Ashkan Karbasfrooshan's Comments RSS Syndication from SeekingAlpha.com http://seekingalpha.comuser/40301/comments http://seekingalpha.com/article/174782/comments?source=feed#comment-773626 773626
Sure, the money would be nice, but I doubt either has a massive stake in the company, most of the proceeds would probably go to the money folks so maybe Evan, Dick and Biz really want to go big. Problem is, at their valuation, they need a massive AdSense like success... not sure "Premium accounts" will do the trick.


On Nov 23 10:01 AM James Beswick wrote:

> Great piece - many interesting points. I'd be really surprised if
> Google steps in here though, since it wouldn't jive well with Google
> Wave and they probably don't want to disturb the Justice Department
> monopoly people while they're busy sleeping over the banking situation.]]> Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:09:25 -0500
Sure, the money would be nice, but I doubt either has a massive stake in the company, most of the proceeds would probably go to the money folks so maybe Evan, Dick and Biz really want to go big. Problem is, at their valuation, they need a massive AdSense like success... not sure "Premium accounts" will do the trick.


On Nov 23 10:01 AM James Beswick wrote:

> Great piece - many interesting points. I'd be really surprised if
> Google steps in here though, since it wouldn't jive well with Google
> Wave and they probably don't want to disturb the Justice Department
> monopoly people while they're busy sleeping over the banking situation.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/174782/comments?source=feed#comment-773621 773621
On Nov 23 09:52 AM Carlos Navarro wrote:

> Thanks for distilling this down to the essence of Twitter's long
> term viability: revenue generation. At the end of the day, Twitter
> can only burn through other peoples' money for so long; at some point
> it has to convert into a true profit-generating machine which it
> has clear potential to do. I'm curious, however, whether another
> media company might have interest in Twitter; perhaps an old media
> company trying for one last "Hail Mary" try at reviving its media
> interests? Not sure -- but would enjoy hearing someone's response?
> Thanks. Carlos Navarro]]> Mon, 23 Nov 2009 13:06:39 -0500
On Nov 23 09:52 AM Carlos Navarro wrote:

> Thanks for distilling this down to the essence of Twitter's long
> term viability: revenue generation. At the end of the day, Twitter
> can only burn through other peoples' money for so long; at some point
> it has to convert into a true profit-generating machine which it
> has clear potential to do. I'm curious, however, whether another
> media company might have interest in Twitter; perhaps an old media
> company trying for one last "Hail Mary" try at reviving its media
> interests? Not sure -- but would enjoy hearing someone's response?
> Thanks. Carlos Navarro]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/173389/comments?source=feed#comment-761245 761245
And... I am guessing, but not sure the AOL editors want to push these either, as they see what kind of content works better.


On Nov 15 11:46 AM Hampton wrote:

> It is curious that Bewkes is focusing Time Warner on content, yet
> he is spinning off AOL which is now hanging its hat on content. Either
> he doesn't believe AOL will succeed or he just doesn't want to make
> the effort.]]> Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:13:40 -0500
And... I am guessing, but not sure the AOL editors want to push these either, as they see what kind of content works better.


On Nov 15 11:46 AM Hampton wrote:

> It is curious that Bewkes is focusing Time Warner on content, yet
> he is spinning off AOL which is now hanging its hat on content. Either
> he doesn't believe AOL will succeed or he just doesn't want to make
> the effort.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/173389/comments?source=feed#comment-761243 761243
On Nov 15 08:05 AM GordonG wrote:

> Ash -
>
> 1. I loved your old success articles from askmen.com. they were
> an inspiration for my own success. almost every one was a masterpiece.
>
>
> 2. excellent analysis on AOL. as a long-suffering TWX shareholder,
> i hope they finally figure it out.
>
> Keep up the great work!
>
> BEST WISHES!
>
> G]]> Sun, 15 Nov 2009 17:11:43 -0500
On Nov 15 08:05 AM GordonG wrote:

> Ash -
>
> 1. I loved your old success articles from askmen.com. they were
> an inspiration for my own success. almost every one was a masterpiece.
>
>
> 2. excellent analysis on AOL. as a long-suffering TWX shareholder,
> i hope they finally figure it out.
>
> Keep up the great work!
>
> BEST WISHES!
>
> G]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/164284/comments?source=feed#comment-708045 708045
On Oct 02 12:56 PM nmittal wrote:

