sl62

Blockbuster Still Lacks a Digital Media Strategy, Ten Years Later

looks like your 1.25 late fee is now the price of BBI stock. Hmmm. Guess shareholders didn't have to wait all that long to be back over a buck..and, uh, which does not happen to be me. I just can see a crank agenda from a mile away and don't care for it. thank you and happy trading.


On Aug 19 02:20 PM Tomcat101 wrote:

> And BBI's customer service sucks too. Let's not forget that.
>
> At a time when they had HUGE signs all over every window on the store
> saying "NO LATE FEES", they hit me with a $1.25 late fee. They called
> it something like a "restocking fee".
>
> I asked the Asst. Mgr. for a refund. She said no. Asked the Store
> Mgr., she said no. Then I sent an email to the corp. office. Within
> a day or two the Regional Mgr. called me and refunded my money. All
> this over $1.25.
>
> If they go belly-up like Circuit City they have no one to blame but
> themselves.

Today May Be Markets' Turning Point

max12345..

some excellent points. Our job as market parasites, lol (the retail investor in general) is to follow the money and get out of the way of oncoming trains. Stocks go up and down when the decision makers say they do (i.e. GS). Look at C for example. Cramer flip flopped on them in a heartbeat because the word came down from his former bosses that C was to be shored up taken higher. No more "fortress five" lol, but suddenly they were a banking institution to be trusted and Vikram Pandit was a genius again. Overnight. Again, being successful in the market means closely slaving to the money flow.

I see in Pre this morning, catch-up hedge money/ probably foreign money continues to pour in. What we don't know is, the ratio of that money, to that which went long in March and helped create this entire move from the March low. Though I do believe there will not be a breach of the July 8,093 attempt at creating the double bottom, it will be interesting to see what happens when this current secondary money flow dries up. Congress is soon back, political issues come more to the fore again, and you have to believe there will be some attempt/opportunity to take this thing down at some point through about the end of October. 'If' that gets some traction, I would look for somewhere in the 8,700 range before then a turn back to here and a bit higher going into the end of the year. That wouldn't be that horrible and might then lastly quell all this talk of too far too fast and bring in even more money early next year. gl.


On Aug 23 03:12 AM max12345 wrote:

> I think Mr. "Albertarocks" above is more likely right than not. I
> am not sure if it's Bankers, but somebody out there certainly is
> manipulating markets.
>
> Something related to his argument that also may be useful to keep
> in mind is that nowadays there is not just one market, but several
> markets (with an "s") and although they are not totally decoupled
> from one another they are partially decoupled.
>
> For instance I don't think that Rothschild bankers manipulate the
> Chinese stock market all that much. (whether directly or indirectly)
> Though there is no doubt whatsoever that bureaucrats in Beijing DO
> manipulate it...and a whole lot. (so different countries have different
> rip-off artists and different schemes through which they operate)
>
>
> I would suggest that people (particularly Americans) start to apply
> the concept and basic principles of "political risk and country risk"
> ALSO to their investments (if any) in the U.S. and in U.S. markets.
>
>
> That is, in Russia one has to worry about the oligarchs, Mr. Putin
> and assorted Russian Mafiosi. In China one has to worry about Mr.
> Hu Jin Tao and the communist party. And in the U.S. one has to worry
> about mafiosi bankers, Goldman Sachs, lying and duplicitous Congressmen,
> and a bunch of other Wall Street rip-off artists.
>
> I also would add that generally speaking (and in international affairs
> in particular) the United States seems to be a lot more capable at
> coming up with fairly subtle and sophisticated propaganda and related
> practices (including in the financial and markets arena) that are
> "plausibly deniable" than -let us say- the Russians or the Chinese
> who tend to use much older and much more "crude" methods. (for example,
> arresting some innocent Rio Tinto employees and locking them in jail
> without charge)
>
> In the U.S. those who do the equivalent of "stealing state secrets"
> are rewarded with mega-jumbo bonuses or huge trading commissions
> instead...and the terms of the argument are ably shifted to become
> about the size of the bonus, not the length of the jail term.
>
> Two or three markets around our sorry world that seem to me to be
> marginally more honest are the Norwegian stock market (Norway has
> the World Bank's highest ranking on its good governance index) and
> the Canadian and Australian markets. Those countries are also resource
> or commodity countries and their markets include lots of small and
> medium-sized businesses.
>
> The preceding characteristics make it harder (though of course not
> impossible) for assorted rip-off artists to concoct schemes to steal
> from the small retail investor investing in those markets.
>
> So watch out for that "country and political risk" (as understood
> more widely and more properly) and good luck with your foreign investments,
> including those you make in the United States.
>
> Caveat Emptor.

