Printable View
Charles,are you saying that Pandora and slacker and others will never charge a fee to listen on-line?MHO is they will and very soon,a year or 2 away..Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriusBuzz
So if your answer is no they vwon't then i don't really care about them as competition,they never will,just against each other..Reason=content..
Now if you think they will eventually charge a fee,then SXM is way ahead of the game as leading the revolution into internet based sub bussiness model..
Maybe I am missing your point, but you made mine. I would agree that there is probably very few Jack fans in Ruth's place, but the point is that both customers desire to fill a basic need, sustenance. Jack is able to appeal to a broader market with price and availability.Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriusBuzz
In order to fulfill the basic need of music entertainment, Pandora and Slacker seems to be able to appeal to a broader market with price and availability.
The appeal of the product differences is where the market segmentation needs defining. To be able to determine the price elasticity relative to content, to the broadest segment.
If Ruth sold hamburgers, do you think the would be the same price as Jack's?
Surely not, but there is a market segment that pays for the better content of Ruth's burgers.
My opinion is that basic needs of music entertainment are being met with Pandora and Slacker. If the basic needs evolve more toward what SIRI provides and Pandora and Slacker drag behind, then you will see a change in the price elasticity for the basic need. SIRI provides much more than the basic needs, so customers pay a premium. No difference than Jack and Ruth.
I predict the stock moves up on Friday. Why? Because we all are going to "will" it to do so!
Cheers.
Well it closed at .3495 with low vol of 22mil shares traded..
The retail investors are holding strong with no real shares available at this SP.they will have to take it up to reach those preset sell points..
YES! spot on. That's the point....they are different markets really. but they certainly do intersect...just like I might go to jacks or burger king, but I also go to Ruths and other top of the line steak house. Let's take some typical families: kids, young adults may love Pandora. the wife may love pandora. But I love Howard and sports.....so......we have both. Pandora for free, and a sub to S-XM. It doesn't have to be one or the other. It might be in many cases, but it also might not in many others. They are really different products......like on cable TV.....get the basic package for $30/month, or get HBO and the other crap for $79. It's been proven in various entertainment product offerings that people WILL pay for content. Hell, in major metro areas, you can still get over the air TV for free (and picture quality if you are close enough to the broadcast antennas).....so why pay for cable? CONTENT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Siriustunes
[QUOTE=debber1212;33524]Great article Tim. It's very true. What SIRI needs to do now is figure a way to add to its business model. I don't mean add stations or stream LIVE concerts, but find some way to utilize its SATs to create a new type of service, or work hand in hand with another company.
What that is I don't know. If I did I wouldn't be typing on a blog here with you folks trying to convince myself that SIRI is a good move. However, there has to be some way to do it.
Pandora and all those other music players SUCK. However, they are FREE. The "sheep", by which I mean the followers of Mainstream music, will use these free services because they don't mind listening to LADY GAGA, and LINCOLN PARK over and over and over again. SIRI can make it, but they need to think outside the box.
I'm sure Mel and Malone will figure something out. Let's just trust them and keep on bloggin away.
sirius and xm thinking outside the box, lmao
you mean like not reactivating the deactivated units automatically after say a year or two has passed but with only promotional material and public service items of a national concern.along with a couple of free ads for the top performing partners.
or like after paying twenty million to settle with the FCC. they try to slip past them on Hawaii with only offering Sirius service.thats out of the box.
or what about building a new device for use in the white-spaces.
or how about they enter the Noi on the arbitron ppm device just issued by the fcc and demand to be counted equally and that the information be submitted to the fcc on a regular basis for use in all proceedings as the fcc has often indicated they receive incomplete or flawed data. man that would be in the publics interest.
Charles, The problem is you cant compare the amount of people each is getting when you have one offering the servise for free and the other charges. I guess the point is this part of your article that you had on the front page:
"Top dog Pandora now has 27 million registered users and is growing strong to the tune of 50,000 new users per day. How does that growth rate compare to what Sirius XM has been pulling in lately? It doesn’t. How happy would investors be if SIRI was adding 1.5 million new users per month… it is probably safe to say that most would be happy if they added that many for the entire year of 2009."
The point here is, no investors would not be happy if those registered users were not paying anything for the service. I think even you would agree that Pandoras financial position is even worse then SIRIXM at this point.
