Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Pandora article comment continuation

  1. #31
    imromo24 is offline
    Guru
    imromo24's Avatar
    Joined: Aug 2008 Location: Steeler Town, MI Posts: 2,524
    I think TV commercials have more "reliability" or trust factor...internet ads always feel like a scam...and billboards only really work for food, when your driving and you see a big mac with the words "mmmm", that makes you remember that you need to eat a big mac soon...

    SXM's billboards were nice though, to the point, utilized the product recognition of colors and the iphone and just a giant "sirius XM" app logo.

  2. #32
    SiriusBuzz is offline
    Head Honcho
    SiriusBuzz's Avatar
    Joined: May 2007 Posts: 2,504
    Quote Originally Posted by john View Post
    And I doubt all that cost as much as one ad on one station on tv. I wonder why that is.
    That all costs FAR MORE then one ad spot during the super bowl. Hands down. Its not even close.

    I dont know why you think TV commercials are so expensive? You can get a local ad spot for $XXX or national commercials on a regular show for $X,XXX and prime time spots are only $XX,XXX.
    Charles LaRocca
    SiriusBuzz Founder

  3. #33
    TSavery is offline
    Head Honcho
    TSavery's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2007 Posts: 524
    There were statements made on another site that I considered to be libel. I requested a retraction of those statements as they are baseless, unsupported by the facts, and unsupported by the truth. The other site removed those comments, but has not published a retraction. Should such a retraction be published, I would ask that members of this forum simply let the retraction stand without comment about it on this site. I can assure readers that I conduct and do my own research, and arrive at my own conclusions without getting any special information from any source. I can also assure readers that I was never given any special information for the purpose of discrediting another site. Further, I can assure readers that while sometimes it may appear that this site is trying to discredit another site because I publish a contrary opionin, that those articles are published in response to concerned people who want accurate and factual information, and not in an effort to discredit anyone. This is not a response site, but rather an accuracy site.
    Tyler Savery
    Satellite Standard Founder

  4. #34
    TSavery is offline
    Head Honcho
    TSavery's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2007 Posts: 524
    Well, efforts to resolve this matter have left it still unresolved. The comments made on another site were as follows:

    "All I’ll say about SB is this. When Malone sells SIRI back his 40%, they will then be valued accordingly. When the ugly deal is refinanced, they will again be shown their worth. They are like little children who laugh at the kid who struck out but are afraid to stand in the batters box themselves.

    There were 12 analyst views on the street. No one expected a loss in subs of the magnitude we saw last quarter. Tuna Amobi himself stated he did not expect a loss in subs last quarter. Truth is no one did. You want to know how Tyler knew? He knew because a certain someone at Sirius XM told him everything to prop himself up above me. It was a favor returned for favors given in an effort to discredit this site only.

    It was at that time when SB was doing everything they could to discredit me personally and ********. They sure loved the traffic my articles brought them. They continue to write articles in response to my articles. You never see them combat the Motley Fool or The Street.com. No. Why would they? They have no balls. They have a personal vendetta against me that has made that site worthless.

    I put myself out there. They would not know how to begin a real analysis. They don’t have to however. They will get the info from a certain source and publish it as though they were some kind of geniuses who came up with the numbers themselves.

    They should call the site ********response.com or *******Buzz.com, because they have no idea what people involved in Sirius XM are buzzing about….until they read ******** of course…


    I contended that the statement made by that site contained libelous statements. I immediately requested a retraction of the posting. The site removed the posting but as yet has not printed a retraction, and perhaps will refuse to do so unless ordered by a court. SiriusBuzz did not request the removal of the post. I did that personally.

    Because legal matter can take time before resolution, I want to defend myself, and have chosen to do that in this forum.

    The first paragraph of the post:

    "All I’ll say about SB is this. When Malone sells SIRI back his 40%, they will then be valued accordingly. When the ugly deal is refinanced, they will again be shown their worth. They are like little children who laugh at the kid who struck out but are afraid to stand in the batters box themselves."

    1. Malone is not required to sell SIRI his shares. The contention that the Liberty deal could be reversed was not correct. The Malone deal is well explained on SiriusBuzz.

    2. The "ugly deal" is referring to the merger financing. There may be a time when it gets refinanced, but other debt such as the XM debt needed to be addressed first. Of course, better financing, or paying off debt is good, and will help the stock price. that is rather obvious.

    3. I do not laugh at "the kid that struck out". I am indifferent to that kid. What I do is make efforts to get accurate information published that leads the readers to have an accurate description of the facts to work with.

    The second paragraph stated:

    There were 12 analyst views on the street. No one expected a loss in subs of the magnitude we saw last quarter. Tuna Amobi himself stated he did not expect a loss in subs last quarter. Truth is no one did. You want to know how Tyler knew? He knew because a certain someone at Sirius XM told him everything to prop himself up above me. It was a favor returned for favors given in an effort to discredit this site only.

    1. It is this paragraph that contains libel statements. There were actually fewer than 12 analysts covering the equity, but that is not really material.

    2. The site states that the "truth" is that no one was expecting sub losses in Q1. This statement is not accurate, as several analysts had come to a conclusion that subs would be negative.