Today May Be Markets' Turning Point

logan...

good presentation..esp. showing the trend line. And how clearly we can see the dreaded double top. Folks, the next time you see a double top in the Dow (or whatever it may be called in the future now that it's for sale lol), I would run for your investor life..I will be. But...looking at my Dow candle chart and using closing prices not intraday, my trend-line is essentially the same as yours. In which we see the down-trend tops staying very true to this line...except in the case of wk of April 14, 2008 - wk of May 5, 2008, where it broke up past the trend briefly...then immediately turned back down. Wk of 14th it closed @ 12,849 and wk of the 5th, it closed @ 13,058 or a gain of 209 pts past the trend. So here we are as of now. As said, by my candle chart, it is saying we officially broke through the trend line wk of August 3 with a close @ 9,370. Yesterday the close was 9,506..a gain for the period of 136 pts...again pts breaking the trend line. So. Is this the same small peak past then a dip back below in a significant way? Hard to say. The upcoming time period would suggest it's certainly plausible. Notoriously, post Labor Day, a certain down mentality seems to want to pervade the marketplace through October..but this year we have a wildcard...which is that coming off such a historic meltdown, slowly improving economic metrics..which would keep any major down initiative at bay (provided those metrics do continue showing improvement. Case in point is housing per yesterday's numbers. Overall the headline was positive and slowly improving..yet a closer look at the numbers show that only lower priced and foreclosure properties showed increases. But the headline is what generally drives the sentiment as we know...which it did yesterday also. So as I believe we will continue to get enough "headlines" over the next 60 days, I would expect more of a stable period. Not up wildly, but not seriously crashing back below the trend line either.

Something else to consider regarding the trend line… As we see, it is a down trend, and has been so now since the double top in Oct of 2007. One has to ask the question: how long do major downtrends generally last? Over the past 20 years, the only other major down trend we've seen is Jan 2000 - March 2003...another bubble. So a period of 3.3 years until a recovery had begun. Currently we are @ 1.9 years peak to trough..however with the caveat that we also dropped much faster during this trend and have already bounced off of the ostensible low. The only other major down turn the Dow has seen in the last 20 years was a quick drop the summer of 1998 where it fell from a high of 9,368 to a low of 7,400 July to September...which also leads to something that may spark a debate of its own. That '98 low of 7,400, the 2003 low of 7,197 and this March's low of 6,470 essentially could be perceived as a triple bottom..a sign of support (speaking in general vicinity terms since we're talking such a large time window). Now, however, on the other side of that debate...this can also be interpreted as making lower lows (which many of us know is not known to be a good sign for overall upward momentum).

