Meetings with Commissioner Tate heat up

Tate is defining her own legacy right now. I just hope she knows what she is doing and understands the enormous benefit a satellite radio provider is to the country.....

Not to mention... isn't satrad more environmentally friendly than terrestrial/HD... ?

Not too late to email Commissioner Tate - http://www.fcc.gov/commissioners/tate/mail.html
and her legal advisor Amy Blankenship - Amy.Blankenship@fcc.gov to urge them to do right by satellite radio consumers.

She should vote today and get this behind her,but like any broad,she loves the attenion...Call me ,talk to me ,send me flowers .

I don't think Tate will be voting today, or on Monday for that matter. Her legal advisor is away till Tuesday. I hope between now and then, she gains some sense of how disappointed the satellite radio community is in her.

what makes this bum different than the other commisioners? can somebody please explain to me what this woman has been doing the past 500 days? its very simple... for the merger or not for the merger.

I don't know all the ins-and-outs of all of this, but on the surface, doesn't the fact that the NAB keeps pushing the HD Radio garbage essentially diminish their own argument of the merger resulting in a monopoly? They're stating that they themselves has a "rival" product!

Hypocrites.

I don't know all the ins-and-outs of all of this, but on the surface, doesn't the fact that the NAB keeps pushing the HD Radio garbage essentially diminish their own argument of the merger resulting in a monopoly? They're stating that they themselves have a "rival" product!

Hypocrites.

someone do something GAY!

Gay.

gay..

gay.........

I am an educated person, and I don't understand what HD has to do with Satrad in the slightest.

HD Radio is an embarrasment to radio broadcasting.

• FM broadcasts with 1/100 of its analog signal.
• AM broadcasts in bad quality.
• Broadcasts will still play the same 10 songs in a row, commercials every 10 minutes, and the same annoying on-air teenage beenie boppers.
• New data services, such as artist and song title, plus scrolling text, traffic updates, weather reports in 20 years.
• Opportunities for entirely new services, like surround sound, diluted audio channels, store-and-replay radio (already in satradio), a "buy" button for music, sports, and concert tickets, and more. (in 20 years)
• Radio guard which offers suscription based programs, which means you must buy a new radio when these services are available....(MORE NAB PROPAGANDA)
• It's FREE and repetative, just like today's analog AM and FM radio.

waitwhat

I put my penis in hd radio cause its GAY! HA!

jeff you should put your penis in a gyro for me to suck down. that would be cool.

ron and fez noon to three

Did the auctioneer from Sotheby's officiate the bidding from Mark Mays and the gang, You know it had to be a favor buying extravaganza in that room.

Why is the arbitrage spread widening today if it looks more imminent that merger will close ?

If she votes the wrong way on this deal she will stand to alienate the "Country Music Industry". If she does that, her future in public life is doomed. She knows what she must do, but is trying to figure a PC way to do it.

Sirius OutQ is Gay

Adelstein is a closet homo

Tate is defining her own legacy right now. I just hope she knows what she is doing and understands the enormous dis-service a government bailout of the satellite radio providers is to the country..... the enormous dis-service a MONOPOLY of the satellite radio providers is to the country.

Not to mention... satrad being more environmentally unfriendly than terrestrial/HD...

I could see Adelstein and Markey tapping eachothers shoes in a minneapolis airport bathroom

The followin was sent to Commisioner Tate:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The merger for XM/SIRIUS has been going on for 486+ days. The Department of Justice made their decision in March, yet this is still going on.
Terrestrial radio's groups such as NAB, Clearchannel and others say the merger would create a monopoly. That is not true. Sat. radio competes with terrestrial radio, Ipods, internet, and other media.
It is true that there would be only one sat.radio company if the merger is approved. It does compete with terrestrial radio.
The subscription to sat. radio is optional, which means if I do not wish to have it, I do not have to pay for it.
The same goes for Ipods and other internet based music download services such as Napster. Terrestrial radio is free to listen to, but the price an individual has to pay is listening to advertisements. After listening to these ads over a period of time, you yourself would probably like to have alternatives(putting it nicely).
Though there is a subsciption to XM and Sirius, it is a choice the consumer makes. If the consumer does not like the service or the sbscription price,they can cancel service.
What groups like the NAB and others are affraid of is losing their listeners. Most of the Sat. radio customers want the merger approved, and are willing to use the 'ala carte' pricing that was aggreed to as one of the conditions of the merger.
I happen to be a sports fan, and think it is bad idea to have to pay for two subscription to listen to games from Major League Baseball, NFL, NASCAR and other sports programing that require subscription to more than on service. As a subscriber, I am asking you to vote for approval of the merger, with no no additional conditions for the merger.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now it is time to write to the link below:
http://www.fcc.gov/commissioners/tate/mail.html

AND DO NOT GET NASTY AS SOME THE ENTRIES HAVE BEEN............................

