Printable View
Starting fresh today all you dumbass twit socialists.
Looks like SIRI is sticking at $1.08 today and that's fine with me. I tried to pick some shares up at ~81 with a limit order two or three weeks ago, but it didn't fill - too greedy. Would be sitting on a ~25% gain right about now.
Hyperinflation - can it happen in America?
SPENCER OSBORNE
As I stated in my article, any contract can be renegotiated at any time provided that the interested parties are all in agreement that a renegotiation be conducted. The "merger of XM Radio holding and XM Radio has NOTHING to do with whether or not Baseball will come to the Sirius radio dial.
The MLB contract with XM pays baseball $60 million per year through 2012. MLB has the option to extend that contract at the $60 million per year terms for 2013, 2014, and 2015. XM has no say in this option. The option is MLB's alone.
At the end of 2012, MLB will either end the contract, or extend it. In my mind, they will extend it. The reason? Because they will not get $60 million per year for their content any more. Simply stated, who is going to pay $60 million for content that is more widely available now than it was when the original deal was struck!
At the time of the contract, MLB had worries that XM may not be able to pony up the money. This was a likely reason for the $120 million escrow account that was controlled by MLB. Should XM not be able to pay, the escrow would take care of two years of the contract. If MLB was astute enough to demand an escrow, one can imagine that they would have had thought about "change of control" as well.
Baseball has all of the cards. They can sit back and know that they hold a three year option. Thus, there is nothing Sirius XM can do about it but accept it. Unless they want to pony up the additional money that MLB is certainly seeking. Sirius XM wont do that, thus, a stale mate exists where MLB will get a pretty penny for content that is not worth as much as it used to be.
It only takes some REASONABLE thinking to see this clearly. REASONABLE PEOPLE ARRIVE AT REASONABLE CONCLUSIONS.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong
You must be young, I say that because you dont seem to recall the Carter years. Here let me take you down memory lane, Inflation was at 11%, unemployment was near 10%, and intrest rates were in the twenties (%), think about trying to buy a house back then.
Not too young, but not old enough to care about Carter and his policies (I was in HS). I don't want to put words in your mouth, but it seems you think it could happen. Carter was 25+ years ago. The world has changed. We now have this sickly relationship with China whereby they fund our national debt, and we consumers fund their manufacturing. Each is dependant on the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by john
I have a good friend who started his wealth in the early 80's investing his cash in CD's. That's when he learned the benefits of saving. Now the guy very comfortable (a couple kids would certainly dent that!!).
What's with SIRI today - no volume?
Take a look at today's chart and connect it up with Friday afternoon . . . tighter than a clam's ass I tell ya
nice "etch-a-sketch" formation which I believe we will ride-out through the 10 day compliance window
the steady diet of monotony is a nice change (hmm, I think that's an oxymoron)
ring-ring, ring-ringQuote:
Originally Posted by ssg
bud: Good morning, commissioner's office, bud selig speaking
mel: Hi bud, it's mel karmazin. Take me off speaker!
bud: Mel karmazin, how the hell are ya mel?
Mel: Lets cut the small talk bud. We need to rework this deal
bud: Been there done that mel. Ain't gonna happen. You know that.
Mel: You know the economics are different this time bud
bud: But spencer osborne says i hold all the cards & a 3 yr option
mel: Yeah, then what?
Bud: Well ah, um . . Well we cross that bridge when we get there
mel: Here's what i want bud . .
Bud: Now hold on mel, i won't be bullied here
mel: First, mlb on sirius is a must
bud: You know i can't do that mel . . .
Mel: 2nd, tear up the current deal and write a new 10 yr contract
bud: Now hold on mel . . .
Mel: A contract that is sensitive to the current economics
bud: Mel i have no authority . . .
Mel: It would make our partners at direct tv very happy bud
bud:
Mel: Bud?