OK. So. what's my take? Given much of the above, I believe the only real litmus we have for "modern times" as it were, is the 2000-2003 downturn. Anything else prior is just too different in scope and historical times. Meaning...Dow 4,000's (which we left behind in Nov 1995) is just no longer realistic unless we have an even worse meltdown from here..and I do not see that happening anytime soon short of some geo-political catastrophe. If I look at the lows of 2003 (double bottom), I see what I believe sets this March '09 low slightly apart. In '03, the second leg of the double bottom happened after a high of 9,043 and that was in Dec of 2002. The first leg of that bottom was a selloff to the actual low of the period (7,147) from April - October. Then a climb back to 9,043, then the second leg bottom of 7,417 (all intraday lows). Now in '09, we set the March 6,470 low in March. In July, after hitting a high of 8,878, another low was registered that same month of 8,093..which I would call a pretty healthy sell-off of what I believe was intended to be the test for the double bottom. However, what cut that short of completion was improving economic data (which we continue to see to-date). So my thesis is, I consider 2003 and 2009 to be very similar in nature (both uniquely prolonged down-turns based on massive bubble bursts), so I would expect very similar bottoming action. I believe the July 8,093 was actually the second leg of the double bottom (or as much as could be gotten out of it due to ever-improving economic metrics). So given my belief that the bottom is in, the double bottom was successfully attempted, and that this down trend must end at a bottom as in 2003, we should be poised not for a fall takedown of any significance and should begin to see us begin to maintain traction above the current down-trend line. As in 2003, we should see a range in the next year of 9,400 - 10,800. From there it will all depend on how the Fed manages all the monetization that has been done and inflationary issues. I say keep Bernanke on and let him keep flying the plane. He should be allowed to finish his own vision (which will take the next few years to complete). that's my take. gl to all.

SEC Makes a Move on Naked Short Selling: Too Little, Too Late for Sirius

raf...

well-summarized....


On Jul 29 06:59 AM R A F wrote:

> With six trading sessions left until the August 6 release of 2nd
> Qtr. earnings and guidance data, let's look at the prevailing framework:
> There will be no intervening significant news for SIRI between now
> and August 6 (save the usual "bashing" from the usual suspects -
> Motley Fool, Street.com, etc. - which is now "old hat" and certainly
> not significant) so price action for SIRI is likely to continue in
> its present mode over the next week - firm on pullbacks, resilient
> on dips, and biased toward further testing of the upside. In my opinion
> - markets are already looking beyond this upcoming 2nd Qtr. release,
> toward the next two releases into yearend '09 and early 2010. This
> is because the 2nd Qtr. will reflect past economic conditions (first
> half of '09 when the U S economy was in dire straits) and that period
> of time now seems to be over, with a recovery underway. For this
> reason - markets are likely to treat much of the data within the
> release as "old news" and focus more intently on the guidance going
> forward - which is likely to be more positive than originally anticipated.
> SIRI's participation in two platforms of great potential - the iPhone
> App and the replacement of the ageing U S auto fleet should keep
> SIRI investors now focused on positive long term potential - well
> beyond that indicated with this 2nd Qtr. release on its own. This
> should bias all trading over the near term - tending to keep present
> SIRI investors remaining long through this period and keeping shorts
> increasingly nervous as inadequate supply comes on the market for
> purposes of covering until prices push to the next higher level.

SEC Makes a Move on Naked Short Selling: Too Little, Too Late for Sirius

siridoom...

you keep typing the same information regarding the merger financing and GS. I am forced to ask you to provide this board with your proof that Mel did a convertible deal at the merger with GS (as you keep saying) that they are currently hedging. c'mon man..please provide some factual references to support your thesis. The time is now.



On Jul 28 12:49 PM SIRI-Doom wrote:

> SIRI is shorted but not naked...
>
> Mel KarmaCrook provided Goldman Sacks a loan guarantee of SIRI stock
> on the day of the merger.
>
> Goldman Sacks uses the guarantee stocks to short and hedge the loan.
>
>
> It was Mel's "quick and Dirty" merger that provided mass shorting...
> Get a clue...

Holding Sirius Stock: An Exercise in Humility

one last thing..and a pet peeve of mine for the sake of accuracy. As was pointed out, there are two kinds of splits. One, a forward split, where the sharehoder receives more shares to their existing 1..and which is denoted by the larger shares listed before the one base share (2:1). Or a reverse split where the shareholder winds up with less shares but equivalent total shareholder value due to a higher compensatory price per share..and which is denoted by the share divisor listed after the one base share (1:10). My meaning here is when you write 10:1, though you mean to refer to a reverse, you are actually writing a forward split where the shareholder will receive 10 new shares for every one they own. And in the case of a reverse, this would not be accurate. Not ragging on anyone, just saying.

Holding Sirius Stock: An Exercise in Humility

Neal B..