Not too late to email Commissioner Tate - http://www.fcc.gov/commissioners/tate/mail.html
and her legal advisor Amy Blankenship - Amy.Blankenship@fcc.gov to urge them to do right by the MAJORITY of US citizens, not the MONOPOLY the blind, ignorant satradio fanoboys are so desperate for.

Let's keep our company to ourselves and tell XM, THE FCC, NAB, Georgetown Partners, C3SR, those filthy/greedy lawmakers and everyone else to go screw themselves... really. We don't need any of them...

We are going to win, regardless of this bullshit merger.

Amy Blankenship, Tate's legal advisor, used to be on Senator Brownback's staff as a legal beagle. Not a good thing since Brownback is against the merger since his wife is heir to a communications network.

I don't think Tate will be voting today, or on Monday for that matter. Her legal advisor is away till Tuesday. I hope between now and then, she gains some sense of how disappointed the satellite radio community is in her. I BET SHE REALLY CARES that a small minorty of blind, ignorant satradio fanboys are in desperation.

True with the merger there will only be 1 satellite company but with all the law bending to allow the big terrestrial companies ( Queer Channel and Shitadel to name the 2 biggest and eventually the only 2 ) to buy as many stations as there bank book will let them, wont they be exactly the same?

Amen walkawaymel Amen

Please just walk away!!

Tate, do the country a favor. Don't pretend you need to collect more data or have more meetings. We know you have no intention of cating the breaking vote unless it benfits you. No, do the country a favor and retire to your Grandchildren. They need decisions you are capable of making.

The arbitrage rate goes up as the stock prices go up, and converely down if the price go down.
Hence, the arbitrage rate is based on yesterday close of $ 2.10 for Sirius, and be higher if /when based on today's close.
As to the idiots posting untoward comments: You are not being funny, just annoying.

You forgot to mention that Tate met with Reagan's OMB Director, James C. Miller III, and he "explained that enabling Sirius and XM to merge will reward them with an
unprecedented monetary windfall, given that Sirius and XM initially purchased their
spectrum pursuant to stringent auction rules, including a prohibition against a merger of
the only two satellite radio licensees." See http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520034492 Will Sirius and XM have to pay American taxpayers the difference between what they paid in 1997 and what it will be worth combined with a government approved monopoly?

why doesnt one of the other regulations just become offering more satellite radio licenses? then they can shut up with the monopoly talk and the "minority" can get a license and start their own version of sat rad

Hey WaitWhat!

Yeah?

Mark Mays "reiterated the importance of reducing the risk" of stifling HD Radio's growth.

Well then Mr. Mays, produce great content and HD Radio will take off on its own without stifling competition. Reduce the risk by INVESTING in your products and services, get off your Rehr Mr. Mays.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A37692-2004Jul8?language=printer

@Simple - Because there AREN'T any more SDARS licenses. Unless the existing one or two SDARS licensees decide to give up part of their spectrum and turn it back for auction.

Simple, indeed.

