Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: nirvana on February 16, 2006, 10:49:50 AM

Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: nirvana on February 16, 2006, 10:49:50 AM
Was just talking about this last night with my friend before this story broke.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11383797/

Oprah is joining XM to counter their falling sales while Sirius enjoys increasing sales, in part due to Howard Stern.  That article would just go to show what I was talking about.  Sirius, while having about 1/3 the stock value of XM, is doing relatively well.  Kinda makes you think there were a few million dollars being thrown around for Oprah to hit the radio waves again.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Meatwad on February 16, 2006, 10:55:43 AM
Oprah on the radio would cause the subs to go away, not help it
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: nirvana on February 16, 2006, 10:58:26 AM
Not when she get's Dr. Phil on there:aok


Besides, if someones willing to watch her show, I imagine they'd be even more willing to listen to her without having to see her.  Hell it would be a damn near miracle for those stay at home moms that run out and do errands while their precious Oprah is yelling at lying authors.  I heard XM is developing an Opradio too.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Meatwad on February 16, 2006, 11:30:09 AM
Opradio is just plain scary, like a friggen cult she has :rofl
Title: Re: XM vs Sirius
Post by: BigGun on February 16, 2006, 02:26:36 PM
Quote
Originally posted by nirvana
Was just talking about this last night with my friend before this story broke.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11383797/

Oprah is joining XM to counter their falling sales while Sirius enjoys increasing sales, in part due to Howard Stern.  That article would just go to show what I was talking about.  Sirius, while having about 1/3 the stock value of XM, is doing relatively well.  Kinda makes you think there were a few million dollars being thrown around for Oprah to hit the radio waves again.


XM sales are not falling, subscribers increase by 83% last year. Also, stock price has nada to do with stock value of company.  Example:

1 share of a $10 stock is same value as 10 shares of a $1 stock. need to look at outstanding shares to determine market cap of company. In fact, Sirius is bigger than XM, not 1/3 the value
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Mustaine on February 16, 2006, 02:33:38 PM
i always hated the made up name "sirius" is it supposed to be a play on serious? is there no significance at all? WHAT THE F DOES IT MEAN!!?? :mad: :furious

anyway, i can't believe with all the MP3 players and FREE radio out there people still choose to pay for radio. at least paying for TV you can see boobs and stuff. what do you get with radio? someone who can cuss like a sailor? whooo that gives me pleasure :rolleyes:

it just seems like a rich way to waste money, and show off.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: NattyIced on February 16, 2006, 02:34:35 PM
Good thing I have Sirius. I can't imagine Oprah going to XM bodes well for those who have XM, and a wife that watches Oprah. Enjoy those car rides.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Tarmac on February 16, 2006, 02:38:19 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Mustaine
i always hated the made up name "sirius" is it supposed to be a play on serious? is there no significance at all? WHAT THE F DOES IT MEAN!!?? :mad: :furious

anyway, i can't believe with all the MP3 players and FREE radio out there people still choose to pay for radio. at least paying for TV you can see boobs and stuff. what do you get with radio? someone who can cuss like a sailor? whooo that gives me pleasure :rolleyes:

it just seems like a rich way to waste money, and show off.


My google impaired friend, Sirius is a star in the constellation Canis Major (the big dog).  Hence the dog logo for the company.  It's also the brightest star in the sky (excluding the sun, of course).
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: NattyIced on February 16, 2006, 02:42:13 PM
Us fat cats, with our pricely satellite radios, love cruising down through the poor areas of town, where the commoners live in their slums listening to FM *HAH* radio, lighting up our fine cuban cigars with $1000 bills in our chauffered Bentleys. It's just the way rich people waste their riches.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: BigGun on February 16, 2006, 02:42:21 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Mustaine
i always hated the made up name "sirius" is it supposed to be a play on serious? is there no significance at all? WHAT THE F DOES IT MEAN!!?? :mad: :furious

anyway, i can't believe with all the MP3 players and FREE radio out there people still choose to pay for radio. at least paying for TV you can see boobs and stuff. what do you get with radio? someone who can cuss like a sailor? whooo that gives me pleasure :rolleyes:

it just seems like a rich way to waste money, and show off.


