FoolNHisMoney's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/299275/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/126535-an-end-to-sirius-stock-manipulation-may-be-in-sight?source=feed#comment-433048 433048

On Mar 19 10:14 AM rtatp31 wrote:

> What ever happened to our friend Relmar?]]> Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:06:37 -0400

On Mar 19 10:14 AM rtatp31 wrote:

> What ever happened to our friend Relmar?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/126153-nicemac-too-early-with-iphone-app-for-sirius-xm-radio?source=feed#comment-427825 427825 Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:55:01 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/123391-usirius-iphone-application-is-denied?source=feed#comment-409912 409912
. . . and WTH just happened here?!


On Mar 02 02:46 PM ZealonsUnited wrote:

> Important message from Seeking Alpha editors: This comment has been
> deleted because it was not a response to the article, but was general
> chat about SIRI's stock with a group of other users.
>
> We care about this because a large number of comments below an article
> slows down the page load time, and it frustrates our other readers
> because the comments have no relationship to the article.
>
> We've built a forum/message board specifically for this purpose --
> it allows instantaneous posting of comments and immediate view of
> other messages: seekingalpha.com/mb/to...]]> Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:31:50 -0500
. . . and WTH just happened here?!


On Mar 02 02:46 PM ZealonsUnited wrote:

> Important message from Seeking Alpha editors: This comment has been
> deleted because it was not a response to the article, but was general
> chat about SIRI's stock with a group of other users.
>
> We care about this because a large number of comments below an article
> slows down the page load time, and it frustrates our other readers
> because the comments have no relationship to the article.
>
> We've built a forum/message board specifically for this purpose --
> it allows instantaneous posting of comments and immediate view of
> other messages: seekingalpha.com/mb/to...]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122952-sirius-xm-looking-ahead-to-fourth-quarter-results?source=feed#comment-406403 406403 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:27:54 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/122952-sirius-xm-looking-ahead-to-fourth-quarter-results?source=feed#comment-406392 406392

On Feb 27 04:16 PM cos1000 wrote:
>
> FoolNHisMoney,
> I did check their last quarter filing cover sheet and they indeed
> are filing as Large Accelerated Filers (60 days) and not Accelerated
> Filers (75 days) as I had thought. I don't think their is anyway
> for them to change their status once that quarter was filed after
> the merger..... we'll see soon enough....]]> Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:24:06 -0500

On Feb 27 04:16 PM cos1000 wrote:
>
> FoolNHisMoney,
> I did check their last quarter filing cover sheet and they indeed
> are filing as Large Accelerated Filers (60 days) and not Accelerated
> Filers (75 days) as I had thought. I don't think their is anyway
> for them to change their status once that quarter was filed after
> the merger..... we'll see soon enough....]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122952-sirius-xm-looking-ahead-to-fourth-quarter-results?source=feed#comment-406393 406393

On Feb 27 04:16 PM cos1000 wrote:
>
> FoolNHisMoney,
> I did check their last quarter filing cover sheet and they indeed
> are filing as Large Accelerated Filers (60 days) and not Accelerated
> Filers (75 days) as I had thought. I don't think their is anyway
> for them to change their status once that quarter was filed after
> the merger..... we'll see soon enough....]]> Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:24:05 -0500