> I have read your articles in the past, and have enjoyed some interesting
> ideas articulated. I believe your table is using incorrect metrics
> as all of the media firms listed are not solely capitalized by equity.
> So, using market cap to sales or EBITDA valuation multiples are inappropriate.
> The total enterprise value needs to be reflected, incorporating debt
> and preferred, if applicable. Those multiples should be substantially
> higher.]]> Wed, 07 Oct 2009 22:09:33 -0400
On Oct 02 12:56 PM nmittal wrote:

> I have read your articles in the past, and have enjoyed some interesting
> ideas articulated. I believe your table is using incorrect metrics
> as all of the media firms listed are not solely capitalized by equity.
> So, using market cap to sales or EBITDA valuation multiples are inappropriate.
> The total enterprise value needs to be reflected, incorporating debt
> and preferred, if applicable. Those multiples should be substantially
> higher.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/162450/comments?source=feed#comment-684769 684769 Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:14:24 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/162450/comments?source=feed#comment-684761 684761
I am not questioning their right etc., but after making $2B in the sale, they need to pick and choose their battles.]]> Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:05:08 -0400
I am not questioning their right etc., but after making $2B in the sale, they need to pick and choose their battles.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/149620/comments?source=feed#comment-594446 594446 Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:56:56 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/140116/comments?source=feed#comment-521529 521529
YouTube is 99% UGC and monetizing 5-10% of its inventory.

Yahoo! can skim the content and adopt a strategy where it only features ad-friendly, pro-content.

2 - On the sales side:

Yahoo! knows how to sell to branded advertisers, YouTube - by virtue of being part of Google - is more into performance based advertisers.

3 - Strategically

- YouTube is part of a search tech company,
- Hulu is owned by the media companies,

so both will eventually hit a wall... creating an opening with for Yahoo who has a) audience, b) content experience and c) sales savvy.

No brainer to me.

The point is, it's not "social or video tech" that will save Yahoo!

On May 28 10:27 AM PastTense wrote:

> Youtube is losing hundreds of millions of dollars a year. So how
> exactly do yo think Yahoo can get into this business and make money?]]> Thu, 28 May 2009 13:08:09 -0400
YouTube is 99% UGC and monetizing 5-10% of its inventory.

Yahoo! can skim the content and adopt a strategy where it only features ad-friendly, pro-content.

2 - On the sales side:

Yahoo! knows how to sell to branded advertisers, YouTube - by virtue of being part of Google - is more into performance based advertisers.

3 - Strategically

- YouTube is part of a search tech company,
- Hulu is owned by the media companies,

so both will eventually hit a wall... creating an opening with for Yahoo who has a) audience, b) content experience and c) sales savvy.

No brainer to me.

The point is, it's not "social or video tech" that will save Yahoo!

On May 28 10:27 AM PastTense wrote:

> Youtube is losing hundreds of millions of dollars a year. So how
> exactly do yo think Yahoo can get into this business and make money?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/137812/comments?source=feed#comment-505135 505135
But for our business, while it made sense in our first year or two, by year three, it just didn't. Thankfully, as a result of the decision to stop giving away our content, we built a hybrid licensing/syndication business model that is now paying dividends.


On May 15 09:36 AM User 414484 wrote:

> I think free distribution can work in certain circumstances. Setting
> up distribution partnerships in much the same way that studios distribute
> to cable/satellite (only using an affiliate model for distribution
> partners) can be a creative and effective way to harness the audience
> needed to generate revenues suffiecient for monetizing production
> or original programming. This is not possible with all types of
> content and is best used with content that has a large natural audience
> online.
>
> The challenge for the majors is learning about and adapting to the
> new landscape and trying to somehow make it fit into the models they
> are used to and dependent upon. At some point there must be a breakdown.
>
>
> New producers are leaner and more agile.]]> Fri, 15 May 2009 10:06:34 -0400
But for our business, while it made sense in our first year or two, by year three, it just didn't. Thankfully, as a result of the decision to stop giving away our content, we built a hybrid licensing/syndication business model that is now paying dividends.