I gladly pay. Monthly fee is next to nothing really. And the music programming and other programming beats the hell out of radio. Can hardly stomach regular radio anymore. $12 a month hardly rich people category. In fact, if think that is lot..u must be one those poor people.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Mickey1992 on February 16, 2006, 02:50:51 PM
XM predicts it will turn its first quarterly profit in Q4 2006 and will go from 6+ million subscribers to 9 million.  Sirus has half the subscriber base and will be quite a few years longer to hit profitability.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: dynamt on February 16, 2006, 03:07:15 PM
XM gives me me NEXRAD radar in the air. Sirius doesn't.;)
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Delirium on February 16, 2006, 03:22:22 PM
As much as I like competition, Sirius is far too reliant on Howard Stern for its subscribers... in one interview he was already talking about what he was going to do after being on Sirius after his contract expired.

Unless something drastic happens, it will be another Mircrosoft/Apple competition.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: LePaul on February 16, 2006, 03:51:35 PM
Which of those providers carries O'Reilly and such?  The Fox guys?

Ive never been a Stern Fan...I agree with Delirium.  So, asides Stern, whatcha got?
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: nirvana on February 16, 2006, 04:40:57 PM
They got commercial free radio, just like XM.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Estes on February 16, 2006, 04:49:26 PM
I had XM for a long time, but it got to the point where they played the same crap over and over again. Too much like FM radio to me.

So I went with Sirius and have been satisfied with their music line up.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Scootter on February 16, 2006, 08:47:41 PM
GARMEN 396 + XM = WINNER
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: FuBaR on February 17, 2006, 12:10:30 AM
CD player
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Habu on February 17, 2006, 08:54:39 AM
I think Sirius will win the competition for listeners due to one thing, their superior content. They paid the big bucks and now they have a much better lineup of channels. Howard Stern (both channels are really good, he is adding other people to them such as Danny Bonaduce), NFL, Nascar (coming shortly), Martha Stewart, and a ton of very good music channels.

XM has sort of dropped the ball on content. Forget Oprah, she is only going to call in for 30 minutes a week. It is a joke how little effort she is putting in to the channel after being paid so much money.

I do agree the data content on XM is great and worth a few hundred thousand subscribers for things like real time weather and traffic on your Garmin 396.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: JimBear on February 17, 2006, 09:11:18 AM
Well  Sirius just signed a 55mil $ contract with Opah for a 30minute weekly "show". 11grand a minute for drivel, yeesh. The idea of Stern and O at the same place is kind of ironic.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Eagler on February 17, 2006, 09:11:54 AM
streaming sirius off the web is nice at work too
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Habu on February 17, 2006, 09:19:16 AM
Quote
Originally posted by JimBear
Well  Sirius just signed a 55mil $ contract with Opah for a 30minute weekly "show". 11grand a minute for drivel, yeesh. The idea of Stern and O at the same place is kind of ironic.


XM signed Oprah. It was a joke deal as she will not allow her tv show to be rebroadcast and she is only going to do 30 min live a week.

It was a desperate deal in order to get some subscribers and boost their stock price.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: JimBear on February 17, 2006, 09:52:56 AM
XM?  my bad.  oh jebus there goes my stock value
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Habu on February 17, 2006, 10:24:25 AM
I think the strongest thing XM has right now is the subscriber income from weather and traffic data for GPS users. That could end up being a fairly big business alone.

Sirius has better content but they paid quite a bit for it.

If I had to pick a stock I would pick Sirius.

However I think one or both of them will eventually be bought or merged with a content provider such as Time Warner, or Viacom or Sony etc.
Title: XM vs Sirius
Post by: Mustaine on February 17, 2006, 10:30:36 AM
Quote
Originally posted by NattyIced
Us fat cats, with our pricely satellite radios, love cruising down through the poor areas of town, where the commoners live in their slums listening to FM *HAH* radio, lighting up our fine cuban cigars with $1000 bills in our chauffered Bentleys. It's just the way rich people waste their riches.
it's not that...

i have my MP3 player for music, and the best morning show in the world IMHO with the local morning guys on 1 station.

there is nothing else i listen too. don't need sat. for local guys, and i get to hear exactly what i want.