Sirius XM In Serious Trouble As Mobile Revolution Gives Rise To Social Radio [View article]
Dan,
You and I had a discussion on twitter back in December when you shorted SIRI. At the time SIRI was trading for $2.89 and I made the suggestion you should cover the position immediately that you had just entered.
To be clear you had tweeted on that day :
"Short $SIRI @ 2.89. Buy 50 Jan '15 put option contracts at 2$ strike @ .27* = $1350. (Dec. 31 12:34 pm) *ask: .28 bid: .26 last: .26"
Obviously what you do with your own money is not my personal business but since you made the trade public, I thought I would bring this up as you did not disclose that you also hold 50 Jan 2015 $2 put option contracts (unless you closed these at a loss?)
You presently sit at a ~10% loss on your SIRI short at $2.89, and to exit your puts today at $0.14 bid would be a loss of nearly 50%. That's a tough pill to swallow.
Does this not concern you?
Also, outstanding positions in September 2013 $2 puts are 36, and they are about 3 cents each. That's about $100 worth if you own all of them. Trade fee and option fee here would cost you about $10 or so I am guessing? Why even enter such a position? Trades on the termination end are going to add another $10 or so there, soo you will need prices to be below $1.96 or so by September of THIS YEAR to turn a profit? To reach this level you would have to crater past even the lowest analyst estimate in the next 6 months, fight the $2 billion buyback, and grab a price John Malone couldn't even manage to get as he was pursuing control.
Do yourself a favor. I beg of you. You're a young kid... and that money (and reputation) is worth even more because of it. Losses now can sting hard. Find an opportunity and at least cover the short, as well as those 2015 puts.....
Memo To John Malone: You Cannot Save Sirius XM Radio [View article]
God help us....
"In 2009, billionaire John Malone and his Liberty Media Corporation (LMCA) negotiated a sweetheart deal in hopes to save Sirius XM (SIRI) from inevitable bankruptcy."
Malone did not negotiate this in hopes to save Sirius XM. He negotiated this in order to capitalize on what was at the time, Sirius XM's failure.
"Today, Sirius XM trades for $2.50, which calculates out to $9.8 billion in market capitalization."
Wrong, don't take your info from yahoo financials. Marke cap includes the remaining preferred stake and is higher.
"As an already impressive score, John Malone and Company's original $530 million Sirius investment is now worth $4 billion."
$530 million was a loan which was repaid. The stake which is worth (over) $4 billion is due to the convertibles which were given for $12,500 cost, not $530 million.
"Certainly, it would serve Malone's interests best to effectively hijack Sirius shareholders and talk them down, in order to avoid paying a premium."
You state earlier that Liberty is near 50% already, and then follow by saying Malone's best interest is to "hijack" SIRI shareholders to talk them down so it doesn't have to pay a premium? Did you proofread your article? Does this even make sense to hypothesize this if Liberty is what amounts of a small number of shares (0.4%) away from full control? Why bother talking anyone down (who are they going to talk down anyways?) for what may amount to a million dollar savings of a multi billion dollar investment?
"Big Media is Failing"
This entire section... well, you know that thing cartoon charaters do when they are taken aback by something that is ridiculous / outlandish / etc? It's kinda like a boing boing boing noise as they shake their head back and forth and their eyes bug out? Congratulations on getting that response out of an actual human :P
" Sirius' intermediate term recovery is largely due in part to Detroit bailouts and easy financing terms that have supported improved automotive and satellite radio subscription sales."
Did you research the impact of the Detroit bailouts? "Largely due in part to"... what does this even MEAN?
"Going forward, European contagion alongside increased market penetration for digital media will destroy Sirius' profitability"
Europe has what to do with Satellite radio which um... has nothing to do with Europe, exactly?
"As a betting man, John Malone should take his chips off the table, cash out, and run. " Have you called John Malone to warn him? I'm sure he'd be ever so grateful....
"Going forward, Sirius XM and Liberty Media shareholders are setting themselves up for severe losses, largely due in part to the clash of personalities between a few legendary figures, who now happen to be out of their league."
Largely due in part again... how all these reasons be the large part? Which is it? And again, have you offered your advice to these "legendary figures" who apparently know nothing and are simply egomaniacs looking to battle it out a the expense of everyone else? You could save them from potential ruin, if they would just listen to you...
Come on man... are you serious with this piece? It's really really really bad... worse the the one from that guy yesterday, and that one was horrible!
Oh come on "duke" ;) Why the sudden rush of postings? Remember back in June, your comment to me?
"Well, Stevie, it was just a month ago when you and I debated whether you had a price target of 2.75 on the stock... ...it is hard to keep up with all the fabrications and denials. You might want to just admit that you got it wrong because you don't understand the dynamics of the market. WHEN I GET IT WRONG I FREELY ADMIT IT. Trust me it is good for your credibility. If you want to use point and figure to alert you readers that is fine. Spencer tried it with the 50 day EMA a couple of weeks ago. You are going to get the right result for the wrong reason. The impending death cross as the 50 day average falls below the 200 day average is what every one is focusing on...not to mention that JM's second forward contract will be complete tomorrow. Here is a hint for your next article since you want to play technical analyst. What does the slope of the fall of the 50 day average as it moves through the 200 day have to do with the fall rate of descent of the stock and its target price. If you really understood TA, you would have been able to predict SIRI's fall before $2.00. Looking forward to your next piece of fiction."