On Feb 27 04:16 PM cos1000 wrote:
>
> FoolNHisMoney,
> I did check their last quarter filing cover sheet and they indeed
> are filing as Large Accelerated Filers (60 days) and not Accelerated
> Filers (75 days) as I had thought. I don't think their is anyway
> for them to change their status once that quarter was filed after
> the merger..... we'll see soon enough....]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122952-sirius-xm-looking-ahead-to-fourth-quarter-results?source=feed#comment-406357 406357 ]]> Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:00:03 -0500 ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122952-sirius-xm-looking-ahead-to-fourth-quarter-results?source=feed#comment-406348 406348 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:54:34 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/122952-sirius-xm-looking-ahead-to-fourth-quarter-results?source=feed#comment-406343 406343
Wow, just saw a spike to .146. looks like we're getting a run up to close!]]> Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:52:23 -0500
Wow, just saw a spike to .146. looks like we're getting a run up to close!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122952-sirius-xm-looking-ahead-to-fourth-quarter-results?source=feed#comment-406291 406291 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:15:44 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/122952-sirius-xm-looking-ahead-to-fourth-quarter-results?source=feed#comment-406287 406287 Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:13:48 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/122221-sirius-xm-media-s-fear-mongering-has-gone-on-long-enough?source=feed#comment-402951 402951
163888, nah don’t worry, like I said, I wasn’t upset about it – start getting upset by things you read on the interweb is a sure way to drive yourself nuts! Just wanted to clear the air. And your point about the timing of an announcement for debt restructuring and the CC is valid, but nothing about this stock makes sense so who knows what will happen. It wouldn’t surprise me to see them file for an extension on the 10K to kick that can further down the road as well and we hear nothing!
]]> Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:36:17 -0500
163888, nah don’t worry, like I said, I wasn’t upset about it – start getting upset by things you read on the interweb is a sure way to drive yourself nuts! Just wanted to clear the air. And your point about the timing of an announcement for debt restructuring and the CC is valid, but nothing about this stock makes sense so who knows what will happen. It wouldn’t surprise me to see them file for an extension on the 10K to kick that can further down the road as well and we hear nothing!
]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122221-sirius-xm-media-s-fear-mongering-has-gone-on-long-enough?source=feed#comment-402248 402248 Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:50:02 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/122221-sirius-xm-media-s-fear-mongering-has-gone-on-long-enough?source=feed#comment-402244 402244
The first link I put above WAS from Revision 33-8644 (the latest TMK). It clearly states the last day of Q2 and does not qualify it as being for a transition period. There were specific roll-in phases to handle the transition so there is not need for a one-time “last day of Q2 rule.” The EOY statement is confusing because it leads you to believe that it means meeting market cap as of EOY. That is NOT what it means – what it means is that the DETERMINATION of Accelerated Filer status need only be made at EOY (not whether or not you are an Accelerated Filer). The determination for Accelerated Filer status is in Section III of 33-8644 (the first bulleted point in the paragraph) – I’ll paste it here again:

www.sec.gov/rules/fina...
“Create a new category of accelerated filer, the “large accelerated filer,” that encompasses an issuer after it first has an aggregate worldwide market value of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the issuer of $700 million or more, as of the last business day of the issuer’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter”

Let me see if I can make it clearer with this example. It is for Accelerated Filer, but Large Accelerated filer should be the same. It is from Question 130.04 in an SEC quidance document intended to help interpret the Exchange Act rules.

sec.gov/divisions/corp...
Question 130.04: A longtime Exchange Act reporting company with a fiscal year ending December 31, 2008 is not an accelerated filer for filings due in fiscal year 2008 and is also eligible to use the requirements for smaller reporting companies for its annual and quarterly reports for fiscal year 2008. As of the last business day of its second fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2008, the company determined that its public float exceeded $75 million, which means that it must start using the larger reporting company requirements in fiscal year 2009, starting with its first quarter Form 10-Q. As permitted by Item 10(f)(2)(i) of Regulation S-K, the company’s last periodic report using the smaller reporting company requirements will be its Form 10-K for fiscal year 2008. Does this mean that the smaller reporting company remains a non-accelerated filer as of the end of the fiscal year with respect to that Form 10-K and future reports because one condition to meet in order to be an accelerated filer or a large accelerated filer is that the issuer “is not eligible to use the requirements for smaller reporting companies in Part 229 of this chapter for its annual and quarterly reports”? See Exchange Act Rules 12b-2(1)(iv) and 12b-2(2)(iv).

Answer: No. When the Commission adopted the smaller reporting company requirements in 2007, it did not also change the manner in which a company transitions to accelerated filer status. A company’s accelerated filer status is determined as of the end of its fiscal year. As of that date, the company will meet the condition in the “accelerated filer” definition that its public float on the last business day of its second fiscal quarter exceed $75 million. In contrast, the determination date for smaller reporting company status is the last business day of the second fiscal quarter. On that date, a larger reporting company that determines it is a smaller reporting company is permitted to transition to the smaller reporting requirements for that quarter's Form 10-Q. “A smaller reporting company required to transition to the larger reporting system after its determination date calculation will not be required to satisfy the larger reporting company disclosure requirements until the first quarter after the determination date fiscal year.” Release No. 33-8876. The fact that the transition period for a company moving to the larger reporting system includes the end of the fiscal year does not mean that the company, as of the end of the fiscal year, is “eligible to use the requirements for smaller reporting companies” for purposes of Exchange Act Rules 12b-2(1)(iv) and 12b-2(2)(iv). [September 30, 2008]]]> Tue, 24 Feb 2009 20:45:03 -0500
The first link I put above WAS from Revision 33-8644 (the latest TMK). It clearly states the last day of Q2 and does not qualify it as being for a transition period. There were specific roll-in phases to handle the transition so there is not need for a one-time “last day of Q2 rule.” The EOY statement is confusing because it leads you to believe that it means meeting market cap as of EOY. That is NOT what it means – what it means is that the DETERMINATION of Accelerated Filer status need only be made at EOY (not whether or not you are an Accelerated Filer). The determination for Accelerated Filer status is in Section III of 33-8644 (the first bulleted point in the paragraph) – I’ll paste it here again:

www.sec.gov/rules/fina...
“Create a new category of accelerated filer, the “large accelerated filer,” that encompasses an issuer after it first has an aggregate worldwide market value of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the issuer of $700 million or more, as of the last business day of the issuer’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter”

Let me see if I can make it clearer with this example. It is for Accelerated Filer, but Large Accelerated filer should be the same. It is from Question 130.04 in an SEC quidance document intended to help interpret the Exchange Act rules.

sec.gov/divisions/corp...
Question 130.04: A longtime Exchange Act reporting company with a fiscal year ending December 31, 2008 is not an accelerated filer for filings due in fiscal year 2008 and is also eligible to use the requirements for smaller reporting companies for its annual and quarterly reports for fiscal year 2008. As of the last business day of its second fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2008, the company determined that its public float exceeded $75 million, which means that it must start using the larger reporting company requirements in fiscal year 2009, starting with its first quarter Form 10-Q. As permitted by Item 10(f)(2)(i) of Regulation S-K, the company’s last periodic report using the smaller reporting company requirements will be its Form 10-K for fiscal year 2008. Does this mean that the smaller reporting company remains a non-accelerated filer as of the end of the fiscal year with respect to that Form 10-K and future reports because one condition to meet in order to be an accelerated filer or a large accelerated filer is that the issuer “is not eligible to use the requirements for smaller reporting companies in Part 229 of this chapter for its annual and quarterly reports”? See Exchange Act Rules 12b-2(1)(iv) and 12b-2(2)(iv).

Answer: No. When the Commission adopted the smaller reporting company requirements in 2007, it did not also change the manner in which a company transitions to accelerated filer status. A company’s accelerated filer status is determined as of the end of its fiscal year. As of that date, the company will meet the condition in the “accelerated filer” definition that its public float on the last business day of its second fiscal quarter exceed $75 million. In contrast, the determination date for smaller reporting company status is the last business day of the second fiscal quarter. On that date, a larger reporting company that determines it is a smaller reporting company is permitted to transition to the smaller reporting requirements for that quarter's Form 10-Q. “A smaller reporting company required to transition to the larger reporting system after its determination date calculation will not be required to satisfy the larger reporting company disclosure requirements until the first quarter after the determination date fiscal year.” Release No. 33-8876. The fact that the transition period for a company moving to the larger reporting system includes the end of the fiscal year does not mean that the company, as of the end of the fiscal year, is “eligible to use the requirements for smaller reporting companies” for purposes of Exchange Act Rules 12b-2(1)(iv) and 12b-2(2)(iv). [September 30, 2008]]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122221-sirius-xm-media-s-fear-mongering-has-gone-on-long-enough?source=feed#comment-402114 402114 Tue, 24 Feb 2009 18:14:58 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/122221-sirius-xm-media-s-fear-mongering-has-gone-on-long-enough?source=feed#comment-402101 402101

On Feb 24 05:30 PM asm61064 wrote:

> siriusmattnmn,
> If you are going to post something here...positive or negative, at
> least be intelligent about it. Quoting CNN is not a good way to do
> it! I hope you do realize if he BKs the company...he also loses 20
> million or so folks whom he might be able to get to subscribe to
> DTV by doing the right thing. It would be awfully out of character
> and shortsighted of him to do that. I suggest you look up the man's
> history of helping financially troubled companies!]]> Tue, 24 Feb 2009 18:02:54 -0500

On Feb 24 05:30 PM asm61064 wrote:

> siriusmattnmn,
> If you are going to post something here...positive or negative, at
> least be intelligent about it. Quoting CNN is not a good way to do
> it! I hope you do realize if he BKs the company...he also loses 20
> million or so folks whom he might be able to get to subscribe to
> DTV by doing the right thing. It would be awfully out of character
> and shortsighted of him to do that. I suggest you look up the man's
> history of helping financially troubled companies!]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122221-sirius-xm-media-s-fear-mongering-has-gone-on-long-enough?source=feed#comment-402093 402093
Anyway, my issue was not with either of you Cos100 or Sl162. It was Bunch of Numbers that brought me up . . . actually, I don't even have an issue with him. As I said, I just wanted to make it clear what I based my information on. Don't you wish the MSM would do the same?! It's all good. ]]> Tue, 24 Feb 2009 17:55:31 -0500
Anyway, my issue was not with either of you Cos100 or Sl162. It was Bunch of Numbers that brought me up . . . actually, I don't even have an issue with him. As I said, I just wanted to make it clear what I based my information on. Don't you wish the MSM would do the same?! It's all good. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122221-sirius-xm-media-s-fear-mongering-has-gone-on-long-enough?source=feed#comment-401848 401848 Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:58:07 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/122221-sirius-xm-media-s-fear-mongering-has-gone-on-long-enough?source=feed#comment-401831 401831

www.sec.gov/rules/fina... (creating of the Large Accelerated Filer)
Create a new category of accelerated filer, the “large accelerated filer,” that encompasses an issuer after it first has an aggregate worldwide market value26 of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the issuer of $700 million or more, as of the last business day of the issuer’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter;

also,

www.sec.gov/rules/fina...
As proposed, once a company becomes an accelerated filer, it remains an accelerated filer subject to shortened deadlines unless and until it subsequently becomes eligible to use Forms 10-KSB and 10-QSB for its annual and quarterly reports.


On Feb 24 08:55 AM cos1000 wrote:

> With the 4Q incorporated in a 10K filing, and given the value of
> their Public Float, they have 75 days from EOY to file their report
> The company still hasn’t press released a date yet. Here’s a link
> of their SEC requirement… I am also looking for some type of Debt
> Restructuring on March 1st, but am not looking for 10K to be synchronized
> with this, especially with KPMG being the auditor this year... and
> important "going concern" contingencies on their recent Malone Deal...
>
> www.sec.gov/answers/fo...]]> Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:43:22 -0500

www.sec.gov/rules/fina... (creating of the Large Accelerated Filer)
Create a new category of accelerated filer, the “large accelerated filer,” that encompasses an issuer after it first has an aggregate worldwide market value26 of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the issuer of $700 million or more, as of the last business day of the issuer’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter;

also,

www.sec.gov/rules/fina...
As proposed, once a company becomes an accelerated filer, it remains an accelerated filer subject to shortened deadlines unless and until it subsequently becomes eligible to use Forms 10-KSB and 10-QSB for its annual and quarterly reports.


On Feb 24 08:55 AM cos1000 wrote:

> With the 4Q incorporated in a 10K filing, and given the value of
> their Public Float, they have 75 days from EOY to file their report
> The company still hasn’t press released a date yet. Here’s a link
> of their SEC requirement… I am also looking for some type of Debt
> Restructuring on March 1st, but am not looking for 10K to be synchronized
> with this, especially with KPMG being the auditor this year... and
> important "going concern" contingencies on their recent Malone Deal...
>
> www.sec.gov/answers/fo...]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122221-sirius-xm-media-s-fear-mongering-has-gone-on-long-enough?source=feed#comment-401749 401749 www.earningswhispers.c...


On Feb 24 10:51 AM Blue23 wrote:

> Here is what I am thinking: Volume the last few days tells me that
> the bigs boys are pretty much complete in positioning themselves
> where they want to be. Curiously enough, they finish positioning
> themselves right before the 4th Q numbers are released this evening
> post close. I really do believe we will see a solid move up and limited
> downside once the move is made. It can get pushed a little...but
> there will be more pushing back at this point than at any time in
> recent memory. This is merely my $0.02.]]> Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:02:41 -0500 www.earningswhispers.c...


On Feb 24 10:51 AM Blue23 wrote:

> Here is what I am thinking: Volume the last few days tells me that
> the bigs boys are pretty much complete in positioning themselves
> where they want to be. Curiously enough, they finish positioning
> themselves right before the 4th Q numbers are released this evening
> post close. I really do believe we will see a solid move up and limited
> downside once the move is made. It can get pushed a little...but
> there will be more pushing back at this point than at any time in
> recent memory. This is merely my $0.02.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/122221-sirius-xm-media-s-fear-mongering-has-gone-on-long-enough?source=feed#comment-401563 401563
"I believe they have until the EOM, which is on the weekend, so next business day. Mel said in the Dec CC that we would know all by March 1, which is also on the weekend so my best guess is that we'll hear something next Monday (March 2) and no sooner. He also said that they will be dealing with the debt issues "forthwith" and we didn't hear a word until the day the debt was due 2 months later, so you can assume that we will be the last people to know the Q4 results! "

Even there I don't say when we will hear Q4 results (just my opinion on when we will hear ANYTHING), as I have no idea when that will be.


