Satellite Radio - XM vs. Sirius?

wizman asks: "I am getting a new car tonight and will be upgrading the audio system. Now that satellite radio is available in most markets and becoming more affordable, I am definitely planning to take the plunge. Unfortunately, the 2 providers -- XM and Sirius -- both seem to have just as many strengths as weaknesses. There is a three dollar price difference, which is really not a concern for me."

"So far I have gathered that XM seems to have better audio quality, and a larger selection of music channels. Sirius has less music channels, but more "commercial free" music channels and more talk channels. Also, it scares me that Clear Channel has a stake in XM -- does this mean XM will eventually turn to utter crap like every Clear Channel station seems to have? Does Clear Channel have enough ownership to have a say in programming?

I'm looking for more strengths and weaknesses from people who have used one (or better yet, both!) of the services. I'm leaning towards XM right now, with the Clear Channel issue being my main fright. Sirius streams their stations online, giving me a good sample. So far I have been fairly impressed. But, I like the fact that XM carries Art Bell, more than one 80's station, and VH1 content. It's a toss up, so I'm looking forward to some info from the Slashdot community."

Comments

Re:In Car MP3 Player Still seems like the best bet

[rmohr02]

That's good if all you care about is music. If you also want news, an MP3 player won't help much.

Sirius vs. XM

[peterdaly]

I am not in the market for one of these right now, but if I were, it would be a hard decision. Based on the business models and actions of the two companies, I would prefer to be giving my monthly usage fee to Sirius. I don't like the XM's idea of almost no, if any commercial free stations. They seem too money hungry. For example, they only have two satalites up there. Sirius has three, which offers them some redundancy if one craps out on them.

Sirius to me seems to be the more professional of the two, where XM seem to be the "Clear Channels version" of the two. That is how I have always thought of them, which is interesting since this is my first finding out Clear Channels is a part owner.

I wouldn't give my money to XM if I have a viable choice. Remember, XM has had a head start as well, give Sirius a little time to get underway, then we can do a more fair comparison.

-Pete

why why why why why?

[Schlemphfer]

It seems to me that before you take the plunge and get one of these things, your first priority should be figuring out, not the feature set, but if either company is likely to survive. Both XM and Sirius are gushing money (both lost over five bucks per share last quarter.)

What a drag it would be to spend 500+ dollars to install a system into your car's dashboard, and then have to rip it out in a couple years if the company goes belly up. At their current burn rate, I'd be willing to bet that at least one of the two companies will fail.

Plus, keep in mind that once you install one of these systems, you are going to be held hostage to any rate increases down the road (pun not intended.)

I personally think these companies took off during the go-go optimism of two years ago. For the money you'd spend on one of these things, you could get one of those hundred-CD units that goes into your trunk, and never worry about the company going belly-up.

Business health

[pos]

Rather than looking at the technology or costs, why not look into the business health of each company. I think if you are going to be making an investment, youwant to be picking the one that is going to have staying power.

The Motly Fool recently shorted sirius believing their company to be overvalued. (That is not to say that their company will fail, stock price doesn't necessarily equate business health) The fool has quite a bit of discussion on each company.

It's a an important perspective.

-pos