Sirius Investors Face Difficult Decisions: It All Boils Down to Faith 216 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
The equity markets are performing poorly. Banks have fallen, and there is the threat that even more bad news could hit the financial sector as Citi (C) becomes the latest target of speculation. People do not know what to invest in, and retirement accounts have been decimated. People, no matter what they are invested in, are expressing dismay and frustration over poor stock performance.
If you are invested in the markets and have not done so already, it may be time to do some soul searching, because like it or not, investments in the markets have boiled down to their simplest form. It all comes down to faith.
Do you have faith in an economic recovery?
Do you have faith in the credit markets easing up?
Do you have faith that consumers will once again feel good about spending?
Those basic questions need to be applied to any equity you are invested in, because these are the core issues that impact nearly everything that is going to happen. When you get to a specific company, you need to ask additional questions of yourself.
Do you have faith that management and the board are acting in your best interest? It seems that the question is simple, but you really should look as deeply as possible. Stocks are performing badly, but it is not unique to one specific company. Are the woes of your investment based on outside influences that are beyond the control of management? If you remove current management, who will replace them? If you vote down a board of directors, who will be at the helm? How long will it take to replace people? What will the impact be on the stock?
For investors in Sirius XM Radio (SIRI), the annual meeting is coming in late December. Among the items to be considered are the Board of Directors, an authorization to increase the authorized shares to 8 billion, and a reverse split between a range of 10 to 1 - 50 to 1.
Investors are frustrated. That is clear. The question is whether the existing management and board have the capability to steer the course, and whether they have the tools and latitude to make things happen. There are strong arguments on both sides of the proposals, but in the end it boils down to your level of faith as well as what actions will be the most prudent.
Investors should ask questions, participate, and vote. They should also be as informed as possible when they make these decisions, and think about how their action would impact the company. Whether you are for or against certain proposals, you need to think about what transpires in the event that these things actually happen.
If you are against the current board nominees, that is fine, but you need to understand that the company will then be in a position where they need to fill the board seats. Who will those seats be filled by? Will the new board members be aligned with your goals and desires for the company? Are you prepared to have a time period of flux, where new board members get up to speed with the happenings at the company?
If you are voting against the additional authorized shares, that is fine. Have you considered what that actually means? No one likes dilution. Authorizing that number of shares is a scary proposition. The company is looking for breathing room, and flexibility in how they are responding to the current markets. What happens if there is no flexibility? Would this board or a new board have their hands tied to an extent where their choices are limited?
If you are voting against a reverse split, that is fine. Are you prepared for delisting if the stock price does not get above $1.00? Yes, delisting would take time to process, and a company can appeal, but will even the very process of delaying a delisting impact the company? No one likes reverse splits either, but these are difficult times across the board, and it is in difficult times that difficult decisions need to be made.
It boils down to faith. How much faith do you have in current management? If your answer is that you do not have faith in them, what are your solutions? If you have no solutions on the table, then you need to think deeper.
Some would suggest that there will be time later to address these issues. That is true, but that would require a special meeting, which has costs. If you want the decision to be held off, in what time-frame do you propose these decisions be made? Will holding off on some of these decisions impact the equity? Will it hamper the ability of this, or any management and board to refinance debt, etc.
I think the involvement of shareholders is a wonderful thing. I think people asking questions is prudent. I have seen ideas about refinancing that are innovative and cutting edge, but I have yet to see anyone implement them in a way that takes things to the next level. I have seen people take a stance on certain items, but not think out the next few moves. I have seen people express their votes on certain items without even having heard the Q3 call. What is transpiring with satellite radio needs more than a knee jerk reaction. It needs deeper thought, and most of all demands that you look at your level of faith not just in SDARS, but in the economy as a whole.
Position: Long Sirius XM, No Position CITI
Related Articles
|
This article has 216 comments:
Is SiriusXM generating revenue from these ads due to new contracts with the TV advertisers?
Or is it because now that they have 19m subs, they raised their asking price per ad spot and have yet to fill in the commercial spots and are just "borrowing" the TV commercials in the meantime?
Either way, it seems we will soon be hearing of increasing ad revenues as a result of the merger synergies.
Keep the faith all. We could very easily be looking back at the $0.15 per share stock price a year from now and be kicking ourselves for not backing the truck up while we had the chance.
Vote FOR the current board, vote FOR the share issuance, vote FOR the reverse-split option. Give our company the leverage it needs to get through these difficult times.
I know the new channel lineup is angering alot of you. I know many of you are worried about share dilution. Please just take a step back and look at the situation from an outsider perspective. These moves are in the best interest of the company going foward from here.
I feel like this board has been captured by Sirius paid advertisers.
Vote no and kick Mel out. The company sucks and Mel is a crook. All the paid advertising in the world will never cover the truth now. The truth about Mel and Sirius is out in full. We all know Mel has planned this low price and a takw over. They guy is a crook!
Vote no else lose your investment!!!
Vote no
Last minute merger financing provided millions in shorts and delution!
Do you realy want this kind of managment holding your money?
Sirius was cought paying a stock holder and law firm to sue Sirius to provide an iron clad settlment that would have prevented stock holders from taking action against Mel and Sirius for these bad operations! They sued themselves to get protection!
Court room confirmed Proof that Mel is a Crook!
Vote NO and kick Mel OUT!!!
I'm unclear about one thing: Mel said not so long ago that he hopes it doesn't come down to him lending the company the money to pay back Feb's debt.
Does this mean he would realistically consider it??
In addition, I don't get this:
The board wants to dilute shares, yet at the same time have a reverse split? How the heck does that work? Doesn't one cancel the other out??
How ridiculous his article is. Does he think he's talking to people with out
brains. Business is numbers, numbers , numbers.
I'll say it again and again. There is $2.7 bil steady, stable revenue. That is almost 1/3 of all film box office for a year. That is a tremendous sum of
money for a single fledgling SatRad Company. The problem is how
management is handling the money. It is wasted, spent poorly, legally
stolen, and manipulated. Even in these bad times, credit crisis, auto
slowdown, rececission, etc., the revenue is stable, may grow a little
according to the publication and 3q call. That's a solid position. Why
isn't working, it's because of Mel and management. They don't cut,
cut, cut. Mel can drop his $5 mil salary. Stern can take a year delay.
Oprah and Martha, how much money do they need now. Cut, Cut, Cut.
Why would we keep a driver who drives the bus off the road.
Reverse split dooms everyone's investment except management. Can't
people see it by the numbers. 50,000 shares becomes 1000 shares.
It doesn't work. When it becomes 1000, Sirius stock would have to rise
to $50 or $100 a share to just break even. It won't happen. A reverse
split means you lose your money. It's that simple. It saves the company
for management only who can issue more stock so the new stock
buyers can pay off the debt, at every other shareholders expense. I
just don't understand why people can't see that. The reverse split is
not for shareholders. As far as Tyler burbling on about what happens
when you get rid of the current board and management and , whoa, we don't know what we might get with a new team. One, how can it be any
worse than what we have, and second, changing management happens
regularly in the corporate world, especially among media Corps. Film
studio's change bosses all the time. Does Tyler think there are no other
media exec's in this world. It's like are there no other bank exec's or
Secretary of Treasury either. Maybe they shouldn't change either because we may not know what we get when Paulson leaves..
Tyler sounds so sophmoric about the business world. His shilling to
keep management and go for dilution and reverse split indicates a
really weak busineess understanding of Sirius' position. The current
bosses are manipulating, filing false lawsuits, lying on record Sirius
may delist (it won't happen, for sure, according to Nasdaq rules), and yet
they want you to believe it might, and Tyler also. The current bosses want to wipe out current shareholder values to save Sirius for themselves by new issues to pay off debt while we all lose. Numbers, Numbers, Numbers. It doesn't work. Don't be fooled by all the BS they are
throwing at you. Hold your ground. No reverse split. NO! NO! NO!
NO dilution. Get rid of management. Their headed to prison anyway
under the RICO charges. Stop them before they rip us all off. They
are liars. They are using the $2.7 for their own benefit. They are trying to
pull the wool over everyone's eyes and Tyler's help. Stupid article.
No reverse split. No dilution. Get rid of management and the board.
That $2.7 bil revenue is solid,Sat.Rad is solid. Hold your ground and
wait it out. The reverse split means you lose everything. Sure, Bk means we'll lose anyhow. But if we hold our ground we have a chance. With
RS there is no chance. Hold the course. HOLD! HOLD!
I will vote yes to the Share Dilution. Given the current credit markets and the stock price at .14 cents, I don't want to handicap their ability to use shares to secure debt. I don't want them to use shares for debt, but I don't want them to be given an excuse to seek BK protection wiping all common shares out.
I don't see any reason this company should go into bankruptcy unless it cannot refinance its debt. Share availability at these prices does make the current level of authorized shares inadequate to provide security against the debt. This company had authorization for 4.5B shares with a stock price of $3.00. Why would any shareholder be afraid of dilution when the stock price is now at .14 cents and there is less than 1 B shares left for debt security. Is it because 8 B shares is going to make the stock price go to .07 cents? Who really believes that? I feel that the dilution is already in the stock price, but the authorization has not yet been given for the company to move forward and secure their debt. Then it is up to the company's management to earn my Respect, Trust, and Faith the old fashion way. Execute on the business plan and work your arsses off or be gone.