On May 15 09:36 AM User 414484 wrote:

> I think free distribution can work in certain circumstances. Setting
> up distribution partnerships in much the same way that studios distribute
> to cable/satellite (only using an affiliate model for distribution
> partners) can be a creative and effective way to harness the audience
> needed to generate revenues suffiecient for monetizing production
> or original programming. This is not possible with all types of
> content and is best used with content that has a large natural audience
> online.
>
> The challenge for the majors is learning about and adapting to the
> new landscape and trying to somehow make it fit into the models they
> are used to and dependent upon. At some point there must be a breakdown.
>
>
> New producers are leaner and more agile.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/133602/comments?source=feed#comment-484866 484866

On Apr 29 03:57 PM notsosmart wrote:

> dont you love it. the guy never read it.what a jerk.]]> Thu, 30 Apr 2009 21:30:48 -0400

On Apr 29 03:57 PM notsosmart wrote:

> dont you love it. the guy never read it.what a jerk.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/133602/comments?source=feed#comment-484864 484864
- Not so Smart: Allow me to clarify: I read online articles quite frequently and actually like the magazine. I apologize about not being more clear.

- Cetin: I worked at AskMen as VP of Ad Sales, columnist etc., so we took and beat Maxim online... but ultimately, Maxim has gone from $28M in EBITDA to $8M in EBITDA; Blender's gone online-only. I don't read Pop. Mechanics but doubt it is on as solid of a footing as it was 10 years ago.

Health, tech, science or news in print is a ridiculous notion, when you think about.

- Ruthanne: When we sold AskMen to IGN, all of the IGN execs showed us data upon data just suggesting that the only healthy magazines (thick ones ;) seemed to be women's oriented lifestyle publications.

For what it's worth, I think print has a future, just a smaller one. If print media firms embrace video as they move online, I think they can do great things. The question is: will they? Or better yet: can they?]]> Thu, 30 Apr 2009 21:30:13 -0400
- Not so Smart: Allow me to clarify: I read online articles quite frequently and actually like the magazine. I apologize about not being more clear.

- Cetin: I worked at AskMen as VP of Ad Sales, columnist etc., so we took and beat Maxim online... but ultimately, Maxim has gone from $28M in EBITDA to $8M in EBITDA; Blender's gone online-only. I don't read Pop. Mechanics but doubt it is on as solid of a footing as it was 10 years ago.

Health, tech, science or news in print is a ridiculous notion, when you think about.

- Ruthanne: When we sold AskMen to IGN, all of the IGN execs showed us data upon data just suggesting that the only healthy magazines (thick ones ;) seemed to be women's oriented lifestyle publications.

For what it's worth, I think print has a future, just a smaller one. If print media firms embrace video as they move online, I think they can do great things. The question is: will they? Or better yet: can they?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/130476/comments?source=feed#comment-463777 463777 Wed, 15 Apr 2009 07:18:57 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/130476/comments?source=feed#comment-463768 463768
I certainly am not implying replacing print's losses with online video's gains (or even all of online!) in the short term, overnight... but since you are now on the digital side (a convert) then we both know that over time, digital can make it up and then some.

But my main argument has always been that yes: online shrinks media, including print, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.]]> Wed, 15 Apr 2009 07:06:10 -0400
I certainly am not implying replacing print's losses with online video's gains (or even all of online!) in the short term, overnight... but since you are now on the digital side (a convert) then we both know that over time, digital can make it up and then some.

But my main argument has always been that yes: online shrinks media, including print, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/127350/comments?source=feed#comment-454588 454588
Well... now I plain embarrassed ;) - thanks

Ash]]> Tue, 07 Apr 2009 08:36:13 -0400
Well... now I plain embarrassed ;) - thanks

Ash]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/127350/comments?source=feed#comment-452610 452610
Hmm... our business is actually doing rather well.

WatchMojo has served 50,000,000 streams on a rather light initial seed investment, with actual revenues and clients and not embryonic ideas.

But, why am I arguing with an anonymous poster. Feel free to question any of the strategies or tactics we deploy... or the results etc... in a private or public forum.

I welcome your criticism if it's actually based on our company and not void of merit or substance.]]> Sun, 05 Apr 2009 16:13:02 -0400
Hmm... our business is actually doing rather well.

WatchMojo has served 50,000,000 streams on a rather light initial seed investment, with actual revenues and clients and not embryonic ideas.

But, why am I arguing with an anonymous poster. Feel free to question any of the strategies or tactics we deploy... or the results etc... in a private or public forum.

