Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 29

Thread: The Deal With HD

  1. #11
    Dlite is offline
    Member
    Dlite's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2008 Posts: 84
    Quote Originally Posted by john View Post
    Newman,The thing that is so scary to me is that so many people here are in favor of this kind of thing. If you ask me it smacks of desperation on their part. Well you can count me out, I am never that desperate. I dont think Mel is ether, thank god that a reasonable man is at the head of the wheel. I am glad you guys are just shareholders and not making decisions for the company.
    Trust me, I'm not in favor of this kind of concession. I agree with you that iBiquity's efforts have been tantamount to extortion. I would much rather go with the voluntary concessions that are in the proposal. But if it comes down to a compromise, I agree with Newman that this might be less harmful than meets the eye -- especially if IB pays for it.

    In other words, if including HD chips is the difference between 8% and 25% spectrum, then iBiquity better start getting to work.

  2. #12
    Newman is offline
    Mentor
    Newman's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2007 Location: Dallas Texas Posts: 1,162
    Quote Originally Posted by zcurzan View Post
    Yes because spinning your tires on the mud while the FCC stone walls you is so much more beneficial to the future of the company.
    Precisely.

    John, let me ask you: Do you feel that Tate is going to approve this thing with the concessions proposed by Sirius and XM? Or do you think there will be a compromise somewhere in the middle?

    If you think there will be a compromise, what do you think that compromise would be?
    HD inclusion?
    Additional spectrum given up?
    Price cap for 487 years?

    Out of those three, which do you find acceptable?

    Of course Mel is a smart man and he will not agree to anything that is outside of shareholder's interests. He will try to get Tate to agree to the concessions as proposed, but what if that doesnt work?

    If you dont like HD inclusion, what additional conditions would YOU find acceptable to get the deal passed?

  3. #13
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    zcurzan, Mel has gotten it this far with the concessions that Martin has stated had little wiggle room left. You I guess would give up the cows to get a milking machine, just as the guy was ready to give you the machine for free.

    Dlite, if you think Ibiquity is going to go from not even wanting to pay for the 10 to 12 dollars for a chip subsidy to wanting to pay for the whole extra cost that would be included for people to get a satellite radio, you better tell Newman to save you a seat on the reality train. My point being first of all satellite radio subsidizes its radios now to make them as cheap as they are for consumers to get them. Now if you add the cost of HD to that, that takes away the whole purpose of satellite radio to subsidize its radios, unless they also pay the HD portion of that radio cost and that means all to most of it. If Ibiquity was planing on doing what you and Newman believe, then there would be no reason for them to go after satellite radio because they would already be doing something close to what satellite radio is doing now. You dont see it though, do you. There is a simple reason, it does not pay for itself for HD to do it. I have gone over this several times before over the past few years, satellite radio is paying ahead for its growth it is a very very costly path. So costly that it is the biggest reason (I believe) why they are in the dept they are in and are not profitable as of yet. As an example SIRI alone has paid well over 400 million in subsidies to the OEMs alone last year. My point being to make it clear, is once again; THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL IBIQUITY IS GOING TO START, TO DO SOMETHING THEY HAVE NOT DONE EVER BEFORE. Have you ever heard if you want 10 ask for 20. so the best case in that is that satellite radio will get stuck with subsidizing at least have of HD radio cost.

  4. #14
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Newman, I have said it from the time Martin approved that Tate was not going to ask for much more then what Martin did that it would at most be guarantees that she would be looking for. This is from a post that I made on Seeking Alpha not to long ago;

    What have I always said about these two democrats. I know some may think it amazing how, I can call so many things. But as I have said, it is not anything special, just common sense. I also dont go to far off the reservation. As an example common sense tells me that when Martin puts a statement out that there is little wiggle room, in the agreement that he put together, take that with passed history on this merger, the fact that Tate is even more conservative then Martin, and that means she will not fall for the crap the NAB is putting out about HD, and the rest, just as Martin did not. You can come up with Tate, not asking for to much more. She is not going to mess this deal up, to get more then can be given. See *common sense*, if you look at it that way you can see what I have said is not going to far off the reservation.

    Newman, I have said it many times; that look at the history of this merger, it will tell you everything you need to know. What did people say when it took so long for the DOJ to give its decision, and what a suprise not only did they approve but said no concessions were needed. Then what did people say when it took so long for Martin to rule on this merger, and what a suprise, once again, no real concessions that were not already told that SIRI/XMSR would agree to already, and I think we can both agree they were not that bad at all. Common sense tells me what I said about Tate before. I may be wrong, but I dont think so. I have the odds on my side, that is why I have been proven right way more times then I have been proven wrong. It is also why so many of the things I have called before, have come true. Nothing special just common sense and not going to far off the reservation.
    Last edited by john; 07-21-2008 at 12:56 AM. Reason: add content

  5. #15
    Newman is offline
    Mentor
    Newman's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2007 Location: Dallas Texas Posts: 1,162
    Quote Originally Posted by john
    THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL IBIQUITY IS GOING TO START, TO DO SOMETHING THEY HAVE NOT DONE EVER BEFORE.
    The funny thing is john: I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU.