Humorous, no?
"WHEN I GET IT WRONG I FREELY ADMIT IT."
No admission, though. Go figure. SIRI hit $2.75 months later, and $3.25 or "close enough" to my $3.30 target before the Q4 call. You were looking for under $1 in 2012, yes? What happened to that? Even the bearish retrace in April / May / June along with the overall market didn't pull it back that far.
You use such an arrogant, know it all tone, yet a quick look through your history of postings here and on yahoo clearly shows you have been wrong far more often than you have been right.
What about the comment cut and pasted to Spencer Osborne's site?
"If Spencer knew the first thing about securities law he wouldn’t have written an article that was blatantly stupid on it face and if one of you knew any thing about the basics of investing you would have called him on it long before I did. I warned you that I would be trying to get rid of those four likes. So how is JM going to do a legal buyback, remain in control of SIRI and have all you geniuses holding the bag. I will show you and I have been alluding to it for months. JM wants the FCC to give him de jure control before he converts the preferred. He will then convert just enough of the preferred to common so that he can replace the current board. The new board will lever up the company and do a buy back but it will only buy back JM’s unconverted preferred shares, not the common. All perfectly legal and you get a debt ridden company that JM still controls. Please tell me that there was at least one soul out there who actually had the brains to figure this out."
Really? That's how it's gonna work, eh? Seems like your brain was the only one to figure this out. Tell me, how does this work now that LMCA has converted every last one of its preferred shares of stock? How stupid everyone else is, though...
Your post from June 10th 2012 :
"You think there is any possibility that Liberty is doing another forward contract with a target price of $1.90 and that when it needs to acquire shares under the target price, it merely drops the bid price and that is why the price declined to 1.86? While you are figuring that it go check the TU and THUR prints. You will see a number of block sales that didn't move the bid/ask. You think these could be negotiated sales to fill in the forward contract. If not how does an 8M share sale not move the bid/ask. Maybe you should consider an alternative theory or maybe you want to consider what happens WHEN THE FORWARD CONTRACT GETS FILLED."
Second forward contract in June? No. Did you admit you were wrong? Nahhh ;)
Or THIS brilliant gem :
"I suggest you read my post yesterday and my response to the questions if you want to learn where the 302M shares came from. Ever hear of a pyramid of forward contracts...probably not. You might want to learn some of this stuff if you plan to keep writing these articles."
Pyramid of forward contracts? It was done through UBS, one contract, and you even made claim that the reason you had been quiet as the stock rose from your short in the $1.80's up to $2.40 early in 2012 was because you HAD to be silent because YOU were part of the forward contract negotiations.
Throw 100 darts and you are bound to hit the bullseye here and there. Remove the 98 that missed and it looks impressive... leave them there and the self proclaimed genius fades away, and arrogance looks like foolishness.
Liberty Media: Buy Before This Happens [View article]
Horrible. You do realize that for every 2 shares Mel sells that Liberty must buy 1, thus effectively reducing the effect of the increased number of shares on the market as sales by half. What makes you think his sales will cause the stock to "plunge" when 20 million went out last week and the shares subsequently ROSE? Likewise he sold in August, and the shares rose. He sold in July and the shares rose. Only May and June sales, in the middle of a bearish market overall, saw declines in the share price.
"What this statement means for Sirius shareholders is pretty obvious. The share value will plunge because Karmazin will probably sell off the Sirius stock options he owns before he leaves. Since his current employment contract will end on December 31, that will be soon.
Karmazin has apparently started the selloff. SEC paperwork shows that he sold 20,362,700 shares on September 17th, 18th, and 19th. What this effectively does is put a lot more Sirius shares on the market. "
It's not "obvious" because what you say is obvious is not going to happen as a result of the sales. Also, Karmazin has adopted a trading plan for the sale of these shares and he has been selling shares on a similar schedule since earlier in the year. It's fully expected he will sell the other portion once they vest and this has been covered repeatedly so this should come as no surprise to investors. It also doesn't really put a lot more shares on the market as these options already exist, and the shares are expected to print once they vest and are exercised.
"It is in the interest of both Malone and Karmazin to knock this stock's value down. Malone wants to avoid a big tax bill, and Karmazin wants to rake in a big pile of cash by selling shares."
This is crazy talk. Why would Karmazin want the share price DOWN if he wishes to receive capital from sale of shares? If you want to sell something don't you want the price UP? Why would Malone want to knock the share price DOWN to avoid taxes? Would you want your investments to decrease in value simply because you wished to make less profit and thus pay less tax? Claiming that either individual would like to see lower stock pricing at this point has absolutely no basis in reality.
I always find the comments claiming poor customer service and long wait times to be interesting. I have had several calls to SIRI over the years (the most recent subscribing my girlfriend's car after the free trial period) and never had a wait time longer than a few seconds, and arguably those few seconds were simply to ring me out to an operator.
Now, I didn't want to go posting this so I just tried calling five different times from three different phones over the course of 30 minutes, two of these numbers are not tied to my own account (work phone, girlfriend's phone).
ALL times I was connected to a human being in customer care IMMEDIATELY.
I never understood the claims of 30 minute... 1 hour, 3 hour wait times, or whatever they are. I've never had a single issue.