The followin was sent to Commisioner Tate:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've been posting and proving my blind, ignorance at www.orbitcast.com about the merger of XM/SIRIUS for 486+ days. The Department of Justice made their decision in March, yet this is still going on. Lets ignore the fact that the DOJ screwed up and rubber stamped what will be a monopoly in satellite radio. Like I pointed out my blind ignorance would like to agree with the DOJ but Terrestrial radio's groups such as NAB, Clearchannel and others are 100% correct when they point out the merger would create a monopoly. That is true. Sat. radio is a alternative to terrestrial radio, Ipods, internet, and other media, but direct competition between sirius and xm would be lost.
It is true that there would be only one sat.radio company aka MONOPOLY if the merger is approved. Satradio doesn't directly compete with terrestrial radio.
The subscription to sat. radio is optional, which means if I do not wish to have it, I do not have to pay for it. (like I pointed out that's my blind ignorance again, hold on while I point out the obvious like a 2 year old)
The same goes for Ipods and other internet based music download services such as Napster. Terrestrial radio is free to listen to, but the price an individual has to pay is listening to advertisements. After listening to these ads over a period of time, you yourself would probably like to have alternativeS(sirius AND XM). But the "alternativeS" must be made to operate within current FCC rules (which sirius and xm have not been)
Though there is a subsciption to XM and Sirius, it is a choice the consumer makes. If the consumer does not like the service or the subscription price,they can cancel service. What's important with both sirius and xm satellite radio companies, consumers have choice and the direct competition between the satradio companies keeping quality UP and cost down, that will be lost with a "merge" scheme.
Groups like the NAB and others want sirius and xm to follow the FCC rules and agreements they have made, everyone but the blind, ignorant minority of satradio fanboys can see right through Melvin Alan "Mel" Karmazin "merge" MONOPOLY scheme and know it's not in the best interest of anyone or the satradio industry. A small minority of blind, ignorant of the Sat. radio customers want the merger approved, and are fooled hook line and sinker by the 'ala carte' pricing idea that was presented as one of the conditions of the merger.
I happen to be a sports fan, and think it is good idea to have to pay for two subscription to listen to games from Major League Baseball, NFL, NASCAR and other sports programing that require subscription to more than on service. As the educated know everything comes with a price, if I want all those sports it's my option "which means if I do not wish to have it, I do not have to pay for it." As a subscriber, I am asking you to vote AGAINST the approval of the merger, I urge you to add additional conditions even without the "merge" MONOPOLY scheme, for fcc time wasted and also current and past rules and regulations which have been not been adherd to. Melvin Alan "Mel" Karmazin "merge" MONOPOLY scheme is more than enough reason to keep the FCC Enforcement Bureau keeping a eye on this repeat offender
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now it is time to write to the link below:
http://www.fcc.gov/commissioners/tate/mail.html

AND DO NOT GET NASTY AS SOME THE ENTRIES HAVE BEEN............................

Posted by: firefox249 | July 18, 2008 12:44 PM

Tate and the other commissioners may receive a recording as early as next week with a Sirius customer that was denied the benefits noted in the members life time subscription plan. This is if the group against the merger manages to obtain the recording from the member. They want to show that abuse is alive and well at Sirius without it being a monopoly.
Let's face it, a monopoly is not in the best interest for the public at large, period. As a stockholder, I made a bad investment at nearly $5 a share and have lost a bundle. Still, how can anyone believe that such a merger should be allowed. The reality is that if the merger took place, given the resulting percentage giveaway of spectrum, price freeze and the loss of exclusive oem units, we will not see our money back for years on end anyway. Perhaps these companies should trim the corporate fat, focus on the business and start making a profit for us. Which is what they should have been doing all along. Instead, they have been busy little bees trying to figure out how to best stuff their personal accounts with our money. Such a merger would duplicate all the corporate officers of the company, why are they so gung ho on this deal? It's not about alruisim my friend, it's not.

Tate and the other commissioners may receive a recording as early as next week with a Sirius customer that was denied the benefits noted in the members life time subscription plan. This is if the group against the merger manages to obtain the recording from the member. They want to show that abuse is alive and well at Sirius without it being a monopoly.
Let's face it, a monopoly is not in the best interest for the public at large, period. As a stockholder, I made a bad investment at nearly $5 a share and have lost a bundle since. Still, how can anyone believe that such a merger should be allowed. The reality is that if the merger took place, given the resulting percentage giveaway of spectrum, price freeze, loss of exclusive oem units, and corporate self indulgence, we will not see our money back for years on end anyway. Perhaps these companies should trim the corporate fat, focus on the business and start making a profit for us. Which is what they should have been doing all along. Instead, they have been busy little bees trying to figure out how to best stuff their personal accounts with our money. Such a merger would duplicate all the corporate officers of the company, why are they so gung ho on this deal? It's not about altruism my friend, it's not. Good luck to all of us.

Pocketradio posting more FUD under yet another screen name. His fear and desperation is getting worse by the day.

"While not everyone has HD radio yet, it is becoming more popular and the receivers are becoming more affordable."

