worth it to keep my two subs + internet access without them.:nono:


----------



## wilbur_the_goose

mute - I don't hate Stern at all. I just think his act has grown old and tired. He's a younger version of Imus (another guy who's act I can't stand)


----------



## mutelight

wilbur_the_goose said:


> mute - I don't hate Stern at all. I just think his act has grown old and tired. He's a younger version of Imus (another guy who's act I can't stand)


Yeah I know, sorry, I was a bit blunt in my assessment. :lol:

I do see where you as well as others are coming from though.


----------



## mlb

I only signed up for Sirius for Howard and Bubba. If they go away then I just go with Slacker or Pandora streaming over my Blackberry. I already use them when working out at the gym, it isn't any more work for me to plug it in to the car stereo or radio on my desk at work rather than my ST5 receiver.


----------



## mrpepper

I signed up for Sirius because of Stern. If he were to leave I would continue my service. I love the music channels. Stern needs to bring back Jackie to liven up the show!


----------



## cartrivision

Hoxxx said:


> with NO Stern maybe the cost would come back down to Earth. No one is worth the money he demands. I never listen to his same ole crap anyway.


Don't expect any reduction in subscription rates if Stern is gone. The $100 million per year that they spend on Stern comes out to about one cent per day per subscriber, and if Stern leaves and one million or more of his listeners cancel, there would be no cost savings, so look for costs to go up, not down.


----------



## cartrivision

SamC said:


> Stern may be the most over-hyped thing of the previous decade.
> 
> In a nation of 300M, he found 0.01% were actually entertained by his saying "F***" on the radio. This was translated by his cult-like following into being "the king of all media". Then he tried to translate this into pay radio, and did not significantly affect the medium, either in terms of XM vs. SSR or in terms of acceptance of the medium generally.
> 
> Now the latest publicity stunt.
> 
> Meanwhile 99.99999999999% of people say "Howard who?"


Are you kidding??? Stern remains one of the most recognizable and known names in the radio industry.

Meanwhile, he brought in enough subscribers to not only pay for his record setting contract, but to also put Sirius in a position to acquire XM.

Howard who? Howard, the one who saved Sirius and put satellite radio on the map, and to this day remains one of the biggest names in radio despite only being available on a pay platform. Any other questions?

BTW, the king of all media name doesn't come from any cult-like following that likes to hear him say f... on the radio. Radio is only one medium. He jokingly dubbed himself king of all media after he dominated morning drive radio, had _several_ TV shows on both cable and broadcast TV (three that ran for several years and another that ran for more than ten years), had two books that both debuted at #1 on the New York Times best seller list, had a major motion picture that was #1 at the box-office on it's opening weekend, and had a CD that debuted at #1 on Billboard's Hot 200 list. That may not be "all" media but it's more than virtually every other media figure has ever been successful in.

Unfortunately for all the Stern wannabe's, it takes a little more than saying f... on the radio to be able to have such success in all those forms of media.


----------



## SamC

What color is the sky in your world?


----------



## JJJBBB

SamC said:


> Stern may be the most over-hyped thing of the previous decade.
> 
> In a nation of 300M, he found 0.01% were actually entertained by his saying "F***" on the radio. This was translated by his cult-like following into being "the king of all media". Then he tried to translate this into pay radio, and did not significantly affect the medium, either in terms of XM vs. SSR or in terms of acceptance of the medium generally.
> 
> Now the latest publicity stunt.
> 
> Meanwhile 99.99999999999% of people say "Howard who?"


Wow , where did this data come from .... I love how Stern haters just make up their own facts. Like 305,316,543 lived here in 2009 so the first line is BS to start (census.gov) . Why not get the real data before you post it makes you look foolish. The sky is blue in our world and statistically most people find it to be blue, I checked before I posted. By the way the word F*** is ussually used when appropriate , just like in the real world!

Meanwhile 99.99999999999% of people say "Howard who? - Statistic?

.


----------



## Boston_bill

I think he's overrated and a sell-out. Never been a Stern fan nor his kiss-ass staff of Gary and Robin


----------



## cartrivision

SamC said:


> What color is the sky in your world?


You should be asking that question to yourself and others who try to make the ridiculous claim that Stern did not bring in enough subscribers to pay for his enormous contract at Sirius, or the absurd claim that most people don't know who Howard Stern is.

Why is it that you are unable to credibly contradict a single thing that I posted?

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the sky is blue, despite your failure to recognize and accept reality.


----------



## Garyunc

cartrivision said:


> You should be asking that question to yourself and others who try to make the ridiculous claim that Stern did not bring in enough subscribers to pay for his enormous contract at Sirius, or the absurd claim that most people don't know who Howard Stern is.
> 
> Why is it that you are unable to credibly contradict a single thing that I posted?
> 
> Sorry to burst your bubble, but the sky is blue, despite your failure to recognize and accept reality.


