Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply US-PHARMACIES UGL OZ
Raptor Labs UGFREAK OxygenPharm
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplyUS-PHARMACIES UGL OZUGFREAKRaptor LabsOxygenPharm

satellite radio stations

Illuminati

New member
what do you guys think about satellite radio? do you think it has the potential to take over and make am/fm radio obsolete? i ask, because i am have been doing some reasearch and am thinking about investing in the two main competing companies (XM Satellite and Sirrus.)
Sirrus just recently signed a deal with howard stern, and stern has a reported 40+ million advid listeners a day. i think it is an 8year, $11mil deal.vvSatellite just signed a deal to air MLB games next season. both companies charge for the satellite reception, which is roughly $12. both companies are still relaitvely new, and their stocks are still still cheap. i think XM Satellite (XMSR) is at $30 and Sirrus (SIRI) is $4.
any thoughts?
 
you should do some research on this there have been a lot of great articles written lately
like I said my brother asked me the same thing a few months ago and I said that I thought they were both good long term holds and I really don't like the stock market.

and btw howard's deal was 5 years for $100 million/year :)

XM just signed the MLB up for $650 million

it's a big business already, don't be fooled by a $4 stock price versus $30 both companies are valued at $7 billion which is putting them in mid cap status!
 
Bran987 said:
you should do some research on this there have been a lot of great articles written lately
like I said my brother asked me the same thing a few months ago and I said that I thought they were both good long term holds and I really don't like the stock market.

and btw howard's deal was 5 years for $100 million/year :)

XM just signed the MLB up for $650 million

it's a big business already, don't be fooled by a $4 stock price versus $30 both companies are valued at $7 billion which is putting them in mid cap status!


either way, with howard stern, the potential listeners that he could, and would rack in to their services would no doubt raise the price of the stock in the long run. granted right now, their cash flow sheet is going to show that they are operating at a loss (XM Satellite $710mil debt, and Sirrius $426mil.) but they are new companies, and they are just getting past their initial phase of purchasing "assets."

i am seriously considering purchasing stock in both companies because i can see a big future for satellite radio. these companies can reach far more of a listening audience when compared to a traditional radio station (be it AM or FM) merely because of the way that the information is going to be transmitted.

both companies are also aggressively going after the auto industry to install their satellite receivers in newer model vehicles. XM Sat. is currently in 103 models of cars...GM owns 5% of XM and is going to put their receivers in 90% of their vehicles. Also, Honda owns 8%. Sirrius is going to be in 50 DaimlerChrysler models, Ford has committed 20 models. It has been shown that 57% of the people who purchase a vehicle equipped with a satellite receiver sign up for the service. with roughly 16million new vehicles sold a year, that would be 9.12million new customers, or approximately $100mil per month in sales. or if you take that there are 200 million vehicles on the road. it just 50% go with the satellite radio, that would be $1.2bil a month is subscription. and that is just the auto industry.
 
I agree with ya bud
just realize *some* of that has already been priced in, but I agree they are great long term holds
Just like my nanotechnology stocks :D
 
They look like great stocks - to go short on.

Both of them have been bleeding money for years. Everyone either listens to local radio for free or if their interests are too niche they have CDs. Local radio is going to be moving to digital audio with better than CD quality and all the smart-tag stuff shortly - and no monthly charge.

Satellite TV's main selling point is that it is cheaper than cable. That same edge isn't going to apply in this market.
 
Synpax said:
They look like great stocks - to go short on.

Both of them have been bleeding money for years. Everyone either listens to local radio for free or if their interests are too niche they have CDs. Local radio is going to be moving to digital audio with better than CD quality and all the smart-tag stuff shortly - and no monthly charge.

Satellite TV's main selling point is that it is cheaper than cable. That same edge isn't going to apply in this market.

CD quality doesn't matter when the music is awful and the commercials run 35 minutes an hour
people in america hate what's on free radio now
 
Bran987 said:
I agree with ya bud
just realize *some* of that has already been priced in, but I agree they are great long term holds
Just like my nanotechnology stocks :D

why do you believe that nanotechnology stock is a good buy and hold stock?
 
Synpax said:
Local radio is going to be moving to digital audio with better than CD quality and all the smart-tag stuff shortly - and no monthly charge.
That is a really good point, I am addicted to Rhapsody. But i still think Sirius has potential.
 
Bran987 said:
CD quality doesn't matter when the music is awful and the commercials run 35 minutes an hour
people in america hate what's on free radio now


they still wont be able to reach any where near the audience that a satellite radio station would due to how the signal is sent.
 
bran987 said:
CD quality doesn't matter when the music is awful and the commercials run 35 minutes an hour
people in america hate what's on free radio now


But that ad space is what keeps free radio thriving. Until satellite starts selling ad space, I think that they are missing a large a revenue stream....
 
mighty306 said:
But that ad space is what keeps free radio thriving. Until satellite starts selling ad space, I think that they are missing a large a revenue stream....

oh they will... I think that's inevitable.
but people will still pay, looks like it's the new cable TV. subscriptions are increasing at screaming paces.
I bought today.
 
Illuminati said:
why do you believe that nanotechnology stock is a good buy and hold stock?