Sincerely,
we're screwed
Big Ben....long Siri....sick product...makes me what to cry
cos1000, you parallel my thoughts exactly on this vote issue.
if we have till sept. 09 (nasdaq delist. rule) why vote rs now !!!!
explain why your for rs.
faith is for religon .. facts are for buisness.
my biggest problem with this now is that mel hase'nt been clear on this.
Even without growth sirius/xm radio can remain at a stailmate for the next year with only 19 million subscribers.Sirus/XM can suffer the loss of higher churn to the percentage of subscriber aquistions just based off the fact that operating losses have been reduced by downsizing the staff of both the old XM and old sirius companies. Consolidating and reducing overhead has saved sirius/XM radio over $250,000 a quarter.
Overall 19million subscribers for the past 2 quarters, 3rd and 4th of 2008, will equal relatively 1.4 billion dollars generated in revenue. That is huge numbers, not to mention company cut backs in reducing overhead.
The only problem I see is that people generally fear debt. Debt is the inevetable of any start up corporation or company and it takes money to make money. No doubt both XM and sirius as seperate companies had spent millions upon millions to compete against each other. Now with the consolidation and merger of the 2, there is no expenses needed to aquire subscribers, pay for advertising, and compete against one another. Of coarse debt looks bad, but when you compare sirius/XM to companies such as charter communications (CHTR) which owes billions more in debt and has a slower subscriber rate than that of sirius. I would wonder; why are CHTR shares worth more than sirius/xm, which charter has had more trouble recieving loans or refinancing loans than sirius xm radio.
The conspiracy theory and relative truth behind shares being as low as .15 a share is due to the reason that JP morgan would have to loan sirius/XM an addition 1billion and refinance loan agreement which would of coarse free up some cash flow from quarter to quarter alleviating alot of bloated payments. This would be through the loral space contract.
Why does sirius get bad reviews from banks? Plain and simply because due to the situation of our economy banks do not want to loan money. Banks like JP morgan put fear into the consumers and share holders to sell stocks. Driving the share value low and saving the banks the fear of loaning this money to sirius/xm. What would sirius need to get this loan? Only .30 cents or the equivelant of an 800million cap. So banks add fear to the share holder to sell, to keep the share value low and prevent shares from hitting that 800 million cap.
I continue to buy thousands of shares of sirius/xm at .15 cents a share. I do not see bankruptcy being evitable, and I don't see sirius xm having problems making there quarterly payments.
I do not agree with share dilution as that doesn't change the actual value of the company. I also don't agree with removing the management that is already existing as you can see quarter to quarter the numbers are only getting better.
But for $240, it's a gamble with good rewards, *only* if $240 is a very small part of your portfolio. If this is your total monthly savings, rather buy a more established stock than a roller coaster like SIRI.
On Nov 24 01:23 AM Agatha wrote:
> Would it be foolish or naive to buy 2,000 shares at .14 a share and
> hope that within several years the stock might reach $5.00? That,
> in inselft, would be a great profit? Just curious.....it would only
> be a $280.00 investment. Would appreciate anyone's comments. Thanks!
What Deal with GS at the Merger? I keep hearing that the company did a deal with GS and that GS is the one shorting all the stock. In all the filings I have read, I find no evidence of any deal with GS other than their 127M of Feb 2009 2-1/2% notes that they hold which was a deal done in 2004.
how is authorizing more shares without the RS going to dilute the shares of this stock more than it already is? The SP is already .14 cents.
Not looking for supporters, I can do my own homework. I am looking for some well thought out discussion as to what the company can and is doing. What is your intent???
If the $280 is something that you don't mind loosing then fine. I have to ask though, why Sirius in this market? There are so many good quality companies in this market, making money, who's stock will easily double upon an economic recovery. Sirius' stock will not be trading at $5 any time soon IMHO. Their are good alternatives to invest in, I would not gamble here. Most of us in this stock are here because we have lost thousands of dollars in equity value in this stock. If you really like the stock, wait until after February 2009 and see how it fairs. Don't worry about the stock price right now, worry about whether this company is still surviving later. I do not believe this stock is for a new investor unless you just like to gamble. IMHO (I am not a financial adviser, or an armchair CEO so take my comments for what their worth)
As a matter of fact, it costs Sirius to generate new subscribers. A lot of their debt to this point is from their choosing accelerated growth, unique and expensive content, and market share, over cost containment and generating FCF. Sirius can still generate good solid revenue without accelerating growth and attain FCF and profitability. As a monopoly, Sirius can get back to fundamentals without the induced competition from the duopoly that caused the race for subscribers. Retaining existing subscribers can be more profitable than bringing on new ones. The metric of significance in this business model is Churn, lost subs.
Here! Here! Announcing something to surprise the Shorts would be great. Bring back the uptick rule sounds good, but with the electronic trading desks on this penny stock, I don't know how effective it would be. Buying back common share debt should be on the list, but paying for Feb 09 and May 09 debt should be a priority. I hear your frustration. Waiting on this company is all we longs seem to do.
............. Sirus/XM can suffer the loss of higher churn to the percentage of subscriber aquistions just based off the fact that operating losses have been reduced by downsizing the staff of both the old XM and old sirius companies.
With all due respect, check your metrics. Sirius cannot suffer the loss of higher churn. Churn is current subscribers opting out. This is bad in any scenario, but inevitable in any subscription business. Churn requires matching growth (new subscribers) to maintain current subscriber totals and revenues. As I said above, focusing on existing subscriber retention and upgrades, is a way to take the pressure off of new subscriber growth. Subscriber retention and upgrades are also place at higher margins. Churn needs to go down or stay the same with growth tempered to equilibrium, for static subscribers numbers, say 19M, to be still profitable. So basically, higher churn puts increased pressure on new subscription growth. Higher churn is a loss in chipset subsidy already payed, causing a lost opportunity to get lower expense per sub revenue going forward. Higher churn rates are also a sympton of less product appeal at a given price point ,from a consumer point of view.
On Nov 23 06:06 PM dayworker wrote:
> Unbelievable! If Tyler isn't groveling for Sirius then I don't know
> what to say.
> How ridiculous his article is. Does he think he's talking to people
> with out
> brains. Business is numbers, numbers , numbers.
> I'll say it again and again. There is $2.7 bil steady, stable revenue.
> That is almost 1/3 of all film box office for a year. That is a tremendous
> sum of
> money for a single fledgling SatRad Company. The problem is how
>
> management is handling the money. It is wasted, spent poorly, legally
>
> stolen, and manipulated. Even in these bad times, credit crisis,
> auto
> slowdown, rececission, etc., the revenue is stable, may grow a little
>
> according to the publication and 3q call. That's a solid position.
> Why
> isn't working, it's because of Mel and management. They don't cut,
>
> cut, cut. Mel can drop his $5 mil salary. Stern can take a year delay.
>
> Oprah and Martha, how much money do they need now. Cut, Cut, Cut.
>
> Why would we keep a driver who drives the bus off the road.
> Reverse split dooms everyone's investment except management. Can't
>
> people see it by the numbers. 50,000 shares becomes 1000 shares.
>
> It doesn't work. When it becomes 1000, Sirius stock would have to
> rise
> to $50 or $100 a share to just break even. It won't happen. A reverse
>
> split means you lose your money. It's that simple. It saves the company
>
> for management only who can issue more stock so the new stock <br/>buyers
> can pay off the debt, at every other shareholders expense. I
> just don't understand why people can't see that. The reverse split
> is
> not for shareholders. As far as Tyler burbling on about what happens
>
> when you get rid of the current board and management and , whoa,
> we don't know what we might get with a new team. One, how can it
> be any
> worse than what we have, and second, changing management happens
>
> regularly in the corporate world, especially among media Corps. Film
>
> studio's change bosses all the time. Does Tyler think there are no
> other
> media exec's in this world. It's like are there no other bank exec's
> or
> Secretary of Treasury either. Maybe they shouldn't change either
> because we may not know what we get when Paulson leaves..
> Tyler sounds so sophmoric about the business world. His shilling
> to
> keep management and go for dilution and reverse split indicates a
>
> really weak busineess understanding of Sirius' position. The current
>
> bosses are manipulating, filing false lawsuits, lying on record Sirius
>
> may delist (it won't happen, for sure, according to Nasdaq rules),
> and yet
> they want you to believe it might, and Tyler also. The current bosses
> want to wipe out current shareholder values to save Sirius for themselves
> by new issues to pay off debt while we all lose. Numbers, Numbers,
> Numbers. It doesn't work. Don't be fooled by all the BS they are
>
> throwing at you. Hold your ground. No reverse split. NO! NO! NO!
>
> NO dilution. Get rid of management. Their headed to prison anyway
>
> under the RICO charges. Stop them before they rip us all off. They
>
> are liars. They are using the $2.7 for their own benefit. They are
> trying to
> pull the wool over everyone's eyes and Tyler's help. Stupid article.