"So while conventional radio listeners will be able to hear the new lineup, secondary programming will be available on the HD2 stream. The third stream will broadcast yet another format 24 hours a day."

"I recognize that these decisions will not appeal to all current listeners, But in the long run ...this enhanced public service will be best for the future"

"More than 1,700 broadcasters have added higher-quality HD Radio signals to their current traditional AM/FM ones. And programmers are using the extra broadcast channels that digital technology provides to woo audiences accustomed to niche-targeted Internet and satellite radio stations."

HD Digital Radio • IT'S TIME TO UPGRADE!
HD Digital Radio. It's here. It's local. It's free. DISCOVER IT!
www.hdradio.com/

Pocketradio = TROLL
Pocketradio = DEBUNKED

the companies propose a menu of pricing options: Subscribers could keep their current service at the same price they pay now; add the "best of" the other service for an extra $4 a month; or choose to get fewer channels at a lower price. But while the companies tout these choices as the a la carte offering that cable TV has never consented to, the fact remains that if you want more channels under a combined XM-Sirius operation, you will have to pay more. "merge" scheme = PAY MORE

The danger in offering packages with fewer channels is the same risk cable TV companies have warned against for years: If consumers can pick and choose channels, that undermines the whole business, because inevitably, the bulk of the audience will spend most of their time listening to a relative handful of channels. Less popular channels, now subsidized by a flat subscription fee, would wither away.

With TV, according to an FCC report, the average cable household only watches 17 of the 100-plus channels they receive. On satellite radio, according to the first-ever satellite ratings report released by Arbitron this fall, a dozen of Sirius's 130 channels were clustered at the top of the heap, including the channels most similar to broadcast radio's offerings -- pop hits, oldies, new and classic country, Howard Stern and a couple of rock formats. On XM, similarly, 20 of the 170 channels drew by far the biggest audiences -- again, classic country; oldies from the '50s, '60s, '70s and '80s; current pop hits; light rock; classic rock; smooth jazz; and urban hits.

How long would more obscure, low-rated satellite programming such as Sirius's Underground Garage rock or NPR Talk channels or XM's Cinemagic movie music or choral classical outlets survive in a monopoly, a la carte system? And if the range of programming narrows, what is satellite offering that AM and FM do not?

Reducing the two services to a satellite monopoly will inevitably bring about a diminution of choices, along with higher prices. At XM's Washington headquarters, the number of producers and DJs would decline, meaning more formulaic programming -- if XM even remained here. How long would Karmazin keep production facilities in both the District and New York, where Sirius is based?

Both XM and Sirius say they can survive without the merger, even in fierce competition with all the other content providers scrapping for an audience today. Let them compete.

April 29, 2007

Siruis: Mel Karmazin's $31 Million Pay Day

Mel Karmazin, the Sirius CEO, made $31 million last year. Most of that was restricted stock and options. The cash portion was $4.25 million.The National Association of Broadcasters, which are trying to block the merger, called the pay "outlandish", according to The New York Post. A Sanford Berstein analyst commented that the disclosure of Karmazin's package could not have come at a worse time. His concern is that opponents of the merger will use the pay day to make management look greedy.

In the calculus of the merger, Karmazin's pay is a red herring.

Oh how the "news" comes back to bite...
http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/mel-karmazin-made-32-million-in-2007-more-than-xm-management-combined.html

Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. chief Mel Karmazin earned himself a comfortable $32.2 million in 2007, according to the company's recent SEC 10-K/A filing. That's $2 million more than XM's executive management team, combined.

While Karmazin's base salary of $1.25 million did not change in 2007, the company awarded its CEO an $4 million bonus. The year prior, the company awarded Karmazin a $3 million bonus.

Add in other compensations, stock awards and option awards last year, and his total compensation package tops out over $32.21 million.

Compare this to XM Radio's entire executive management team - which includes the compensation paid to former-CEO Hugh Panero - and Mel Karmazin beats their combined total by $2.3 million.

http://investor.sirius.com/EdgarDetail.cfm?CIK=908937&FID=950123-08-4834&SID=08-00

After finding these articles, I do not believe that internet radio is
going to be as much of a threat to satellite radio as HD Radio. The
main complaint of HD Radio is the weak reception. However, according
to these articles, the reception problem can be easily resolved by
following these simple do-it-yourself tips. I believe this spells
doom for satellite radio now that people will be able to clearly
receive HD Radio's lack of content and commercials.

http://sirius-satellite-radio-investors.googlegroups.com/web/Give%20Y...

http://sirius-satellite-radio-investors.googlegroups.com/web/Give%20Y...

http://sirius-satellite-radio-investors.googlegroups.com/web/Give%20Y...

http://sirius-satellite-radio-investors.googlegroups.com/web/Give%20Y...