Nanotech Frontiers: Next 10 Years Will See Huge Growth for Nanotech


Sales of products incorporating emerging nanotechnology will rise from less than 0.1 percent of global manufacturing output today to 15 percent in 2014, totaling $2.6 trillion. This value will approach the size of the information technology and telecom industries combined, and will be 10 times larger than biotechnology revenues, according to a new report by Lux Research Inc. (New York). However, sales of basic nanomaterials, such as carbon nanotubes and quantum dots, will total only $13 billion in 2014. “Nanotechnology’s economic impact will arise from how these fundamental building blocks are used, not from sales of the materials themselves,” says Matthew Nordan, Lux vice president of research.

Nordan refutes the popular misconception that nanotechnology is an industry or a sector. Rather, he insists that “nanotechnology is a set of tools and processes for manipulating matter that can be applied to virtually any manufactured good.” He urges manufacturers to “focus on how nanotechnology is being exploited across industry value chains, from basic materials to intermediate products to final goods.” By 2014, Nordan predicts that 4 percent of general manufactured goods, 50 percent of electronics and IT products, and 16 percent of goods in healthcare and life sciences will incorporate emerging nanotechnology.

Nanotechnology’s growth will occur in three phases:

- In the first phase, ending this year, nanotechnology is being incorporated selectively into high-end products. In 2004, revenues from products incorporating nanotechnology will total $13 billion, $8.5 billion of which lies in automotive and aerospace applications..

- Through 2009, commercial breakthroughs will unlock markets for nanotechnology innovations, with revenues rising to $292 billion. Electronics and IT applications will dominate as microprocessors and memory chips built using new nanoscale processes come to market.

-From 2010 onward, nanotechnology will become commonplace in manufactured goods, with revenues rising to $2.6 trillion in 2014. Healthcare and life sciences applications will become significant in this period as nano-enabled pharmaceuticals and medical devices emerge from lengthy human trials.

Nordan claims that the widespread use of nanotechnology in mainstream products will have profound ripple effects. For instance, he predicts that 10 million manufacturing jobs worldwide in 2014—11 percent of total manufacturing jobs--will involve building products that incorporate emerging nanotechnology. In addition, nanotechnology will shift market shares and introduce unconventional competitors. “For example, silicon nanowire display printing technologies could cut capital requirements for flat-screen display plants by an order of magnitude, tempting fleet-footed manufacturers like Dell Inc. (Round Rock, TX) to enter the market,” says Nordan. “Supply chains will simplify as highly functional materials eliminate steps in manufacturing processes, negatively impacting subassembly manufacturers and transportation companies while making value-added taxes more productive for governments than sales taxes.

“Nanotechnology’s increasing relevance creates clear mandates for business and government leaders,” adds Nordan. “Corporations need to develop an explicit nanotechnology strategy. Investors should focus on nanotechnology applications in the middle of industry supply chains where profit potential is highest, and consider laying nanotech as a long-term secular trend. Public sector leaders should focus on fostering nanotechnology demand, not just supply, and establish informed regulation to address health and safety issues.”

---------------

This article expresses the views of the larger scientific community as well.
As far as I'm concerned, ENOUGH SAID!!!
 
Illuminati said:
what do you guys think about satellite radio? do you think it has the potential to take over and make am/fm radio obsolete? i ask, because i am have been doing some reasearch and am thinking about investing in the two main competing companies (XM Satellite and Sirrus.)
Sirrus just recently signed a deal with howard stern, and stern has a reported 40+ million advid listeners a day. i think it is an 8year, $11mil deal.vvSatellite just signed a deal to air MLB games next season. both companies charge for the satellite reception, which is roughly $12. both companies are still relaitvely new, and their stocks are still still cheap. i think XM Satellite (XMSR) is at $30 and Sirrus (SIRI) is $4.
any thoughts?


just to update. when i started this thread, Sirrius was at $4 a share. it has blown up. currently trading at $6.66.
 
bran987 said:


the only reason why i haven't bought the stock yet is because i am currently looking at a piece of land back home in the state of maine. its 7 +- acres, with 737ft of ocean front property. they only want $100k for it.
if i were you, i would hang on to the stock. i checked out your other thread. i believe that karmazin being signed has a lot to do with the recent jumps in the price. that, along with stern. not to mention they just recently inked a deal with the NFL to air all football games. i believe that this stock will reach the price of XM in the next 1-2 years.
 
Illuminati said:
the only reason why i haven't bought the stock yet is because i am currently looking at a piece of land back home in the state of maine. its 7 +- acres, with 737ft of ocean front property. they only want $100k for it.
if i were you, i would hang on to the stock. i checked out your other thread. i believe that karmazin being signed has a lot to do with the recent jumps in the price. that, along with stern. not to mention they just recently inked a deal with the NFL to air all football games. i believe that this stock will reach the price of XM in the next 1-2 years.
you going to develop something on the land? or just hold it
 
I thought long and hard about which satellite radio to buy before I made my decision.

XM in my opinion is better than Sirius:

-XM units are lighter and more compact than Sirius'

-MLB is a radio game. Anyone who cares about football is home watching it on Sunday or Monday night.

-XM signed Opie and Anthony. They put on a better show than Stern.
 
Top Bottom