
Originally Posted by
TSavery
What was stated:
"If Sirius XM was to issue only an additional 1 billion shares of stock in order to reverse the Liberty deal, it would have the net effect of removing the 2,586,976,762 shares that Liberty's preferred stock represents. The total number of fully diluted outstanding shares would thus be REDUCED by more than 1.5 billion shares, which of course benefits Sirius XM shareholders."
1. You can not reverse the Liberty deal. All you can do is pay off the loan early. This means that Liberty STILL Owns 12.5 million shares of preferred.
2. Sirius XM can only dilute to a certain point because of the Liberty deal.
3. The company can buy back the shares, but their value has already increased substantially from the point in time at which they were granted to Liberty. This also assumes that Liberty would want to sell the shares. Liberty has every right to simply say "no thanks". There is no mechanism to force them to sell.
The bottom line is that the shares are now out there, and will continue to be out there. Issuing more shares will not change that fact.
I was not trying to "attack" anyone personally, and did not put any names into the article. I wrote it in such a way as to give the clarity that Sirius Buzz readers were seeking. I received several e-mails in regard to the subject asking whether or not the Liberty shares could be revesed. I provided the answer, and did so in such a way that was intended to simply give the information that people were seeking. Some took it to be an attack on another site. It simply was not the case, but appears to have turned into an all out debate. I am perfectly comfoirtable in stating that the Liberty shares are out there, and will contiunue to be no matter what sirius XM does.
The importance here is that people are considering there positions on proxy mnaterials for the annual meeting. If they feel that adding to the share count may help erase the Liberty shares, then they are making a decision on information that simply is not accurate. That being said, I fully expect the share authorization to pass anyway (thus the issue may be moot), but still, people need to be aware of why they feel the way they do about an issue, and need to feel comfoirtable that the information they have is accurate.
This is not a he said, she said debate. I have taken exception to many articles in the past. This has included various analysts, as well as other perspective. Disagreement can be done in a respectful way. As always, if I disagree with an opinion of someone else, I simply give my own opinion on the matter. If I feel someone thinks that something is a fact, yet everything else points otherwise, I will point that out as well.
People come to sites and read analyst reports for information, opinion, and facts. I feel that they should read as much as they can on a subject, and take a few steps to verify opinions, facts, etc. Only by doing this can someone be as fully informed as possible.