4 Stocks To Buy, 1 To Avoid For Long-Term Media Investors [View article]
Rocco, I think you need to understand that the quality of the comments are due in part to the tone the author sets. You write well, and trust me when I say I completely understand how to twist the screws and get people agitated with a simple shift of words, and you employ this in great fashion. But to then shrug and go "whaaatt???? It wasn't meeee it was them!" is akin to when I'd poke at my brother when we were younger until he decided to hit me, and then he'd get in trouble. I should have known better, I'm the older brother. Like the author of an article on Seeking Alpha, I set the tone.
I hope you don't mind but this piece is as good an example as any.
Since you opened with, as you state "a friendly challenge" to Sirius XM bulls, I am sure you understand that right off the bat, you are adversarial with part of your audience. Such a comment is accusatory to "all" Sirius XM bulls who comment, not merely the handful of commenters who dog many of your articles, and articles of others who have chosen the route of essentially homogenizing the 99% in with the vocal 1% and labeling them all as the 1% portray themselves.
Part of my decision to become a writer here for Seeking Alpha was a back and forth with one of the authors whom I attempted to have an actual thoughful discussion with about Sirius XM within the comments section of one of their articles. In what I felt was polite disagreement with the author (the complete discussion is easily reasearched at the beginning of my comment history), I was met with repetitive brush offs which eventually turned into "typical siri long" and 'only an idiot would' type comments. Understand that as a SIRI bull who rarely ever commented but was a daily reader, it is frustrating enough to have to weed through the daily "unless you're stupid like a typical braindead emotionally deranged SIRI long living in a psychological vacuum" articles. Upon attempting to have some sort of intelligent discussion, to then receive it within the comments when it was certainly not deserved? I'm a big boy :) I can handle myself... and I have done quite well at that and will continue to do so. But I think to some others this may be offputting and the result being a detriment to Seeking Alpha.
You go on shortly thereafter to state :
"If you do not think we're headed in a direction that portends universal wireless access, I'm not sure you're paying attention."
Again, I completely understand what you are saying, but it's a poke at anyone who disagrees with you. It paints them as idiots... daydreaming and gazing around chasing butterflies as the world passes them by. Immediately, if anyone dares to disagree they run the risk of falling into this group of children not paying attention. Again, trust me when I say I know how to work with words and bend people's emotions in subtle ways, and you do it well. Not many people can do it in a subtle fashion. That's a compliment in some ways but I don't think it works well here if you are trying to promote civil discussion within the comments. You incite those who do not have thick skins, and this can and will cause a backlash, especially in an online forum.
Further you go on to paste a quote and then follow up with :
"Of course, SIRI bulls will latch onto points A and B and argue that I make the case for SIRI. That misses the point."
Instantly, if anyone decides to argue with you on this they are, "of course" a SIRI bull (already illustrated as the "bad" guys within the article), and they "miss the point." Possibly due to anyone who is bullish on Sirius XM not paying attention, as stated in the body and in the titles of some of your articles.
If you go on the offense with a group of people you can expect some backlash. It's just how these things go. I'm not even going on the offense in my articles yet I had a SIRI bear the other day lighting them up with what amounted to "You're all dumb, go look at AAPL, AAPL rules!" etc etc. Ignore it, it goes away. If it doesn't... continue to ignore it. To make these few the focus of your articles and incite them is going to create more of them, and completely degrade the quality of your comments.
Again, trust me, I know exactly how to press the right buttons on most people and send them this way or that. You're able to do this also. You write well. I can read your articles and be completely fine with them, but not everyone can. I think you do yourself a complete disservice by going the button pressing, screw twisting, or whatever you'd like to call it, route. Is it frustrating with a couple of people take shots, make fun of your picture or dance around as Pandora goes down in share price and poke and prod at you? Of course it is. Ignore it? You can ignore these things and let them tire of it and move on (and most of them will) or you can fight with them and have the overall message of some very good articles and potentially great discussion lost in the little battle with these few you've chosen to fight.
In my short month of writing here I have received a large number of direct messages, the majority of them saying what amounts to "thank you for being polite." This is not me tooting my own horn here... but it is apparent that many individuals, at least when it comes to SIRI, had become frustrated with the nonsense.
As authors we're in the position of control, and able to set the tone we wish for our articles. I hope everything I wrote above is taken as constructive criticism, as that is all it was meant to be. (Sorry to sidetrack from the article but having started the article with such comments, I felt this was the best place to respond).
Sirius XM: Reflections For The Weekend [View article]
Also, Regarded, I'm going to ask that you keep it civil in the comments section if you wish to partake in the discussions here. I'd like to have discussion with my readers, and that's going to be impossible if you come in here and start some kind of war.
Please respect that, and try to keep your comments on point and on topic, free of personal insult. If you can't do that, then please refrain from posting within my article. You're an author here... you represent Seeking Alpha with each post you make.
Sirius XM In Serious Trouble As Mobile Revolution Gives Rise To Social Radio [View article]
Sorry from what I can tell by time and sales on those September options you paid 6 cents for them. Net outlay is closer to $200 and you will need prices below $1.93 in September or before to turn a profit.
Dan... c'mon man it's one thing to be bearish but this is REALLY REALLY bearish....
You mentioned to me in December that if SIRI kept going up you'd just short more and buy more puts. I really hope you are not doing that... Not for *my* sake. Heck, the more shorts the better as they'll buy later...