>
> No reverse split. No dilution. Get rid of management and the board.
>
> That $2.7 bil revenue is solid,Sat.Rad is solid. Hold your ground
> and
> wait it out. The reverse split means you lose everything. Sure, Bk
> means we'll lose anyhow. But if we hold our ground we have a chance.
> With
> RS there is no chance. Hold the course. HOLD! HOLD!
The stock should recover that much (or go bust depending on who you listen to) Of course a price of .93 would only mean you had recovered from the orginal drop from 7.33.
I just wish Mel will say something soon about the refinancing. I've averaged down to $0.75 already, and I'm considering doing it again if the price stays around $0.15 for a bit... I just always get the feeling that I'm throwing money into the toilet whenever I pump more into SIRI since it NEVER EVER EVER seems to stop dropping, but hey it won't be the first time I've made a bad decision, so whatever...!
I just wish Mel will say something soon about the refinancing. I've averaged down to $0.75 already, and I'm considering doing it again if the price stays around $0.15 for a bit... I just always get the feeling that I'm throwing money into the toilet whenever I pump more into SIRI since it NEVER EVER EVER seems to stop dropping, but hey it won't be the first time I've made a bad decision, so whatever...!
Some say that faith has no place in investing, the markets, or the economy. for those people, I ask, what gives value to the dollar. There is no gold standard.....only a level of confidence that a dollar will carry a certain value.
With these economic times, people have lost faith in the system. Some more than others. Individual equities are at the mercy of success of an economic system based on faith.
I was not at all suggesting that people base their investment decisions on faith, but rather that faith has become the only thing left. What I am saying is that investors (in virtually any equity) are faced with difficult decisions. Numbers that are okay do not matter. Book values seem to have gone out the window, and even good news is meet with a high degree of skepticism. whether we like it or not.....whether it is prudent or not.....whether it is scientific or not, we are all faced with having to question our level of faith in the system that exists. Perhaps that concept is too deep for some to grasp, but peel away the layers, and you get down to your level of "belief" or "faith".
People ask me if I am for or against the reverse split. I have two choices, and neither is very appetizing. I do not like the choices offered, but have to choose one. karmazin stated that the reverse split is for the purpose of listing requirements. Given a choice of seeing the equity delisted, vs. doing a reverse split, I will take the reverse split. can the decision wait? Sure. The company can hold a special meeting in a few months, and spend a couple of million to make a decision later, in the 11th hour. How wise is that? NASDAQ rules dictate that the company must have a plan to get the equity into compliance. Part of that plan needs to include a reverse split. Come mid January, if a reverse split is not approved, the company will be out of compliance on two fronts. A stock price that is too low, and a plan that is not acceptable. That could accelerate the delisting process, and remove the companies ability to appeal delisting.
No, I am not a fan of reverse splits. i am also not a fan of pink sheets. Investors have a lot of serious issues to consider. I have run into many that have not even thought through what happens if the way they vote comes to fruition. That in and of itself is scary
On Nov 24 11:14 AM Tyler Savery wrote:
> Faith is the level of belief that an individual can put into something.
> If you believe that a certain outcome is likely to happen, then you
> are placing faith in that belief.
>
> Some say that faith has no place in investing, the markets, or the
> economy. for those people, I ask, what gives value to the dollar.
> There is no gold standard.....only a level of confidence that a dollar
> will carry a certain value.
>
> With these economic times, people have lost faith in the system.
> Some more than others. Individual equities are at the mercy of success
> of an economic system based on faith.
>
> I was not at all suggesting that people base their investment decisions
> on faith, but rather that faith has become the only thing left. What
> I am saying is that investors (in virtually any equity) are faced
> with difficult decisions. Numbers that are okay do not matter. Book
> values seem to have gone out the window, and even good news is meet
> with a high degree of skepticism. whether we like it or not.....whether
> it is prudent or not.....whether it is scientific or not, we are
> all faced with having to question our level of faith in the system
> that exists. Perhaps that concept is too deep for some to grasp,
> but peel away the layers, and you get down to your level of "belief"
> or "faith".
>
> People ask me if I am for or against the reverse split. I have two
> choices, and neither is very appetizing. I do not like the choices
> offered, but have to choose one. karmazin stated that the reverse
> split is for the purpose of listing requirements. Given a choice
> of seeing the equity delisted, vs. doing a reverse split, I will
> take the reverse split. can the decision wait? Sure. The company
> can hold a special meeting in a few months, and spend a couple of
> million to make a decision later, in the 11th hour. How wise is that?
> NASDAQ rules dictate that the company must have a plan to get the
> equity into compliance. Part of that plan needs to include a reverse
> split. Come mid January, if a reverse split is not approved, the
> company will be out of compliance on two fronts. A stock price that
> is too low, and a plan that is not acceptable. That could accelerate
> the delisting process, and remove the companies ability to appeal
> delisting.
>
> No, I am not a fan of reverse splits. i am also not a fan of pink
> sheets. Investors have a lot of serious issues to consider. I have
> run into many that have not even thought through what happens if
> the way they vote comes to fruition. That in and of itself is scary
On Nov 24 11:14 AM Tyler Savery wrote:
> Faith is the level of belief that an individual can put into something.
> If you believe that a certain outcome is likely to happen, then you
> are placing faith in that belief.
>
> Some say that faith has no place in investing, the markets, or the
> economy. for those people, I ask, what gives value to the dollar.
> There is no gold standard.....only a level of confidence that a dollar
> will carry a certain value.
>
> With these economic times, people have lost faith in the system.
> Some more than others. Individual equities are at the mercy of success
> of an economic system based on faith.
>
> I was not at all suggesting that people base their investment decisions
> on faith, but rather that faith has become the only thing left. What
> I am saying is that investors (in virtually any equity) are faced
> with difficult decisions. Numbers that are okay do not matter. Book
> values seem to have gone out the window, and even good news is meet
> with a high degree of skepticism. whether we like it or not.....whether
> it is prudent or not.....whether it is scientific or not, we are
> all faced with having to question our level of faith in the system
> that exists. Perhaps that concept is too deep for some to grasp,
> but peel away the layers, and you get down to your level of "belief"
> or "faith".
>
> People ask me if I am for or against the reverse split. I have two
> choices, and neither is very appetizing. I do not like the choices
> offered, but have to choose one. karmazin stated that the reverse
> split is for the purpose of listing requirements. Given a choice
> of seeing the equity delisted, vs. doing a reverse split, I will
> take the reverse split. can the decision wait? Sure. The company
> can hold a special meeting in a few months, and spend a couple of
> million to make a decision later, in the 11th hour. How wise is that?
> NASDAQ rules dictate that the company must have a plan to get the
> equity into compliance. Part of that plan needs to include a reverse
> split. Come mid January, if a reverse split is not approved, the
> company will be out of compliance on two fronts. A stock price that
> is too low, and a plan that is not acceptable. That could accelerate
> the delisting process, and remove the companies ability to appeal
> delisting.
>
> No, I am not a fan of reverse splits. i am also not a fan of pink
> sheets. Investors have a lot of serious issues to consider. I have
> run into many that have not even thought through what happens if
> the way they vote comes to fruition. That in and of itself is scary
is a value which allows one to believe that a certain reality will
be possible within a person normal experience. When the reality
is already a part of actuality, like the numbers of a monetary position
based on the goods and services, the numbers trump the value
as a real position as opposed to what a faith in those numbers might
mean. The numbers are exact. A reverse split means you lose your money,
your value, and your faith. Tyler doesn't understand the legal position about the Nasdaq rule in interpreting the plan presented for delisting
requirement. The plan can be a built in speculation against current
economic conditions with fluidity. They are not written in stone under
the current credit crisis. Nasdaq changed the rule in a policy move to
abate the current number of stocks falling below $1. They will adjust
for company's as needed, especially with a revenue stream of $2.7 bil.
Tyler still doesn't get it about management he keeps shilling for.
Keep them he says. What for? There are media exec.'s more qualified
to run this lucrative company. What's at stake is a $2.7 bil revenue
stream that's stable. In this current financial strain that is a tremendous
position to be in. It's the $2.7 bil against debt and expenses. Good
management can renegotiate both debt and costs. When you have
who is currently in place at SIRIUS you get people who are helping themselves first. There are much better managers out there. Let's
take a chance on a new team. Let's change. YES WE CAN.
NO RS! NO DILUTION! NEW MANAGEMENT! HOLD ON, WE CAN
MAKE IT. CUT COSTS. RENEGOTIATE DEBT AND SALARIES AND
TALENT COSTS. YES WE CAN. HOLD ON! DON'T GIVE THEM WHAT
THEY WANT. PERIOD! WE'RE IN CHARGE WITH THE $2.7 BIL
REVENUE STREAM RUNNING THRU OUR PORTFOLIO VEINS. IT'S
A SOLID POSITION. NO NEED TO TURN IT OVER TO THE CROOKS.
On Nov 23 10:32 PM Big Ben wrote:
> Big Vin...we need to have a little chat here. Why would it not be
> good for siri to go ito bankruptcy?