I still can't believe people would actually pay $12.95 a month just to listen to Howard Stern...


----------



## JJJBBB

Garyunc said:


> I still can't believe people would actually pay $12.95 a month just to listen to Howard Stern...


Believe, for me 100 & 101 are the only channels unless they are on vacation, then maybe I will surf to one called classic rewind, come to my senses and listen to a best of show back on 100. I hear there are other talk channels but I can't confirm that at this time.


----------



## SteveHas

wilbur_the_goose said:


> mute - I don't hate Stern at all. I just think his act has grown old and tired. He's a younger version of Imus (another guy who's act I can't stand)


+1!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I used to laugh my A$& off at his show, the last 3 years I listened though he spent more time *****in', then entertainin'


----------



## cartrivision

SteveHas said:


> +1!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> I used to laugh my A$& off at his show, the last 3 years I listened though he spent more time *****in', then entertainin'


That's quite funny since many long time listeners say that what they don't like about the current show is that Stern doesn't ***** and complain like he used to do in the old days.


----------



## Scott in FL

Garyunc said:


> I still can't believe people would actually pay $12.95 a month just to listen to Howard Stern...


You could pay me $12.95 a month and I still wouldn't listen to him.

I know he brought a lot of listeners to Sirius, but was his salary worth it? That's the math we don't know. XM had a lot of subscribers without him.

The reason Sirius bought XM is because both services were losing money. Having duplicate operations in DC and NY was too expensive. I think the reason they are now in NY is because that's where the talent lives or visits. NY is a media town. DC is the Federal Government.

I did hear last week that he might be going to Clear Channel. As far as I'm concerned they deserve each other, but that's another story...


----------



## djlong

XM still produces out of it's studios in D.C. Over time, it's probably going to be cheaper to move some production out of NYC (where Sirius/XM rents) to D.C. (which XM owned, now Sirius XM) except for whatever presence they have to keep in a media center like NYC.


----------



## cartrivision

Scott in FL said:


> You could pay me $12.95 a month and I still wouldn't listen to him.
> 
> I know he brought a lot of listeners to Sirius, but was his salary worth it? That's the math we don't know. XM had a lot of subscribers without him.


The math is pretty simple. Stern only had to bring in about 1 million new subscribers to pay for his contract, so there's not much of a question of if he was worth it.



> I did hear last week that he might be going to Clear Channel. As far as I'm concerned they deserve each other, but that's another story...


Clear Channel recently stated that they were interested in signing Stern, but it's pretty clear that Stern would never go back to terrestrial radio. If he doesn't re-sign with Sirius-XM, he'll be gone from radio.


----------



## Boston_bill

Scott in FL said:


> You could pay me $12.95 a month and I still wouldn't listen to him.
> 
> I know he brought a lot of listeners to Sirius, but was his salary worth it? That's the math we don't know. XM had a lot of subscribers without him.
> 
> The reason Sirius bought XM is because both services were losing money. Having duplicate operations in DC and NY was too expensive. I think the reason they are now in NY is because that's where the talent lives or visits. NY is a media town. DC is the Federal Government.
> 
> I did hear last week that he might be going to Clear Channel. As far as I'm concerned they deserve each other, but that's another story...


I have a friend who works in the DC office and they're not duplicate operations.


----------



## Scott in FL

Boston_bill said:


> I have a friend who works in the DC office and they're not duplicate operations.


Not any more, no. But they were before the merger.


----------



## Scott in FL

cartrivision said:


> The $100 million per year that they spend on Stern comes out to about one cent per day per subscriber...


That works out to 23.4 million subscribers. At the end of 2009 they had a little more than half that number of subscribers: 15,703,932.

But your point is valid: it only costs pennies per day to pay for Stern.

What we don't know is how many subscribers would leave -- today -- if Stern were gone. Yeah, I know how many signed up when Stern was added, but that's history. How many would leave today? We don't know. If 1 out of 15 subscribers left that would be a reduction of 1 million listeners. 1 out of 15 leaving because of one guy? I doubt it.

I'm guessing his high salary is no longer justified.


----------



## cartrivision

Scott in FL said:


> That works out to 23.4 million subscribers. At the end of 2009 they had a little more than half that number of subscribers: 15,703,932.
> 
> But your point is valid: it only costs pennies per day to pay for Stern.
> 
> What we don't know is how many subscribers would leave -- today -- if Stern were gone. Yeah, I know how many signed up when Stern was added, but that's history. How many would leave today? We don't know. If 1 out of 15 subscribers left that would be a reduction of 1 million listeners. 1 out of 15 leaving because of one guy? I doubt it.
> 
> I'm guessing his high salary is no longer justified.


Sirius/XM ended the year with 18.8 million subscribers, which is the number I used to come up with "about one cent per subscriber per day" as the cost of Stern's contract.