Haven't seen you in a while..hope all is well. Good post as usual. I think where the SP is concerned, there a just a few hurdles left in the short-term. Including squaring away the remaining Sept and Dec '09 debt and then of course hopefully dealing with the 2014 550M convertible financing that carries a 1.875 conversion price. If that is left in place of course this SP would get no higher and stay below that range, pre-reverse. But as you say, overall the future of this company looks very bright. 2010 should be when we see more upward movement in the stock..at least getting back over a buck thus washing out the NASD minimum bid non-compliance violation that will be issued as of 9/3 (assuming the state off things remains equal). And of course as you say by 2011...the picture will just look so much different.


On Jul 27 09:06 AM Neal Barkett wrote:

> If we look at this stock from a realistic view, it basicly comes
> down to where are they compared to other stocks when this economy
> turns around. They like most other companies have cut a lot of the
> fat off of expenses , especially since the merger has been completed
> (that was the idea of the merger). They are also trying to work on
> other revenue streams besides the auto industry. They were at a point
> close to death and given thru the media there last rights on a daily
> basis. It was a wake up call that though so very painfull for all
> involved that gave them a "coming to Jesus experiance". Not a good
> thing in the short run but no doubt they have been forced at how
> they were doing business and opened up their minds (Malones input
> doesn't hurt either). So say what you will this company with there
> streamlining and there Great headway into the % of cars w' factory
> installed Sat radios they are poised to be one of the front runners
> when this economy turns around. The only major concern is the economy
> must turn around in the next couple of years or the storm clouds
> will start forming again. My non- professional guess if a decent
> economic turn around would occur in the next year I wold think the
> stock price would be @ $3.00-$3.50 by the end of 2011. Long &
> Strong SIRI

Holding Sirius Stock: An Exercise in Humility

siridoom...

that of course would be the form 7/30 424b5...it's early. Happy reading....


On Jul 27 09:01 AM sl62 wrote:

> siridoom...
>
> I believe I have told you this before but...

Holding Sirius Stock: An Exercise in Humility

siridoom...

I believe I have told you this before but...

>>SIRI stock is rigged with a Goldman Sacks Computer in control. People talk about "THE SHORTS". They do not understand it is a GS hedge that Mel issued to guarantee the GS loan. Mel rigged SIRI with GS the day of the merge<<

This is incorrect. If you reference the 7/30 525b4, you will see that GS is not involved with the merger financing per se and therefore not connected to that hedge. The two IB's connected with that XM 550M deal are Stanley and UBS. GS's convertible from 2004 was the Feb '09 Note maturity that nearly bankrupted SIRI. But that was hedged in years gone by and as we know, they no longer even held the debt at the end.

Now. Having said that...I won't disgree with you that GS remains active in SIRI trading. Even though it is confirmed through mffais that they have a substantial long holding still in SIRI, they also know the resistance levels the SP currently faces esp through Dec of 2009. We know from their recent earnings report that GS's trading business was their most profitable in Q2..so it's safe for me to assume that they have been playing SIRI both ways..knowing their long position will pay off in due time..of which they have plenty. But..when you're quoting facts on the current 2014 XM ugly deal hedge that was created to close the merger, you are mis-speaking to say it is GS that is behind it. If as you say this board is a joke because of innacurate facts, you need to also be correct on yours.


On Jul 27 06:03 AM SIRI-Doom wrote:

> Great question:
> Would you pay even 1 penny to let someone rob you of $1? No. So why
> would you invest in a failing company.
>
> I agree. For me, it is pride. That gangster CEO, Mel KarmaCrook duped
> all the pre-merger longs and I am getting some back 3 cents at a
> time.
>
> SIRI stock is rigged with a Goldman Sacks Computer in control. People
> talk about "THE SHORTS". They do not understand it is a GS hedge
> that Mel issued to guarantee the GS loan. Mel rigged SIRI with GS
> the day of the merger.
>
> They Milk people who refuse to belive reality. But not me. I have
> worked that computer for 11 months to recover from that theif. <br/>

Blockbuster Still Lacks a Digital Media Strategy, Ten Years Later

mr rayburn...