On Feb 24 09:18 AM 163888 wrote:

> relmor2003 you see what I mean about the foums thats what I get for
> believing in "foolnhismoney" about that end date of having to put
> out the end of quarter results. Thanks cos1000, I guess I should
> have asked for a link before. By the way I am not batting to well
> lately I just learned that I got the XMSR satellites mixed up. I
> thought when XMSR was taking about XM5 they were talking about XM4.]]> Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:58:14 -0500
"I believe they have until the EOM, which is on the weekend, so next business day. Mel said in the Dec CC that we would know all by March 1, which is also on the weekend so my best guess is that we'll hear something next Monday (March 2) and no sooner. He also said that they will be dealing with the debt issues "forthwith" and we didn't hear a word until the day the debt was due 2 months later, so you can assume that we will be the last people to know the Q4 results! "

Even there I don't say when we will hear Q4 results (just my opinion on when we will hear ANYTHING), as I have no idea when that will be.


On Feb 24 09:18 AM 163888 wrote:

> relmor2003 you see what I mean about the foums thats what I get for
> believing in "foolnhismoney" about that end date of having to put
> out the end of quarter results. Thanks cos1000, I guess I should
> have asked for a link before. By the way I am not batting to well
> lately I just learned that I got the XMSR satellites mixed up. I
> thought when XMSR was taking about XM5 they were talking about XM4.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/121204-sirius-xm-s-reverse-split-realities?source=feed#comment-394493 394493 Thu, 19 Feb 2009 00:30:11 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/121204-sirius-xm-s-reverse-split-realities?source=feed#comment-394490 394490 Thu, 19 Feb 2009 00:23:20 -0500 http://seekingalpha.com/article/120682-tuesday-trading-may-bring-new-life-to-sirius?source=feed#comment-391380 391380
As to the post on Sirusbuzz, it was actually just a question as I have no personal knowledge of the escrow agreements with the NFL and MLB. I was just postulating that an escrow account is typically setup for the payment of a specific debt and wouldn't the currently due payments draw from these accounts. It was later clarified that the MLB account at least was set up for the last two years of the deal an not for payments due in the interim. A bad deal IMO, but who knows what the circumstances where when the agreement was reached? In any case, it would seem to behoove the MLB to allow some latitude in the agreement to let Sirius access this account now - isn't $60 mil now with an agreement to replenish the escrow in the future better than what they would receive in bankruptcy?

Furthermore, as a business Sirius should certainly be accruing money for these payments so that they are not unexpected hits to COH. That also was a point that I disagree with Homer on although I may not have stated it clearly. We will definitely know more as early as tomorrow morning so let's hope for the best. My position is that Sirius could handle the Feb debt without help if absolutely necessary so I'm hoping that much of what we're hearing is using that fact to leverage make the deals that are now being negotiated best for the company . . . and eventually to us lowly shareholders!


On Feb 16 08:43 PM cos1000 wrote:

> Fool..... Nhismoney,
> Good to see you here. I had a question from the post over on Siriusbuzz
> thread. Was I just missing that the accounting for the expenses in
> contracts for content doesn't require you to put cash for payment
> from revenues into an account. Or What?? Homer was making it sound
> like they had to treat the MLB and NFL like they were not Accrued
> Cash Expenses. Do you think that's the way Sirius Xm is doing it?]]> Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:54:10 -0500
As to the post on Sirusbuzz, it was actually just a question as I have no personal knowledge of the escrow agreements with the NFL and MLB. I was just postulating that an escrow account is typically setup for the payment of a specific debt and wouldn't the currently due payments draw from these accounts. It was later clarified that the MLB account at least was set up for the last two years of the deal an not for payments due in the interim. A bad deal IMO, but who knows what the circumstances where when the agreement was reached? In any case, it would seem to behoove the MLB to allow some latitude in the agreement to let Sirius access this account now - isn't $60 mil now with an agreement to replenish the escrow in the future better than what they would receive in bankruptcy?