Yes the total cost of acquiring subscribers will rise if SAC does not fall faster than gross additions rise.
I mean... if I add 1 million subscribers at $10 per, my cost is $10,000,000 ... but if I add 2 million subscribers at $9 per, my cost is $18,000,000
So long as I can cover the cost, and so long as I can monetize the new subscribers to similar extents, this really doesn't present any sort of a problem. It's a particularly good thing if SAC declines while total costs for acquiring subs goes up, because you acquired a greater number of subs for less cost.... like buying in bulk.
4 Stocks To Buy, 1 To Avoid For Long-Term Media Investors [View article]
You linked the instablog directly from this article, and tell every "SIRI bull" to go there and read it, as a "challenge." You then state (in this article here), upon the reader's return :
"Together, we've set a bar. We've set expectations as a community. Let's realize and meet that standard on every article. No exceptions."
My comment directly addressed the tone of this article which you posted after posting your instablog. Directly after you post an instablog stating that authors and commenters alike must share responsibility, you pen and post an article poking and prodding at the same people you invite over there to read your instablog.
This was the correct place to address the tone of this article, yet I apologized for sidetracking from the content of the article for the readers who do not wish to get into this specific part of it.
"I am not sure how long you've been at this sort of thing, but it's impressive how you seem to have figured it out -- and understand me better than I understand myself -- in such a short time."
What sort of thing? Writing? I've written for 14 years now, in many different spaces and from many different positions. I've had to manage communities of hundreds of people within a highly competitive anonymous environment and have been at the center of plenty of controversy over the years. Tens of thousands of pieces of writing, and much of it back and forth. While I do not have a degree or schooling to better help me understand the anonymous faces behind the computer screen, I do have 14 years of firsthand experience in doing so.
A skilled author will completely control the audience and the flow of disucssion. If I move this discussion to your instablog thread and cite specific examples from your articles over the past several months and present an argument, this would be preferable? But see, the tone within that instablog is pleasant, congratulatory, because it is interlaced with good tidings and the 1,000,000 subscriber number. If I come in with a negative, I change the tone. I'm the bad guy. I know how it works. Like I said, 14 years have taught me well.
Instead I chose to attempt to explain here, and in what I feel is a constructive fashion, and relevant to the tone set within the article, and the "challenge" at the top. I am attempting to "help" in my post, although I completely understand if you do not take it that way.
Can Sirius Fight Off Apple, Google And Pandora? [View article]
Richard.
Howard's contract is not up in 18 months. It is up in 31 as dmdpsu corrected.
On top of this you show a very serious lack of understanding of Howard and the sector in general to think that:
TuneIn.... will just throw a few hundred million at Howard and get him back on an internet version of FM.
Again, dmdpsu has the right viewpoint here.
You will absolutely have to do better than this stuff or the readers are just going to chew you up and spit you out. The Sirius XM vs. Pandora vs. Google vs. Apple issue has been beaten to death, dug up, beaten again, buried, rotten, the worms have taken the flesh from the bones and what was left was ground up into dust for some witch's potions. End of 2011, early 2012 "article a day" about the topic pretty much killed the discussion on it. Nothing has changed since.
Sirius XM Radio: Let's Not Buy Just Yet [View article]
"It wouldn't take much to eat into that revenue if the economy deteriorates again."
Do you suggest if the economy deteriorates that it will result in a net exodus of subscribers?
"Remember, we are coming to the time when we "sell in May and go away.""
I see this often. Should investors sell all their holdings in May or just SIRI? Is there any reason to keep a position in any stock if "sell in May and go away" holds true?
"It would take just one of these (listed macro issues) to send the economy into reverse and shrink the revenue stream. This would greatly affect the debt load and ability to pay that debt off."
Again, are you suggesting those issues may send us into a recession? In this case is it not better to sell all stocks, not just Sirius XM? How bad do you feel things need to get in order to send churn high enough that a net decrease in paying subs is realized?
"Astute investors must wonder why any insider -- much less the CEO -- would sell shares only two weeks ahead of the report. I personally would look at what is going on and consider if the CEO lacks confidence in the stock to go higher. "
The CEO has stated reasons for the sale. Do you believe he has misrepresented this reasoning? Are you aware of the issues surrounding Liberty and a potential change of control within the company? Are you aware of the age of the CEO?
"So we have the stock trading at $2.22 and the CEO selling early. Would he sell if he thought the stock was going higher?"
Partial sale, 9% of his total position. Would he hold 91% if he thought the stock was going lower?
"Liberty Media, which has been talked about in regard to buying the company, will not pay over $2.50 a share."
Where do you get the information that Liberty Media will not pay over $2.50 per share? You say this in definative fashion.
"Between the macroeconomic conditions, insider selling and the time of year, it seems as if the stock may have already peaked for the foreseeable future."
Other than insider selling, those issues, such as "time of year" are applicable to every stock, no? It's the same "time of year" for every stock, yes?
"For those who like option plays, I can see buying June 2012 "2" put option and holding it to see how far the stock moves. There is good support at $2.10. Even if the stock falls that much and the option increases in value 20%, it is a good move. The option presently is trading at $0.07, so the price is not that bad."