Again, nothing against you but I am unsure of your agenda. I have to wonder what makes someone write so many words on the perceived lack of development by this company in the digital media delivery space. Something irks you that much, yet you say you are neutral the company in every way? I'm perplexed by your empassioned motivation. Maybe you can enlighten me. And again, your company comparisons between BBI, iTunes (AAPL), Netflix, et al, also make me wonder. You never addressed my issue that BBI is postioned very differently than any of those other companies. Why? Because BBI is the one coming off and evolving from being completely dominant in the B&M video rental space as it once existed.

>>with more than 7,400 company-owned or franchised stores in more than 20 countries (about 60% are in the US). The chain rents more than 1 billion videos, DVDs, and video games at its Blockbuster Video outlets each year.<<

Why can't you just admit that their evolution into the digital media arena is much much much different than anyone else. Instead you vilify them for it. Did Netflix corner the VHS/then DVD video store rental market since 1985? Have they ammassed 7400 stores in more than 20 countries? iTunes? No they haven't. Netflix came along in 1999 with a new spin on the DVD delivery market (for lazy American consumers I might add) and it took hold. Good for them and I applaud their success. With no B&M from go, you're surprised they so easily transitioned into digital delivery and are successful at it? It's really a no-brainer. But again, apples and oranges to the BBI model that will take much longer for that same saturated transition (because of from where it is they are coming and who their comsumer base is). Knowing these issues of disparity that exist between the different companies in the space I am at least willing to let BBI continue to show me some new moves as they continue working into digital. Yes, they have work to do, but I just told you why my posts. Will they ever become the new leader in the new space..I doubt it. But because of their advantage when it comes to access to actuakl content, I won't say never. But they've been leading their space as it existed for MANY years. They're like a lot of companies coming from all B&M roots. They are reinventing themselves over time. Not in the snap of your fingers as you would like. I asked you in my last post. What would you do with all the stores? Close them all down at the same time and just proclaim we are now only about digital?? c'mon man...

Again, I'm not sure from where your uber passion eminates that BBI is not the current leader in digital delivery. But whatever. You say you don't own the stock. Are you a bondholder? For a guy with seemingly no connection to the company, your article wreaks of bitterness, and a sense of urgency for changes to be made. What gives?

Lastly with 2008 sales @ $5.3B, I think this company has more than just a chance at successfully completing their evolution into the brave new all-digital world.

Blockbuster Still Lacks a Digital Media Strategy, Ten Years Later

mr rayburn...

My response is a response to your rambling, redundant article. I have nothing against you, but that's what your article does. It rambles about how BBI's digital strategy progress doesn't conform to your standards to-date. Whether or not you even present facts in this case is irrelevant because that is strictly your opinion. The truth is, just by the Samsung deal alone, it is proven they have a digital strategy. But again, not far advanced enough for your liking. Ok. I can accept your opinion but not over and over and over. Your article should have been half as long and I don't feel like you proved your case, because your case was weak to begin with. Again. THE FACTS are that BBI has proven they have "some" strategy in place RIGHT NOW and are developing it. Facts about current deals that you yourself present, that I reiterated, and which are common knowledge to anyone familiar with this company. Finally, the fact that you ended with pure conjecture bothers me. Again, it's your opinion, but nowhere near necessarily accurate. And..you yourself admitted the online delivery industry is still in its infancy. I don't know what kind of businessman you are but my experience supports that being a leader in anything that is still in its infancy, means very little and doesn't ensure longevity nor long-term profitablity. Did you ever stop to think it IS BBI's strategy to be a little late to a party that is no where near ramped up? What you are doing is not allowing for how the company is currently gauging their own consumer base. Did you ever also think that their current loyal base which now dates back to 1985, are of certain demographics that don't even freaking know what the word digital means? The transition they are making is tricky because of the heavy legacy they still must successfully manage...retaining current loyal muscle-memory consumers used to the B&M space, while at the same time showing both that contingent AND new and future contingents the new directions in which they are heading. You think this is easy??? They have little choice but to transition slower from their heavy B&M legacy. Or would you say I'm just dreaming this?? But you can only make apples to oranges comparisons to their newer age start-up model competitors who have no connection whatsoever to B&M nor what it means to have to navigate and ween away from such a model. All you can say is "look at how cool Netflix is..they don't use any B&M..they leave BBI in the dust!" Apples and oranges my friend.