I welcome your criticism if it's actually based on our company and not void of merit or substance.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/127350/comments?source=feed#comment-438201 438201
Thanks for the feedback.

Mr. MyFakeName,

Thanks for the insight. Priceless.]]> Tue, 24 Mar 2009 11:34:04 -0400
Thanks for the feedback.

Mr. MyFakeName,

Thanks for the insight. Priceless.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/127350/comments?source=feed#comment-436762 436762
"Study their venture transaction with TCV.. TCV has a preference on the stock they bought.. so about 55 million of the cash is spoken
for in any transaction."

As such, saying they have no debt is incorrect.

This explains why the stock is priced the way it is.

Mystery solved. Still think they need to diversify away from finance, though.]]> Mon, 23 Mar 2009 12:21:07 -0400
"Study their venture transaction with TCV.. TCV has a preference on the stock they bought.. so about 55 million of the cash is spoken
for in any transaction."

As such, saying they have no debt is incorrect.

This explains why the stock is priced the way it is.

Mystery solved. Still think they need to diversify away from finance, though.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/127350/comments?source=feed#comment-436592 436592 Mon, 23 Mar 2009 11:08:00 -0400 http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-304357 304357
"I don't need 4,000 dollars worth of wall to wall airbags , my seatbelt is fine with me "

"hell , no one's going to pay ME to ruin my business !!!!!!!!!"

that's pretty funny...

Anyway, I'll add one serious thing re: SIRI. The company's billion dollar debt comes up next year, in 2009. How likely is it for shareholders to be wiped out?

Just saying. ]]> Wed, 12 Nov 2008 14:53:11 -0500
"I don't need 4,000 dollars worth of wall to wall airbags , my seatbelt is fine with me "

"hell , no one's going to pay ME to ruin my business !!!!!!!!!"

that's pretty funny...

Anyway, I'll add one serious thing re: SIRI. The company's billion dollar debt comes up next year, in 2009. How likely is it for shareholders to be wiped out?

Just saying. ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-304294 304294
- When AOL/TWX merged and then wrote off $40B or so due to loss of shareholder value, was that paper loss also irrelevant? If mgmt orchestrates a merger and one short year later has to acknowledge that $5B in value evaporated, I don't care if it's an accounting loss or a real loss, it's a bad reflection on management.

- Which takes me once again to the crux of this post: management and candor. But yes, once the subject moved from management to investing, then I brought up the connection between the three industries because they are very much related... so if finance is non-existent and new car sales not happening, then why do we expect Sirius to do well.

- Wild guess here: Many of you are obviously long this stock, you defend them as if they've helped you buy a few homes and pay for your children's education. Last I checked, this stock is trading at $0.25. Have you lost all common sense in defending them? Why don't you attack them (the strategy, the execution, the executives who cash in massive pay while returning little to stockholders) instead of me for calling a spade a spade.

However, considering their entrenched position with carmakers, and at such levels, I admit that it's worth looking at the stock from a micro/unique perspective... but from a macro/systematic perspective, come on, stocks will continue to head down...

If everything goes according to plan, I can see why at these levels, there's enough of a safety of margin to dive in. But right now, I don't see much support in equity prices... More bad news to come... ]]> Wed, 12 Nov 2008 13:55:52 -0500
- When AOL/TWX merged and then wrote off $40B or so due to loss of shareholder value, was that paper loss also irrelevant? If mgmt orchestrates a merger and one short year later has to acknowledge that $5B in value evaporated, I don't care if it's an accounting loss or a real loss, it's a bad reflection on management.

- Which takes me once again to the crux of this post: management and candor. But yes, once the subject moved from management to investing, then I brought up the connection between the three industries because they are very much related... so if finance is non-existent and new car sales not happening, then why do we expect Sirius to do well.

- Wild guess here: Many of you are obviously long this stock, you defend them as if they've helped you buy a few homes and pay for your children's education. Last I checked, this stock is trading at $0.25. Have you lost all common sense in defending them? Why don't you attack them (the strategy, the execution, the executives who cash in massive pay while returning little to stockholders) instead of me for calling a spade a spade.

However, considering their entrenched position with carmakers, and at such levels, I admit that it's worth looking at the stock from a micro/unique perspective... but from a macro/systematic perspective, come on, stocks will continue to head down...

If everything goes according to plan, I can see why at these levels, there's enough of a safety of margin to dive in. But right now, I don't see much support in equity prices... More bad news to come... ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-303896 303896
***Problem being: you need carmakers to grow your business... and carmakers in turn need financials to offer cheap credit...***

Which I think makes it hard for SATRAD to take off... especially now.]]> Wed, 12 Nov 2008 09:03:40 -0500
***Problem being: you need carmakers to grow your business... and carmakers in turn need financials to offer cheap credit...***

Which I think makes it hard for SATRAD to take off... especially now.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-303657 303657
Nice to see 8 years of foolish and arrogant foreign policy hasn't softened the ethnocentrism of some of the US readers on this page ;) ]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 23:33:26 -0500
Nice to see 8 years of foolish and arrogant foreign policy hasn't softened the ethnocentrism of some of the US readers on this page ;) ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-303586 303586
What I meant by bias was actually something more important: whether I owned shares or was short.

Also, I think I can be bullish on something as a consumer but negative as an investor, no? In this case, I like SATRAD as a consumer but yes, so far, I am bearish as an investor. I don't think that is a crime or all that crazy. I am all for open source tech as an entrepreneur who uses it, but as an investor/entrepreneur who would back such a thing, not sure... ]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:16:40 -0500
What I meant by bias was actually something more important: whether I owned shares or was short.

Also, I think I can be bullish on something as a consumer but negative as an investor, no? In this case, I like SATRAD as a consumer but yes, so far, I am bearish as an investor. I don't think that is a crime or all that crazy. I am all for open source tech as an entrepreneur who uses it, but as an investor/entrepreneur who would back such a thing, not sure... ]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-303574 303574
"But don't be like others who are on their punk-ass high horse who take for granted what they have today. "

That is not the objective.

All to say... I promise to consider than any post might at any time pop up on SA... so I need to cover my bases, granted.

See... I'm more Obama than Bush ;) - but on a separate but related note, folks, stop bashing Obama and give him a chance... In one night, America got back it mojo... that in of itself will help the US get back on track... why? Because it's all about confidence. Maybe you will like this, maybe you won't:

The Week We All Became Americans, Again
watchmojo.com/web/blog.../]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:00:55 -0500
"But don't be like others who are on their punk-ass high horse who take for granted what they have today. "

That is not the objective.

All to say... I promise to consider than any post might at any time pop up on SA... so I need to cover my bases, granted.

See... I'm more Obama than Bush ;) - but on a separate but related note, folks, stop bashing Obama and give him a chance... In one night, America got back it mojo... that in of itself will help the US get back on track... why? Because it's all about confidence. Maybe you will like this, maybe you won't:

The Week We All Became Americans, Again
watchmojo.com/web/blog.../]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-303570 303570
You're right that SIRI is really not anything like AIG or GM with regards to its history and future: 100% right there.

But... here is the thing I don't get: yes, terrestrial radio SUCKS (when I was younger - I'm only 30 now - I used to host a bunch of radio shows) but it's free... Free is very hard to beat and satellite radio has always seemed like a puffed up industry to me, sort of like financial services and carmakers these days.

This last connection between the three is why I juxtaposed the three:

- carmakers "needing" a bailout, even though consumers don't "want" US cars.
- financial companies "needing" a bailout, even though they take the money and spend it on parties, getaways (which looks worst that it might actually be) and bonuses (which is criminal).
- satellite radio: let's merge two companies that cannot survive independently, but we expect to thrive once combined...

***Problem being: you need carmakers to grow your business... and carmakers in turn need financials to offer cheap credit...***

See the madness in this stock's story?

So yes, I am guilty of that: if I was not spending 99% of my time building a media startup myself... sure, I should take more time to outline these connections.

Guilty as charged ;)

But go back to this

***Problem being: you need carmakers to grow your business... and carmakers in turn need financials to offer cheap credit...***

And tell me I am crazy or wrong.

I am all ears.]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:54:12 -0500
You're right that SIRI is really not anything like AIG or GM with regards to its history and future: 100% right there.

But... here is the thing I don't get: yes, terrestrial radio SUCKS (when I was younger - I'm only 30 now - I used to host a bunch of radio shows) but it's free... Free is very hard to beat and satellite radio has always seemed like a puffed up industry to me, sort of like financial services and carmakers these days.

This last connection between the three is why I juxtaposed the three:

- carmakers "needing" a bailout, even though consumers don't "want" US cars.
- financial companies "needing" a bailout, even though they take the money and spend it on parties, getaways (which looks worst that it might actually be) and bonuses (which is criminal).
- satellite radio: let's merge two companies that cannot survive independently, but we expect to thrive once combined...

***Problem being: you need carmakers to grow your business... and carmakers in turn need financials to offer cheap credit...***

See the madness in this stock's story?

So yes, I am guilty of that: if I was not spending 99% of my time building a media startup myself... sure, I should take more time to outline these connections.

Guilty as charged ;)

But go back to this

***Problem being: you need carmakers to grow your business... and carmakers in turn need financials to offer cheap credit...***

And tell me I am crazy or wrong.

I am all ears.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-303550 303550
But I am anything but disgruntled: I sold YHOO at $29 - It's at $12 now!

The truth I sold in May, went away... and invested in my media company WatchMojo.com.

Let's face it: the stock market is casino for those that don't really like casino. Financial statements, GAAP, SEC etc., are all things to make us feel like it's not... but who are we kidding.

Since I sold my shares, the market's tanked, I am waiting to get back in... but don't see an end in sight with regards to bad news... it would also be nice to see some candor from management - another thing I highlighted - something that Warren Buffett always looks for, by the way.

All right, I have a soccer match to head off to... go easy on the lynching while I am away.]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:34:34 -0500
But I am anything but disgruntled: I sold YHOO at $29 - It's at $12 now!

The truth I sold in May, went away... and invested in my media company WatchMojo.com.

Let's face it: the stock market is casino for those that don't really like casino. Financial statements, GAAP, SEC etc., are all things to make us feel like it's not... but who are we kidding.

Since I sold my shares, the market's tanked, I am waiting to get back in... but don't see an end in sight with regards to bad news... it would also be nice to see some candor from management - another thing I highlighted - something that Warren Buffett always looks for, by the way.

All right, I have a soccer match to head off to... go easy on the lynching while I am away.]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-303548 303548
Your comment is very fair. Frankly, my post was first posted on my own blog, HipMojo.com (for His Investment Portfolio-Mojo or His Intellectual Property-Mojo) where I mainly cover the Web, online advertising, M&A, stocks, etc. as both an investor and an entrepreneur, fully disclosing my positions.

Sirius - not any bank or other company - was in the news today, as such, I commented on it.

For what it's worth, this post had more to do with management, candor, doing the right thing etc., and not investing. Trust me, when it's about investing, it's very different... but that's not anyone's problem but my own.

Either way, sometimes my posts are 1,000 words, sometimes they're 100 words. Definitely I could have added a few paragraphs to get into the fact that it was an impairment charge, but I did link to two stories that explain that, no?

For what it's worth, my regular readers would have figured that I was trying to make a point and using the loss in a figurative manner; the SA readers naturally took it in the literal manner.

Seeking Alpha is free and allowed to pick and choose what they want off my blog. As a publisher, they generally pick up what:

a) covers publicly traded stocks and
b) what will get the faithful SA readers irritated.

This post fell under both a) and b) clearly ;)

I really have nothing against Sirius. Mel K. is someone I look up to as a media entrepreneur / executive... but I have always been cynical about satellite radio... especially with their reliance on the car companies, which in today's climate exposes Sirius' exposure even more so.

But, I would love to be proven wrong on why Sirius, or for that matter, GM or AIG, are great stocks to invest in. I've been sitting on the sideline with cash to invest... I am all ears ladies and gentlemen. Seriously.

I heard yesterday one analyst calling GM to go to $0. Is that not sensationalist? Of course it is...]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 20:29:35 -0500
Your comment is very fair. Frankly, my post was first posted on my own blog, HipMojo.com (for His Investment Portfolio-Mojo or His Intellectual Property-Mojo) where I mainly cover the Web, online advertising, M&A, stocks, etc. as both an investor and an entrepreneur, fully disclosing my positions.

Sirius - not any bank or other company - was in the news today, as such, I commented on it.

For what it's worth, this post had more to do with management, candor, doing the right thing etc., and not investing. Trust me, when it's about investing, it's very different... but that's not anyone's problem but my own.

