SIRI INTRADAY THREAD: WEDNESDAY MAY 13th 2009

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john

Tyler, thats what it was. My only question is though was that site "siriusnewsrumors" created by Brandon or you guys together with him. The reason is it is, that site I am talking about that he said he started when he (cfrceo) got upset about the way he was treated here and at other sites.

---

Siriusnewsrumors was created soley by Brandon, prior to us ever conversing with him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by relmor2003

TRADER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

GET HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
:eek::p

---

LOL.....

sorry, but I love Slacker as well. It is a great service, and they have some cool stuff that sirius XM should emulate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by homer985

I know that that is the PC thing to say - and kudos to you for being willing to do it... quite frankly, with the error laden articles I read from CRFCEO, I find it hard to read anything over there with any sense of credibility.

All I ever asked the dude to do was research more before publishing -- and instead, CRFCEO just attacked me.

That's some credibility.



----------

---

Some people will go to a site which they can rely on for good information. Some will go to a site that tells them what they want to hear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by homer985

It all comes back to "homer"... why me, why oh why does it always have to be me :banghead:

---

For the record, and from my perspective it was not Homer that brought this on. It was several other issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tim wallick

well all be right over to disrupt your other site. lmao, just kidding

---

LOL....The site could use the traffic!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nisvan

guys, with all due respect, this is the STOCK section of the forum.
I realize there's a lot going with who of you did what to each other when
and so forth, but i submit it has little relevance to the siri stock price
and other siri stock variables.

And so i think this dialogue back and forth about sat radio forum sites,
and the personalities that comprise them, deserves its own thread, away from the stock section

please consider it
thank you

i know you thot it would all end quickly - this topic - but it clearly hasn't - it goes on and on - which is fine, but again, how about relocating the topic to a different thread ?

thanks

---

Nisvan.....

To an extent I agree, and it should die off anyway in short order

hum, this was approved yesterday by the fcc....so my question is this, is it one repeator for each operating unit or is it two new low power repeaters which covers both operating units spectrum my bet would be the latter.


SAT-STA-20090324-00036 E
Special Temporary Authority
Date Filed: 03/24/2009 12:02:53:77600
Sirius XM Radio Inc.
Sirius XM Radio Inc. (Sirius XM) requests special temporary authority for a period of 180 days to operate two terrestrial repeaters in the
Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, area at power levels at or below 2000 watts average Effective Isotropically Radiated Power. The repeaters will operate
in the spectrum assigned for the exclusive use of Sirius XM (2320-2345 MHz) to provide Satellite Digital Audio Radio Service (SDARS).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TSavery

Siriusnewsrumors was created soley by Brandon, prior to us ever conversing with him.

---

That is what I thought, and the name was changed later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TSavery

For the record, and from my perspective it was not Homer that brought this on. It was several other issues.

---

I dont care what you say Tyler, I am going to blame homer. It just seems to be the "feel good" thing to do.
























P.S. Tyler you know I was joking about homer, right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TSavery

John.....

Satwaves has existed for quite some time, though it was not utilized very much. As Tim states, there is a fine line that has to be walked, and I always tried to do my best to stat on the correct side of that line.

I outlined the information in the above post.

I would have preferred that message board postings would have slowed down and died off, but they didn't. Charles and I always stated that there was no need for any of us to post links to the site, and that people would find there way to the information on the site naturally.

Brandon and I differ in many ways. How we appraoch an article, how we approach our research, how we approach speculation, how we approach discussion of stock prices, buys, sells, etc., and what is/is not proper in terms of marketing the site (I prefer a more organic growth).

Readers can see these differences for themselves, and I am not saying that I am right and he is wrong in how we approach things. We simply differ. People who read the sites will formulate their own opinions as to the quality of the read, the quality of the information, and the depth of that information.

I hope this clears up things for you. My recollection is that the original brandon site was siriusnewsrumors.blogspot.com. SiriusBuzz had no affiliation with it.

---

Tyler,

In the relatively short time I have been a member of this board, one thing
has become clear to me. You have conducted yourself as a gentleman.
Definition of a gentleman: Good, courteous conduct. Thank you.
Julie

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by julietoo

Tyler,

In the relatively short time I have been a member of this board, one thing
has become clear to me. You have conducted yourself as a gentleman.
Definition of a gentleman: Good, courteous conduct. Thank you.
Julie

---

julietoo.....

Thank you for the kind words.

tyler said this thread would die, i agree but when is the question.