As for how many would leave if Stern left, I don't think it's out of the question that a million or more subscribers would leave if Stern left. There were only 600,000 Sirius subscribers before he signed with Sirius, and he was a very big reason for the growth to where they were in the years that followed.

Even if you could make the case that they would lose less than a million subscribers if Stern left, it still would be a non-trival number, so Sirius/XM would then only be saving a fraction of one cent per day per subscriber, but at the cost of losing future marketability of their product with the loss of one of the biggest and most well know "marque value" names in the industry. Then there's the fact that Stern's show is probably responsible for a very large portion of the $50 million per year in advertising revenue that the company earned in 2009 (a year when radio ad revenues were in the toilet... in 2008, they had $70 million in ad revenue), so when all factors are considered, I don't see how losing Stern would be anything but a money losing proposition for Sirius/XM.


----------



## Sea bass

Who needs Stern when there's Jay Thomas on 108 Give em' a listen!


----------



## Mark Walters

Sea bass said:


> Who needs Stern when there's Jay Thomas on 108 Give em' a listen!


Jay Thomas is at his best every Friday on Howard 101.


----------



## Jimmy 440

Him and LeBron are starting their own show. "Men who are in love with themselves"


----------



## Mark Walters

Jimmy 440 said:


> Him and LeBron are starting their own show. "Men who are in love with themselves"


Bron better not get a show...he is not known for his speaking! ...based on that awful scripted show.

Stern has conquered his field/business by himself, against all odds, with no Dwayne Wade, Bosh, Miller, Haslem...etc. Lebron basically joined forces with Imus. Can you imagine Stern and Imus working together? The two juggernauts of WNBC hated each other. They wanted to be the best and do it on their own terms with no help. Lebron obviously doesn't care to build and foster a legacy for himself based on his recent boneheaded decision.

He was crowned the best before he even started playing in the NBA. Now look at him.. he is on Wade's team. Jordan must be laughing his ass off watching this self destruction to a legacy. Kobe keeps pulling further away as the (present) best player on the planet.


----------



## hbkbiggestfan

mlb said:


> I only signed up for Sirius for Howard and Bubba. If they go away then I just go with Slacker or Pandora streaming over my Blackberry. I already use them when working out at the gym, it isn't any more work for me to plug it in to the car stereo or radio on my desk at work rather than my ST5 receiver.


Pandora and Slacker aren't going to work so well when your driving.

I think Sirius will lose a TON of subscribers if Howard leaves. I've always been somewhat of a Stern although I did not follow him to Sirius as I just can''t justify for myself paying for radio. Some people need to just shut up after they make their point that they don't like the guy because some of you are posting too much of the same stuff.


----------



## sigma1914

Mark Walters said:


> Bron better not get a show...he is not known for his speaking! ...based on that awful scripted show.
> 
> Stern has conquered his field/business by himself, against all odds, with no Dwayne Wade, Bosh, Miller, Haslem...etc. Lebron basically joined forces with Imus. Can you imagine Stern and Imus working together? The two juggernauts of WNBC hated each other. They wanted to be the best and do it on their own terms with no help. Lebron obviously doesn't care to build and foster a legacy for himself based on his recent boneheaded decision.
> 
> He was crowned the best before he even started playing in the NBA. Now look at him.. he is on Wade's team. Jordan must be laughing his ass off watching this self destruction to a legacy. Kobe keeps pulling further away as the (present) best player on the planet.


Mark, I often disagree with your posts, but not this one! :lol:


----------



## CodyJ

If Stern goes, I goes...

What made the show great was having a true funny man there with him. That was Artie Lange, who I loved. However, for nearly a year now the show has been without the Artie--due to his personal problems--who made the show worthwhile.

For all the haters out there, who only hear the shock stuff, you have to remember that Howard is without equal in the interview department. This is some of the most entertaining radio I have ever heard, and when he gets someone like a Chris Rock in there, it's amazing.

There is more than meets the ear!


----------



## ehilbert1

Lots and lots of Stern haters on here. I love how people will say he wasn't worth the money. He saved Sirius. There would be no Sirius without him. When Sirius hired him people finally started talking about satellite radio. 

If you don't like him thats fine, but don't ever say he wasn't worth the money. He brought in more subscibers than the NFL,NASCAR,MLB, Oprah and Martha. I also love how people say they don't care about him and he doesn't matter. Those same people have to come in this thread and chime in though. I guess he matters enough for you to comment. Howard who????....... Get the F out of here. He changed radio.


----------



## ehilbert1

Yea Howard gets no press. David Arquette calls in and its all over the net and all over every entertainment show. Who else in satellite radio has that power?????? Haters will be haters.

http://tv.yahoo.com/blog/david-arquette-why-courteney-cox-and-i-split--1637


----------



## cartrivision

Sea bass said:


> Who needs Stern when there's Jay Thomas on 108 Give em' a listen!


Jay Thomas does a good show, and he's also heard on Howard 101 Friday mornings.


----------