Bankruptcy is bad in general. Thats worse than dilution. Depending under what chapter of bankruptcy sirius/xm would file under could still allow them to restructure and maintain listing on the nasdaq.
Problem is that once bankruptcy is filed shares plumet to a few pennies to a fraction of a penny and only shows that management didn't do well being responsible to the company.
Realistically before the merger of sirius/xm. XM satellite radio before the merger had a 50% chance of filing bankruptcy. Sirius satellite radio had a 20% chance of filing bankruptcy. Right now due to market conditions sirius/xm radio has a 45% chance of filing bankruptcy. I'm willing to bet on the 65% chance that bankruptcy wont happen.
Secondly, due to market conditions I don't see sirius/xm becoming delisted anytime soon. So I would rather see sirius/xm battle it out with there payments. This will be the best .15 cents per share I have ever spent.
If im so dumb why do i own a stock that jumped 20 percent fri and 20 percent today, and why if Im so dumb did i buy citi calls on friday, and doubled my money? Sounds like I could use some more dumb. The only dumb thing I did was believe my CEO, so there.....
Well anyway, Im not bragging, but I do feel if people listen to me they should know Im competent in my investments. I was wrong about Mel....I knew he was lying, i documented this months ago, but I didnt think he was lying to tank the company.. I thought he was just lying to tank the stock...I now feel since proxy vote that he was lying to tank the company... I saw the lies and manipulation, but I underestimated their evil intentions....
Cos1000 you should share a few of your trading ideas too...
Market will be up this week, we could see 10000 by fri...
After that look out....
Rebuy after Dec.14th....
HOLD TILL MARCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...
Going to get fun!!!!
Though I was disappointed by the gov not just giving The Big Three a bridge-loan as they did for AIG and others without receiving much detail, in the end, it had to be that way. These three CEOs clearly showed themsleves by not going into those hearings more prepared. Anyone would have believed they would have been hard at work weeks prior, gathering "see?" information and numbers. Had they done that, they would have the money right now. Instead they spoke in stuttering generalities with no specifics and now will have to come back and do it again weeks later. To be honest, they are lucky they even are getting another chance. And frankly, for what they just did, they should all be replaced no questions asked. You would think they could at least just fly a regular airline (even first class) to the hearing--a difference between 3K and 20K for the private jet. And we're supposed to believe these companies are on top of cost reductions? Clearly, these guys are not thinking right--which is a problem. Congress was right not to approve any money until these guys get their sh%t together. I think they will now, and therefore receive the money, but this leads to my main point about SIRI.
Shareholders are SIRI's Congress. We want facts from the company beyond Q metrics. SIRI wants us to approve 3.5B of additional shares for them to use as they see fit. I urge all shareholders to go back and read from several prospecti of 7/30 or the one from late October. In those, SIRI, gives themselves the rights of a despot. They basically say they have the right to do ANYTHING THEY DEEM RIGHT FOR THE COMPANY--no matter how it may affect the investment of any common shareholder (and essentially that the investor of the common should think twice about investing due to the risk of heavy losses). The operative words there are DEEM RIGHT. They give themsleves these rights basically without accountability. They say, we make the decisions, and you live with them. Ahhh, but now we have a rub. Now they are asking us for our permission to "make decisions and have us live with them." The decision is ours whether or not to grant them more power and more opportunity for us to assume more risk. Something is a little askew there isn't it? Essentially they're asking us to cut our own throats--and understand that we're doing it to ourselvesm risking our own health in the process. Mel would have done very well in his recent Q CC to show a vision, to show that he is seeing the ENTIRE picture of which he is a part, by acknowledging the current NAS delisitng extensions and provide more clarity regarding his intentions for the additional shares he seeks. Instead, he just said he "EXPECTS" shareholders to approve both...and goodbye. These are not the words of transparency. The same kind of transparency the Congress would demand and is demanding from The Big Three. One has to assume that the only real reason for requesting additional shares is to be able to raise more capital. Duh...no company seeks more shares except to use them dilutively to raise capital. The trouble for SIRI is, nowhere in their Q report or in any other communications, will they state that they need to do this. There is no "plan" from the company on definitively managing their current debt. They are the opposite of transparent..which is opaque. And worse, we the shareholders are given little more than intentional distraction and double entendre. A point I raised directly after the Q CC, was if Mel was refering to his expected additional shares, when he suggested "talking to lenders" and "in short order." By the behavior of the SP and no further communication frm the company regarding any possible refi deals (not even a rumor), one can only assume the Street believes exactly that.
It seems (and maybe not surprisingly) that The Big Three and SIRI have similar styles of doing business. It's the old way of management entitlement and an extreme facist if not communist way of implementing their business plan. Trickle down, trust us we know what we're doing, etc... From my POV, without clarity of intention, just asking for blanket approval for "maybe" or "someday" or "when we might need to in the future" is irresponsible if not disrespectful. In fact, it's hard now in hindsight to even reconcile Mel not even mentioning the absurdly low stock price and how sorry the company might be that it was sitting @ .26 at the time. And that he and the company are working around the clock to make sure that price turns around and moves higher. There were no statements to that effect. No concern whatsoever for the plight of the "common" (emphasis on the nature of the word common) shareholder. Your stock has just been reudced to rubble, dust, from $3-4. One would expect at least a mention to commiserate with those actually funding the company (us...and literally in this case due to the nature of much of the financing deals currently in place) and affected the most by that decline. Yet, nothing. Just, we EXPECT approval at the meeting and goodbye.
Essentially, like many seeking solace in the TARP, SIRI is seeking a blank check and blank check powers without having to justify anything with a plan or goals or communication of any kind. Just like Congress said no to The BIg Three without details, shareholders should say the same to SIRI. I voted no to a blank check and I voted no to blank check powers. It's no longer acceptable for Mel to do "ugly" deals and then go on Cramer and say it was ugly. Going forward, ugly needs definition, it needs details and it needs discreet approval from those it will affect the most--shareholders. Because it appears that's what shareholders are staring down yet again... Ugly, 11th hour, backroom, good old boy network handshake deals that rape the common shareholder and allow management to continue living in penthouses, cut themselves extensive bonus checks, and let them continue to implement THEIR vision, THEIR way, in THEIR timeframe, no questions asked. The question of the day is, when exactly do shareholders actually receive any value or get rewarded in this company structure? It appears to me, history has proven the only shareholders that get rewarded in this system are those who believe the company will fail or who are allowed to hedge an investment made in the company. For them, it's nothing but through-the-roof, never ending profits. For the positive contingent, it's heavy losses and fortunes lost.
I hope additional shares and reverse split authorization are soundly rejected. It will at least force the company to come clean about what's next. If that's BK, then so be it. @ .14 - .16 going into BK means little to nothing to shareholders at this stage. The common is effectively already wiped out, so shareholders would lose nothing more than already lost. In a filing, the SP would open @ .05. The only hope any shareholder has now (outside of BK) is that certain "mechanical and contrived" aspects of this SP decline are lifted or reversed, allowing the SP to normalize somewhat. If that does not happen in any significant way, this company is already as good as in bankruptcy with the stock where it is now. Even Worldcom's stock went from .05 to .35 during bankruptcy protection--and which is about the norm. So anyone in around .30 or under, are next to guaranteed their money back regardless of what happens. Case in point: Circuit City opened at .0605 the morning they filed on 11/10 and they hit a high of .30 on 11/14. Today they are quoting .225 currently--even higher than SIRI!! Right now, I believe the ONLY thing keeping SIRI from filing is the immediate delisting. The minute you file for BK, you are YANKED that day from the exchange and are head right to Pink Sheets (as Circuit City was from the NYSE).
It could very well be that Mel and Co, might be using this plea for extra shares as his last gasp. If so, he will roll the current bondholder agreements over, split for the higher price so the common can be re-shorted. If that is the case, I say shareholders should stop the madness, say no and let this company file and get it over with. It's all a sad situation as shareholders have lost so much. But at least current shareholders would be looking out for future holders, who would also be ruined in time. This company should be allowed to take their medicine now and hopefully come out the other side a more viable entity.
Further, in the case of BK, more shareholders would actuaklly stand to regain their investments--albeit with additional capital. As said, in the instance of a filing and a stock opening @ .04 - .05, I will be piling in with new mega shares knowing it will be bid up to about .30 due to many others doing the same and shorts covering. This way, in a few days, one could nearly make their entire loss back. So... another reason to force management's hand at this point. There's actually potentially more upside for shareholders in BK than out. At least in that case, the stock is all but guaranteed to go higher quickly due to the new set of focused parameters. Otherwise, what you have now is day after day languishing. That's a sad statement but IMHO seeming more and more accurate. I still think a major squeeze is on the table prior to the meeting...but that's only if the company is playing fair and actually has a plan for debt resolution other than using new share dilution. I will continue to hold my current re-entry shares in the .20s right through the meeting. Either way I know that investment is safe and if I need to enter again post BK, I will gain that new pop, then remove everything @ about .30. Then it's goodbye SIRI!