Looking to short term trade this put on the earnings call? Why would you buy the June $2 put at 7 cents (for most, 7.75 with fee) and turn around and sell it (cost basis 8.5 with fee) for a 20% swing (impossible at 7 cents since these trade in penny increments and 20% of 7 is 1.4, unless factoring in cost basis on purchase and sale at 11 cents but that would likely require a drop under $2.10) expecting $2.10 Better would be to buy the 2.50 put at 37 ( cost basis 38.5) and profit from a decline to 2.10 if you have bearish sentiment as this should be worth roughly 45, or 17%. Much safer with this in the money put. If the share price stays at 2.20 you retain most of your cash, if the share price increases to $2.30, $2.40, you lose about one half to 2/3 where buying the 2 put will see close to a complete loss on an upward swing.
Risky business on the 2 put, especially if as you say, strong support exists at 2.10.
Sirius XM In Serious Trouble As Mobile Revolution Gives Rise To Social Radio [View article]
You and I had a discussion on twitter back in December when you shorted SIRI. At the time SIRI was trading for $2.89 and I made the suggestion you should cover the position immediately that you had just entered.
To be clear you had tweeted on that day :
"Short $SIRI @ 2.89. Buy 50 Jan '15 put option contracts at 2$ strike @ .27* = $1350. (Dec. 31 12:34 pm) *ask: .28 bid: .26 last: .26"
Obviously what you do with your own money is not my personal business but since you made the trade public, I thought I would bring this up as you did not disclose that you also hold 50 Jan 2015 $2 put option contracts (unless you closed these at a loss?)
You presently sit at a ~10% loss on your SIRI short at $2.89, and to exit your puts today at $0.14 bid would be a loss of nearly 50%. That's a tough pill to swallow.
Does this not concern you?
Also, outstanding positions in September 2013 $2 puts are 36, and they are about 3 cents each. That's about $100 worth if you own all of them. Trade fee and option fee here would cost you about $10 or so I am guessing? Why even enter such a position? Trades on the termination end are going to add another $10 or so there, soo you will need prices to be below $1.96 or so by September of THIS YEAR to turn a profit? To reach this level you would have to crater past even the lowest analyst estimate in the next 6 months, fight the $2 billion buyback, and grab a price John Malone couldn't even manage to get as he was pursuing control.
Do yourself a favor. I beg of you. You're a young kid... and that money (and reputation) is worth even more because of it. Losses now can sting hard. Find an opportunity and at least cover the short, as well as those 2015 puts.....
Memo To John Malone: You Cannot Save Sirius XM Radio [View article]
"In 2009, billionaire John Malone and his Liberty Media Corporation (LMCA) negotiated a sweetheart deal in hopes to save Sirius XM (SIRI) from inevitable bankruptcy."
Malone did not negotiate this in hopes to save Sirius XM. He negotiated this in order to capitalize on what was at the time, Sirius XM's failure.
"Today, Sirius XM trades for $2.50, which calculates out to $9.8 billion in market capitalization."
Wrong, don't take your info from yahoo financials. Marke cap includes the remaining preferred stake and is higher.
"As an already impressive score, John Malone and Company's original $530 million Sirius investment is now worth $4 billion."
$530 million was a loan which was repaid. The stake which is worth (over) $4 billion is due to the convertibles which were given for $12,500 cost, not $530 million.
"Certainly, it would serve Malone's interests best to effectively hijack Sirius shareholders and talk them down, in order to avoid paying a premium."
You state earlier that Liberty is near 50% already, and then follow by saying Malone's best interest is to "hijack" SIRI shareholders to talk them down so it doesn't have to pay a premium? Did you proofread your article? Does this even make sense to hypothesize this if Liberty is what amounts of a small number of shares (0.4%) away from full control? Why bother talking anyone down (who are they going to talk down anyways?) for what may amount to a million dollar savings of a multi billion dollar investment?
"Big Media is Failing"
This entire section... well, you know that thing cartoon charaters do when they are taken aback by something that is ridiculous / outlandish / etc? It's kinda like a boing boing boing noise as they shake their head back and forth and their eyes bug out? Congratulations on getting that response out of an actual human :P
" Sirius' intermediate term recovery is largely due in part to Detroit bailouts and easy financing terms that have supported improved automotive and satellite radio subscription sales."
Did you research the impact of the Detroit bailouts? "Largely due in part to"... what does this even MEAN?
"Going forward, European contagion alongside increased market penetration for digital media will destroy Sirius' profitability"
Europe has what to do with Satellite radio which um... has nothing to do with Europe, exactly?
"As a betting man, John Malone should take his chips off the table, cash out, and run.
"
Have you called John Malone to warn him? I'm sure he'd be ever so grateful....
"Going forward, Sirius XM and Liberty Media shareholders are setting themselves up for severe losses, largely due in part to the clash of personalities between a few legendary figures, who now happen to be out of their league."
Largely due in part again... how all these reasons be the large part? Which is it? And again, have you offered your advice to these "legendary figures" who apparently know nothing and are simply egomaniacs looking to battle it out a the expense of everyone else? You could save them from potential ruin, if they would just listen to you...
Come on man... are you serious with this piece? It's really really really bad... worse the the one from that guy yesterday, and that one was horrible!
Sirius XM: The Big Money Keeps Pouring In [View article]
Oh come on "duke" ;) Why the sudden rush of postings? Remember back in June, your comment to me?
