Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: Zcurzan, you knew this was coming! LOL

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836

    Zcurzan, you knew this was coming! LOL

    I TOLD YOU SO, I TOLD YOU SO, I TOLD YOU SO, read, 7th and 8th paragraph down:

    Satellite-Radio Merger
    Will Pass After Firms
    Pay $20 Million in Fines
    By AMY SCHATZ and SARAH MCBRIDE
    July 24, 2008

    Commissioners at the Federal Communications Commission have reached a tentative deal to approve the proposed merger of Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. and XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc., FCC officials said Wednesday.

    Commissioner Deborah Taylor Tate is expected to cast the final and deciding vote on the deal shortly, the officials said, after details are resolved on several outstanding enforcement issues. In exchange for her vote, Ms. Tate and FCC Chairman Kevin Martin have been negotiating with the companies to pay upward of $20 million in fines for violations regarding tower locations and power limits, people close to the negotiations said.

    The companies are valued at $7.5 billion combined.

    The deal will allow Sirius to make a big marketing push at holiday time, traditionally a big selling period for satellite radio. Within three months, the company is expected to have new la carte radios on the market. These will allow consumers to mix and match 50 or 100 radio stations from the two services.

    Even without a new radio, consumers will have new options. For example, a bare-bones plan of just 50 stations from one of the two services will cost $6.99 a month, compared with $12.95 for more than 100 stations currently. Consumers will also likely soon see a number of programming changes as the companies get rid of redundant programming.

    For the companies, the deal will come at a steep price. They are expected to enter into a consent decree, with XM paying about $17.5 million and Sirius paying about $2 million, to settle complaints they produced satellite radio transmitters that exceeded FCC power limits and placed booster towers in unapproved locations.

    The deal would resolve the issue of stronger-than-permitted radio receivers and repeaters, which take satellite signals and transmit them to radios in many urban areas. The companies have tried to modify overactive repeaters and tweak newer radio models, but the quirk has led to satellite-radio signals bleeding into some local-station signals.

    Ms. Tate has suggested a variety of other conditions. People close to the negotiations said these wouldn't significantly change terms already agreed upon by the companies. In June, the companies agreed to a three-year price freeze for existing customers. They also agreed to set aside about 8%, or about 24 channels, of their combined lineup for use by educational and minority broadcasters.

    Notably, the deal wouldn't require the companies to include technology in their radios allowing consumers to receive digital signals from local radio stations. That is a blow to broadcasters who want to expand the number of consumers who listen to their new digital stations.

    An adviser to Ms. Tate didn't respond to a call for comment. Exact details of the deal are unknown because FCC officials and company lawyers are still working them out.

    Ms. Tate's vote would end the agency's 13-month review of the deal and would clear the final hurdle for the merger, which was approved by the Justice Department in March. Ms. Tate's vote was critical, since the FCC's four other commissioners were split evenly on whether to approve the deal.

    The new options that would be available through the merged companies, including the bare-bones plan, could significantly reduce churn, or the number of subscribers who ditch the service each year, said Tony Wible, an analyst at Citigroup. As the economy enters tough times, he said, many consumers might prefer to switch to a low-frills option rather than cancel.

    XM declined to comment. Sirius didn't respond to requests for comment


    I TOLD YOU SO, I TOLD YOU SO, I TOLD YOU SO.


    Now I just hope the Wall Street Journal is right because I would hate to have to retract and apologize to you and then have to say; YOU TOLD ME SO, YOU TOLD ME SO, I WAS WRONG.

  2. #2
    clueless is offline
    Senior Member
    clueless's Avatar
    Joined: May 2007 Location: New York Posts: 251
    Worst post ever. This is not about zcurzan it is about the merger deal so, write an appropriate title and label it as such. If you want to be a dink, then do so at the bottom of the post. No one here cares about your beef with zcurzan so send him a private message and spare us all from reading your childish crap.


  3. #3
    deewcom is offline
    Enthusiast
    deewcom's Avatar
    Joined: Jul 2008 Posts: 166

    Good Find

    I have not yet located this article on the web. It contains some important and interesting bits. Thanks for posting it, John.

  4. #4
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    clueless, did you read the article, it says that Tate will not have the concessions that you and many others thought would be there. While it does prove that my common sense and research was right. It is still confirmation that I am sure many may take some comfort in. Only because, even though I have been right so many times. I know my research and commonsense would not be enough for most.

    P.S. clueless If you cant see the importance to the merger on this article, I will have to resort to calling you an idiot, or a nit-wit. I would like not to have to do that so please read it then get back to me.

    Newman, I hope this makes your gut feel better.