We must get Mel and Sirius management the boot out the top floor window. I would like to see is Mel bounces like my checks will bounce after the RS.
You state, "Tyler doesn't understand the legal position about the Nasdaq rule in interpreting the plan presented for delisting
requirement."
I do understand the rule. I also am well aware that the rule has had a change. I wrote about it. NASDAQ has latitude, but how much. You say they don't have to do this, or don't have to do that, but you are basing that opinion on faith that what you currently know is accurate.
You state, "The plan can be a built in speculation against current
economic conditions with fluidity. They are not written in stone under the current credit crisis. Nasdaq changed the rule in a policy move to abate the current number of stocks falling below $1. They will adjust for company's as needed, especially with a revenue stream of $2.7 bil."
Nasdaq can do many things. The important word here is "can". No where do you see that "NASDAQ WILL". You are thus basing your opinion on faith that NASDAQ will see things as you do. That NASDAQ will make certain rules for some companies, but not others.
You say, "Tyler still doesn't get it about management he keeps shilling for. Keep them he says. What for? There are media exec.'s more qualified to run this lucrative company. What's at stake is a $2.7 bil revenue stream that's stable. In this current financial strain that is a tremendous position to be in. It's the $2.7 bil against debt and expenses. Good management can renegotiate both debt and costs."
Shilling for? Sorry, not me. Keep management? If someone else can do the job better, then bring them in. What I stated is that is is foolish for someone to consider removing people at this juncture without a plan in place. Even here, you say, "There are media exec.s more qualified". WHO ARE THEY? What would it take to bring them on? Will they come to Sirius XM? There are many moving parts to consider.
Good management can renegotiate debt and costs. True, but we are in a time when banks are more worried about their own survival than that of a satellite radio company. Good management gets the best deal they can. The Revenue stream is great, but it does not guarantee a great financing deal. Any lender worth their salt looks at Revenue AND expenses. When you signed your mortgage, did the bank just want to know what you make, or did they also want to know your expenses?
You do know that come Jan 16 (or officially the 19th) starts a 30 day clock, then if non compliance, starts a 180 day clock for recompliance? That's July Tyler (also barring further extensions) Do you think it's unreasonable to think that if SIRI is performing properly and thriving on metrics, that at least by July of next year, they couldn't organically raise their SP atleast to over a buck? Personally, I think it is very unreasonable to think that--given healthy metrics and an improving economy.
This company must have a plan (that they communicate with their shareholders) for dealing with their debt issues that is other than using more shares to satisfy those obligations. Or if that's the plan currently on their table, they need to communicate that too to help shareholders make critical decisions. If that was the company's intentions from the beginning of the buyout (to use shares to deal away inherited debt), I would call that not genuine nor transparent. We will have to wait and see for sure how it all plays out. I am not prejudging management but want to see what their actions are from here. Then I will judge on actions. Right now it's all conjecture (though the company, through silence, rarely helps swirling conjecture stay positive).
Also remember. Still few talk about the hedge short. If you have insight into such investment/creditor deals, I sincerely would love to read an article from you on how such things resolve in the end (after the stock is pile-driven into the ground as it has been here). Any input on that would be helpful to all. I do not know or sure, which is why I'm asking if you do...it is an issue and componet of this whole matter that few focus on nor talk about (other than what's buried, but clearly stated, in the various prospecti released by the company).
benefit. His compensation for 2007, including options was $32 million.
He manages it so well now he has it in a position to take it private.
He owns 25 million shares. At a reverse split of 50 to 1 he would have
500,000 shares. Why would he take that loss. Many of the shares came from compensation bonsus with no out of pocket expense. He would do it because he knows the plan he has set up down the road. With a RS
split he can now issue more shares to pay down the debt. Without the debt and still a low share price private equity can make their move. This is a classic pattern of predatory takeover. The new shareholders will
pay off the debt for them. I don't diasgree with you that he is a good manager. It's just not for the shareholders benefit. I think some people are having a hard time realizing that these people are white collar criminals. There are so many examples of how they have manipulated the stock into a position for themselves. If you want to be really informed read the RICO charges in the documents filed by Savesirius and M. H.
There is a pot of gold with Sirius. The revenue stream of $2.7 bil is crooks dream. Get rid of the debt by new shareholders money and their home free. Your right the 10 q's show how well Mel did, but not for shareholders. Your idea he should stay because he will benefit the shareholders in future is a delusion. They will dump the shareholders after the debt is paid off. Unless of course you trust him, or are part of the racket or are just unwilling to look at the facts in the RICO case. Your right, he's so good he's got us right to the position we're in now so he can blow us out of the water. Of, course unless we stop them. Vote
NO! NO! NO! NO! By the way, SIRIUS subs grew because the auto
makers saw a good thing. It would have happened with any management.
Thank you for you comments, but you know that your use of the word Faith here was controversial to many. Provocative, one might say. Sarcastic, others might proclaim. As a writer of articles, that is fine for debate and discussion purposes. Almost all, use the word faith in a religious context, or with words and phrases like Blind, Leap of, In Good, Having, and so on. In the discussion of a business' relationship to shareholders, business partners, and consumers the use of faith is foolery. It belongs with phrases like trust me, the check is in the mail, would I lie to you, and the like.
Tyler also, and correct me if I am wrong, but the delisting notice from the NASDAQ comes with an automatic 180 day compliance period, in which the companies notified have to bring the stock price up above $1 for 10 consecutive days. Before this 180 day period expires, the company failing to comply with the $1 rule, need to submit a plan to bring the stock price up over a $1 when asking for an additional 180 days. The RS would have to be part of that plan for extension request and is not needed now. In addition, there is no evidence that the market conditions that existed in October, when NASDAQ suspended the rule for member companies, has improved. In fact, conditions have deteriorated and their is no reason to think that they would not extend the rule suspension before Jan. 16, 2009. If extended this discussion is moot and their is no immediate need for the RS as described by management.
On Nov 24 12:52 PM sl62 wrote:
> I was thinking this weekend more about SIRI's current condition and
> the answers only come up one way. Equivalent to the scrutiny the
> U.S. auto makers are going through now (partially brought on by their
> own lack of vision they keep showing by things like flying to Washington
> in private jets and with no real numbers or plan to relay in congressional
> testimony), so must SIRI be subjected to the same scrutiny by shareholders.
>
>
> Though I was disappointed by the gov not just giving The Big Three
> a bridge-loan as they did for AIG and others without receiving much
> detail, in the end, it had to be that way. These three CEOs clearly
> showed themsleves by not going into those hearings more prepared.
> Anyone would have believed they would have been hard at work weeks
> prior, gathering "see?" information and numbers. Had they done that,
> they would have the money right now. Instead they spoke in stuttering
> generalities with no specifics and now will have to come back and
> do it again weeks later. To be honest, they are lucky they even are
> getting another chance. And frankly, for what they just did, they
> should all be replaced no questions asked. You would think they could
> at least just fly a regular airline (even first class) to the hearing--a
> difference between 3K and 20K for the private jet. And we're supposed
> to believe these companies are on top of cost reductions? Clearly,
> these guys are not thinking right--which is a problem. Congress was
> right not to approve any money until these guys get their sh%t together.
> I think they will now, and therefore receive the money, but this
> leads to my main point about SIRI.
>
> Shareholders are SIRI's Congress. We want facts from the company
> beyond Q metrics. SIRI wants us to approve 3.5B of additional shares
> for them to use as they see fit. I urge all shareholders to go back
> and read from several prospecti of 7/30 or the one from late October.
> In those, SIRI, gives themselves the rights of a despot. They basically
> say they have the right to do ANYTHING THEY DEEM RIGHT FOR THE COMPANY--no
> matter how it may affect the investment of any common shareholder
> (and essentially that the investor of the common should think twice
> about investing due to the risk of heavy losses). The operative words
> there are DEEM RIGHT. They give themsleves these rights basically
> without accountability. They say, we make the decisions, and you
> live with them. Ahhh, but now we have a rub. Now they are asking
> us for our permission to "make decisions and have us live with them."
> The decision is ours whether or not to grant them more power and
> more opportunity for us to assume more risk. Something is a little
> askew there isn't it? Essentially they're asking us to cut our own
> throats--and understand that we're doing it to ourselvesm risking
> our own health in the process. Mel would have done very well in his
> recent Q CC to show a vision, to show that he is seeing the ENTIRE
> picture of which he is a part, by acknowledging the current NAS delisitng
> extensions and provide more clarity regarding his intentions for
> the additional shares he seeks. Instead, he just said he "EXPECTS"
> shareholders to approve both...and goodbye. These are not the words
> of transparency. The same kind of transparency the Congress would
> demand and is demanding from The Big Three. One has to assume that
> the only real reason for requesting additional shares is to be able
> to raise more capital. Duh...no company seeks more shares except
> to use them dilutively to raise capital. The trouble for SIRI is,
> nowhere in their Q report or in any other communications, will they
> state that they need to do this. There is no "plan" from the company
> on definitively managing their current debt. They are the opposite
> of transparent..which is opaque. And worse, we the shareholders are
> given little more than intentional distraction and double entendre.