Do not forget to lubricate the capacitor for smoother tuning using a
light machine oil on the ball bearings.

a report out from Bank of America analyst Jonathan Jacoby saying that "stand-alone values and merger synergy values likely are lower than previously estimated" – in other words, the companies are worth less than thought whether they merge or not.

a proxy filing out from Sirius , Apr 23, 2007 that shows, in addition to a bonus of $3 million, $1.25 million in salary and $2.83 million in stock awards, Karmazin got $24.1 million in options awards in 2006. At a time when both options grants specifically and executive compensation in general is under intense scrutiny, Karmazin's $31.18 total pay package is not going to help the merger go through.

What about all those "rogue antennas" that XM put up to overcome coverage gaps, particularly in urban areas, calling them "a network of hundreds of antennas that were built and operated in violation of U.S. Federal Communications Commission rules."?

What are all these bonus's? Neither satradio company has made a dime and investors are watching their investments tank.

Sorry, here are the full links to these helpful tips.

http://sirius-satellite-radio-investors.googlegroups.com/web/Give%20You%20FM%20Tuner%20a%20Longer%20Reach%2001.jpg

http://sirius-satellite-radio-investors.googlegroups.com/web/Give%20You%20FM%20Tuner%20a%20Longer%20Reach%2002.jpg

http://sirius-satellite-radio-investors.googlegroups.com/web/Give%20You%20FM%20Tuner%20a%20Longer%20Reach%2003.jpg

http://sirius-satellite-radio-investors.googlegroups.com/web/Give%20You%20FM%20Tuner%20a%20Longer%20Reach%2004.jpg

TechDirt’s staff has been covering the XM-Sirius merger substantively, and one of their commenters notes that the fine print of the new offering really has very little to offer consumers, and may actually leave listeners worse off:
For one, the technical incompatibility of the two systems becomes clear (even with a new radio, the most channels a Sirius subscriber can get from XM — at a hefty premium — is 11, of which there is almost no chance any will be sports or premium music). Two, the a la carte “deal” if taken to its logical extreme would substantially raise the cost for the average consumer. The “50″ or “100″ channel a la carte plans do not include premium programming like Howard Stern or play-by-play sports like the NFL. If you want those “super premium” channels you have to pay an extra $5 (for sports) and $6 (for Howard). So if you chose the 50 channels (you’re losing a lot for the right to pick) and add say sports, you are already paying more than what you would pay for the whole of one service

Most of all, as a consumer advocate who always looks skeptically at mergers, I wonder if centralization and consolidation really serves the listener. Given that the fate of another alternative music outlet, Internet radio, hangs by a fragile thread, is it really wise to reduce the two (only two) competitors in the still-young satellite radio world to one?
I went into the Karmazin conference not convinced that this merger was the right move for radio fans and the radio business, and everything I’ve seen since then tells me I’m right to be skeptical. Playing political Kabuki to appease a business-friendly conservative fundiecrat and shafting your customers in the long run is not the way to ensure stability and innovation in your field. I never thought I’d be on the side of corporate lobbyists like the NAB (and I’m still not), but this isn’t a simple case of rooting for the underdog. Not by a long shot.

F = Funny
C = Collection
C = Clowns

N = Nasty
A = Assed
B = Bastards

T = Twofaced
A = And
T = Totally
E = Election Focused

Now, don't go copying me Nab assholes.... be creative on your own for once.

http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/index.php/archives/2007/04/13/how-did-satellite-radio-become-uncool/

How Did Satellite Radio Become Uncool?

No one knew what satellite radio was until Howard Stern signed on.

And people hate Howard.

Suddenly satellite radio went from something cool, the new iPod, into the same old thing, but you pay for it.

I mean who wants to pay for Howard Stern? Oh, his show is better than ever, but it’s all about freeing HIM, not servicing YOU! He was constrained by the FCC, not you. And suddenly you got the same old thing, except it cost you $12.95 a month. Sure, diehard fans were happy to pay. But most Stern listeners were not. Only a fraction followed him to satellite.