"Well, Stevie, it was just a month ago when you and I debated whether you had a price target of 2.75 on the stock... ...it is hard to keep up with all the fabrications and denials. You might want to just admit that you got it wrong because you don't understand the dynamics of the market. WHEN I GET IT WRONG I FREELY ADMIT IT. Trust me it is good for your credibility.
If you want to use point and figure to alert you readers that is fine. Spencer tried it with the 50 day EMA a couple of weeks ago. You are going to get the right result for the wrong reason. The impending death cross as the 50 day average falls below the 200 day average is what every one is focusing on...not to mention that JM's second forward contract will be complete tomorrow.
Here is a hint for your next article since you want to play technical analyst. What does the slope of the fall of the 50 day average as it moves through the 200 day have to do with the fall rate of descent of the stock and its target price.
If you really understood TA, you would have been able to predict SIRI's fall before $2.00.
Looking forward to your next piece of fiction."
Humorous, no?
"WHEN I GET IT WRONG I FREELY ADMIT IT."
No admission, though. Go figure. SIRI hit $2.75 months later, and $3.25 or "close enough" to my $3.30 target before the Q4 call. You were looking for under $1 in 2012, yes? What happened to that? Even the bearish retrace in April / May / June along with the overall market didn't pull it back that far.
You use such an arrogant, know it all tone, yet a quick look through your history of postings here and on yahoo clearly shows you have been wrong far more often than you have been right.
What about the comment cut and pasted to Spencer Osborne's site?
http://bit.ly/VmX8Mb
"If Spencer knew the first thing about securities law he wouldn’t have written an article that was blatantly stupid on it face and if one of you knew any thing about the basics of investing you would have called him on it long before I did. I warned you that I would be trying to get rid of those four likes.
So how is JM going to do a legal buyback, remain in control of SIRI and have all you geniuses holding the bag. I will show you and I have been alluding to it for months. JM wants the FCC to give him de jure control before he converts the preferred. He will then convert just enough of the preferred to common so that he can replace the current board. The new board will lever up the company and do a buy back but it will only buy back JM’s unconverted preferred shares, not the common. All perfectly legal and you get a debt ridden company that JM still controls. Please tell me that there was at least one soul out there who actually had the brains to figure this out."
Really? That's how it's gonna work, eh? Seems like your brain was the only one to figure this out. Tell me, how does this work now that LMCA has converted every last one of its preferred shares of stock? How stupid everyone else is, though...
Your post from June 10th 2012 :
"You think there is any possibility that Liberty is doing another forward contract with a target price of $1.90 and that when it needs to acquire shares under the target price, it merely drops the bid price and that is why the price declined to 1.86?
While you are figuring that it go check the TU and THUR prints. You will see a number of block sales that didn't move the bid/ask. You think these could be negotiated sales to fill in the forward contract. If not how does an 8M share sale not move the bid/ask.
Maybe you should consider an alternative theory or maybe you want to consider what happens WHEN THE FORWARD CONTRACT GETS FILLED."
Second forward contract in June? No. Did you admit you were wrong? Nahhh ;)
Or THIS brilliant gem :
"I suggest you read my post yesterday and my response to the questions if you want to learn where the 302M shares came from. Ever hear of a pyramid of forward contracts...probably not. You might want to learn some of this stuff if you plan to keep writing these articles."
Pyramid of forward contracts? It was done through UBS, one contract, and you even made claim that the reason you had been quiet as the stock rose from your short in the $1.80's up to $2.40 early in 2012 was because you HAD to be silent because YOU were part of the forward contract negotiations.
Throw 100 darts and you are bound to hit the bullseye here and there. Remove the 98 that missed and it looks impressive... leave them there and the self proclaimed genius fades away, and arrogance looks like foolishness.
Web 2.0 Will Destroy Sirius XM Radio [View article]
To save others the trouble, please view this clip from "Billy Madison" and consider it my response.
http://bit.ly/NVcQM5
Liberty Media: Buy Before This Happens [View article]
"What this statement means for Sirius shareholders is pretty obvious. The share value will plunge because Karmazin will probably sell off the Sirius stock options he owns before he leaves. Since his current employment contract will end on December 31, that will be soon.
Karmazin has apparently started the selloff. SEC paperwork shows that he sold 20,362,700 shares on September 17th, 18th, and 19th. What this effectively does is put a lot more Sirius shares on the market.
"
It's not "obvious" because what you say is obvious is not going to happen as a result of the sales. Also, Karmazin has adopted a trading plan for the sale of these shares and he has been selling shares on a similar schedule since earlier in the year. It's fully expected he will sell the other portion once they vest and this has been covered repeatedly so this should come as no surprise to investors. It also doesn't really put a lot more shares on the market as these options already exist, and the shares are expected to print once they vest and are exercised.
"It is in the interest of both Malone and Karmazin to knock this stock's value down. Malone wants to avoid a big tax bill, and Karmazin wants to rake in a big pile of cash by selling shares."
This is crazy talk. Why would Karmazin want the share price DOWN if he wishes to receive capital from sale of shares? If you want to sell something don't you want the price UP? Why would Malone want to knock the share price DOWN to avoid taxes? Would you want your investments to decrease in value simply because you wished to make less profit and thus pay less tax? Claiming that either individual would like to see lower stock pricing at this point has absolutely no basis in reality.
Pandora Takes Huge Bite Out Of Sirius [View article]
Sirius XM Customer Dis-Service [View article]
Now, I didn't want to go posting this so I just tried calling five different times from three different phones over the course of 30 minutes, two of these numbers are not tied to my own account (work phone, girlfriend's phone).