> A point I raised directly after the Q CC, was if Mel was refering
> to his expected additional shares, when he suggested "talking to
> lenders" and "in short order." By the behavior of the SP and no further
> communication frm the company regarding any possible refi deals (not
> even a rumor), one can only assume the Street believes exactly that.
>
>
> It seems (and maybe not surprisingly) that The Big Three and SIRI
> have similar styles of doing business. It's the old way of management
> entitlement and an extreme facist if not communist way of implementing
> their business plan. Trickle down, trust us we know what we're doing,
> etc... From my POV, without clarity of intention, just asking for
> blanket approval for "maybe" or "someday" or "when we might need
> to in the future" is irresponsible if not disrespectful. In fact,
> it's hard now in hindsight to even reconcile Mel not even mentioning
> the absurdly low stock price and how sorry the company might be that
> it was sitting @ .26 at the time. And that he and the company are
> working around the clock to make sure that price turns around and
> moves higher. There were no statements to that effect. No concern
> whatsoever for the plight of the "common" (emphasis on the nature
> of the word common) shareholder. Your stock has just been reudced
> to rubble, dust, from $3-4. One would expect at least a mention to
> commiserate with those actually funding the company (us...and literally
> in this case due to the nature of much of the financing deals currently
> in place) and affected the most by that decline. Yet, nothing. Just,
> we EXPECT approval at the meeting and goodbye.
>
> Essentially, like many seeking solace in the TARP, SIRI is seeking
> a blank check and blank check powers without having to justify anything
> with a plan or goals or communication of any kind. Just like Congress
> said no to The BIg Three without details, shareholders should say
> the same to SIRI. I voted no to a blank check and I voted no to blank
> check powers. It's no longer acceptable for Mel to do "ugly" deals
> and then go on Cramer and say it was ugly. Going forward, ugly needs
> definition, it needs details and it needs discreet approval from
> those it will affect the most--shareholders. Because it appears that's
> what shareholders are staring down yet again... Ugly, 11th hour,
> backroom, good old boy network handshake deals that rape the common
> shareholder and allow management to continue living in penthouses,
> cut themselves extensive bonus checks, and let them continue to implement
> THEIR vision, THEIR way, in THEIR timeframe, no questions asked.
> The question of the day is, when exactly do shareholders actually
> receive any value or get rewarded in this company structure? It appears
> to me, history has proven the only shareholders that get rewarded
> in this system are those who believe the company will fail or who
> are allowed to hedge an investment made in the company. For them,
> it's nothing but through-the-roof, never ending profits. For the
> positive contingent, it's heavy losses and fortunes lost.
>
> I hope additional shares and reverse split authorization are soundly
> rejected. It will at least force the company to come clean about
> what's next. If that's BK, then so be it. @ .14 - .16 going into
> BK means little to nothing to shareholders at this stage. The common
> is effectively already wiped out, so shareholders would lose nothing
> more than already lost. In a filing, the SP would open @ .05. The
> only hope any shareholder has now (outside of BK) is that certain
> "mechanical and contrived" aspects of this SP decline are lifted
> or reversed, allowing the SP to normalize somewhat. If that does
> not happen in any significant way, this company is already as good
> as in bankruptcy with the stock where it is now. Even Worldcom's
> stock went from .05 to .35 during bankruptcy protection--and which
> is about the norm. So anyone in around .30 or under, are next to
> guaranteed their money back regardless of what happens. Case in point:
> Circuit City opened at .0605 the morning they filed on 11/10 and
> they hit a high of .30 on 11/14. Today they are quoting .225 currently--even
> higher than SIRI!! Right now, I believe the ONLY thing keeping SIRI
> from filing is the immediate delisting. The minute you file for BK,
> you are YANKED that day from the exchange and are head right to Pink
> Sheets (as Circuit City was from the NYSE).
>
> It could very well be that Mel and Co, might be using this plea for
> extra shares as his last gasp. If so, he will roll the current bondholder
> agreements over, split for the higher price so the common can be
> re-shorted. If that is the case, I say shareholders should stop the
> madness, say no and let this company file and get it over with. It's
> all a sad situation as shareholders have lost so much. But at least
> current shareholders would be looking out for future holders, who
> would also be ruined in time. This company should be allowed to take
> their medicine now and hopefully come out the other side a more viable
> entity.
>
> Further, in the case of BK, more shareholders would actuaklly stand
> to regain their investments--albeit with additional capital. As said,
> in the instance of a filing and a stock opening @ .04 - .05, I will
> be piling in with new mega shares knowing it will be bid up to about
> .30 due to many others doing the same and shorts covering. This way,
> in a few days, one could nearly make their entire loss back. So...
> another reason to force management's hand at this point. There's
> actually potentially more upside for shareholders in BK than out.
> At least in that case, the stock is all but guaranteed to go higher
> quickly due to the new set of focused parameters. Otherwise, what
> you have now is day after day languishing. That's a sad statement
> but IMHO seeming more and more accurate. I still think a major squeeze
> is on the table prior to the meeting...but that's only if the company
> is playing fair and actually has a plan for debt resolution other
> than using new share dilution. I will continue to hold my current
> re-entry shares in the .20s right through the meeting. Either way
> I know that investment is safe and if I need to enter again post
> BK, I will gain that new pop, then remove everything @ about .30.
> Then it's goodbye SIRI!
By the way, I am confident that with no further rule changes or extensions from NASDAQ, that if the price of Sirus Xm's stock is not over a $1 by Sept. 2009, when their plan for a 180 day extension will have to be submitted, that I will no longer be in this stock or care about the company's outcome and neither will most here because it will have already have been decided.
times each case is an individual decision on each companies plans. Your statement SIRIUS will be out on two fronts is wrong because you interjected
the plan would be unacceptable to Nasdaq. How do you know the plan will be unacceptable. Have no faith, do you. Exactly my point about how Nasdaq will interpret this case, which more than likely means there will be no delisting under current economic conditions and current Nasdaq rules.
But why do you interject that delisting is still possible on 2 failed fronts. Doesn't that mean Tyler's position is shareholders should be concerned
about delisting and so RS will alleviate delisting. That's the same position
as Mel. So it seems possible to draw a conclusion based on inference
your on their side. Maybe a shill. Tyler doesn't write objectively about
the facts of the numbers and possible outcomes of different scenarios.
So it seems his position is biased. A shill. Draw your own conclusion.
As far as new managers. There are people like Tom Freston. He was
one of the people who started MTV and ran that successfully. He then took over Paramount Studio. He's very talented and qualified. And
to make the point about how Media exec's go thru revovling doors, when
Viacom dropped in 2006 from about $45 to $38, because of Paramount,
Tom Freston was out. But still he was wrongly outed. So if based on shareprices, the drop in Sirius is much greater than the drop in Viacom
when they ousted Freston, why should Mel still be around. If he were at
Viacom under the same circumstances he would be gone. Sirius is a media company which distributes radio talent thru it's hardware. That's of course different than media distributed thru cinema theatres or media
thru cable and television. Why think in the media world, with all the changes in exec's with film,tv, cable, music biz, and concerts, that Mel is the only one capable of running a media corp. distributing talent. If you read the trades, Variety and Hollywood reporter, you know there are
always changes at the top of media company's. New and fresh management always brings new energy and new ideas. If there were some pattern that showed a plan to serve shareholders, ok, but, historically it's all set up for a predatory takeover by private equity.
Otherwise, what's another secenario. As far as transitions, from one CEO
to a new team, new CEO, happens all the time. The transitions are
always possible.
Needless to say , that card is history , and will NEVER see me again
This is not a good time to run up credit cards ....I believe we are going to see a lot of rate hikes on very shady reasoning .................Just wanted to pass that on to everyone ...........
I heard Charlie Gasparino this morning reporting again that the SEC is seriously looking at doing something with FAS157 (mark to market accounting). Either a temporary suspension or some other kind of rule change. Mark to market is a good concept but not with so many bad assets that could one day be better again when the housing market comes back. The panel discussing Charlie's comments all agreed that if that happens the market will rebound significantly...I'm really surprised they didn't do this from the beginning. My only thought why they didn't was the cleansing of middle class assets that they have now accomplished. If they wind up changing that rule in the near future, and the market does rebound let's say in December, I will have to only believe that is why. Because they have to have known from day 1 in September, it was mark to market that has killed the cat here....let's see...
dismissal of the charges with out a trial indicates you must know how
to decide case with out due process. Let the legal system take it's course.
I haven't heard that the case was rejected without merit.
As far as saying i'm misleading on the facts of worthless options, i'm just
quoting directly from the annual report and proxy statement. On page 21,
Summary of Compensation Table.
Name and Principal position, Mel Karmazin.....Total ($) 32.219,055
So i guess if i'm stating it wrong from the SIRIUS report, then the report
must be wrong. Gee, another fasle statement, because you know more than the published report.
I agree 100% that M. Hartlieb damaged his credibility through inaccuracies. That piece I saw of him on Fox was laughable (sorry to say). Do you believe he really caused a 6 mo. delay of the buyout? That would suck if true...