Great way to build a business. Giving the middle finger to your audience. Telling people you need to feel free to make $100 million, but really you’re all in this together. Bullshit.

And those not into Howard Stern, they were happy to stay away from the stink.

But what about XM?

X what?

Suddenly, satellite became synonymous with Sirius. Howard hyped it everywhere he went, for a year before he could even be heard on the service.

And then Mel Karmazin followed him there.

Mel Karmazin is the number two poster boy for everything Americans hate about radio. Number one, of course, is the Mays family/Clear Channel. But wasn’t it Mel who turned CBS Radio into an advertising juggernaut? And everywhere he went after signing on to Sirius, Mel babbled about how he was going to sell so much advertising.

Suddenly, satellite radio was Howard Stern with commercials. And you had to PAY FOR IT! People were turned off.

Most people have never heard satellite radio. They’ve got no idea of its charms.

Then again, if you listen to Sirius, it doesn’t sound that different from terrestrial. The deejays are jive and the records are repeated endlessly. But you’ve got STARS! Curious, don’t you think. In an era where the stars on television are the hoi polloi, where everyman is what most people want to see, they suddenly want to PAY to hear the bloviations of people who have no previous history in radio?

Now if you need Howard, Sirius is the only place to go.

And if you buy a Sirius-ready car, you’ll find the service is superior to terrestrial, so maybe you’ll keep up your subscription.

But where’s the growth?

Suddenly signing up satellite subscribers is a grind. The kind Mel Karmazin works with his salesmen. Instead of people flocking to buy it, like Windows switchers to Macs, you’ve got to convince people. And that’s tough.

XM had it right. The service was growing organically. Its best salesmen were its subscribers. But you can’t sell XM to non-subscribers anymore. They know all about satellite. Losing money and desperately begging for a merger. Battling with terrestrial and iPods. Shit, does the iPod cite the Walkman as competition? But we’ve got Mel all over the media saying Sirius and XM have no choice but to merge, because of all the competition. Does U2 have competition? Even Coldplay? Great bands generate their own desire. It’s only crap bands that have to fight for their spot in the marketplace.

I’m getting a bad feeling that the Sirius/XM merger is a fait accompli. That all of Mel’s whining is going to convince the regulators. And this is sad. Because what’s lost in translation is satellite radio’s PROMISE!

Oh, don’t tell me about Net radio. First and foremost, you can’t get it in your car, and won’t be able to for a while. Never mind that too much of it is unlistenable. And HD radio? The amount of money thrown towards programming wouldn’t keep XM or Sirius afloat for minutes. No, satellite radio is the answer, if only they could make it cool again.

I don’t think Mel is interested in making Sirius cool. He’s just interested in the bucks. Which is why satellite is being dragged down. But XM? Can XM be cool again? Can XM be saved by a repositioning, a separation from Sirius?

XM is not terrestrial without the commercials. It’s a different philosophy. The deejays don’t talk jive and the playlists are varied. Not that anybody but subscribers knows this, because nobody has told them!

The future is about filters. XM is a filter today! But it’s been positioned so poorly, it’s dying on the vine.

While Hugh Panero focused on car deals, he did no soulful marketing. And, didn’t plan for car owners to switch the service off, because the vibe on satellite is so bad in the community. Buying satellite is like buying a Zune. What kind of chump lays hard-earned money down for crap?

First and foremost XM has got a perception problem. Sirius does too, but it’s going to use this merger to triumph. But what if the merger doesn’t happen? What if regulators finally see that competition is best? Can XM sell itself again? Can it get people to believe and spread the word? That’s its challenge.

'In 2007, We Will Be Generating Cash'
Mel Karmazin, CEO, Sirius Satellite Radio
By Mel Karmazin, Ceo, Sirius Satellite Radio | NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Jul 17, 2006

Stone: Is Sirius where you wanted it to be a year and a half into your tenure?

Karmazin: The company is far ahead of where most people thought it would be. When I joined in November 2004 we had 700,000 subscribers, and as of the end of the first quarter of this year we had over 4.2 million. Obviously, investors are most interested in how we can make money. In 2007, for the first time, we will be generating cash as compared to using cash. That could happen as soon as the fourth quarter this year.

