A Rare Opportunity to Gain Inside Perspective on Liberty's Sirius Investment 48 comments
an article to
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
Ever since Liberty Media (LCAPA) took a stake in satellite radio, people have wondered and contemplated what may be in store. While Malone’s Liberty Media has preferred shares that amount to a 40% stake in the company, and up to six board seats (Liberty appointees will likely fill three seats soon), there has been no real specific outline of what his plans are with Sirius XM (SIRI) other than some general statements about potential that they see going forward.
Malone is in the middle of a three part interview with the Denver Business Journal, and in Wednesday's segment, he will discuss the future of telecommunications, Liberty Media’s financial rescue of Sirius XM Satellite Radio, as well as Liberty Media’s strategy going forward.
One shift that has happened in satellite radio is how it is treated by analysts and the street. For years SDARS was viewed as a technology company with potential. Now, more than ever, it is being treated as a media company. With the Liberty Media investment into Sirius XM, the perception should begin to make the full shift away from tech and towards media. This shift will have a learning curve, and given the state of most media companies, will present an uphill climb. Media companies simply are not Wall Street darlings these days. This does however present an opportunity for Sirius XM, as well as Liberty Media, to shine.
Malone did not invest into this segment of the media to simply sit back and relax. He goes into such deals with a plan and a focus. His vision does not always come to fruition, but more often than not, Liberty has found a way to reap rewards of their strategic moves. Wednesday’s Denver Business Journal piece will not provide all of the answers investors are seeking, but it will likely give people a general idea. Combine this interview with the conference call on May 7th and the annual meeting, and it won't be long before analysts, investors, and the street will finally see the beginnings of what a merged and stable satellite radio company has in store.
I would encourage readers to take a bit of time to catch the interview in the Denver Business Journal, and in particular catch Wednesday's edition which will focus on Liberty’s Sirius XM investment. It is not often that you get the opportunity to gain perspective like this just prior to a conference call and annual meeting.
Position - Long Sirius XM, No Position Liberty Media
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largest
increase in followers
in the last 7 days-
1
TraderMark
-
2
David Fry
-
3
Peter Schiff
-
4
Paco Ahlgren
-
5
John Mauldin
Fastest Climbers » -
1
-
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
Top
StockTalkers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
Cliff Wachtel
-
3
Mike Havrilla
-
4
David White
-
5
Hedged In
Top StockTalkers » -
1
If a writer says in 2004,
"Sirius will not make it. It will either go under or be sold on the auction block."
Then reprints that in June of 2008 followed 2 days later by the statement,
"It is not my intention to get anyone to buy or sell SIRI or XMSR. It is only my intention to help investors understand the full risks to satellite radio."
Followed yesterday by "Since the dotcom bubble collapsed, reality has set in. SIRI has done nothing but fall - and with good reason."
How can you take him too seriously?
If his statement of 5 years ago were true we would not be here today. If he statement on July 1, 2008 were true why would he be writing about it again yesterday? If what he wrote yesterday were true we would be under $.05 instead of 8 to 12 times that in the last 2 weeks.
I do not deny he makes some valid points but by and large he is just another guy being paid to bash the company so his employer can profit from the result.
That is why I have said nothing until your question.
On Apr 29 10:33 AM Jagman wrote:
> If Sirius were an "unwanted" holding, then why are car manufacturers
> still (especially Ford, who will come back) implanting them in new
> automobiles? Why not just put an internet based radio in these cars
> instead, since there will supposedly will be no intrinsic value to
> Siri shares going forward?
DUH! Sirius IS unwanted. Explain "10-20 MILLION radios sitting idle"
Both SIRI and XM bribed car companies to install their radios.
SIRI pumped "synergies" because now we dont have to outbid each other" SIRI didnt save anything here. Ford STILL says if you want those stupid obsolete radios in our cars, PAY US.
PEOPLE DON'T WANT IT. LET THAT SINK IN
On Apr 29 10:33 AM Jagman wrote:
> If Sirius were an "unwanted" holding, then why are car manufacturers
> still (especially Ford, who will come back) implanting them in new
> automobiles? Why not just put an internet based radio in these cars
> instead, since there will supposedly will be no intrinsic value to
> Siri shares going forward?
DUH! Sirius IS unwanted. Explain "10-20 MILLION radios sitting idle"
Both SIRI and XM bribed car companies to install their radios.
SIRI pumped "synergies" because now we dont have to outbid each other" SIRI didnt save anything here. Ford STILL says if you want those stupid obsolete radios in our cars, PAY US.
PEOPLE DON'T WANT IT. LET THAT SINK IN
P.S.- so does using all caps...
Going back to other articles written by Stathis you cannot comment on any of them. Not just the article on SIRI. That should tell us all something about him.
Every receiver has an S.I.D number that is referenced and cataloged. So While the catalog shows a reference for an S.I.D does not at all mean that the receiver is close to operable. My brother is a prime example of a subscriber who has one account, but has gone through 3 receivers due to bad luck.
On Apr 29 02:11 PM BChargers wrote:
> DUH! Sirius IS unwanted. Explain "10-20 MILLION radios sitting idle"
www.satwaves.com/satwa...
On Apr 29 01:28 PM sl62 wrote:
> Seeking Alpha...
>
> I am curious about why no one can comment on Mike Stathis's crummy
> self-absorbed and aggrandizing assesment article about SiriusXM?
> How can he be allowed to throw out there to the public such a one-sided
> opinion of sour grapes and not have any counterparties? It seems
> like he is either being protected or SA is taking a swipe at the
> company by censoring any rebuttal. Wondering if SA has a response
> to my inquiry. Thank you.
seekingalpha.com/artic...
On Apr 29 06:37 PM relmar2003 wrote:
> What article? I cant see it?
On Apr 29 06:37 PM relmar2003 wrote:
> What article? I cant see it?
On Apr 29 06:46 AM JWticker wrote:
> Tyler, will this information begin to shave off all the negativity
> associated with sirius/xm in the future?
On Apr 29 06:46 AM JWticker wrote:
> Tyler, will this information begin to shave off all the negativity
> associated with sirius/xm in the future?
LET THIS SINK IN...IF THERE'S ANYTHING TO ABSORB.......
I WANTED SAT AND NOW I HAVE IT ALONG WITH 19million others that feel the same way and it's growing. I had to call your bluff because your statement doesn't have any value to anyone.
And if Siri XM was a complete failure Liberty would not have done it DUE DILIGENCE and invested into this company.
On Apr 29 09:57 AM BChargers wrote:
> Sirius Satellite Radio is a COMPLETE FAILURE
> SIRI was MINUTES FROM DECLARING BANKRUPTCY
> when Malone invested (for pennys on the dollar)
> His main reason was for control AFTER SIRI goes bankrupt.
> For you SIRI hopefuls / zombies, that would be more like
> harvesting organs from a cadaver than saving the person.
> LET IT SINK IN - PEOPLE DONT WANT IT.
www.satwaves.com/satwa...
Let that soak in!
thanks for the background on Stathis.
And I guess SA doesn't want to answer my question. Why on earth would his nutty rant be the only article (or now as you say any of his articles) that doesn't allow comments..and yet the article somehow gets to stand like it's some pristine gospel? A bit slanted if not censored. whatever.