For you to just rant on about how they are not digital enough for your taste is not much of an argument. Sorry. In my humble opinion, BBI is still a viable player in the space and will continue to be so for many years to come as they change with the industry. Not at the pace you want them to change, but at the pace that makes sense for the business as a whole. As said, come back in another year and I want to hear what you have to say then as to how the company is doing. Thank you.

Blockbuster Still Lacks a Digital Media Strategy, Ten Years Later

Man...you're a bitter dude. And thanks for telling us why up front:

>>Globix never did get Blockbuster's delivery business <<

Still hurting from not getting their business my friend? I think so. Get over it and move on. Writing incessant crap like l this over and over and over "where is your digital strategy" "and "boo hoo..mommy, mommy, they're not compatible with my precious mac" does not an informative article make.

And this:

>>Sadly, I don't think Blockbuster will ever be a leader in the digital media arena. While I don't think it's too late in the market, they simply don't have the mentality or the foresight that they showed ten years ago. And while the online video movie industry is still in its infancy, if and when Blockbuster gets its act together, I think the opportunity will have already passed them by.<<

is a completely nutty swirling sucking eddy of conjecture and contradiction. So..let's see. According to you, the online video industry is still in its infancy (which you are correct, it is and still years away from being de rigeur)...yet you're betting your house, wife and kids that BBI has already missed the boat? Missed the boat of an emerging industry still in its infancy? How do you make that correlation? When they are announcing deals like with Samsung this week and the deal with TiVo earlier? Just because you're not happy with how those moves fit into YOUR life, or maybe they are a little later than others who never came from all B&M and freaking VHS, it doesn't mean they're not good moves or that the company is not thinking about the future of their own industry. Making the transition from 100% B&M, coming from the simplicity of VHS, et al, into digital and online delivery is not as immediate as you flippantly make it out to be. They can't just implement a brand new model on a dime while they still have all the legacy B&M out there still. What do you suggest? They just close all their stores down and become Netflix? And to that, Netflix has their own issues with DVD headed for extinction. Doesn't work that way my man. And so what 'if' they are experimenting with things like kiosks, that favor the concept that people actually LIKE GOING OUT WHERE OTHER PEOPLE ARE and not sitting in front of a boring computer. So what?...if they haven't yet decided to totally abandon the social consumer experience model. They're trying it to see if a hybrid shows any strength (while they still have the capability). If not, they'll keep moving on. Fact is, they have more than enough time to experiment a little to assess the future mix of B&M (while they continue to tighten that up by downsizing the number of stores) and while also putting the new digital model in place. They are a behemoth brand that has many more issues to deal with than you give them credit for. But they clearly show, they are making the moves they should be making on the digital side of the equation to eventually arrive at the right mix of delivery strategy.. but please.. Never forget my friend, that BBI holds pocket aces over their competition when it comes to CONTENT (which as we know is king!). And in this case meaning they get new movie content before any competitor, who have to wait for the PPV release market. What will you write about when they fully complete their model mix transition AND they are the first-in supplier of content. Hmmm. I'll look for your next article about a year from now. Can't wait to see what dirty socks you'll have in your mouth then!

Take a breath, grab a beer and reboot your take on the world. My advice to you: please stop thinking about how BBI "screwed you" back in 1999 and go follow another company. Thank you.

Is Sirius XM Positioned for Government Contracts?

siridoom....

give this thing a chance...it will surprise you sooner than later...

