Seeking Alpha
View as an RSS Feed

Stephen Faulkner  

View Stephen Faulkner's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Judge certifies potentially huge class action against Sirius XM [View news story]
    "10-15% of that attributable to pre-1972 recordings"

    The problem is that this is a definitive statement. It is not a maybe, or "I estimate" or "The Turtles estimate" or "XXXX estimates" or guesses or assumes etc. etc.

    Sirius XM has not indicated that 10-15% of their revenue comes from recordings before 1972.

    Anyone familiar with the service and anyone who has followed the company for some time will know that not only do they have only a few channels devoted to or that partially play pre 1972 recordings, but the company's most popular channel is not anything pre 1972 (it's 80's on 8 and then 90's on 9 for music), and given that there is a wealth of other content that the company pays for (Howard Stern, sports, comedy, news, talk, financial, etc etc etc) to say the company pulls 10% MINIMUM of its revenue from such a small selection of the content it provides leaves a LOT of questions.

    It doesn't matter what the documents say or what can be calculated from them. They are ALL assumptions.

    Sirius XM has not ever released that it generates a minimum of 10% of revenue from pre 1972 content.

    Because it is a guess, an estimation, an assumption, it is "made up" regardless of the calculations (which are made up of numbers that are also in part assumptions / guesses / estimations). This should be stated clearly.

    The problem with not stating it is someone reads this, then quotes it, and they're quoted, and more people read it, and eventually it becomes some "fact" that isn't really a fact at all. Perhaps it never gets to that point but it's important to indicate when something is an estimation or when it simply IS.
    May 28, 2015. 10:41 AM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Judge certifies potentially huge class action against Sirius XM [View news story]
    From nowhere. There is absolutely no way to come up with a percentage of revenue based on a date range of music played. I'm not sure why that number was made up by the editor and simply thrown out there. Even if it has a source there is no way for the source to have this information reliably unless SIRI has stated it themselves.

    And I doubt it has.
    May 27, 2015. 08:58 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Sirius XM: Explaining The 1 Cent 'Miss' In Q1 Earnings [View article]
    It's a nuisance.

    I firmly believe any and all living artists should be paid if their music is used by any company / service. Once they die I think it should be free use.

    But I don't think SIRI owes these guys $400 million for usage of their 1 hit wonder song from nearly 50 years ago.

    My opinion is they should have contested the law when it went into place if it was an issue. Not wait and try to score on differences between state and federal.

    Can't give them money now either as it'd open a can of worms. Perhaps if they had not sued for $400 million in damages (laughable) and instead sought compensation similar to what post 1972 artists get, I'd take them more seriously.

    Gives that judge and them and the lawyers something to do, though, and probably looks good for Volman ("Eddie" apparently... the one that insured his "frizzy hair" for $100K... ) who is apparently a professor at Loyola teaching music business courses.

    Anyways whatever happens, if anything, should affect all players. IMO common sense says federal law applies here but I'm not a lawyer.
    May 27, 2015. 06:28 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]
    Here you go.
    May 23, 2015. 01:24 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Howard Stern Will Leave Sirius, And It's Great News [View article]
    ^^^ this guy. LOL.
    May 23, 2015. 01:22 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]
    He could decide he wants to become a beekeeper too. Anything is possible :P
    May 22, 2015. 12:38 PM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]
    Correct, NEVER let taxes guide your decision to sell. It was applicable to the comment by the individual I was speaking with which included personal conversation not in the thread and you came rollin' on in like a goon.

    Sugar coat it? Let me tell you. I was there, when the bear, ate his head (he thought it was a candy). What would YOU say? was not one of the questions. And while every dog has it's day every day has it's way of being forgotten... (it's almost my birthday, hope mom doesn't forget!)...

    A+B conversation. I'm sorry you wanted to be a part of it but C U later! :*
    May 22, 2015. 09:38 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]
    I see how I misread the tax benefit issue but I guess I don't see the problem whether or not the benefit is immediate or a few years out.

    Time will tell based on the future SP at that time I guess whether or not it was beneficial to be buying back the shares in the $3's as thy have or if they had instead paid a dividend or sat on cash or taken some other sort of action which can be computed.
    May 22, 2015. 09:26 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]

    Link to the comment in question. It was in response to a comment by an individual who said it was IMPOSSIBLE to sell at the time because of tax reasons.

    Given that it was impossible at the time but possible today then the only valid assumption is it had not shifted from ST to LT CGR yet and the maximum differential would be between 39.6% and 20% or 19.6% total on the profit on the investment which he said is 22%.

    19.6% of 22% = 4.312% of the share price = approximately 17 cents rounded up which means instead of selling and paying the tax at $4.17 he chose to hold and wait for the STCG to shift to LTCG and pay the lower tax rate. What this has resulted in is him holding the shares from OCT 2013 through now MAY 2015, or 19 months, and a reduction in value of his stake by what is currently 24 cents, or greater than the amount saved by waiting for the shift from STCG to LTCG, especially when considering the time value of the money as well.

    Never let taxes guide your decisions. They are consequential, as any and all numbers are in equations, but holding for a tax shift? not a good idea and the situation the individual is now in shows clearly why this is the case, especially when that gain is so darn small.