ALL times I was connected to a human being in customer care IMMEDIATELY.
I never understood the claims of 30 minute... 1 hour, 3 hour wait times, or whatever they are. I've never had a single issue.
4 Stocks To Buy, 1 To Avoid For Long-Term Media Investors [View article]
I hope you don't mind but this piece is as good an example as any.
Since you opened with, as you state "a friendly challenge" to Sirius XM bulls, I am sure you understand that right off the bat, you are adversarial with part of your audience. Such a comment is accusatory to "all" Sirius XM bulls who comment, not merely the handful of commenters who dog many of your articles, and articles of others who have chosen the route of essentially homogenizing the 99% in with the vocal 1% and labeling them all as the 1% portray themselves.
Part of my decision to become a writer here for Seeking Alpha was a back and forth with one of the authors whom I attempted to have an actual thoughful discussion with about Sirius XM within the comments section of one of their articles. In what I felt was polite disagreement with the author (the complete discussion is easily reasearched at the beginning of my comment history), I was met with repetitive brush offs which eventually turned into "typical siri long" and 'only an idiot would' type comments. Understand that as a SIRI bull who rarely ever commented but was a daily reader, it is frustrating enough to have to weed through the daily "unless you're stupid like a typical braindead emotionally deranged SIRI long living in a psychological vacuum" articles. Upon attempting to have some sort of intelligent discussion, to then receive it within the comments when it was certainly not deserved? I'm a big boy :) I can handle myself... and I have done quite well at that and will continue to do so. But I think to some others this may be offputting and the result being a detriment to Seeking Alpha.
You go on shortly thereafter to state :
"If you do not think we're headed in a direction that portends universal wireless access, I'm not sure you're paying attention."
Again, I completely understand what you are saying, but it's a poke at anyone who disagrees with you. It paints them as idiots... daydreaming and gazing around chasing butterflies as the world passes them by. Immediately, if anyone dares to disagree they run the risk of falling into this group of children not paying attention. Again, trust me when I say I know how to work with words and bend people's emotions in subtle ways, and you do it well. Not many people can do it in a subtle fashion. That's a compliment in some ways but I don't think it works well here if you are trying to promote civil discussion within the comments. You incite those who do not have thick skins, and this can and will cause a backlash, especially in an online forum.
Further you go on to paste a quote and then follow up with :
"Of course, SIRI bulls will latch onto points A and B and argue that I make the case for SIRI. That misses the point."
Instantly, if anyone decides to argue with you on this they are, "of course" a SIRI bull (already illustrated as the "bad" guys within the article), and they "miss the point." Possibly due to anyone who is bullish on Sirius XM not paying attention, as stated in the body and in the titles of some of your articles.
If you go on the offense with a group of people you can expect some backlash. It's just how these things go. I'm not even going on the offense in my articles yet I had a SIRI bear the other day lighting them up with what amounted to "You're all dumb, go look at AAPL, AAPL rules!" etc etc. Ignore it, it goes away. If it doesn't... continue to ignore it. To make these few the focus of your articles and incite them is going to create more of them, and completely degrade the quality of your comments.
Again, trust me, I know exactly how to press the right buttons on most people and send them this way or that. You're able to do this also. You write well. I can read your articles and be completely fine with them, but not everyone can. I think you do yourself a complete disservice by going the button pressing, screw twisting, or whatever you'd like to call it, route. Is it frustrating with a couple of people take shots, make fun of your picture or dance around as Pandora goes down in share price and poke and prod at you? Of course it is. Ignore it? You can ignore these things and let them tire of it and move on (and most of them will) or you can fight with them and have the overall message of some very good articles and potentially great discussion lost in the little battle with these few you've chosen to fight.
In my short month of writing here I have received a large number of direct messages, the majority of them saying what amounts to "thank you for being polite." This is not me tooting my own horn here... but it is apparent that many individuals, at least when it comes to SIRI, had become frustrated with the nonsense.
As authors we're in the position of control, and able to set the tone we wish for our articles. I hope everything I wrote above is taken as constructive criticism, as that is all it was meant to be. (Sorry to sidetrack from the article but having started the article with such comments, I felt this was the best place to respond).
Sirius XM: Reflections For The Weekend [View article]
Please respect that, and try to keep your comments on point and on topic, free of personal insult. If you can't do that, then please refrain from posting within my article. You're an author here... you represent Seeking Alpha with each post you make.
Sirius XM In Serious Trouble As Mobile Revolution Gives Rise To Social Radio [View article]
Dan... c'mon man it's one thing to be bearish but this is REALLY REALLY bearish....
You mentioned to me in December that if SIRI kept going up you'd just short more and buy more puts. I really hope you are not doing that... Not for *my* sake. Heck, the more shorts the better as they'll buy later...
Sirius Subscriber Acquisition Costs Keep Rising [View article]
I mean... if I add 1 million subscribers at $10 per, my cost is $10,000,000 ... but if I add 2 million subscribers at $9 per, my cost is $18,000,000
So long as I can cover the cost, and so long as I can monetize the new subscribers to similar extents, this really doesn't present any sort of a problem. It's a particularly good thing if SAC declines while total costs for acquiring subs goes up, because you acquired a greater number of subs for less cost.... like buying in bulk.