Is Sirius XM Positioned for Government Contracts?

siridoombag...

c'mon man...wtf, bro? Man you are a bitter dude. Always bringing enough hate to go around and then some. Here's a suggestion: go hunt down M. Hartlieb and MarkbMark and get with those guys. File a few lawsuits, go picket outside the ivory tower, make appearances on FBN, CNBC (oh wait, CNBC won't have anything to do with you because they're not hard up for ratings plus they go beyond hate for SIRI, they just pretend the company doesn't even exist), and all the rest. You're spending waaaay too much time here calling out Mel as a crook. You need to get over that fixation. Esp, if you go back and do some research. If you do, you'll see that Mel had ZERO to do with tanking an SP that was bid up by a euphoric market, not Mel. Remember $150bbl oil last year?

For those interested in facts, here's the real deal:

>> *SIRI hit its tech bubble high here:
03/06/00 V382,900 H68.00 L64.75 O65.375 C65.0625.
*By Oct 1 2002, the SP was here:
10/01/02 V1.28M H1.02 L0.80 O1.00 C0.90
*Into Q1 of '03 the SP was here:
03/14/03 V23.48M H0.45 L0.389 O0.42 C0.41
*On no profits, and the market crashing back to reality, this will surprises no one (except maybe Siridoombag).

*From there specualtion began creeping back in:
05/30/03 V133.44M H1.60 L1.45 O1.50 C1.60
01/05/04 V302.29M H4.20 L3.44 O4.191 C3.50
09/28/04 V39.49M H2.77 L2.60 O2.751 C2.65<<

*Then on Oct 6, 2004, the Howard news broke that he would start on Sirius in Jan of 2006 and this is what happened:
10/06/04 V344.15M H4.29 L3.6701 O4.2495 C3.87

*Then on Nov 19, 2004, MEL JOINED SIRIUS and this is what happened:
11/19/04 V317.10M H5.55 L5.02 O5.535 C5.17
12/07/04 V408.69M H9.43 L8.50 O8.69 C9.014

*Then you had this period:
12/08/04 V582.10M H8.101 L6.58 O7.89 C6.90
01/11/05 V134.92M H6.74 L5.99 O6.70 C6.10
04/27/05 V92.60M H4.88 L4.357 O4.65 C4.67
07/27/05 V15.78M H7.001 L6.936 O7.00 C6.97
11/16/05 V64.79M H7.4601 L7.24 O7.24 C7.40

*Then Howard showed up in Jan of 2006 and it was downhill from there.<<

Now. Siridoom. Please explain to me again how Mel is responsible for the SP decline again? He took over a company that had no profits and a hyper-inflated SP all based on OVER SPECULATION. And I know you know in general SIRI is a spec play without me having to tell you that, no matter what the SP is. According to your logic, Mel K entered into a win/win. Wrong. The facts say he entered into a lose/lose. Through which body hole exactly was he supposed to push out profits? Knowing that, he set out, and executed, the strategy he was brought in for: to GROW the company. Siridoom. I know you know the expense of high growth. Heavy expenditure will always ensue my friend. And so that phase of the story culminates on July 28 of last year when he did the impossible, but also the correct and very logical. Expand the company exponentially through acquisition. And what part of LBO don't you understand or the costs related to one? And a deal that should have been done at least 6 months before it was done were it not for those who never wanted it to happen in attempts to save their own necks and very livelyhoods. What part of that don't you understand? Do I also have to remind you that the revalue SP was $1.50? Given an apples to apples economic situation, the SP never would have been able to be taken down from that. Do I have to remind you of the credit freeze that began even before the deal was completed? Which led to a forced financing with loan sharks MS and UBS that came with a hedge? That required 74M sh to be lent out to potentially hurt the SP given the right prolonged bad news? Which perfectly came true right on queue and in spades as 100 y/o fnancal institutions were going bankrupt and the world's economy was unraveling across the board? What part of that don't you get? Look. you can hate on Mel as much as you want, or this company, whch provides a unique and desired service to society. But we're going to refute your accusations that aren't backed up by facts. That way readers can decide for themselves if they should follow your way of thinking. The facts are that SiriusXM is essentially a brand new company. Satrad, as a concept with multiple players in the space is not new. SiriusXM as a single entity and monopoly, is brand new to the world as of 7/28/08. So what does any new company deserve? Time. What I see so far is nothing short of great progress. I have a Kia spot running in my market right now that calls out Satrad as a standard offering to their stable of features. This is what you are seeing and will see much more of every month from here on out. Satrad in the car is next to becoming THE standard for radio delivery already because of all the entertainment and navigation that comes with it. It's an entertaiment PORTAL to your car the same way your fav web portals are to your computer. That is the new "radio". Radio as the music and AM talk stream we once knew is all but dead and in the casket. You'll see this in the coming years. Mel is responsible for effectively creating a new company that will outshine ALL of its peers and competition in very short order. .38 SP? What a joke and not long to be a distant memory. Now with it also on the iphone, you will see better proliferation outside the car also. This is a can't lose deal my friend. NO matter how bitter you want to be about what has come before and whomever you want to erroneously blame, Sirius XM will be shutting people like you up also in short order. So, I would say enjoy your time while it lasts. Or maybe just look at yourself in the mirror and take responsibility for your own trades on a spec stock that fell of the table on you. Maybe call up some of the dudes who lost their ass in oil last year because they didn't do their DD and bitch and moan with them about how the big bad market took your money. You gotta play smart my fiend. When you play smart, you don't get hurt. And if/when you should happen to get hurt, you don't bitch and moan, you move on and alter your strategy to make up for your own shortcomings. Think about it.