I am well aware of the January date. as I stated, I have written about it.
siriusbuzz.com/delisti...
That article developed a slew of e-mails challenging that I was making up the new changes. To which I responded with this:
siriusbuzz.com/delisti...
That being said, There are indeed appeals and "grace periods" , and some are simply granted as a matter of course. However, there are very specific rules and guidelines that need to be in place to have a grace period. A company must submit a plan of action that demonstrates efforts they will make to get into compliance. Part of that plan must include a reverse split. This is not saying that a company must have a reverse split, but rather that they need to have it as a consideration.
While it is true that the company can make a decision on a reverse split at a later date, it would still require shareholder approval. This would mean additional filings, a special meeting, and a lot of expenses, whereas the annual meeting is already a required meeteting that is going to be held.
If the decision is to wait until later, how does that impact the ability of the company to take care of their financing needs? Lenders will want to know where things stand NOW. Not in June of 2009. How eager will lenders be to loan money to a company on the pink sheets? These are considerations that need to be thought about.
As for the word faith. While people may attach it to religion, the meaning is broader. The point I was making was that everything that we have always counted on in making an investment decision is quickly evapoating. It is boiling dxown to your faith (or belief) in the system and the market. If you do not believe in it, you may want to exit the market. If you are unsure, you will want to watch things as closely as you can.
In the end, how much difference does it make whether the RS is authorized in December or in June, or in September? People criticise management for "not having the merger financing arranged ahead of time", and "not having everything lined up for a smooth transition", yet now, they want to tie their hands and make them once again wait until the last possible instance to make such a decision.
Management may not do what we want if they have approval now, but we also might be setting them up to fail by restricting latitude.
It is a difficult position for a shareholder to be in, and in the end, it boils down to your faith in management.
This means, of course, that had Michael not delayed the merger through actions that were found to be without merit, the merger would have been approved before the economy went into recession. This means that the company would have had 2 extra quarters of combined revenues and decreased costs to contend with the debt issues now upon them. My opinion of the self titled group “Save Sirius” is on par with the actions of C3SR - another self righteous, hypocritical group seeking nothing more than the demise of Satellite Radio. In other words, Michael, you need to remove the plank from your own eye, so you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brothers!"
Thanks for the response. But you did not address my point (or cos1000's) that given SIRI's own positive outlook of growth-oriented metrics, why would SIRI possibly have an issue getting over a buck by July of 2009? They absolutely should not....unless you're not communicating the whole picture. Which shareholders deserve IMHO.
I have to ask, why wouldn't Mel just believe (given his own metric prognostications), that SIRI can fight through this and get back to $3-4 organicallay by reporting great numbers? What kind of contingency is it to have anothe 3.5B shares laying around to further dilute shareholders (that they themselves approved?). Ahhh...unless, you're not telling shareholders that something like a hedge short will keep the stock depressed. See, that's the truth I want to hear FROM THE COMPANY...if it indeed is the truth. Let's have it, I say.
I welcome your opinion on this...
If they use the rule change to bail out the unregulated CDS market that became the insurance to Mortgage Backed Securities then we are in trouble. Suspending or limiting the amount of devaluation that M to M requires for actual mortgages that have an asset attached will be a good thing. I personally feel they should limit the amount of devaluation that can occur in any given quarter on these assets. Slowing down the deleveraging will allow the system to revalue on its own eventually without shocking the system. The CDS is an off book, unregulated transaction market, that allowed people to buy the risk of a mortgage backed security to default, without knowing anything about the underlying assets. It was all virtual money linked to virtual assets so they need to get virtually f**k'd IMHO. Just slowing down the M to M in the MBS arena will actually slow down the CDS losses as a secondary outcome. Tax payers should not pay for the financial engineering that took place on these derivative transactions.
I do remember that now. We might wonder though is Brandon's accounting reliable...if true though, it blows MH's whole premise out of the water. Funny he never mentioned it along with his list of demands lol. Further, again, if really true, it has screwed up a lot of people in the process...
Totally agree...nothing related to CDS's. That still needs it's own exchange set up so all can see what is going on and with whom. As you say, it's just the devaluation that needs to be addressed...since it's causing banks not to interact with one another due to potentially huge devalued asset exposure (which then also exposes it to the attached CDS's).
I like the backing of toxic assets this morning for Citi. My guess is Citi is probably one of the heaviest into RMBS...which must have been at the heart of the decline. My mortgage is with guess who...Citi!
Interesting that at the time of the merger waiting period ,C3SR was clearly supported by NAB and their legal team. I wonder why M. H. never was enjoined in his lawsuit by NAB if, in fact, he was that effective at holding off the FCC decision. I read Brandon's article on this, but it didn't seem right to me. It might have been a little puffing of Micheal's chest in discussions with Brandon regarding his own relevance. Otherwise The NAB would have pushed this issue along to further delay the proceedings, not just with the FCC but earlier with the DOJ, don't you think??
July 2009 is 7 months away. Between now and then we have the Feb debt issue, and the may debt issue. After July we have the Dec debt issue. We will also have the annual report, and the Q2 report.
If we assume that the feb debt gets resolved, there is still $700 million in debt that needs resolution. If debt is such an overhang, how much impact will getting 1/3 of it have on the equity.
This stock will need to appreciate by 600% in 7 months.
It is ironic. People want Mel to talk and express confidence, but every time he says something, he has a potential law suit on his hands. I can't say I blame him for saying nothing.
There are positives as well as negatives. It is my opinion that this stock has a ceiling well below $1.00 until they get the feb debt done. Then, it will be a challenge dealing with the new debt.
How long will the credit crisis last? Hopw long will we see poor auto sales? These are aspects of the business that would require speculation.
Mel used 12,000,000 in auto sales as a worst case scenario, and it got tossed around as if it were fact. You see, no matter what he says or does, someone is going to use it against him.
From a metrics standpoint, and if Mel hits his guidance, things will be fine (in theory). However, the price of this equity has far more than the metrics to consider.
I mean even in M. H. Fox interview he said that Mel said.... Mel would love to take the company private at these levels in his interview with a WSJ reporter... Anyone who saw the entire interview that Mel had knows that is false. He said he would have to bring the stock price up and eliminate the debt before taking the company private could even be entertained. This is why I believe most feel he wants the dilution, RS, then eliminate debt, and take the company private. Without any definitive information from the company, or shareholders against these actions, we are left in the dark with nothing but, ....... OK Tyler, Faith in the system that it will all get worked out in due time.
These are all valid points you raise. But I'm still trying to cut to the heart of the matter. The company released the info regarding the "ugly" financing in their shelf and subsequent prospectus supplements. Many of us found out (too far after the fact unfortunately) that the "ugly" part of the financing refers to the de facto short that the bondholders would be imposing on the common. That MS/UBS were "given" millions of newly printed shares with the sole purpose of shorting the common, to act as a hedge against their investment in SIRI. Jim Cramer said it on Mad Money and Mel K. agreed with him but said he would "make the shorts pay" (which is yet to happen apparently).
My issue is how this information fits into the current scenario. The company states it's real in their supplement filings--when it is reconciled? It can't be real and phantom at the same time. My issue is also the company's SP is .15 and they are asking for 3.5B more shares. How does one reconcile all of this so it makes sense?
You say, don't tie management's hands but IMHO, somehow the above information needs to be recconciled from the company to shareholders before we can just move on to the next dilution and reverse. To me, that's not being accountable. It's just asking for highly volitile and impacting "blank check" instruments (In shares and reverse) and saying "we've wiped you out already but you just have to trust us." And it would be OK not to communicate with shareholders on one hand, but Tyler, I know you've read all the risk information regarding shareholders in various prospecti. In those materials, they do all but say if you decide to invest in our company, you most likely will lose all your money. IMO, you can't do both. Where, at what point, do shareholders get some sort of recognition, risk tolerance/management, or safety net? I realize it's early in the game for the combined companes...BUT...IMHO.... the company is meaning to continue to use shareholders, diluting shareholders as a means to the company's future success, don't you think at some point we should be told so in truth and candor? I mean, their common is worthless. What, at this point do they have to lose by being upfront with shareholders who have already lost everything?
Exactly.....Unless the common isnt worthless....
You see... You can go both ways with that arguement...
They know something good or bad, they know something we dont...
They dont seem to care about the common stock price, so im going to assume they dont care what it is at when they split, as long as they are allowed to split...
So they think the price is going up, or they have news that insures they will sell these shares at reasonable prices...
They sold for .29 cents, i assume with this latest drop they can pawn them off for .25 cents...
But if by the time they issue and sell the sp is at .50 cents, then they can sell them for .65 cents ....etc...
Either way the stock isnt going to 0, and its not staying at .14 cents forever... This is now quite obvious...
I dont think you can sell .10 cent shares on the open market..... Maybe in a start up mining company, but come on, isnt that a little ridiculous? So if the stock price is at .50 cents they can sell them for .30 cents or whatever, i reversed it above, i meant a premium lower than the current price...
and at .14 cents, what are you going to offer them.....05 cents?