UGH... you are still missing my point. There is a HUGE overlap between Sirius XM and the free internet radio (and portable) music companies. I am not making your point. What I said was that your analogy was a point taken but weak in the sense that there is next to zero overlap. More people in my office listen to services other then Sirius XM rather then Sirius XM. No one in my office is going to Ruth today.Quote:
Originally Posted by Siriustunes
Its a very small segment. I don't want Sirius to be a very small segment when they don't have to be. There are plenty of people who are willing to pay a little more for something that they can get for free if its better, that is the opportunity Sirius XM has. Going to Ruth vs Jack is NOT a little more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Siriustunes
I understand the point you are trying to make but for the love of GOD, there is a huge difference. The difference is a $3 meal vs a $50+ meal. With Sirius vs Slacker you are talking about $3 vs $12. If Sirius can't cut into that market then they fail in my book. I am NOT SAYING that the company will fail, I am saying that they are grosly ignoring something that they should be able to score with ease.Quote:
Originally Posted by Siriustunes
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriusBuzz
charles...
can they do an internet version of pandora on their own? They pay less royalties, and have a much larger music library. Maybe have it as a free option with every subscription. Im assuming internet and iphone only... as i dont see how that kind of interaction from the sat signal would be possible.
or am i dreaming?
Sure you can. That is lost market share. I am not suggesting that Sirius XM should be growing that fast, I am saying that they are losing potential subscribers at that rate. That is concerning. It is going to be FAR MORE DIFFICULT to take people who use Pandora and slacker and convert them to paid subscribers. If they had the first music application to market they could have more easily won new subscribers. If they had a sexier web interface with additional capabilities the could be more easily be winning new subscribers. The list goes on. It should NOT be hard to convince people who are utilizing something free to pay a tiny bit more for something much better. Those people are their target demo, I guess thats were some of us will have to agree to disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by john
Slacker has charged for a premium sub for quite some time.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyIrishXM
They already compete, your feelings and mine can be throw away. The fact is, its the same target demo.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyIrishXM
I dont think pandora ever plans on charging a fee.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyIrishXM
isnt it more an argument of why you listen to music, how you listen to music, and if your not a "music only guy", your a radio guy, meaning you like music, talk, comedy, and live sports, CNN channel, etc...Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriusBuzz
These are not necessarily the same markets.
Like buying a Lexus, vs. buying a Camary. Sure, its the "car market", but really not the same market one bit. Different income levels, different needs, etc...
I concur. Unless technology changes.Quote:
Originally Posted by relmor2003
There is still a big diff between a lexus and a camry. We are talking about a few bucks per month. Is Sirius XM worth $12 per month more then Pandora to you? What I am saying is, you should be able to convince everyone! For you its content that makes it better, for someone else it could be the interface, for another it could be the delivery capabilities.Quote:
Originally Posted by relmor2003
People arent just using Slacker because its free, they are using it because its better in SOME senses whether that is superior sound quality, customizability, or iphone delivery. What I am saying is DONT LET SLACKER BE BETTER IN ANY SENSE! That should NOT be hard for Sirius XM to do and as a tech guy, you cant convince me of anything different.
Sirius XM should be dominating so hard that slacker and pandoa should not even exist but they do, and they are growing at an alarming rate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriusBuzz
If it is such an overlap that there is little distinguishing value, then that is a problem. But remember hamburger is just ground up steak! It all depends on the quality of the steak and the presentation.
I think we are saying the same thing two different ways.
I think the reason pandora is doing so well is because they pay no royaltys to artist like Sirius-XM.This must change. I'm sure in some way the NAB is behind them getting away with this long.
That is a total misconception. They do in fact pay royalties.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boat
http://www.nasdaq.com/asp/holdings.a...FormType=form4
This could explain why we had one up day in 10 on 5.19.09. That's over 20% of the days trading volume.
=( ............
No no no no no no no.Quote:
Originally Posted by jamesey
Is that enough no's?
Insiders were awarded that many shares. Issued from shares that Mel turned down. Went back into the pool to be awarded to other people. They will begin selling these added shares at zero enter value, 2 weeks apart for the next year. So not to hurt the stock price, or make people feel is because of bad news. Not true at all. They are not selling one other share already held.
This is pure earned bonus money, and only issuing shares to avoid hurting their cash position. It is dilution, but it was factored in dilution(not much dilution at all, and the way they are selling the shares is very beneficial to stockholders.
Good move overall. We saw this coming.....
Non event..
Did this information leak, and be why we went down a bit more than we should have....
I still say, even if it was known about...
Already priced in....
This plan has been on their filings for a while now.
I reloaded today, expect a run back to .60 cents in coming weeks.
No matter how you slice it, Automotive sales are linked to the Sirius for the time being. Come June 1 we will in all likelihood have two Automotive companies in BK. Chrysler still has three key dates before a "NEW" company is formed.
1) May 27 - Sale Hearing
2) June 4 - Designated agreements are established
3) June 12 - Purchaser Confirmation Notice is issued
These items are all significant to GM for the purpose of legal precedent. The dollar amounts that both companies are dealing with are not significant in the resolution process. Believe that a positive outcome of the Sale Hearing on the 27th will have a positive impact on SP!