Lastly...

You are providing more bad info the community. you said:

>>SIRI DEBT
2010: $350 in loans coming due<<

This is incorrect. Where is the new bond deal in your numbers? That money is no longer due next year:

>>NEW YORK, June 25 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- XM Satellite Radio Inc., a wholly owned indirect subsidiary of SIRIUS XM Radio (Nasdaq: SIRI - News), priced an offering of $525,750,000 of Senior Secured Notes due 2013. The offering size was increased today from $350,000,000 in response to strong investor demand.
The notes, which were offered pursuant to Rule 144A and Regulation S under the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act"), will bear interest at an annual rate of 11.25%. The price to investors will be 95.093% of the principal amount of the notes. The company will receive gross proceeds of $499,951,448 from the sale of the notes before deducting the initial purchaser's commissions and estimated offering expenses. The notes will be guaranteed by XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. and certain subsidiaries. XM will use the net proceeds from the offering to repay all amounts outstanding under its amended and restated credit agreement; to replace the $150 million second-lien credit agreement with Liberty Media Corporation, which will be terminated upon the closing of the offering; and to refinance or repay other debt of XM and XM Holdings. The balance of the net proceeds, if any, will be used for general corporate purposes.<<

>>Form 8-K for SIRIUS XM RADIO INC.
*On March 6, 2009, XM Satellite Radio Inc. ("XM"), our wholly-owned subsidiary, amended and restated (i) the $100 million Credit Agreement, dated as of June 26, 2008, among XM, XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc., our wholly-owned subsidiary and the parent of XM ("XM Holdings"), the lenders named therein and UBS AG, as administrative agent (the "UBS Term Loan") and (ii) the $250 million Credit Agreement, dated as of May 5, 2006, among XM, XM Holdings, the lenders named therein and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent (the "JPM Revolver" and, together with the UBS Term Loan, the "Previous Facilities"). The Previous Facilities have been combined as term loans into the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of March 6, 2009, among XM, XM Holdings, the lenders named therein and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent (the "First-Lien Credit Agreement"), and Liberty Media LLC (the "Purchaser") has purchased $100 million aggregate principal amount of such loans from the lenders.

*On March 6, 2009, XM entered into an Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (the "Second-Lien Credit Agreement") with Liberty Media Corporation, as administrative agent and collateral agent, and simultaneously closed the facility. Pursuant to the Second-Lien Credit Agreement, XM may borrow $150 million aggregate principal amount of term loans on December 1, 2009. The proceeds of the loans will be used to repay a portion of the 10% Convertible Notes due 2009 of XM Holdings on the stated maturity date thereof. The Second-Lien Credit Agreement matures on March 1, 2011, and bears interest at 15% per annum.<<

Sirius XM Extends Itself Globally

everyone be good...next week could be the a make up week for this weeks shat....