Sirius Stock discussions(SA Posters)

[Brandon Matthews]

Wrong, wrong, wrong!

The latest reports showed Goldman as owning most of the bonds. Either the bonds were held by Goldman for Ergen, or he bought them more recently than we were led to believe from Goldman. Either way, the record is clear. GOLDMAN held most of the Feb 2009 converts until recently. I'll find the link and add it here with the edit feature....check back to this post soon...


http://siriusbuzz.com/forum/showthread.php?t=745

http://siriusbuzz.com/sirius-xm-cramer-wars.php

[relmor2003]

We all know the bondHOLDER shorts the common. As bonds were acquired by Ergen, the former bondholder (Goldman Sachs) would have covered, again for a tidy profit although the bonds were sold at a loss.

In continuing to manipulate down the price of the common, bondholders such as Goldman Sachs were able to cover their short positions at a much lower price and lock in a hefty profit.

With each acquisition of bonds by Ergen he would have shorted it himself. You would not have noticed a change in short volume because they only report every 2 weeks. Once Goldman covered and Ergen shorted, their would be very little difference in short volume, yet no naked shorting would have occurred and the shares would have been available at that time.

They worked in concert, and that's why Cramer has been flaunting it. The funny thing is, I think Cramer WANTS to talk. The SEC should have a conversation with him. I think he feels guilty knowing all of this but being unable to talk about it.

Sir, go read deep capture story, and you will change your tune. Cramer has about as much good in him as the emperor on Star Wars. Hes an evil man, period, with the desire to do NO GOOD. I couldnt disagree with you more on that statement. Cramer had his chance to talk to the SEC about his involvement with KITE and street.com, etc... He refused.
Hes a crook.
Mel is a crook.
The media are crooks.

[Koop]

koop, as you said that Deep Capture is a worse case. I suggest you look up homers clif notes on that subject along with the auther of it.

Dont get me wrong here I have not change my mind I still think the deal sucked. While it is, as you just said a worse case it is also possible in the end if SIRIXM cant pull through. This deal gives Malone everything reguardless of what happens as far as making a shit load of money. That is one reason the MSM was saying it is the deal of the century for him and not SIRIXM.

thanks,
I'll check out them cliffy notes.
koop

[mogami]

Hi, Didn't he say he wanted the job of head of SEC?

[john]

edeyoung99, I am sorry I started it with this stock (calling it a pig over at SA). It is a term I have always used to discribe alot of things I believe are being ****ed up.

[asm610]

asm610, No, No you are missing my point. He wants the whole company not just the satellites. Once again if it comes down to where SIRIXM cant pull this off in the next 3 years. Also even if they can he will own at least 40% of a profitable company. Not to shabby ether way.

John,

The whole company is useless without programming and subs! I don't think he is the bad guy here....but what do I know.

Also ...what kind of hurdles would there be for him as he already owns Sat spectrum with DTV? I would think that would not be an easy sell to the GOV.

[OldDruid]

Sir, go read deep capture story, and you will change your tune. Cramer has about as much good in him as the emperor on Star Wars. Hes an evil man, period, with the desire to do NO GOOD. I couldnt disagree with you more on that statement. Cramer had his chance to talk to the SEC about his involvement with KITE and street.com, etc... He refused.
Hes a crook.
Mel is a crook.
The media are crooks.

Anyone watching Cramer during the "great rise of the nasdq" could never trust anything about him.

[relmor2003]

thanks,
I'll check out them cliffy notes.
koop

No, its a common case. Just have very few CEO's who will talk about. Mark Cuban HAS never been afraid of authority. Hes under SEC investigation too. So was Patrick Byrne. But Cramer can rip up his subenoa on air(mark it up, whatever). SEC knew about Madoff for years. SEC is a joke. They make sure the common investor doesnt use insider information to make money, and protects the insider system on wall street that uses it constantly. The SEC could arrest every major media owner in the country, most CEO's, and every investment bank, and analysist firm tomorrow with enough evidence to convinct them all. But that destroys the "image" and the "means" to steal money from the common man. Wall Street doesnt "guess" on stocks, they make the price come to them, by whatever means necessary. Cramer talks about it. If your not using manipulation he has stated, your not trying. Basically, if you dont have insider information, dont bother playing. And if you do, you DESERVE to lose your money. Ya, Cramer sounds like a great guy to me. Lets nominate him for the nobel peace prize.

[mogami]

Hi, There will not be any monopoly questions again. Terrestrial radio is competition for sat and there are at least 2 sat TV companies and using cable as competition you could go to 1 . Anyone can acquire anyone else and use the other forms as competition now.

[john]

koop, I found it for you this is right from homer985;

Green is an idiot. Always has been, always will be. This is not the first of such articles he has written about DARS -- he's been doing pieces just like this for the last 5 years.

Much of his interpretation of how the debt is set up is true -- but he once again assumes moronic conclusions.... worst case scenarios, with the worst assumptions. He's just a puppet for Cramer and always has been.

Did Liberty put themselves into this position with these issues? Yep. Won't argue there. But what Green ignores is that almost ALL of XM's debt is already senior secured... why do you think there's an option for Liberty to purchase $100MM of that XM debt? So that Liberty can get in line with that subsidiary too... this is just Sirius' first time issuing secured debt... both facts I've noted several times in the past. I also noted on the boards 2 days ago that this put Liberty at the front of the line - and that his shares would probably not be converted, because they are senior to the common. But did Green note that GM also has preferred shares??? Nope.

But what really gets me? Where he just assumes that XM won't be able to payoff or refinance the $150MM in 2011. Why would Green make that assumption? How does he know what the cashflow will be like for these companies in 2 years? Does Green also know that the 10% Converts due in mid Dec (not the Ergen converts, but the ones held by Honda)... does that idiot know that the SAME convenants on dilution and debt issues are also in the bonds held by Honda? Obviously not... the idiot specializes in doing a cursory read of ONE filing, deciphers it and then draws numerous conclusions without considering and looking at the big picture.

Honda via their converts and former Series C shares they held in XM, had the same control over the company. It was there to protect their investment from management doing something they didn't agree with -- it wasn't there to prevent them from doing business -- business like refinancing maturing bonds - it was there to prevent them from doing something stupid. Does Green really believe that if XM can't repay the $150MM in cash, that Liberty will prevent them from refinancing them upon maturity and would rather force bankruptcy? If in a year or so, the economy and bond market rebound - and Sirius XM is stronger with good cashflow -- and they have the opportunity to refinace with a lower coupon and want to use the funds to buyback the Liberty notes at 105%, does Green really think that they'll say "no" by enforcing the restrictive covenant about debt issuance?

Worst case scenario, that's what this guy does... IMHO, the time to bankrupt Sirius XM was this year -- not 2 years from now when the company will likely have strong cashflow and nearly in the black. His whole assertion of bankrupting in 2 years is laughable. It's a protection for Liberty's investment -- yes... but it's not to force the company into bankruptcy in 2 years, rather than allowing them to refinance maturing debt. What is with the fascination over and assumption that all debt MUST be repaid and not refinanced when it matures anyhow? I never got that...

And yes, I have tangled with him before -- correcting MANY mistakes and bad assumptions he's made in his articles over the years... he never responds.