I really like the interviews that mark seems to land always full of information and he calls it the way it is imho..another person i respect.

heres the link to whats below the mp3 is longer

Quote:

---

Radio: The End is Near – Unless you heed Bob Garfield
Bob Garfield is the ad critic for Advertising Age and the co-host of one of my favorite public radio programs, On The Media. He is also the author of a forthcoming book called The Chaos Scenario about the collision of traditional and digital media and the collapse of familiar marketing structures.

Bob’s take on what he calls “The Chaos Scenario” is one of the most important pieces you will read this year if you are in the radio trenches – or in its corporate boardrooms.

Read on. And share it with your peers.

Here's the full and unfiltered interview I conducted with Bob. You should listen to it. What follows is an abbreviated and edited transcript.


MP3 File

Bob, what is “The Chaos Scenario” that media face today?

The Chaos Scenario presumes first, that all of our existing media structures built on the symbiosis between mass media and mass marketing are collapsing - that we’re in the middle of an apocalyptic episode in our industrial history, equivalent to the industrial revolution. And because of the digital world, all of the old structures are shrinking, fragmentation is calamitous, and the yin and yang of media and marketing are flying apart, never to be rejoined. So that’s the first part.

The second part is that the new digital universe does not entirely replace the old world as we’ve come to know it and cherish it and count on it and believe it’s our birthright, and that while the digital revolution promises us more content than has ever been imaginable in all history of man and great opportunities to market and to forge relationships between marketers and consumers, that it will not give us new episodes of Lost and the Howard Stern Show.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TSavery

Nisvan.....

To an extent I agree, and it should die off anyway in short order

---

My lord the one day i step away from the P.C. for awhile and you 4 decide to ruin my thread with this off-topic crap!!!!JK

Well Tyler i have a little problem with you and charles now slamming Brandon/CRFCEO for His dealings with his writing style and bussiness honesty and you both knew who he was and knew john and Homer had a problem with his style of no facts and didn't let the forum know who BM really was.
Now for myself who is relatively knew here and didn't know CRFCEO or any other forums other than here and SA but saw some posts and herd CRF referenced here a few times,My credibility factor for here is strained..
Aliases,pen names double and triple posting names,my lord what else is going to rear it's ugly head..

The matter of the 2sites coexisting will work itself out as knowledgable people will figure it out on there own,you can't post 10 articles a day on SATRAD,be real,you'll start making false factless mistakes and opinion's will be taken as fact soon enough(oh wait that is already happened,never mind).

But to wind up,John Homer and Tim thanks for the posting's here and everywhere..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JohnnyIrishXM

My lord the one day i step away from the P.C. for awhile and you 4 decide to ruin my thread with this off-topic crap!!!!JK

Well Tyler i have a little problem with you and charles now slamming Brandon/CRFCEO for His dealings with his writing style and bussiness honesty and you both knew who he was and knew john and Homer had a problem with his style of no facts and didn't let the forum know who BM really was.
Now for myself who is relatively knew here and didn't know CRFCEO or any other forums other than here and SA but saw some posts and herd CRF referenced here a few times,My credibility factor for here is strained..
Aliases,pen names double and triple posting names,my lord what else is going to rear it's ugly head..

The matter of the 2sites coexisting will work itself out as knowledgable people will figure it out on there own,you can't post 10 articles a day on SATRAD,be real,you'll start making false factless mistakes and opinion's will be taken as fact soon enough(oh wait that is already happened,never mind).

But to wind up,John Homer and Tim thanks for the posting's here and everywhere..

---

I can understand your position. Continuing to post on Yahoo was a source of long term frustration for me. It was my hope that he would simply fade away from that activity in favor of writing.

When he left for about 2 months in the fall, I thought that the issue would simply fade away, and that Charles and I would move on. He then came back and began posting again. Disagreements on activities started again, and I became diheartened with all of it. You will see my posting became more scarce. I was torn on what to do. Then the second Hartlieb thing hit, and the camels back was broken.

Brandon is good at heart, but simply differs from what this site wanted in too many ways. It was for the best that the split happened. It was for the worst that the flame wars started.

As for pen names.....you need to understand that many authors use them. There are many "crazies" out there. I did not want middle of the night phone calls, etc. Brandon experienced that first hand when he registered the satwaves name and did not use Domains by proxy, but his own name.

I have no problem with people knowing my real name IF i have an understanding of who they are. It is why I correspond with people and let them know.

[QUOTE but to wind up,John Homer and Tim thanks for the posting's here and everywhere..[/QUOTE]

hay, i only post in two places and both are sirius boards ones here and the other one is............not the other place, so you must mean john and homer.

by the way your welcome. i really enjoyed trashing your thread and i mean that in a good way.