Bud: Ahhhh, let me get back to you on that mel
mel: Click
MLB Yet To Expand Satellite Radio Deal To Include Sirius
Under Current Arrangement, About 9 Million
Sirius Subscribers Will Not Get Live MLB Games
MLB and Sirius XM Satellite Radio are "sparring over whether to make MLB game broadcasts available to the entire spectrum of Sirius XM's 19 million subscribers," according to John Ourand in this week's SPORTSBUSINESS JOURNAL. Since XM merged with Sirius last July, MLB and Sirius XM execs have spent "several months negotiating whether to expand the access of live MLB games beyond just XM subscribers," which have had exclusive access to games due to an 11-year, $650M deal signed in '04. About 9 million Sirius listeners will not have access to MLB game broadcasts this season, and league execs want to maintain their exclusive platform "unless a new deal can be worked out." Sources indicated that the NFL and NBA, which originally signed exclusive deals with Sirius, "allowed their game programming to be broadcast on both for the same rights fee they had been getting." But MLB is "holding out, unless it can work a better deal, which almost certainly means a higher rights fee." MLB believes that the "volume of its game programming and its traditional appeal make it more valuable to satellite radio" than other sports properties. However, Morgan Joseph & Co. analyst David Kestenbaum said that Sirius XM "does not have the money to keep paying so much in rights fees." Kestenbaum: "I thought the original MLB deal was a foolish one for XM. I don't think enough new subscribers signed up to justify paying $60[M] per year." MLB's deal with XM expires in '15, and industry experts believe this the could be baseball's "last chance to have leverage with Sirius XM." Kestenbaum: "There definitely won't be any bidding wars for these sports rights next time" (SPORTSBUSINESS JOURNAL, 3/9 issue).
LINK:
http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/article/128371
Spencer Osborne
Reasonable People Drawing reasonable Conclusions. Much better than the other way around!
Cheers
Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong
Yea I was not even in HS but I remember and I cared even back then at that age. Now while I agree with your relationship with China (that we need each other to keep going) I dont think it will effect the hyperinflation we will be seeing in the end. As a matter of fact we may both (USA and China) be having our own and very seperate problems soon. China will be to busy dealing with its runaway economy and higher interest rates to tamp down on it and we will need to raise ours to deal with the increasing debt. Fact is, twits that say Bush polocies created this deep recession dont have a clue. I ask them everytime what was it about his tax cuts that cuased this deep recession again. They never have an answer to that. While Bush ran up debt it was much more sustainable then it is now and it did not cause hyperinflation, the rasing of interest rates or taxes. All of which are causes of a deep recession. What caused this deep recession was that people who could not pay for a house were able to get a house, there by making the banks fail. The fausehood is driven by saying that the big banks did it to themselves by buying those loans. The fact is that they would have been forced to do it because in the end what would have happened to the original banks that would not give the loans IN THE FIRST PLACE, would happen to the other big banks buying them up in the end. The reason is simple, look at what happen to the original banks when they told congress they could not give those types of loans because noone would buy them from them.....Enter Fanny Mea and Freddy Mac and the democrats that made it polocy for Fanny and Freddy to buy those loans. Now there were only so many home loans even they could buy up before they would then have to say listen we cant buy up anymore of those loans. I should not have to even get into the fact the big banks were in a sense lied to because they were not just buying those subprime loans they were mixed up with other investments. Not to mention it was not their job to make sure the loans were good and that the people getting them could actually pay them back (they did not even have the original parpers on the original home borrowers to confirm if they could pay them back) that was the job of the original banks but they were being forced (yes I say forced because there is a reason they never gave those loans before). I dont put to much blame on the big banks for the reason that if they knew the loans where even close to as bad as they were, they would have NEVER bought them in the first place. I can see them saying, well if Fanny and Freddy are buying the loans and they are basically run by the government there is no way the loans could be that bad.
The fact is the "DEEP" part about this recession was cause by the sense of intitlements and the reason socailism fails everytime it is tried. Not anyone is intitled to have a house.
As for SIRIXM and its low volume. I will take a guess and say with all the investigations that are going on, everyone is skiddish about doing anything even remotely wrong. Just another guess but watch what happens to short positions.
Goldman CEO to Perform Community Service as Treasury Secretary
‘Will Do Less Harm’ in New Post, Says Treasury Spokesperson
NEW YORK (The Borowitz Report) – In a settlement of the government’s securities fraud case against Goldman Sachs, the bank’s CEO, Lloyd Blankfein, has agreed to perform two years of community service as Treasury Secretary of the United States.
At a press conference in New York, Mr. Blankfein said that as Treasury Secretary he would “continue to do God’s work as I did at Goldman, but at a significant pay cut.”
A Treasury Dept. spokesperson said that by performing community service as Treasury Secretary, Mr. Blankfein will be able to do less harm to the economy because he will have significantly less power than he had as Chairman of Goldman.
His experience at Goldman, however, will be “invaluable” in his new role as Treasury Secretary, the spokesperson said: “Lloyd Blankfein’s years of marketing worthless securities have prepared him for the important task of selling Treasuries to the Chinese.”
Mr. Blankfein is the latest in a long line of Goldman chairmen to serve as Treasury Secretary, although he is believed to be the first to do so while wearing an electronic ankle bracelet.
Well, Big Ben should be overjoyed with today's open. Let's hope SIRI doesn't get sucked down with it. Part of me says this is a buying opportunity.
