CASH CRUNCH!!!!

WARNING - WARNING - WARNING

No need to launch this when Mel takes over the geosynch XM sats.

Rumor has it that the launch will be held up for a year or so in committee

Merger delayed plans delayed.

Hoo Hoo. I invented satellites. Hoo Hoo.

That's how it goes, isn't it?

Hoo Hoo. I invented satellites. Hoo Hoo.

That's how it goes, isn't it?

Simple if you do not need the satellite till later why have it in orbit burning Fuel Sort of like heating or cooling a room you are not using.

"No need to launch this when Mel takes over the geosynch XM sats." - Stupid post.

XM's satellites are geostationary, Sirius' are geosynchronous.
XM's satellites broadcast at a different frequency than Sirius'.
The firmware/hardware of all the current Sirius units can't receive the XM signal.
Sirius-5 is a great idea, and will help tremendously from the signal fade some see 3x/day.

Frank Z.: Hoo hoo? It's not funny anymore, if it ever was.

The satellite's nearly ready for the launch, and will be launched. John's post is the only rational one so far.

I heard they found out the merger will not go through so they are adding a laser on the sat to destroy the FCC, NAB, DOJ, and add new channels.

Was that the gayest comment ever made on orbitcast?

John said,
>>>Simple if you do not need the satellite till later why have it in orbit burning Fuel Sort of like heating or cooling a room you are not using.

Sorry to disagree with you John, but delaying a launch by 6 months -- for a satellite that will remain in orbit for up to 15 years -- will make little to no difference to the big picture. Especially in the outlying years.

What you may not realize is that in Sirius' launch application for the FM-5 satellite, Sirius stated that among the reasons for this satellite is to boost the robustness of the signal, in particular the need to boost "reliability, service quality and improve spatial diversity"... especially now that the company is implementing its hierarchical modulation scheme. If the need for this satellite is truly for this (as they noted in the application), then launching it early would be better. Delaying it 6 months is not going to save the company much "fuel" for use in the year 2023... the use for it is more impactful now, than saving 6 months for later.

You delay by that short amount of time for accounting reasons only, plain and simple.

-

Isn't geostationary just another geosynchronous? Like saying a square is a parallelogram. Its a more specific form, but it is still correct. So XMs are Geostationary, which is also geosynchronous.

Geostationary and geosynchronous are very different types of orbits. Their similarity is in that they are both at an altitude such that their orbit coincides with the Earth's rotation, but that is all. Geosynchronous satellites have an orbital inclination that makes them trace an oscillating pattern as seen from the ground -- Sirius' familiar figure 8 orbit path.

Geostationary satellites are in the plane of the equator and have no inclination. Satellites in that orbit appear to hang motionless as tracked from the ground.

There is a little more to this than just what you get at first look. Moving the launch from 18 months before the satellite is needed to only about 12 months has some significant risks.

First, if there is a spectacular launch failure like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9GcME5hy7U&feature=related

there will not be time to get a new bird ready before you need it. (Yes I know Sirius doesn't use Sea Launch, but a launch failure can happen to anyone ) Remember this happened ONE launch after the successful flight of XM-4.

Second, even if you are not the victim of the launch failure, if there IS a launch failure for someone else, all launches of similar vehicles could be delayed by up to a year. That's cutting it a bit close.

I think the earlier poster is right, it's about kicking the expense of the launch and insurance down the road a bit. If it works, it's brilliant. If it doesn't everyone will ask 'What WERE they thinking !!'

There is a little more to this than just what you get at first look. Moving the launch from 18 months before the satellite is needed to only about 12 months has some significant risks.

First, if there is a spectacular launch failure like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9GcME5hy7U&feature=related

there will not be time to get a new bird ready before you need it. (Yes I know Sirius doesn't use Sea Launch, but a launch failure can happen to anyone ) Remember this happened ONE launch after the successful flight of XM-4.

Second, even if you are not the victim of the launch failure, if there IS a launch failure for someone else, all launches of similar vehicles could be delayed by up to a year. That's cutting it a bit close.

I think the earlier poster is right, it's about kicking the expense of the launch and insurance down the road a bit. If it works, it's brilliant. If it doesn't everyone will ask 'What WERE they thinking !!'

There is a bit more risk to this delay than is being mentioned. Cutting the time between launch and use of the satellite from 18 months to 12 has 2 issues.

First if there is a launch failure like http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHXfWRTf8Bs , there is not enough time to get a new bird built and launched. (Yes I know Sirius does not use Sea Launch, but ANYONE can have a launch failure. It happens about 1 time in 12 )

Second, even if you are not the victim of a launch failure, if someone else has one, all flights of the same vehicle might be grounded for up to a year. That's cutting it pretty close.

I think the earlier poster is right....this is about kicking the expense of the launch and insurance down the road. If it works, it's brilliant, but if it doesn't work out everyone will be saying 'What WERE they thinking !!

Here's the new merger scenario currently being discussed among analysts. They all IMHO could be very, verys wrong, but just read:

No news will come from either DoJ or FCC before March 1.
Saturday Midnight, March 1 the Merger Agreement between SIRI and XMSR will silently expire; no strings, no ties, no fines. Neither DoJ nor FCC needs to speak up before or after -- and they won't.

Situation open for renegotiation -- if they want to. But first Boards will meet and graciously extend the Merger Agreement another month until March 31, along the line of and following Kevin Martins 'end of 1st Quarter decision' statement. Meanwhile they discuss and sadly will not reach concensus onhow to move forward -- after March 31, 2008.

If renegotiation takes place SIRI, the buyer, will want a different share exchange ratio based on current valuations, which XMSR judges as insufficient and offensive. Parties disagree and propose, after March 31, to have their shareholders meet, propose and agree on say: 1-2-3 payment scenarios for a new Merger Agreement, yes -- going through the same DoJ and FCC hoops, but both with c. 100 fully trained-on-the job lawyers, who will rephrase their language to be very effective.

Meanwhile, business as usual: standalone; SIRI the stronger, developing business.

Neither DoJ nor FCC will venture to decide, pending the delicate extension, shareholder meetings and their outcome.

After March 31 the extension expires and -- alas, parties go their own way having consulted their shareholders.
The Merger Agreement is void; neither DoJ nor FCC needs to take a stand. Finito.

SIRI, thriving, as well as XMSR is again a standalone company, target for takeover by rich Media or Tech companies, running their respectiev businesses. No Monopoly nor Anti-Competitive situation present.

you to can have a global market