    Even worse would be if he is below the 39.6% ST rate.

    I guess one could argue that there is a 20% differential in the $1,800 window where the shift from 35/15 and 39.6 / 20 occurs but the chances of someone landing in that are extremely slim and the 0.4% difference is not worth digging into.
    May 22, 2015. 01:26 AM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]
    I see you cut off the rest of what I wrote on 2/13 ;) At least you put the "..." to show you did! ;)

    Bluejay Quote 5/21/2015

    "... important to understand many SA contributors are simply ordinary Joes with ... special insight. "

    Thanks for the compliment! :D
    May 21, 2015. 11:35 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]
    God help me I am never going to be able to read your posts and comprehend them LOL ... I am not trying to be insulting... I swear there is just something about my brain that does not let me understand a word you say! lol

    At least I understood "Absolutely." :) That's good enough :P
    May 21, 2015. 11:31 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]
    "The buyback mostly benefits liberty by increasing its ownership, making a merger more affordable or in some ways makes a spin-off more profitable. He grows his ownership ever so big, spins it off...pocketing billions...while the minority shareholder gets a debt-loaded company with few financial options for growth. The thing probably won't default, but Sirius is not without risks in my opinion."

    If this is your opinion then you should own LMCA.

    "That said, I plan on holding."

    Doesn't compute if you believe in the statement above.

    "Don't yet want to pay the taxes"

    Has some merit but again considering the statement above but you are LTCG correct? Do you exceed the 15% tax bracket? $37,450+ AGI. If not then you're at a 0% LTCG rate and taxes don't matter. If you're above that then let's assume you're in the 15% bracket. Say you have $10K in SIRI and all of it is profit (just keeping it simple here). $1500 taxes $8500 after tax buy LMCA so you "lost" 15%. Fast forward and what you say about LMCA is true and they reap the benefits and somehow end up with, let's say 100% appreciation in 4 years vs. SIRI 75% appreciation.

    Had you held SIRI you'd have $17,500 and on sale of SIRI pay 15% (Assuming you are still in that bracket and taxes do not go up) of that amount or $2625 and pocket $14,875 post tax.

    Had you sold SIRI and bought LMCA you would have a CB of $8500 on LMCA and an end value of $17,000 on LMCA of which you would pay $1275 tax at 15% and pocket $15,725.

    There is a break even point but it's small and honestly there's a formula that can be derived here to calculate how much more LMCA has to appreciate RELATIVE to SIRI but I'm too lazy to bother. If LMCA and SIRI appreciate in tandem then the original theory is invalidated and erroneous and so that scenario doesn't much matter but in that case you end up with $14,280 selling SIRI now and going with LMCA if they stay the exact same.

    If you hold the thought that LMCA will reap the benefits here the logical choice is LMCA. This becomes especially so the higher your current cost basis in SIRI vs. the current SP.

    This is why I constantly boggle at the investors in SIRI who are always posting that everything benefits LMCA, all will go to LMCA, LMCA this and LMCA that but they still stay in SIRI. Taxes are consequential yes, but not to the extent that they should cause one to hold a stock that they expect to LOSE vs. another to any degree higher than a few percent.
    May 21, 2015. 10:17 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]
    Sorry went 1% the wrong way, 26% :P
    May 21, 2015. 08:22 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]
    Howard isn't going to go forge ahead and try to make waves elsewhere. His wave making days are done. Anyone who is familiar with him and his show will likely come to this same conclusion.

    He's old... and that's not saying it in a derogatory sense. The guy has done some wonderful things, brought laughter to tens of millions of people, and built a legacy that is unrivaled / unlikely to be rivaled in his lifetime if he stopped today.

    He doesn't complain about SIRI so much as he complains sometimes about continuing to work / do the radio show. But he also has mentioned time and again his feeling of responsibility to those he works with and I wouldn't put it past him to negotiate continuing at SIRI on a further reduced or more flexible schedule and perhaps eventually simply licensing his content library for replays.

    I'd suggest the BRAND of Howard does not carry on to someone else like, for example, The Tonight Show does with hosts. It wouldn't work. The Howard Stern show is, at its core, Howard Stern, and there is no one comparable to him that could or would replace him.

    You don't have to like the guy but it is hard to disagree that he is unique, talented, and not replaceable in kind.
    May 21, 2015. 08:20 PM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Effect Of Sirius XM's Share Buyback To Diminish [View article]
    Mel's options were there for LMCA to buy on its pursuit of control years down the road.

    Mel was gone at the appropriate time, got a whole boat load of options, and did his job for LMCA and was paid appropriately for it.

    My opinion.

    And just my opinion but they halted the stock from running away at the time and greatly assisted its downfall as they hit the market. LMCA grabbed them all but done correctly (and it did appear the third party handled it well) the volatility "smack" it caused gave the daily volume between hard support at the time near 1.80 and previous peak top resistance near $2.40.

    Hindsight is 20/20.

    Buncha conspiracy stuff one can go into in all that and well... you know me... hate that conspiracy! :P
    May 21, 2015. 08:10 PM | 2 Likes Like |Link to Comment