  5. #5
    SiriusBuzz is offline
    Head Honcho
    SiriusBuzz's Avatar
    Joined: May 2007 Posts: 2,516
    Clueless never said that there was no importance in the thread. What he is suggesting (and he is correct) is that it is so important that it should have been titled and labeled as such.

    If the merger was announced tomorrow the headline on our blog would not be "stackpointer is an idiot."

    Point taken?
    Charles LaRocca
    SiriusBuzz Founder

  6. #6
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    Charles, I will agree I read clueless post the wrong way. To be honest I dont see the difference between what I put up and, I dont know, "No HD from Tate". I give people a little credit, that if the are following the Forums they would know what the title ment. If they were not then "No HD from Tate" would mean as little to them as my title. Lets face it The title I put up mattered little because people are for the most part like me curious and will check it out anyway, and once on they are there they are directed to go to the important part of it. You know it, and I know it. Once again to be honest, if it were not for the, catcha to zcurzan I would not have even bothered to put it up. I also think that after the arguement that I had with him I deserved the vindication of the title I put up. Now this is your site and your forums but lets not forget I am not asking to put up an article on the main site. If you want to control the forums like that (try to dictate or censor the titles people use) then I will leave it is a nice simple solution. I have no problem with that. I do however have a problem with someone telling me what title I should use on a forum though. You are not my editor, this is a forum for god sake. As for clueless the same gos for him.

    As a matter of fact now that I read clueless post again. I take it back he has no right to tell me about the worth of my post. I have read many of his post and I have a long way to go before I even get to the worst post ever going just from his post.

    One more thing Charles If you are that unhappy with the title I used then maybe you should change your title from, "General Sirius Discussion" to "Breaking News Everything Here Must Be Serious News", not **GENERAL** sirius **DISCUSSION**, or did I get the catogory wrong. Is this general sirius discussion or not.
    Last edited by SiriusBuzz; 07-24-2008 at 11:47 AM. Reason: triple post

  7. #7
    zcurzan is offline
    Senior Member
    zcurzan's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2008 Posts: 404

    "Is he gone yet?"

    Alright here we go. I was biting my tongue this entire time out of respect for the board Charles is running here, but he let me off the leash.

    1.)
    Anyone with a set of eyes who cares to review the thread that we were arguing in can see that the argument we got in was regarding Mel walking away from the merger, and not whether HD inclusion would be part of the final deal.

    2.)
    The discussion that we were involved in before that thread deteriorated was a debate on the merits of accepting HD inclusion in order to get the merger passed, if it were to be (hypothetically) at no cost to satellite radio. Which all seemed to agree that Ibiquity would never pursue.

    At the end of that thread I just assumed we were misreading each others posts and walked away, because we were clearly having two separate discussions and not getting anywhere. A fact with Newman pointed out to you in the thread.

    I really enjoy what you bring to the forum, but try to remember that not everything has to be a pissing contest. I can count on a single hand the number of threads you have contributed two without belittling or otherwise antagonizing another poster. Case in point, my first experience of you on this board was calling us all sissies for asking crfceo to stay and contribute. (I'm sure the board will not extend the same courtesy to you, for fear that our estrogen levels will somehow reduce the size of your nuts) You seem to like dissecting the post of others (even Charles), and picking them apart. I'm not sure why.

    In any event, I agree with him. I don't mind you calling me out, keeps this board interesting. I don't take it personally either. But make it a separate thread in hopefully what will soon be a new part of the forum. Otherwise the real important part of the thread, the news, can get lost behind all of our bullshit, as it has in this one.
    Last edited by zcurzan; 07-24-2008 at 11:58 AM.

  8. #8
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    First you said:

    Thousands of people come to SB every day... I am willing to bet that 4 of them knew you had an argument with him. I for one, did not.

    Then you said:

    "You sure do assume a lot. I will briefly try and cover some that are incorrect.

    1. Just because you do not see people involved does not mean that people are not here reading the forums. Check the number of guests viewing the forums at any given time and you will see that over the course of the day it is THOUSANDS of people."

    So who started doing the assuming here. Then somehow you got that I said that you did not have thousands of people coming to the forums. So I will show you again what I said and expain it to you.

    "I dought that, not the fact that thousands come here, fewer still to the forums, but that few that come to the forums knew."

    From that I can stated that fewer came to the forums then to the main site. That comes from years of experience, common sense and what I read here. Hell I have seen and heard comments (on Sirius Buzz no less) that there were people that did not even realize that there were different catagories to the left (investors, general, Canada, equipment, ect., ect.) So it is a fact that less come to the forums then goto the main site. Also just because you see 5 to ten people viewing does not mean they are not repeaters , such as zcurcan, crfceo, myself and many other regulars. I know this because I have seen more then one occurrence where I was on a 2nd or 3rd visit and have seen many others were there again (because of the green light you have). Second you assumed 4 people seen the article I can say that was wrong because there were more then that in the article 5 to be precise. then you say thousands come to the site then chances are that, more then the people on the article came to read it and knew about the debate. Unless you think that title was done wrong to.


    You quote me so and then make a statement about what I said which is wrong. How you got what I said is censorship, so lets break this down:

    so I will expain, one is offensive and, one that I would not *want* on the front page ether.

    The key word here is "want" not demand, or need, there is a difference. That difference also comes from the person saying it. Hence me saying it, I have no authority on this site to change it, You saying it, takes new meaning, you get the point yet.


    Next you said:

    Like I said from go, I have no problem with the content, I just wanted it labeled as such. If you don't want to contribute then don't

    Then why were these not commented on, "July22", "When the smoke clears", "hmmm....I dont know what to make of this", "something I find funny", and "A glimmer of hope". All give no clue any more then mine did about the content, and as a matter of fact mine did. lets not forget was there to show zcurzan,and others on the original debate that there would be no HD added to satellite radio.


    Then you said:

    You got me... you sure are a good debater. I will say you have been good for a good laugh and the 4 PM's which I received questioning your sanity.

    So let me clearifiy you are crazy if you have to be up late at night, because you have a 10 month old that just started teething. Thats what you get for Assuming again, I will help you out you really need to have common sense before you do that kind of assuming. there are many reasons that would have somebody up that late as I have just stated. But you see I would know that about someone, before I did that. Such as I had made a comment to Tyler about a few months ago about having to pull away from a comment that he said the same thing on that posted after his. and I told him I was feeding my baby, and he beat me to the punch.


    Then you said:

    For the record, all of this was a SUGGESTION and as you will see your stupid title is still in place

    This brings me back to what I said before, about what some people say compared to others. When It comes from the "Head Honcho" it is taken differently, then from somebody else.


    Finally you said:

    By the way... you're grasping at straws and your argument is weak but that is neither here no there. Feel free to set up a poll in the new General Chat (once it is in place) about who "won" this "debate" and I am sure the winner will be clear.

    grasping at staws and weak, I dought that. I have systematically torn you comments apart and corrected and shown you to be wrong on them piece by piece. There was little you said that made sense. As you will see I did leave a few things out because I agree. Such as when you told me not to keep posting 3 times but to just edit it, there might have been one or two other things.

    Finally what kind of nim-rod are you. Yea that would be a totally unbias survey on a site you have control of and run. Here is an example how dumb you are; A survey on the article, that I was proven right on, which was the one against zcurzan (and the reason for this article) would have shown me to be wrong then. That would not have made that survey correct, though would it. I have found many times that I have debated many people at the same time on the same subject. That if you took a survey at that time I would be wrong according to the survey, that did not change the fact I was proven to be right. Here is another example on Seeking Alpha. It was about, there not being a short sqeeze because of the ARB play (yes, thats right the same thing Tyler has said). Yet I was debating 4 different people and many others that thought I was crazy. Well if a survey was taken then, I would have been wrong, As we now know though, I (and Tyler) were right. Here is a clue for you, popular opinion does not make you or anybody else right. The facts do. In this I have the facts on my side. I dont lose to many debates, something zcurzan should have learned from the last debate, I wiped the floor with him. It is obvious he has not, instead of just coming here and saying: yes john, you where correct thank you for your insight, I now got to go, and wipe the floor with him again.

  9. #9
    zcurzan is offline
    Senior Member
    zcurzan's Avatar
    Joined: Jun 2008 Posts: 404
    Wait wait wait... let me change out of my work-shirt before you wipe the floor with me.

    Oh and just so you know that you aren't being picked on regarding the title thing. A week or so ago I started at topic titled "7/16" to which Charles (I can only assume it was him) appended the main point of the body of the post "Are we up because of the strength in the market?"

  10. #10
    john is offline
    Guru
    john's Avatar
    Joined: May 2008 Posts: 2,836
    zcurzan, this is going to be easy, you should have learned your lesson from the last debate you were proven wrong on, by me and only me. I am not the type of nit-wit, that you find on the Yahoo message boards. Thats right nit-wit, I know thats where you were til you just recently came to Sirius Buzz Forums.

    You said:

    "1.)
    Anyone with a set of eyes who cares to review the thread that we were arguing in can see that the argument we got in was regarding Mel walking away from the merger, and not whether HD inclusion would be part of the final deal.
    2.)
    The discussion that we were involved in before that thread deteriorated was a debate on the merits of accepting HD inclusion in order to get the merger passed, if it were to be (hypothetically) at no cost to satellite radio. Which all seemed to agree that Ibiquity would never

    At the end of that thread I just assumed we were misreading each others posts and walked away, because we were clearly having two separate discussions and not getting anywhere. A fact with Newman pointed out to you in the thread."


    There is noone that would read that and would not understand that it was, that if all the things that Newman and others there, wanted it would be no big deal, and something that you would agree to, as a shareholder. Then when I showed you all that even that would still be a big cost to SIRI/XMSR. You guys moved on to that If SIRI/XMSR accepted what Newman and you guys set forth, that Ibiqiuty would not do it, because they never did it before. I then told you that Mel would not even take that chance. You then moved to SIRI/XMSR has to agree to something like that because SIRI/XMSR had no bargining power, that they could not just walk away. I told you that Mel would never take that (walking away from the deal) off the table, and would use that not to just except Tates offer that you guys thought to be reasonable. I was proven right on both accounts, that is undeniable now. We left it with us agreeing to disagree, But I told you I like to say; "I TOLD YOU SO. So when I was proven right I was going to do that. I said it again in another article when it looked like I was right and we both made lite of it.


    next you said:

    "I really enjoy what you bring to the forum, but try to remember that not everything has to be a pissing contest. I can count on a single hand the number of threads you have contributed two without belittling or otherwise antagonizing another poster. Case in point, my first experience of you on this board was calling us all sissies for asking crfceo to stay and contribute. (I'm sure the board will not extend the same courtesy to you, for fear that our estrogen levels will somehow reduce the size of your nuts) You seem to like dissecting the post of others (even Charles), and picking them apart. I'm not sure why"

    I was always this way. I just have not had to be that way to many times before, because for the most part everyone with the exception of (Stack pointer, FrontMed, hypocritical ass, which are all the same person) were very reasonable. But even Charles I think can see that this board has become more busy in the last few weeks. I know exactly why that is, and while he MAYBE (IMO) torn between the fact that his board is receiving alot more traffic, that traffic has mainly come from the same Yahoo message board he hates. You, zcurzan are a case in point on that. As to me, once again, I have always been this way, this board has change to the same kind of crap I have seen on the Yahoo board. I have always called them, like I see them just like Homer985. I have never before seen the kind of crap here I saw on that post, except on the Yahoo boards, and who where the main players, with the exception of Newman, most came from the Yahoo boards. I have been debating people like (Stack pointer, FrontMed, hypocritcal ass) and (homer985, who by the way is a great debater) and others for a long time here and other places, so dont worry I would never need that kind of pathetic patronizing crap, nor would I want it. When people are wrong they are wrong peroid. As for Charles he could have and should have, put what he wanted from me in a different way as I explianed in the prior post to him. He could have said: hey john the next time, would you make your title a little clearer. Thanks. I would have not jumped down his troat if he would have put it that way. I have always said as you have seen me write, if I think someone comes at me they will get the same back. I also am very nice until I have to repeat my self 3 times to prove a point that is clear as day to me, Hence why I have been proven right way way more then wrong. I know what to debate and who to debate That is why I try to stay away from "homer985 the guy knows his shit. I normally dont debate Tyler ether or Charles, or homer but when they are rarely wrong they are wrong as in this case with Charles.


    Finally you said:

    "In any event, I agree with him. I don't mind you calling me out, keeps this board interesting. I don't take it personally either. But make it a separate thread in hopefully what will soon be a new part of the forum. Otherwise the real important part of the thread, the news, can get lost behind all of our bullshit, as it has in this one."

    The calling you out and the information (the article), go hand in hand, what about that, do you people not understand. I used the article the prove you wrong. To be honest I thought most here, would have seen it by that time.

    You should know I have not changed, just the people/content of the forums has. I have made 10 times the post on this forum in the past few weeks as I have in the past few months (hell I have been at this site for over a year and never felt the need to even post/sign-up in the forums as I have in the past few weeks. Why do you think that is. I will tell you why, I have never seen such dumb ass people on the forum before. Where do you think most of them come from. I knew when I saw crfceo start talking about this site on the Yahoo boards this would happen. I have to tell you I just started posting on the Yahoo board about a month ago and will not go back now. That is not what I wanted to see happen here, so yes I am a little pissed when I see a good thing come to an end. What was, for the most part reasonable people. Hence why I have not felt the need to post in the forums in the last several months as I have in the last few weeks. Until you guys came I had a total of 6 post on the forums, now I am up to 60 in 2 weeks, I think you can see why the difference. Besides FrontMed and maybe on a very rare once or twice have I had to insult people on this site (I am talking about the main page here not the forums and up to a few weeks ago never on the forums) before. Now however as you said it is almost a regular thing. Why do you think that is?

  11. Ad Fairy Senior Member
Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •