Slashdot Mirror
Satellite Radio in Fiscal Trouble
prostoalex writes "It looks like Sirius Satellite Radio is going through its worse times. From the same article XM Satellite does not seem to be doing well either, even with 200K customers. Will it signify the end of the satellite radio?"
Under the new plan, which is subject to regulatory and shareholder approval, current holders of Sirius common stock will together hold 8 percent of the new common stock.
:)
Uh, yeah, I know I'd vote for that.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
I've heard ads for this on the radio, and I've always wondered if it makes any money at all. It doesn't really make sense to me, but I guess some use it.
You mean "worst".
I hope.
Will it signify the end of the satellite radio?
As someone whose has XM I really hope that they pull through. It's one of the best services I've seen in a long time and just about the only way to get some good blues and jazz in your car outside of cd's. I'd pay twice as much for the service just to keep it alive.
Keep Austin Weird!
Sure satellite radio seems nice, but everything's too expensive to be worth the trouble. $299+ for the receiver, then another $10/mo for the service. Not a good business model when your competiton is free.
Maybe people are feeling the squeeze on their wallets from all the market problems we've been having, and are unwilling to commit to something that seems to be almost 100% luxury.
I know that if I were concerned about my retirement fund, I'd be cutting back where I could to put more money there.
When this thing came out, many people didn't say "can't" or "shouldn't" when it came to luxury purchases. Now, though, people are keeping their wallets in their pockets a bit more.
You mean satellite radio ever began? I mean, sure, I've seen commercials for it, but I know of no-one who has it, and I know so many tech-geeks who go out and buy the latest and greatest just because it's new (well, okay, not so often in this economy), and yet none of them have it.
I can think of a lot of reasons why it wouldn't be doing so well though... how much does it cost to put a satellite into orbit or "rent" one of the ones already up there? And how much are they charging customers per month for the service?
200,000 customers? In a major metropolitan area, like New York City, one radio station can have that many listeners. It sounds like a lot, but it isn't.
Kierthos
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
I'd pay twice as much for the service just to keep it alive.
:-)
Not wanting to speak on their behalf, but I'm fairly sure that if you offer they'll accept
Try NetBSD... safe,straightforward,useful.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
1. I mostly listen to the radio when I'm in my car. Since I live in a big city, I'm rarely in my car.
2. And when I am in my car, I listen to traffic, weather, or my own music collection or local radio.
3. The exception is long distance trips. Perhaps one multi-hour drive a month.
4. At home, I have a big music collection. Stuff I actually bought over the years. (Don't blame MP3s in my case). I also have digital TV, with it's music channels. Plus a collection of reasonable local radio stations (and many more unreasonable ones)
So! Someone has to remind me why I should spend $$$ for this service. I can see why some people would spring for it. Just not me.
Damn, it's snowing... there goes summer...
The FCC just announce standards for Digital Radio: fcc.gov
If "clear signal" is one of the key benefits of satelite radio, I would call this a major killer of the industry. Can you say "I-R-I-D-I-U-M"? I plan to be operating XM Radio in 6 months after I pick it up on EBay for $50.
I'm pretty sure with all of the deals these companies have signed with auto makers, all the customers they already have, and most importantly the millions of dollars in satellites overhead, they wouldn't just let them crash into the ocean because their revenues are starting out low.
Even a massive project like Iridium eventually found a buyer. Even if both of these companies go bankrupt it would be an attractive purchase for some investor.
I am personally kind of surprised that they were even able to get online. Sure there's a market for coast-to-coast single channel coverage, but how much of the market can truck drivers cover?
Most people spend 99%+ of their time driving within 50 miles of home, where one radio station will cover them. Anyone who's all that picky about what they listen to will probably want to listen to CDs anyway. Personally I'm probably going to get a car MP3 player (I was waiting for an OGG player but I'm tired of waiting).
I spend $120 a year but I send it to public radio.
The sat radio services have been live for what, less then two years? It seems disturbing that a venture of this size wouldn't have had a longer term plan.
Sat radio is a great idea, and an idea that I have held off embrasing due to too many uncertianties. Why they chose to go with propritary hardware for their services is beyond me. $200-400 for the setup, and if the service goes out of business, you can't just call up the compitition to reprogram the radio.
