Report: Satellite radio retail down, Stern a non factor.
#81
02-06-2007, 01:58 AM
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
You're right. It goes to real numbers and statistics and valid references..... :lol:
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
Some firms limit portfolio managers to only stocks over $5. Once Sirius exceeds that level, we think many fans of satellite radio will buy it. Now, our best hope is for a happy holiday season!
Last Trade: 3.64 XM SATELLITE RADIO (NasdaqGS:XMSR) Delayed quote data Edit Last Trade: 14.17
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
Because XM was first to market, it has been selling units for a year or two longer than Sirius.
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
Nope. Forbes says EXACTLY why Sirius has a higher SAC - because XM has been in the business longer, and has absorbed the costs longer.
Originally Posted by ben45750
Sirius once had a lead-to-market over XM, it went public in 1994 while XM IPO'd in 1999
Originally Posted by ben45750
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
That's right. The numbers don't lie. Let's look at them, shall we?
 Down Down Down for XM  Holding pretty steady for Sirius Your right. The numbers don't lie. Lets look at them, shall we????????  It goes past $80.00 and falls all the way down below$5.00!!!!!!!!!!!!  It goes past $50.00 and then falls down and hold steady for years!!!!!!!!!!! 
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
Down Down Down for XM
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
Holding pretty steady for Sirius
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
Originally Posted by ben45750
Oh yeah, hey Rev forgot something in my last post.........
It goes past $50.00 and then falls down and hold steady for years!!!!!!!!!!!
So what stock went higher and what stock went lower???????????
Neither.
My next post gets even better!!!!!!!
Originally Posted by ben45750
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
Nope. Forbes says EXACTLY why Sirius has a higher SAC - because XM has been in the business longer, and has absorbed the costs longer.
Oh really? Am I wrong?
Its three satellites were launched in 2000.
Originally Posted by Rev.Vassago
That is the amount of your post worth quoting, as your numbers and your business logic are really lacking.
#82
02-06-2007, 02:18 AM
So Rev I have posted links showing O&A's ratings book for fall 2006 and posted the link showing O&A's numbers taking over for DLR and they clearly so what DLR's numbers where and how much O&A increased the numbers.
So as you can see Rev likes to post half of the information in his favor and when you post the all of the information showing that he is wrong he quickly changes to something else and then wants YOU to provide information and provide links. Lets see how he spins this? I posted the crap from the other thread where I prove a point to him and it shows he either still thinks it's wrong or he pulls a Clinton and break down a sentence and define a word or read that carefully....ect. Rev is good at the "copy and paste" from the DOT book but when it comes to general knowledge or common sense his cheese has slid off his cracker.
#83
02-06-2007, 02:31 AM
Originally Posted by ben45750
So Rev I have posted links showing O&A's ratings book for fall 2006 and posted the link showing O&A's numbers taking over for DLR and they clearly so what DLR's numbers where and how much O&A increased the numbers.
So as you can see Rev likes to post half of the information in his favor and when you post the all of the information showing that he is wrong he quickly changes to something else and then wants YOU to provide information and provide links. Lets see how he spins this? I posted the crap from the other thread where I prove a point to him and it shows he either still thinks it's wrong or he pulls a Clinton and break down a sentence and define a word or read that carefully....ect. Rev is good at the "copy and paste" from the DOT book but when it comes to general knowledge or common sense his cheese has slid off his cracker. I don't doubt that they got a 4.1 share, or whatever they are at right now, but that doesn't change the fact that they are comparing their individual ratings for their show to the overall station ratings from when Roth was there. They are comparing apples and oranges, because it's the only way they can show something positive. And that doesn't change the fact that they are sporting a 3.1 share compared to Stern's impressive 13 share at the same station, in the same time slot. :lol:
#84
02-10-2007, 09:24 AM
This is too freaking funny!
Rats! Invasion at XM Satellite Radio Headquarters
XM Satellite Radio's Washington DC headquarters is under attack by pests (not O&A kind).
"We're talking rodents," writes XM senior vp Dan Turner in an internal memo. "Those of you familiar with DC rodents know that we're looking at the size of small house cats." Apparently the second floor of The Eck, which is on a raised floor to allow the running of fiber cable underfoot, is where the invasion appears to be centralized. That same raised floor "represents an eight-lane superhighway to anywhere the rats want to go," according to the memo. Turner continues: "Currently we have lost the functionality of Production Room 8 as the rodents have discovered that the cover on our fiber optics cables makes good nesting material. A couple of weeks ago it was one of the multi-function studios that was taken out of commission. Tomorrow it could be a cable to a satellite uplink. It is that serious." The Orkin Man was called in to provide some firepower. "They put out the appropriate 'boxes' in the right places to address the problem," says Chance Patterson, vice president of corporate affairs at XM. "And hopefully the memo will encourage people to do their part to mitigate the issue." |