Sirius XM: 390 Million Shorts Should Join The Long Side [View article]
4 Stocks To Buy, 1 To Avoid For Long-Term Media Investors [View article]
"Together, we've set a bar. We've set expectations as a community. Let's realize and meet that standard on every article. No exceptions."
My comment directly addressed the tone of this article which you posted after posting your instablog. Directly after you post an instablog stating that authors and commenters alike must share responsibility, you pen and post an article poking and prodding at the same people you invite over there to read your instablog.
This was the correct place to address the tone of this article, yet I apologized for sidetracking from the content of the article for the readers who do not wish to get into this specific part of it.
"I am not sure how long you've been at this sort of thing, but it's impressive how you seem to have figured it out -- and understand me better than I understand myself -- in such a short time."
What sort of thing? Writing? I've written for 14 years now, in many different spaces and from many different positions. I've had to manage communities of hundreds of people within a highly competitive anonymous environment and have been at the center of plenty of controversy over the years. Tens of thousands of pieces of writing, and much of it back and forth. While I do not have a degree or schooling to better help me understand the anonymous faces behind the computer screen, I do have 14 years of firsthand experience in doing so.
A skilled author will completely control the audience and the flow of disucssion. If I move this discussion to your instablog thread and cite specific examples from your articles over the past several months and present an argument, this would be preferable? But see, the tone within that instablog is pleasant, congratulatory, because it is interlaced with good tidings and the 1,000,000 subscriber number. If I come in with a negative, I change the tone. I'm the bad guy. I know how it works. Like I said, 14 years have taught me well.
Instead I chose to attempt to explain here, and in what I feel is a constructive fashion, and relevant to the tone set within the article, and the "challenge" at the top. I am attempting to "help" in my post, although I completely understand if you do not take it that way.
Can Sirius Fight Off Apple, Google And Pandora? [View article]
Howard's contract is not up in 18 months. It is up in 31 as dmdpsu corrected.
On top of this you show a very serious lack of understanding of Howard and the sector in general to think that:
TuneIn.... will just throw a few hundred million at Howard and get him back on an internet version of FM.
Again, dmdpsu has the right viewpoint here.
You will absolutely have to do better than this stuff or the readers are just going to chew you up and spit you out. The Sirius XM vs. Pandora vs. Google vs. Apple issue has been beaten to death, dug up, beaten again, buried, rotten, the worms have taken the flesh from the bones and what was left was ground up into dust for some witch's potions. End of 2011, early 2012 "article a day" about the topic pretty much killed the discussion on it. Nothing has changed since.
Sirius XM Radio: Let's Not Buy Just Yet [View article]
Do you suggest if the economy deteriorates that it will result in a net exodus of subscribers?
"Remember, we are coming to the time when we "sell in May and go away.""
I see this often. Should investors sell all their holdings in May or just SIRI? Is there any reason to keep a position in any stock if "sell in May and go away" holds true?
"It would take just one of these (listed macro issues) to send the economy into reverse and shrink the revenue stream. This would greatly affect the debt load and ability to pay that debt off."
Again, are you suggesting those issues may send us into a recession? In this case is it not better to sell all stocks, not just Sirius XM? How bad do you feel things need to get in order to send churn high enough that a net decrease in paying subs is realized?
"Astute investors must wonder why any insider -- much less the CEO -- would sell shares only two weeks ahead of the report. I personally would look at what is going on and consider if the CEO lacks confidence in the stock to go higher.
"
The CEO has stated reasons for the sale. Do you believe he has misrepresented this reasoning? Are you aware of the issues surrounding Liberty and a potential change of control within the company? Are you aware of the age of the CEO?
"So we have the stock trading at $2.22 and the CEO selling early. Would he sell if he thought the stock was going higher?"
Partial sale, 9% of his total position. Would he hold 91% if he thought the stock was going lower?
"Liberty Media, which has been talked about in regard to buying the company, will not pay over $2.50 a share."
Where do you get the information that Liberty Media will not pay over $2.50 per share? You say this in definative fashion.
"Between the macroeconomic conditions, insider selling and the time of year, it seems as if the stock may have already peaked for the foreseeable future."
Other than insider selling, those issues, such as "time of year" are applicable to every stock, no? It's the same "time of year" for every stock, yes?
"For those who like option plays, I can see buying June 2012 "2" put option and holding it to see how far the stock moves. There is good support at $2.10. Even if the stock falls that much and the option increases in value 20%, it is a good move. The option presently is trading at $0.07, so the price is not that bad."
Looking to short term trade this put on the earnings call? Why would you buy the June $2 put at 7 cents (for most, 7.75 with fee) and turn around and sell it (cost basis 8.5 with fee) for a 20% swing (impossible at 7 cents since these trade in penny increments and 20% of 7 is 1.4, unless factoring in cost basis on purchase and sale at 11 cents but that would likely require a drop under $2.10) expecting $2.10 Better would be to buy the 2.50 put at 37 ( cost basis 38.5) and profit from a decline to 2.10 if you have bearish sentiment as this should be worth roughly 45, or 17%. Much safer with this in the money put. If the share price stays at 2.20 you retain most of your cash, if the share price increases to $2.30, $2.40, you lose about one half to 2/3 where buying the 2 put will see close to a complete loss on an upward swing.
Risky business on the 2 put, especially if as you say, strong support exists at 2.10.