Either way, sometimes my posts are 1,000 words, sometimes they're 100 words. Definitely I could have added a few paragraphs to get into the fact that it was an impairment charge, but I did link to two stories that explain that, no?

For what it's worth, my regular readers would have figured that I was trying to make a point and using the loss in a figurative manner; the SA readers naturally took it in the literal manner.

Seeking Alpha is free and allowed to pick and choose what they want off my blog. As a publisher, they generally pick up what:

a) covers publicly traded stocks and
b) what will get the faithful SA readers irritated.

This post fell under both a) and b) clearly ;)

I really have nothing against Sirius. Mel K. is someone I look up to as a media entrepreneur / executive... but I have always been cynical about satellite radio... especially with their reliance on the car companies, which in today's climate exposes Sirius' exposure even more so.

But, I would love to be proven wrong on why Sirius, or for that matter, GM or AIG, are great stocks to invest in. I've been sitting on the sideline with cash to invest... I am all ears ladies and gentlemen. Seriously.

I heard yesterday one analyst calling GM to go to $0. Is that not sensationalist? Of course it is...]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-303510 303510
Whenever someone even raises an objection or criticizes a company or executive... you see shareholders in that company cry foul. Occasionally, management comes out, as well, and attacks the critic. The point is, usually the person doing the criticism has nothing to gain or lose, but those defending the company have a lot to gain if the stock goes up. With their positions entrenched, they are too emotional and attached to think objectively. Sometimes I wish I would have sold a stock sooner myself instead of holding on, blindly trusting management.

Anyway, you saw that when an analyst raised red flags on Citigroup, or previously, Overstock. Both turned out to be right.

My point here, basically, was that these are all poor sectors to begin with, and you have elaborate corporate development deals or requests for government interventions that simply are not necessary or unfair to the average American citizen.

- Sirius/XM was tying two rocks and hoping it would float.
- The Big Three have had problems that have nothing to do with this economic downturn, etc.

Why not defend the industries, companies, and executives? No... too hard. Much easier to attack the critic.

No wonder then that most American investors have lost massive amounts of wealth while the perpetrators of these actions are retiring with millions.

It's a shame. Instead of attacking the critics, why not focus on those who are wasting shareholder money and destroying jobs?]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 19:13:09 -0500
Whenever someone even raises an objection or criticizes a company or executive... you see shareholders in that company cry foul. Occasionally, management comes out, as well, and attacks the critic. The point is, usually the person doing the criticism has nothing to gain or lose, but those defending the company have a lot to gain if the stock goes up. With their positions entrenched, they are too emotional and attached to think objectively. Sometimes I wish I would have sold a stock sooner myself instead of holding on, blindly trusting management.

Anyway, you saw that when an analyst raised red flags on Citigroup, or previously, Overstock. Both turned out to be right.

My point here, basically, was that these are all poor sectors to begin with, and you have elaborate corporate development deals or requests for government interventions that simply are not necessary or unfair to the average American citizen.

- Sirius/XM was tying two rocks and hoping it would float.
- The Big Three have had problems that have nothing to do with this economic downturn, etc.

Why not defend the industries, companies, and executives? No... too hard. Much easier to attack the critic.

No wonder then that most American investors have lost massive amounts of wealth while the perpetrators of these actions are retiring with millions.

It's a shame. Instead of attacking the critics, why not focus on those who are wasting shareholder money and destroying jobs?]]> http://seekingalpha.com/article/105470/comments?source=feed#comment-303481 303481
Yesterday, less than 15% of Americans said the country was going in the right directions.

Consumers are spending less...

Companies are less confident, and as such are laying people off right and left.

I got out of the stock market after seeing YHOO mismanage the MSFT offer. As a shareholder, I lost confidence.

Personally, I am surprised any investors have any confidence in any companies right now.

If you own shares in satellite radio, automakers, financials etc., do you have confidence in their Boards or mgmt?

I would not. ]]> Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:41:26 -0500
Yesterday, less than 15% of Americans said the country was going in the right directions.

Consumers are spending less...

Companies are less confident, and as such are laying people off right and left.

I got out of the stock market after seeing YHOO mismanage the MSFT offer. As a shareholder, I lost confidence.

Personally, I am surprised any investors have any confidence in any companies right now.

If you own shares in satellite radio, automakers, financials etc., do you have confidence in their Boards or mgmt?

I would not. ]]>