    3. The site stated, "You want to know how Tyler knew? He knew because a certain someone at Sirius XM told him everything to prop himself up above me. It was a favor returned for favors given in an effort to discredit this site only." This is libel and an utter lie. I talk to Sirius XM, but NEVER receive information that is not already public information. While I can not speak for Sirius XM, I can say that they have never given me information for the purpose of discrediting that site. The allegation that Sirius XM gave me specific information to discredit that site is pure fabrication, is unsubstantiated by the person making the statement, and is an utter lie.

    The third paragraph states:

    "It was at that time when SB was doing everything they could to discredit me personally and ********. They sure loved the traffic my articles brought them. They continue to write articles in response to my articles. You never see them combat the Motley Fool or The Street.com. No. Why would they? They have no balls. They have a personal vendetta against me that has made that site worthless."

    1. SB was not trying to discredit that site, nor that person. There were actions by that site, and statements forwarded to many people that were direct attacks on SiriusBuzz as me

    2. The traffic to SiriusBuzz since that writer left has remained constant and within trends that satellite radio site experience. There has been little impact to traffic. The fact of the matter is that most readers load many satellite radio sites.

    3. I do not write articles in response to that site. I write articles that carry an accurate portrayal of the facts. It may appear that I am responding to his articles, but the fact is that I am responding to readers who express concern over inaccuracies in other articles. I also write articles critical of the street.com, and Motley fool. The evidence of that is available all over SiriusBuzz as well as SatelliteStandard. Thus, the assertion that I have no balls is really an uninformed opinion. Some simple and basic research will reveal that I have responded to many Fool and Street articles, and my assertion here is accurate.

    4. The poster contends that I have a vendetta against him that has made SiriusBuzz worthless. He is entitled to his opinion. Readers were told on this site that Malones shares were his to keep. Valuable information for investors. If investors were to believe that the Liberty shares could come back to Sirius XM, they would be making an investment decision on a bad assumption. Readers knew here that the bond offering was paying of the XM debt. If they were believing that the bond offering was for paying off the merger debt of Sirius XM, they would be making a bad assumption. Readers learned here that sub numbers would be very bad in Q1 and Q2. If they were to believe that subs were going to be positive, that would be a bad assumption. Readers here get accurate information that many consider valuable.

    The fourth paragraph states:

    "I put myself out there. They would not know how to begin a real analysis. They don’t have to however. They will get the info from a certain source and publish it as though they were some kind of geniuses who came up with the numbers themselves."

    1. He puts himself out there. Okay. I guess he can characterize himself however he wants.

    2. I do understand real analysis. I do it all of the time on this equity. My record speaks for itself.

    3. He states, "They will get the info from a certain source and publish it as though they were some kind of geniuses who came up with the numbers themselves." This statement is libel. I receive information that is public information. I receive information and dig up information from many sources. I do not agree with a lot of that information. I carry my own formulations and assumptions in my own analysis. People that analyze equities use many sources of information and opinion in developing their models. My model is no one elses. It is my own.

    Paragraph 5 states:

    "They should call the site ********response.com or *******Buzz.com, because they have no idea what people involved in Sirius XM are buzzing about….until they read ******** of course…"

    1. I have no intent of naming this site after his site, or him. This site does not use his site for our information, nor would we care to. We are committed to accurate articles that present the facts. We are committed to good opinion and good speculation that offer readers balance. We are not sensationalistic, and that is by design.

    2. We are well aware of what is happening in the Sirius XM sector. Our articles and efforts demonstrate that quite clearly.

    In closing, I can understand that there are some who feel that this issue should simply be dropped. I would love to see that happen, but can not allow libelous statements to go unanswered. Seeing positive comments on articles with gross errors throughout the net demonstrate that some will believe just about anything thrown out there. How this matter will end is unknown, but I wanted to clear the record so that readers can have two opinions to consider.
    Tyler Savery
    Satellite Standard Founder

  5. #35
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Tyler, while you may not be able to say it I will, he is an idiot. He doesn't learn from his mistakes he gos way off the reservation and when found to be wrong time and time again, he does not stop. Even a monkey knows if something doesn't work after a few times to try something else. I have tried to tell him several times to stay on the reservation or at least close to it when making a assumtion. You know what they call someone that does the samething over and over again and expects a different result, is right.



    P.S. The site would be a good site if they did not have him to deal with.
    Last edited by john; 07-19-2009 at 10:25 AM.

  6. #36
    TSavery is offline
    Head Honcho
    TSavery's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2007 Posts: 524
    Quote Originally Posted by john View Post
    Tyler, while you may not be able to say it I will, he is an idiot. He doesn't learn from his mistakes he gos way off the reservation and when found to be wrong time and time again, he does not stop. Even a monkey knows if something doesn't work after a few times to try something else. I have tried to tell him several times to stay on the reservation or at least close to it when making a assumtion. You know what they call someone that does the samething over and over again and expects a different result, is right.



    P.S. The site would be a good site if they did not have him to deal with.
    Thank you for the support. I try to make accuracy and integrity, key components of what I write. I take pride in knowing that the information I write about is based on a foundation of hard data, good assumptions, and reasonable speculation. Having followed this company for quite some time, I have experience in knowing the historical data, and the mistakes I have made with assumptions in the past.

    The record here at SiriusBuzz speaks for itself. The tenor of our assumptions and speculation speaks for themselves. Our opinions and speculation are grounded by reason and probability.

    We do not always get everything right, but when we speculate, we make it quite clear, and typically offer counter stances to our own assumptions.
    Tyler Savery
    Satellite Standard Founder

  7. Ad Fairy Senior Member
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •