So anyone here think Brandons article has NOTHING to do with not Holding .13 today?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john

sl62, I have already said I dont think they even went into it. Considering the FCF positive for the last 2 years was growing by leaps. The cash burn will not even be there in the 4th quarter. They will most likely have added to it. I know I am not going to like it when they say they have 400, 500+, in COH. I am going to be pissed, because that means there were other options open. Now did Charles Frick alot of those options up, I think he did. I also think he forced Mels hand on alot of this bullshit. That if he would have kept his gruppy hands to himself then we would not have had to give up 40% of the company.

---

I'm wondering if that new supplier arrangement with Emerson cost them any of their COH?

It looks like the next time Sirius has to worry about debt is about 70M in December, which is pennies to them, then 250M of the May debt got pushed to May 2010. This will not be an issue next year once Mel continues to rip into his synergies and cut out costs. Revenues and subs are still growing.

It's gong to be a messy Q4 CC, but all this will be behind us.

I'm excited at the prospects, especially the new internet push, with new devices, Iphone app and a new refreshed SiriusXM marketing along with cross-marketing with Direct TV.

Beers & shots this weekend !!! :cheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john

sl62, I have already said I dont think they even went into it. Considering the FCF positive for the last 2 years was growing by leaps. The cash burn will not even be there in the 4th quarter. They will most likely have added to it. I know I am not going to like it when they say they have 400, 500+, in COH. I am going to be pissed, because that means there were other options open. Now did Charles Frick alot of those options up, I think he did. I also think he forced Mels hand on alot of this bullshit. That if he would have kept his gruppy hands to himself then we would not have had to give up 40% of the company.



P.S. I know some are going to say well if they had that much COH then why did they say they were close to filing for BK. The reason was not just the Feb. debt but all the rest that was coming up. That when Charles came in the banks were now not so certain that extending the credit facilities with Mel in control was the best option. So now that means the COH was not going to be enough to cover both what was left in Feb. and the Bank debt due in May and still have enough to carry out business on a day to day basis.

---

I am not sure about this but I dont recall SIRIXM ever saying directly that BK was a possiblitity because of Feb. debt. They did say that BK was possible and that is why they did not need the shareholder vote. The point being that they ether needed to get this deal done or face the reality of May not getting extented. The deal was a here and now kind of thing that had to be done now and may not be there later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sl62

888's...

I think you are not going to like the answer we get. Burn was averaging about what 70M? Yeah, they will report COH I think that will preplex us. But I look at it this way. Mels said in an interview in Sept that in his opinion COH and FCF were the two most imoprtant things to a public company (which we would agree with). I assure you, his plan is to present a cash rich company (irrespective of the overall debt load)...kind of in an out of sight out of mind kind of way. Which he has now done. I don't know the details on the May bank facility, when it was pushed to, but with no debt due in '10, if JPM was pushed to 2011..Mel succeeded in his mission. If that, he will now be tryng to show how much COH the company has over the next Q's while the Street will forget about the debt for a while. He feels that will attract the investors, grow the market cap and after reverse, the even bigger fish. That's my take on his strategy...

---

I have like 3 conversations going, but some of the money from the press release today stated it was for operational purposes, and that dec debt would be paid with cash on hand...so money should be good

Hi, COH in March is not COH in Dec. I Mean they could have 0 COH in March and still pay 80 million in Dec from COH if they were positive cash flow April to November.
What will propell SP increase is if they state "operating expense is below revenue"

Brandon, all I can say is that you have a lot of balls even thinking that you posted that article based on your conscience to you readers.... get a grip man.... your full of yourself.... Mel and company couldn't give you the time of day..., let alone make an announcement of their hard worked deal EARLY, because you wrote an article of their imminent demise. You are as has been said.... a hack and a sensationalist.... and now the problem you have is you dragged my ass into it all...... Thanks ....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cos1000

Brandon, all I can say is that you have a lot of balls even thinking that you posted that article based on your conscience to you readers.... get a grip man.... your full of yourself.... Mel and company couldn't give you the time of day..., let alone make an announcement of their hard worked deal EARLY, because you wrote an article of their imminent demise. You are as has been said.... a hack and a sensationalist.... and now the problem you have is you dragged my ass into it all...... Thanks ....

---

Hi, COS no one really thinks that. I understood from the start that we were examining a document not making predictions. Really no one thinks you opened the thread because you sold shares before a .02 rise. (I feel bad because I nearly said "no don't do it" (not because I knew there was a pop coming but because I Knew there was no drop coming)

One of these days the Sirius gang has to have a beer blast somewhere we can all get to

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brandon Matthews

I have like 3 conversations going, but some of the money from the press release today stated it was for operational purposes, and that dec debt would be paid with cash on hand...so money should be good

---

The problem I have with journalist who would write as you have written, re your last two articles, is accountability. When I began my trade, I served an aprenticeship, a journeymanship, then moved on to become a master. The first two levels were sometimes very cruel in the traning and abuse from the masters. But I understood why. The decisions that I make, instrumentaion selection, systems intergration, and the method of installation, can actually mean the difference between humans living or not living, in an emergency. If I make the wrong call, I am held responsible, fully accountable, with not much room to dodge. Therefore I tend to hold other 'professionals' to that same level of accountability.
Numeous people at this site, the same site that you used as a source to develop your articles, warned and admonished you that what you were about to write was based on flawed and highly speculative data. You completely ignored their warning and went for the 'sensationalizim of the moment'. I know, the odds were in your favor. This company has been beaten upon unrelentlessly. There was a chance that you could have come off looking good. Even if these issues had not been resolved today, but rather a week from now, alowing you to put some new spin, WHAT YOU DID WAS NOT PROFESSIONAL. There was 'probable cause' for you to not write as you did. As far as I am concerned, you took a hard credibility hit. How you choose to get up is up to you. Just my opinion.:(

Geeze, and I guess that I was just being an idiot for thinking that the May debt, after the Feb Malone Bridge debt was done, needed to be taken care of..... before KPMG gave a Going Concern paragraph in the 10K... dahhhh!! The only way they can get the shareholder exemption fron the NASDAQ was to have Going Concern, or BK issues....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john

I am not sure about this but I dont recall SIRIXM ever saying directly that BK was a possiblitity because of Feb. debt. They did say that BK was possible and that is why they did not need the shareholder vote. The point being that they ether needed to get this deal done or face the reality of May not getting extented. The deal was a here and now kind of thing that had to be done now and may not be there later.

---

SIRI share holders are not SO-Phis-Ta-K-Ted