You recently spoke about the possibility of buying XM. Clearly that's not a short-term possibility. Why did you say it?

I was asked the question. I answered it honestly. Certainly I'd be interested if a company is for sale, if the price is right and if regulators would allow it. In the case of satellite radio, it's hard to argue that strategically [buying XM] would fit. It's not something we're pursuing.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brent-budowsky/mel-karmazin-enrages-cong_b_42881.html

Mel Karmazin Enrages Congress, May Have Defeated XM-Sirius Merger
Posted March 7, 2007 | 03:20 PM (EST)

In Mel Karmazins recent testimony to Congress about the XM-Sirius merger his testimony could be called deceptive, misleading, or outright lying. In any event, Congress and the FCC are not happy campers with an industry that has a track record on not delivering promises to regulators.

I am a long term XM subscriber, great service, well worth the $12.95 per month cost. Here is the problem with Mel's testimony:

He stated to Congress that the merger would be good for consumers because we would receive expanded services without expanded price. Several times he stated that he would agree to not raise prices for a designated time, say 1, 2, 3, 4, years.

As a subscriber, I interpreted that to mean that my subscription price post-merger would not rise above $12.95. That is exactly how Members of Congress interepreted this.

Now Mel is squishing and squirming and it appears that what he really meant to say was this: XM and Sirius subscribers would indeed pay more than the current $12.95 per month, pre merger, but less than two times the $12.95 per month, post-merger.

The truth is still not clear, but Members of Congress are on the warpath and as they learn about this "loophole", they feel misled. A very bad move for a CEO in his first testimony to Congress to plus a brand new merger.

I know a lot about the radio industry generally, including satellite radio, and the problem is clear. XM and Sirius got into financial trouble because of ballooning cost structures, including giant costs for talent such as Howard Stern and Oprah, and because of limited business models with limited revenue streams beyond subscribers.

A merger could limit some costs by eliminating overlap of programming (i.e. music and talk genres need not be duplicated) and cost savings through layoffs. However, this would not save nearly enough money, by my math, to keep subscriber fees at $12.95. I have not seen their books, but Mel's numbers did not add up, by my count.

Now we learn that I will apparently be paying not $12.95, but $14.95, or $18.95, or whatever Mel ultimately offers. This was not what he discussed before Congressman Conyers' Committee and not what customers were led to believe.

Prediction: this merger is in very, very big trouble today. There will be major backlash from customers, regulators and Congress. In the current political environment, anything short of total integrity and candor could be the quick kiss of death.

Plowboy,

Don't worry about being "copied" you've yet again proven your ignorance, rude and crude, classless, sexist self. Your act and posts have about as much worth as your risky and failed satradio investments. 0.0. However your still hell bent on continuing to prove your ignorance by your slander and blaming of FCC Commissioner Tate for YOUR own screw ups.

0.0

The nabs are getting hostile and desperate ... so desperate that they have resigned to posting year old news! Alas... I would be desperate too if my team was losing. Lucky for me I made an excellent investment that will reap about 35% on many, many shares.

Then on to the next crusade.... nab pays performer, Adlestein for Chairman, and Tate send a packing back to Tennessee to watch the grandkids where she belongs.

As a wise man once said ....

" An incompetent womans place is in the home"

Plowboy the investing Champion!

Plowboy,

Please quit picking on me. I'm almost done with my deliberations. I've only had 18 months to study this weighty issue. I'm sure in two or three more months I may be able to come to a decision...

BTW, do you know anyone in Congress that can get my appointment confimed?
(Call me)

Deb Tate

F = Funny
C = Collection
C = Clowns

N = Nasty
A = Assed
B = Bastards

T = Twofaced
A = And
T = Totally
E = Election Focused

Now, don't go copying me Nab assholes.... be creative on your own for once.

Plowboy,

Your "team" did lose, just like your "team" lost your risky investment. Your desperation for "merge" MONOPOLY, your desperation to be Melvin Alan "Mel" Karmazin's favorite and most ignorant bitch is your fanboy reality.

0.0

How can something heat up when nothing ever happens in Tate's office?

More like posting the TRUTH! oh can you smell the TRUTH blind, ignorant, satradio fanboys can't handle the TRUTH!