I checked out the slacker active site, nice looking site wonder whom built the site.......just kidding cl! now get the other sections finished.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tim wallick

[QUOTE but to wind up,John Homer and Tim thanks for the posting's here and everywhere..

---

hay, i only post in two places and both are sirius boards ones here and the other one is............not the other place, so you must mean john and homer.

by the way your welcome. i really enjoyed trashing your thread and i mean that in a good way.

I checked out the slacker active site, nice looking site wonder whom built the site.......just kidding cl! now get the other sections finished.[/QUOTE]

By the way....

Tim....of course I remember you. We have traded several emails back in the golden days of satellite radio!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by homer985

I know, I can be a stickler for details and research, but come on?!?! His latest article discusses the Radio Performance Royalty... in it, he quotes the House Bill and Senate Bill. The problem with it? He's quoting both bills from the 110th Congress -- with link backs to the those same Bills from the 110th Congress. What's the big deal? Congress is now in the 111th Session. Both of those Bills he's quoting from are DEAD. They died at the end of last year when the 110th Congress concluded its session.

---

Well, FWIW... since I posted the above comment earlier today -- Brandon has gone back and changed his story by correcting it to say the proper Bill's now, linking them back to the 111th Congressional Session Bills.

I guess that means the Brandon still lurks on this site, to see what is being said about him.

Too bad he still ignores the fact that the opposition still has 193 votes opposing the new Performance Tax.

Tyler, I saw your article on this topic now -- and your attempt to play the non-biased side of the story. I get that. Yes, I am biased to the other side. All I will say at this point is that the 110th Congress had a similar Bill with 236 opposing co-sponsors. So it is not out of the realm of possibilities that the oppositition can garner the final 25 of so that they need to kill the Conyers Bill -- as they have done in the past.

The sad part about all of this??? The fact that the media keeps reporting this as a Royalty to benefit the artists -- when it is the record companies that will benefit the most, taking 50%+ of the royalty for themselves -- leaving the artist with a fraction of what they should really be getting for what they created.

This is another example of the record industry ****ing the artists who created the music in the first place. And they're doing it in the name of the "performer".

...yet it is us guys in radio being looked at as the "bad guy".

Unreal.

Why doesn't everyone look to see how much of the SoundExchange royalty paid by DARS actually goes to the writers/performers -- and how much goes to the record companies... I think you all would be surprised. This WHOLE setup is designed to make the record companies richer...


Back to Brandon/CRFCEO... what a skunk.

-------

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by homer985

Well, FWIW... since I posted the above comment earlier today -- Brandon has gone back and changed his story by correcting it to say the proper Bill's now, linking them back to the 111th Congressional Session Bills.

I guess that means the Brandon still lurks on this site, to see what is being said about him.

Too bad he still ignores the fact that the opposition still has 193 votes opposing the new Performance Tax.

Tyler, I saw your article on this topic now -- and your attempt to play the non-biased side of the story. I get that. Yes, I am biased to the other side. All I will say at this point is that the 110th Congress had a similar Bill with 236 opposing co-sponsors. So it is not out of the realm of possibilities that the oppositition can garner the final 25 of so that they need to kill the Conyers Bill -- as they have done in the past.

The sad part about all of this??? The fact that the media keeps reporting this as a Royalty to benefit the artists -- when it is the record companies that will benefit the most, taking 50%+ of the royalty for themselves -- leaving the artist with a fraction of what they should really be getting for what they created.

This is another example of the record industry ****ing the artists who created the music in the first place. And they're doing it in the name of the "performer".

...yet it is us guys in radio being looked at as the "bad guy".

Unreal.

Why doesn't everyone look to see how much of the SoundExchange royalty paid by DARS actually goes to the writers/performers -- and how much goes to the record companies... I think you all would be surprised. This WHOLE setup is designed to make the record companies richer...


Back to Brandon/CRFCEO... what a skunk.

-------

---

Homer....

Very little doubt that the Performance tax bill has the advantage. The Conyers changes in the bill were designed to benefit the small stations and show a comprimise.

The record companies are the ones getting rich either way.

Shoot me an email.

homer, From what I understand the proformer gets pennys per CD, that it is really only the concerts that they make their money on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by john

homer, From what I understand the proformer gets pennys per CD, that it is really only the concerts that they make their money on.

---

for a good history of how record labels take advantage of artists, look up the TLC story. They were I think into there third huge albumn release, and they were still making almost nothing on that effort. Yes, ive heard that too, to motivate the artist to tour as well, they link most profits for them from that end of it. Maybe changing now, not sure.