Furthermore, as a business Sirius should certainly be accruing money for these payments so that they are not unexpected hits to COH. That also was a point that I disagree with Homer on although I may not have stated it clearly. We will definitely know more as early as tomorrow morning so let's hope for the best. My position is that Sirius could handle the Feb debt without help if absolutely necessary so I'm hoping that much of what we're hearing is using that fact to leverage make the deals that are now being negotiated best for the company . . . and eventually to us lowly shareholders!


On Feb 16 08:43 PM cos1000 wrote:

> Fool..... Nhismoney,
> Good to see you here. I had a question from the post over on Siriusbuzz
> thread. Was I just missing that the accounting for the expenses in
> contracts for content doesn't require you to put cash for payment
> from revenues into an account. Or What?? Homer was making it sound
> like they had to treat the MLB and NFL like they were not Accrued
> Cash Expenses. Do you think that's the way Sirius Xm is doing it?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/120682-tuesday-trading-may-bring-new-life-to-sirius?source=feed#comment-391295 391295 www.youtube.com/watch?...]]> Mon, 16 Feb 2009 20:30:10 -0500 www.youtube.com/watch?...]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/91750-sirius-xm-waves-goodbye-to-s-p-creditwatch?source=feed#comment-388127 388127
Now, that being said there may still be an option to reconfigure existing satellites (either Sirius's or XM's) to transmit BOTH signals, not somehow allow existing XM receivers to accept Sirius signal through a magical firmware update. I think this was the point of that link to the patent about sending an alternate signal on a single transmitter. I am by far not technically able to figure out how possible this is, but it would satisfy the obligation to support the existing XM receivers and open the door to either BK XM or sell off it's assets. ]]> Fri, 13 Feb 2009 22:56:07 -0500
Now, that being said there may still be an option to reconfigure existing satellites (either Sirius's or XM's) to transmit BOTH signals, not somehow allow existing XM receivers to accept Sirius signal through a magical firmware update. I think this was the point of that link to the patent about sending an alternate signal on a single transmitter. I am by far not technically able to figure out how possible this is, but it would satisfy the obligation to support the existing XM receivers and open the door to either BK XM or sell off it's assets. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/120571-sirius-xm-working-on-debt-but-not-out-of-the-woods?source=feed#comment-388092 388092

On Feb 13 08:45 PM kingreecan wrote:

> How does one purchase after hours? I've never purchase AH before
> so I'd like to know if there are limitations to pur shares when markets
> closed... any further info on AH trading is appreciated.
> Sirius SH: since 2006]]> Fri, 13 Feb 2009 22:04:28 -0500

On Feb 13 08:45 PM kingreecan wrote:

> How does one purchase after hours? I've never purchase AH before
> so I'd like to know if there are limitations to pur shares when markets
> closed... any further info on AH trading is appreciated.
> Sirius SH: since 2006]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/120441-will-john-malone-rescue-sirius-xm?source=feed#comment-387683 387683

On Feb 13 03:30 PM 163888 wrote:

> I have known it for some time after hearing them talk about the Iraq
> war, Obama, and the recession that started in 2007.
>
> I did disagree with Homer on the forums when it came to the COH and
> the burn rate compared to the cost of the 1st quarter. I did not
> think he included that there is revenue that comes in in the 1st
> quarter and that you really have to look at 2008s 1st quarter cash
> burn rate for both before you can come up with any numbers like he
> had. I have been waiting for a reply but have not seen one as of
> yet.]]> Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:43:48 -0500

On Feb 13 03:30 PM 163888 wrote:

> I have known it for some time after hearing them talk about the Iraq
> war, Obama, and the recession that started in 2007.
>
> I did disagree with Homer on the forums when it came to the COH and
> the burn rate compared to the cost of the 1st quarter. I did not
> think he included that there is revenue that comes in in the 1st
> quarter and that you really have to look at 2008s 1st quarter cash
> burn rate for both before you can come up with any numbers like he
> had. I have been waiting for a reply but have not seen one as of
> yet.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/120441-will-john-malone-rescue-sirius-xm?source=feed#comment-387651 387651

On Feb 13 03:13 PM cos1000 wrote:

> If not for the news of John Malone coming to the table, what result
> would we have today.....?? BK IMHO because Mel wouldn't hand the
> company over to Ergen.....]]> Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:28:27 -0500

On Feb 13 03:13 PM cos1000 wrote:

> If not for the news of John Malone coming to the table, what result
> would we have today.....?? BK IMHO because Mel wouldn't hand the
> company over to Ergen.....]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/120441-will-john-malone-rescue-sirius-xm?source=feed#comment-387638 387638 Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:21:10 -0500