    What I was saying is that Sirius/XM could choose the lesser of 3 evils, and make this COUNTER proposition, and then leave it up to iBiquity to be the bad guy and turn it down. Then all of the congressmen, attornies general, and everyone else who doesn't matter and should never have a voice in this merger in the first place can truely see who the bad guys are.

    iBiquity would never go for such an agreement. You know it, I know it. Let Sirius/XM prove it to everyone else.

  6. #16
    zcurzan is offline
    Senior Member
    zcurzan's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2008 Posts: 404
    haha getting fired up now. this board is starting to get interesting

    zcurzan, Mel has gotten it this far with the concessions that Martin has stated had little wiggle room left. You I guess would give up the cows to get a milking machine, just as the guy was ready to give you the machine for free.
    Farmer zcurzan has five cows who he has to milk by hand. It costs him a lot of money and time and it's giving him tennis elbow and a bad back. If the FCC is willing to sell him a milking machine that lets him milk cows faster and more efficiently, he will sell one of his five cows to make it happen. Especially if the cow he's giving up, doesn't produce any milk.

    No one's buying HD's radios 2 percent...it's sour. And rest assured, there are no free milk machines.

    Okay enough about the milk.

    As an investor I share your optimism that Tate is just a slow reader. But as a third party observer of the politics involved, I see the reality. Satellite radio has no leverage in this negotiation. We can yammer on about how there is little wiggle room. Make it look good to the press. The fact is, we are asking for a merger, we can play nice or walk away. When push comes to shove, which one do you think is a better move?

  7. #17
    zcurzan is offline
    Senior Member
    zcurzan's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2008 Posts: 404
    iBiquity would never go for such an agreement. You know it, I know it. Let Sirius/XM prove it to everyone else.
    Exactly, and I don't think it would hard to get the public on our side. All you would have do to is issue a press release with the headline, "Ibiquity: You're Kidding Right?". And then go on to explain we are more than willing to make your technology available to our customers as long as you want to pay for it to be there. Voila, they are the bad guy.

    I suppose Ibiquity wants the combined company to pay for their corporate rent and utility bills as well.

  8. #18
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Newman, I just dont think it will come up. As was talked about before the "open access" takes that out of the loop. Then you cannot tell the OEMs what they have to do. Besides you read everything I wrote about my conclusion about Tate and what has happen before. You know all that I said is true. So what would your common sense tell you would happen. Like I said it is not a fore gone conclusion, but is is more likely, then not, that what I said will happen will.

    zcurzan, I used that example as to "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free", Anyway. That is fine if it was a one time thing. What we were talking about was not. It is something that would cost you a cow each month every month untill you had no more cows to give. In that example you are still better off, milking by hand right, at least you still have cows to milk. The reason I say this is if you look at the prior post you will see there is no need to give that much more. They are near the finish line the hard work is over Martin got the bulk of the concessions. There is no way SIRI/XMSR is going to give more now, then all that Martin asked for, to get a commissioner that should have been for the deal anyway. Trust me take a good look at the concessions that are there now put forth by Martin. What you were talking about before Newmans last statement, was more then all of them combined.

  9. #19
    zcurzan is offline
    Senior Member
    zcurzan's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2008 Posts: 404
    I think my position got lost in all the cow talk. If Sirius is going to have to pay for it, I don't support it. But if they make a one-time concession such as allowing HD to be in our radios at Ibiquity's cost, that is not a repeating cost to the satellite radio company, in fact its not really a cost at all. HD inclusion is hardly going to steal customers, the two products are too different. I fail to see the substantial business impact.

  10. #20
    Newman is offline
    Mentor
    Newman's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2007 Location: Dallas Texas Posts: 1,162
    John, I hope you are right. I hope it does not need to come up. I am hoping Tate will sign off on the deal as is, just with wording that has enforcability, and maybe an agreement to a small fine from the enforcement division. I certainly FEEL that it should be this simple.

    But my gut feeling tells me that nothing in this merger has been simple so far, and why am I expecting it now? I think this may be the next tactical step if they are unable to get Tate to sign off on this as is. Redirect the focus back on the NAB and HD radio.

  11. Ad Fairy Senior Member
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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