I take issue with Tylers (Spence Osborne) article.
Actually just one part of it. I take issue with the part of Tylers (Spence Osborne) article that deals with ARPU. Was the royalty fee included in ARPU yes that is correct.
1) Is that wrong to do?????
NO, and I for one was expecting it to happen sooner if not right from the beginning.
2) Should that take away in anyway from the ARPU number?????
Once again NO it should not. That number includes what they are getting in average revenue from each subscriber. That includes Fees (especially fees they once were not getting but still paying for on their own).
3) So is it really important to split it up into different sections and say, opps this part of it went down. Did anyone HERE really do that before????
Once again NO,
4) So what makes this different then before????
I say nothing what so ever, ARPU is ARPU no matter were it comes from.
Not to be to hard on Tyler, I can see what he was trying to do (by showing SIRIXM was giving more deals to keep subscribers). But really dont they always do that, and yes the ARPU usually gos down when they do. The thing here is that it did not and it went up, which is what I expected it to do long before (because I was always expecting them to include that fee # in the ARPU from the start). So Tyler whats the difference?? ARPU is ARPU no matter were it comes from and if that gives SIRIXM a little more wiggle room to give some extra deals, whats the big deal.