I know it's odd to quote yourself, but I'm glad to see that the bulls are fighting back today, but there a lot of time left. There was a buying opportunity out there. Stocks that were down around $1.50 are now only down $0.75.Quote:
Originally Posted by SiriuslyLong
SIRI is hanging tough at $1.07. It's going to be interesting especially if it stays over $1 over the weekend.
I would be happy with a pullback (of course i want Sirius to maintain over $1 for the 10 days) There are definitely some stocks i have my eye on at a lower price.
P.S. And as we all know, its Obama and the Democrats fault its going down today. LOL.
Finally he says something that I agree with 100%. LOL. I've been looking at CTL. Nice dividend yield of 8%. They bought Qwest and they are down $1.00 so far. Don't know why, but it is tempting. 8% dividend yield has a spot in my portfolio.Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
SIRI is holding its own. Good to see.
Actually, take a look at VZ today and read why it's down LOL.
The market is starting to move back up. That can mean only one thing.
Bush is in charge. :D
After all this is what Mr. Socialist, Communist, dumbass, twit has told us is the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Havakasha
Like all liberial twits they forget this is the age were you can pull back up everything that was said or written (democrats always get nailed with that all the time now). So ether it is that or this was still to difficult for you to understand (I am sorry but I cant explain it any more simple then this).
"Here it is really difficult so I will explain it like you are 12 years old. The market was down because people knew of Obamas polocies the market went up after he tossed (what is now project to cost 848 BILLION) into the economy. There is noone that believes that you cant throw that kind of money around and not have some effect, even if it is short term (the fact is the market would have gone up at least as much if he took just 250 billion and directed it towards small bussiness). The market reacts to long and short term effects the smart money knows this and will take advantage of it. Hence the reason we see SIRIXM PPS go down just after a great CC (I know from your post that that must still confuse you as to WHY it happens). The market knows that while the stimulas had an effect that it will be short term and that the deficit it caused will effect the economy (in ways it will take much to long to explain to a 12 year old). Reguardless the first effect it will have is that it will send taxes up (capital gains) and everyone and their brother knows (except you), what happens to the market just before they raise capital gains. The target date is Jan., so what you will get is people trying to beat out others (playing chicken so to speak) so the market will start to go down well before it happens. Do you get it you dumb twit."
So which is it you are less then 12 years old or is it that like all liberials you conveniently forgot this was already posted. This is the reason why liberials are the biggest hypocrits. Here is the latest example; hey does anyone remember N. Polocy calling for Civility when protestors were calling for killing Bush and for those that dont think it was mainstream what about the book OR THE movie that showed how to kill Bush. Hummm I seem to recall her saying it is great to protest the government. I guess she only ment civility (or in other words, just sit down and shut up) when it is directed towards democrats but towards republicans everything and anything is ok. See what I mean about the hypocritical.
latest spin from thestreet.con . . . I am posting this for general information only for those that may not have seen it but FOR GOD'S SAKE DO NOT MAKE ANY INVESTMENT DECISIONS ON ANYTHING YOU READ IN THESTREET.CON OR FROM ANY OF THE NAMED ANALYSTS CITED IN THE ARTICLE
Part 1:
Why Sirius XM Won't Be Delisted
By Robert Holmes 04/22/10 - 10:18 AM EDT
NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- Sirius XM(SIRI) investors can breathe a sigh of relief: It appears the satellite radio provider's stock will not be delisted from the Nasdaq when the company meets with the exchange for a discussion next week. That, some argue, could provide a floor for Sirius XM's share price. (but Tyler Savery hasn't mentioned that in his recent reporting, are you sure about that?)
Sirius XM shares have closed above the $1-per-share mark for six consecutive sessions ended April 21, which has helped to assuage fears that the company could face a delisting on April 29, when it will meet with a Nasdaq hearing panel. (7 consecutive days now but who's counting . . it's a real nail bitter . . . Tyler Savery has chewed his nails down to the quik - ouch)
For now, a scenario of the stock falling to the Over-The-Counter Bulletin Board or Pink Sheets seems to be off the table. "This is an unprecedented situation with a stock close to penny-stock levels but with a multibillion market cap," says Jack Hain, an analyst with Barrington Research Associates. "That doesn't happen."
Hain says that with few foreseeable negative catalysts on the horizon to drive the stock down, Sirius XM's delisting troubles may be a thing of the past. It wasn't always clear that Sirius XM had a good chance at beating the Nasdaq's minimum big price requirement. While the stock did manage an eight-session string of above-$1 finishes in late February, Sirius XM hasn't finished above $1 for 10 consecutive sessions since Sept. 9, 2008.
If a stock closes below the $1 mark for 30 consecutive business days, it is granted a grace period of 180 calendar days to regain compliance with the Nasdaq's listing requirements or face delisting. To regain compliance, a stock like Sirius XM would have to close at or above $1 for a minimum of 10 consecutive trading sessions.
Sirius XM had been granted a 180-day grace period after receiving a warning letter from the Nasdaq in September 2009. As the stock failed to regain the $1 mark for a sustained period of time, the Nasdaq sent a second notice to the company after a March 15 deadline passed.
Sirius XM immediately requested a hearing with the Nasdaq's Listing Qualifications Panel, which put off any action on the stock's continued listing. When confirming plans to ask the exchange for a hearing, Sirius XM CEO Mel Karmazin laid his cards on the table.
"Sirius XM is one of the most liquid securities on the Nasdaq Global Select Market, we have a large investor base consisting of both individual and prominent institutional stockholders, and our equity capitalization is greater than approximately 92% of the companies listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market," Karmazin said in a statement.
Funnily enough (not funny at all, coincidental perhaps but more likely well-planned), April 29 could potentially be the day that Sirius XM will say the stock has closed above $1 for 10 consecutive trading days, which becomes another bullet in Karmazin's chamber. On Thursday, Sirius XM was down 3.6% to $1.06, as the broader market sold off. But in even simpler terms, it seems obvious that the Nasdaq would be crazy to delist a stock that is typically among the most traded on that market daily.
The Nasdaq collects a fee from Sirius XM to keep its stock listed. Sirius XM did not respond to a request for information on the fees it pays to the Nasdaq, but according to a Nasdaq listing standards and fees notice from March, a company like Sirius XM, which trades on the Nasdaq Global Select Market and has more than 150 million shares outstanding, pays an annual fee of $99,500 for continued listing.
"The Nasdaq definitely has an economic interest in seeing Sirius XM remain listed," says Matthew Hooligan, an analyst (joke)with Wunderlich Securities (hedgie water boys). "They benefit economically from trading activity. The average volume is close to 180 million shares a day. It's integral or material to the economics of the Nasdaq. And it's certainly not like they're manipulating anything. It's a viable company that should be listed." Hooligan has a neutral rating on Sirius XM and a price target of $1. (gee that's odd, that's not the rule-of-thumb metric you gave on your prior downgrade during the last compliance run you fraud)
Tuna Amobi, who covers Sirius XM for Standard & Poor's Equity Research, cautions that while a delisting on April 29 is unlikely, there still is a chance that the Nasdaq could bounce Sirius XM from the Global Select Market as it has done in to other companies with well-known companies. (poor Tuna . . . clueless bastard . . )
"With the way the minimum price rule has been applied in the past, I think the Nasdaq is blind to whether a company is supposedly iconic or not," Amobi says. "There were several top 10 broadcasters, like Westwood One, that have been delisted in the last few years as a result of this bid price rule."
Even if the stock stays listed on the Nasdaq, the question of a reverse stock split still lingers for Sirius XM investors. There is, however, good news. Despite the negative connotation of a reverse split, as well as Sirius XM's assertion that it will effect a reverse split only if it determines the action to be in the best interests of stockholders, some analysts say that the pros certainly outweigh the cons.
"It would serve the shareholders' interests well to do the reverse split anyways," Barrington's Hain argues. "There are nearly 4 billion shares outstanding and even more on a fully diluted basis. That's an egregious number of shares outstanding. That's the real issue." Barrington Research has an outperform rating on Sirius XM and a $1.25 price target.
Hain says that it is typical for some information content to prompt a reverse split, such as the share price has declined consistently over a long period of time and the reverse split is a means to an end to try to maintain listing. "Clearly, we're not in that type of situation here, and for that reason I don't think a reverse stock split should be viewed through that filter," he says.
A reverse stock split would artificially raise Sirius XM's share price to a level that would entice more buyers, such as institutional buyers and mutual funds. "It would open it up to more investors if they did a reverse split," says David Joyce, an analyst with Miller Tabak & Co. "The benefit would be to make it a more palatable price point because there are some institutions who cannot invest in stocks with prices under $5 or under $1. That's not a fundamental call but a pricing level restriction in their own investing charter." Joyce has a neutral rating on Sirius XM and a $1.25 price target.
Of course, given the negative connotation by market participants, a reverse split comes with a downside. S&P's Amobi says that a reverse split is a gamble for a company like Sirius XM and that its management team is probably still calculating the pros against the cons.