Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Interoperable Radios and Executive Candor, a look back.

  1. #21
    tim wallick is offline
    tim wallick's Avatar
    Joined: Jul 2008 Posts: 204
    Quote Originally Posted by crfceo View Post
    I did talked to Michael. He's not a nutjob. We spoke at length and each explained our positions. We will probably be speaking in the future. We agreed on many things and and agreed to disagree on the others. For what its worth after I crucified him, he had no knowledge that the NAB was going to use his letter as they did. He's been looking for some answers that have not come, and he was venting through whatever means he could. I do the same thing on my blog.

    he's a good guy not a nut job and very pissed, sirius twisted and used the interoperal issue right up to the mention of merger and they even had the select satellite radio site unblocked and information was available on a timeline for 2006.

    it even became very clear they were using the brockwell suit to protect managment and the company going forward for any merger related actions.
    its never good when you try to strip your shareholders of due-process with a suit that should have been most likely tossed out.

    you just dont wake up one day and think lets buy xm radio. it takes some time to study the best way to present your case. if you want to save all the combined spectrum.and get through the fcc process intact.

    I do think management was less then honest and very selectively used words to suit their needs at will.

    what was done is clearly wrong i dont care if they think they have a current loophole Because what they told the fcc and sec when they first filed is whats important. and if they had a change in concept to that understanding they were obligated to report it.

    not just state no merger "no dual device" thats a complete load of crap.

  2. #22
    crfceo is offline
    crfceo's Avatar
    Joined: Apr 2008 Posts: 205
    sirius twisted and used the interoperal issue
    Herein lies the problem. After just using your own link to prove that the mandate referred to the technology, you came back with a whole lot of nothing. It seems you are twisting the words here.

    You argued the point and I showed you the error in your you are ranting about a bunch of off topic stuff...stay focused. I'm open to this.

  3. #23
    Dlite is offline
    Dlite's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2008 Posts: 84
    Hartlieb makes some decent points and is probably correct that there could have been more research leading up to the merger, and definitely more transparency before and during.

    I just think that all his efforts now are tantamount to a Baseball manager arguing in the 9th inning about a play that occurred in the 1st inning. If he still feels betrayed then he should pursue his own recourse, but he shouldn't continue trying to harm these two companies and their attempts to merge. That hurts everyone, not just Sirius, but the investors and customers too.

  4. #24
    Newman is offline
    Newman's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2007 Location: Dallas Texas Posts: 1,162
    I guess the key issue to Hartlieb's argument relating to the merger is that Sirius is overpaying for XM. Am I correct Michael?

    What exactly do you feel was a fair price for Sirius to obtain the ONLY other chunk of 12.5 ghtz of spectrum, 6 satellites (4 in orbit), some major OEM deals, and 9 million subscriptions?

    I think Sirius and XM worked out a decent agreement that was pretty fair. Sirius has the growth, XM has the OEMs. Sirius has Stern, XM has the music. XM has more OEM agreements, but at a higher cost. Sirius has fewer OEMs, but more name exposure, NFL, Nascar, NHL, ...

    When the two combine, they will be able to renegotiate a large number of contracts, bringing prices way down, which will increase the value of what XM brings to the table. I dont know if Sirius will be able to reneg thier major deal (Stern) which would lower their offerings to the merger.

    As I said, I think the merger agreement was fair. I agree with Dlite. The interop argument is too late at this point to make a difference. Interop WILL come with the merger, so the point is mute.

  5. #25
    hartleib1 is offline
    hartleib1's Avatar
    Joined: Mar 2008 Posts: 135
    You are correct , but it dosn't matter what I think. I just want the truth to be told as shareholders were denied a fully informed vote. These two cos. have done everything to stop the truth being known about Interoperable devices!

  6. Ad Fairy Senior Member
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

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