I don't mean any disrespect, but these commissioners all seem to be cookie cutter, cut from the same cloth, afraid to make waves types who haven't had an original idea in their lives. They are all playing "The Game" as is par for the course. I just wish one of them would stand up and say that the DOJ was correct, it's not a monopoly, and that it should be approved with no conditions. Like almost every other merger is approved! Can you imagine, a 6 year price freeze being proposed to just about any company in this entire world? Is this not the most ridiculous crock of shit ever? EVER? No, it isn't; the suggestion that HD radio must be built into satellite receivers is, without a doubt, the most absurd, retarded, twisted, asinine, absolutely unfathomable proposal I think I have ever heard in my life. How on earth is a business supposed to survive when you have to promote and sell the competition along with your own product? It's like they are saying "Go ahead and merge; we have arranged things so that you will be going out of business soon. Best of luck to you!" Like I've said before, the level of corruption during the Bush administration is unprecedented in the history of this country. This merger realy shines a light on just how dysfunctional, corrupt, and morally bankrupt our government has become.

Anonymous Warrior,

As you have proven what might be "correct" to you is a MONOPOLY to others.

As you have proven what might be "ridiculous crock of shit ever to you is a MONOPOLY to others.

As you have proven what might be without a doubt, the most absurd, retarded, twisted, asinine, absolutely unfathomable proposal I think I have ever heard in my life to you is a MONOPOLY to others.

As you have proven what might be a dysfunctional, corrupt, and morally bankrupt our government has become to you is a MONOPOLY to others.

You and others (uneducated) Placing blame on everyone else who is educated enough to point out Melvin Alan "Mel" Karmazin's "merge" scheme is a MONOPOLY and is not being done to benefit consumers in any way.

I would vote for the merger with only one condition....

SAVE O&A!!!!!!

Anonymous Coward, You insulting, ignorant, learning disabled simpleton. The way you write, with words left out and your inability to even structure a complete sentence correctly tells me just how educated you are. You are the most inarticulate buffoon I have come across on this site since I discovered it. You may have actually had a valid point to make, but to be honest with you I could barely understand this shit pile of gibberish that you posted! You repeat what I said, and then end every dim witted thought with "Is a MONOPOPLY to others." I aspire to be a Rhodes Scholar like you someday, but in the meantime I will ponder your incredibly incoherent literary composition you have so graciosly bestowed upon Orbitcast. By the way, Einstein, I'm not the only one who doesn't think it's a MONOPOLY. Did you ever hear of these guys called the Department of Justice. They don't think it's a MONOPOLY either. Here's the phone number you can call to tell them how uneducated they are: 1- 800 - ACD - UMMY.

Anonymous Warrior, You insulting, ignorant, learning disabled simpleton. The way you write, with words left out and your inability to even structure a complete sentence correctly tells me just how educated you are. You are the most inarticulate buffoon I have come across on this site since I discovered it. You may have actually had a valid point to make, but to be honest with you I could barely understand this shit pile of gibberish that you posted! You repeat what I said, and then end every dim witted thought with "Is a MONOPOPLY to others." I aspire to be a Rhodes Scholar like you someday, but in the meantime I will ponder your incredibly incoherent literary composition you have so graciosly bestowed upon Orbitcast. By the way, Einstein, I'm not the only one who doesn't think it's a MONOPOLY. Did you ever hear of these guys called the Department of Justice. They don't think it's a MONOPOLY either. Here's the phone number you can call to tell them how uneducated they are: 1- 800 - ACD - UMMY.

Anonymous Warrior, By the way, Einstein, I'm not the only one who doesn't think it's NOT a MONOPOLY "merge" scheme. Face reality, face the truth, the DOJ screwed this one up, you hanging your desperation and what everyone knows is BS is pathetic.

Better to get a education before proving your desperate ignorance again and again.

"Better to get "a" education before proving your desperate ignorance again and again." Who writes this stuff for this guy......George Bush? Your grammar is atrocious! No, I didn't just insult your grandmother, you imbecile. Not to be outdone, will somebody please interpret this for me: "I'm not the only one who doesn't think it's NOT a MONOPOLY "merge" scheme." AC, you are absolutely correct; I must be stupid, because after reading that line 25 times I still can't figure out what the hell it means! You're eloquence is exceeded only by your ignorance. Go back and get your GED before posting anything else, because, not to be negative ( or double negative in your case ), I don't understand what the hell you are saying.