Im sorry but in rules of the market, this price already has priced in emminent bankrupcy or complete whipeout of common stock... And they want us to futher dilute and issue shares...
Sl62 and cos1000 are right, something is up here, something isnt right here, and there is vital information we need to make this decision which we dont have....
So i voted no on all issues and voted the board out as well....This was told to me by the board and CEO to do, as it is a must, because given all available and facts that i can gather, the CEO and board appear insane(assuming we know all we need to know).
So since the board and CEO are obviously insane, we must not allow them to run the company anymore. Only insane people ask a common stockholder to kill themselves....
I dont think you can sell .10 cent shares on the open market..... Maybe in a start up mining company, but come on, isnt that a little ridiculous? So if the stock price is at .50 cents they can sell them for .30 cents or whatever, i reversed it above, i meant a premium lower than the current price...
and at .14 cents, what are you going to offer them.....05 cents?
Im sorry but in rules of the market, this price already has priced in emminent bankrupcy or complete whipeout of common stock... And they want us to futher dilute and issue shares...
Sl62 and cos1000 are right, something is up here, something isnt right here, and there is vital information we need to make this decision which we dont have....
So i voted no on all issues and voted the board out as well....This was told to me by the board and CEO to do, as it is a must, because given all available and facts that i can gather, the CEO and board appear insane(assuming we know all we need to know).
So since the board and CEO are obviously insane, we must not allow them to run the company anymore. Only insane people ask a common stockholder to kill themselves....
So they are obviously insane, if your going bankrupt , then go bankrupt already, and be done with it. Because your not getting my vote, or anyone elses who has a half of a brain...
Yes, im saying tyler and brandon have at the most no more than 1/2 of a brain. They are obviously trying to have dumb people vote yes so they can get there company completely from us.
So they are obviously insane, if your going bankrupt , then go bankrupt already, and be done with it. Because your not getting my vote, or anyone elses who has a half of a brain...
Yes, im saying tyler and brandon have at the most no more than 1/2 of a brain. They are obviously trying to have dumb people vote yes so they can get there company completely from us.
I agree, that is the other side. Which has predominantly been my feeling that as you say, they don't care about what price the common is because they know it's going back up (at some point). Our big mystery is when. Before meeting or after. I still believe in the squeeze, just when. And you're right too about the lack of communication. That other side, says Mel says nothing because he knows this is a game and there is a resolution, though he's not allowed to say so.
What a mess. As said, I can't see the SP being .14 at meeting time. I say .45. Then he at least has bargaining chips to say see? the price is coming back up. He will have a tough time explaining to any large instutions still on board .14. My take is he won't have to because it won't be there. In all honesty, I look forward to when all this bs/uncertainty has resolved one way or another...soon.
Well, another 900pt rally. Let's see how much they sell into this one. Maybe now with some order in the court finally, the next declines won't be as steep...and eventually next month we can move a little higher with some stabilty.
All sirius needs to do is gain a penny a day until the meeting.
Seriously a penny gain a day is all it needs for more leverage. The only problem is that sirius/xm is the most shorted stock of all time.
Right. As Imentioned earlier, announcing bankruptcy, the stock would open at .05... a measly .09 from where it is now. So the market as of right now is nearly pricing in a bankruptcy. So I say, if that's the case, let's do it. We'll just go to Pink Sheets buy 200K shares @ .05 and dump when it gets to .30 in a few days and net 50K. That's the way you do it..money for nothing and your chicks for free lol! Circuit City closed @ .215 today. A bankrupt company has a higher SP than SIRI! Sorry but that's a fact all.
BUT...we know better. Mel will never allow instantaneous delisting to Pink Sheets. So the stock stays here to up from here on out. Anything lower prices in a bankruptcy...but there is no bankruptcy. Confused? Now we will see where the hedge takes us. Where al this silence takes us. Where grounding this SP to dust takes us. If the hedge means anything...a cover can't be far behind...
Gee, we must have hit a nerve. I guess the total compensation listed in the
annual is not posted on their IRS income filings. It's just a number to
make Mel look good but doesn't really mean income. They want to sue
people on bogus claims to punish and get vengeance. Use the legal
system to extract retribution not proper justice. Of course we could do the same to them. But maybe we have integrity. When someone says I
could sue someone for no apparent good legal reason but just to punish
them and extract money because they don't like the position they take on a blog kind of shows what type of people they are. What self respecting attorney usues the legal system that way. It's good it was put
in print and published on the web. It sort of gives us proof that illegal
methods are considered to influence bloggers by intimidation and
heavy handed use of the legal system for nefarious reasons. Publishing
threats of false lawsuits is good evidence to the bar that a legal license
to practise law is being abused for ulterior motives. Gee I wonder what
bar association should be notified. All of a sudden there is a monoply on this blog today of a couple of people trying to over-ride evryone with the
pro-management position. I think the layers of the oinion are slowly peeling away. If the RICO suit has no merit then Mel and others have
nothing to worry about. If there is no merit to the suit it will be thrown out.
So why fret. Maybe little beads of sweat are forming on the brow. Maybe
they want to silence us with threats of false lawsuits. Nice people, huh.
Kind of like people who wouldn't hesitate to sell others down the tube.
People you are getting to see the evil side now. The monsters are begining to show their heads. I hope they make some more published remarks to use the legal system improperly so we can add them to the
files. Kind of like Mel saying in the call we need the RS or SIRIUS will get delisted. Nice to have that on record. Nice to have threats of false lawsuits on record as well. Give us some more. Who knows, maybe were very wealthy attorney ourselves with deep pockets and good connections. It's just that maybe we prefer justice and fair dealing and will stand up for what's right instead using the justice system to try and
abuse people to intimidate them. Hey, SIRIUS lawyers, let things take
the proper legal steps. What have you got to lose if your in the right.
Unless your afraid of the results and need to print consideration to
file false lawsuits to intimidate bloggers they have pay if they don't
show up. What if we do show up and show how you planned a false
lawsuit. Maybe being disbarred is what you want trying to protect
some criminals. Bring it on. Showdown at the OK corral. Toe to toe.
Gee, I guess a Harvard law degree might actually come in handy for me some day.
My sentiments exactly. Mel did the 'ugly" deal without shareholder knowledge. I wonder if shareholders would have voted yes to that financing. If anyone wnats to pipe in there feel free. But more importantly, now shareholders get to actually vote on where or not they want their throats slashed and to continue bleedng to death.
Some here have said, give them shares and reverse, let them take out all debt and then we're all debt free and making money hand over fist. Sounds fun. But the dilution cost to shareholders is not worth the move. Because guess what...they can do the same thing in BK and with a 10K quick investment after BK is announced, shareholders can make 50K, get out and then after they emerge, you can buy the new shares and make even more money as everyone else buys into a new company with no debt...
Now.....I feel like a fool.....thanks for bringing me back to reality! : )
On Nov 24 09:51 AM shure46 wrote:
> agatha - 2,000 shares @ 5.00 is $10,000 , NOT , $100,000
With shares closing at an all-time low of $0.14 last week and Sirius XM slashing subscriber targets in recent weeks, an iPhone tie-in would be just the ticket in generating buzz for Sirius XM's scarred investors as well as a great customer retention tool.
I'm not building the hype to tease you. At least one company is working on an iTunes App that will let iPhone owners -- and Wi-Fi-tethered iPod touch jockeys -- stream their active satellite radio subscriptions through their portable devices. Surprisingly, that company isn't Sirius XM.
Don't be a Playr hater
StarPlayr is no stranger to riding Sirius XM's coattails. The company already offers a more advanced streaming alternative for PC and Mac users over the in-house Sirius XM solution.
There is no firm release date for StarPlayr's iPhone application, but the developer's product list has appetizing screenshots with cool features including album artwork, song lyrics, and the monetization gems of ad serving and the ability to purchase the current track through iTunes.
Why is a third party developer beating Sirius XM to the punch? It's a fair question. Maybe the radio giant doesn't want to devote too many of its resources toward developing platforms beyond its receivers. XM and Sirius have been providing Web streaming of its networks for a few years now. Access is included at no additional cost to existing subscribers, though the company also sells stand-alone streaming plans. Sirius XM has never bragged about its Web-only subscriber counts during its conference calls, so it's safe to assume that it's a limited audience. There is too much competition in cyberspace, with the pervasiveness of free Internet radio making it difficult to justify aggressively marketing a premium Web product.
It's a near-sighted approach. Sirius XM should take a page out of the Netflix (Nasdaq: NFLX) playbook. Seriously....
On Nov 24 10:23 AM mogami_99 wrote:
> Hi Agatha buying 2000 more shares @.16 will lower your avg stock
> price to 1.92 and raise your investment in Sirius to 5094.50 (assuming
> a $10 commison on new stocks.) The Current forcast (guess) I am using
> for sirius has .925 per share in 1 year. To reach that you would
> need another 5350 shares (or about another 856 dollar investment)
> Avg share would then be .93
> The stock should recover that much (or go bust depending on who you
> listen to) Of course a price of .93 would only mean you had recovered
> from the orginal drop from 7.33.