This can, and should be able to work in the long run; It's just that good of an idea.
The Internet is generally stupid
Nah, they'll probably do the same thing as satellite phones. Declare bankrupcy, ditch their debt, and then take off. Heck, WorldCom's doing it and other bankrupt telecoms, why not everyone else?
People used to joke that new startups were following the following model:
1) Create a website
2) ?
3) Profit!
But I posit that the today's companies have revised that to:
1) Create something unprofitable
2) Run up massive debt to pay for massive capital costs
3) Declare bankrupcy
4) Profit!
I like lots of people. That doesn't mean I go carting them around the galaxy with me. --Dr. Who
Satellite Radio and XM will basically become options on luxury cars so that those companies can get paid up-front for service. The manufacteurer will then pass off the cost to the consumer, and most likely the monthly fee will disappear. Or, they maybe just make it standard in luxury vehicles. The possabilities for markets for their products are there. I just don't see them using those markets.
Zech Harvey, MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA
I thought all satellites had radios since sputnik.
Oh wait, you mean satellite RADIO... thats out?
There is nothing wrong with being gay. It's getting caught where the trouble lies.
Ssshhh! ;-) But, yeah I agree with you. I have Sirius and 100 channels was a bit overwhelming at first, but now I've grown into it and it's the best thing that ever happened to radio. I really do hope it survives.
In 4 weeks I'll be in the middle of the Mohave Desert, listening to jazz, swing, the BBC, etc. where I got bugger all last year.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
AP has a story published Oct. 21st about how local station(already has a huge market share) can now broadcast digital radio. Why buy a subscription for a satellite radio signal instead of catching a free local stream?
Another thing, most people listen to the radio for local weather and traffic conditions. Satellite radio doesn't supple that need.
Here's the AP story:
Digital Radio May Give Shot In Arm To AM, FM
Some Stations Will Broadcast With CD-Quality Sound
A few months from now you'll be able to hear AM and FM broadcasts like you've never heard them before.
Some stations will broadcast digital signals with CD-quality sound.
Dennis Wharton with the industry trade group, the National Association of Broadcasters, said stations are already buying the equipment needed to transmit these signals.
He said it'll mean local radio won't become a second-class communications service. Wharton said digital radio will allow stations to compete on an equal footing with cable and satellite-delivered radio services.
In order to hear digital AM and FM broadcasts, you'll need a special radio. But you'll still be able to hear analog broadcasts on the radios you have now.
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
Maybe the satalites will wind up floating around in space like Iridium. Maybe someone will snap 'em up and sell the service for $2 a month. That, I would pay for. If there was a data link on XM I would buy it yesterday
What does XM offer that traditional radio doesn't?
Let's see, no subscription - no wait, I have to pay a per-month fee. Traditional radio is free.
I don't have to listen to ads? No, wait, I am paying for my airtime to listen to people trying to sell me stuff. Same as t-radio.
Quality of music? I must be able to listen to indie artists and hard-to-find cutting edge stuff, right? Gee, that doesn't seem to be the case either.
Static free? Hmm, most of the time my FM is static free, too.
So I'm just not seeing the value of paying $300+ for a receiver and $120/yr for the service. The cost-to-benefit ratio is just to high.
If they got rid of *all* the ads, I would probably do it in a heartbeat. But I'm not paying to have someone push product on me. (Note that I don't have cable TV either...)
Matt
that it would fail.
Why?
Recall Iridium, the satellite mobile telephone service that failed?
Well, Sirius is only offering to bring audio noise 1-way down from the satellite. No full duplex!
If duplex lost, simplex can't hope to win!
"Provided by the management for your protection."
Yet, it has been observed in lean times people spend more money on entertainment. Isn't that a h00t? Video game sales are good, movie attendance is setting records, the pub has been jammed with people visiting our tourist-trap city lately. I'd like to see "less spending" backed up by a number of people who have discontinued cable TV (usually $30 a month for basic)
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Satellites don't seem to be real profitable in a consumer environment. Anyone have some examples of it making $$$?
How's the satellite TV industry doing? Well, I'd assume.
If these idiots didn't charge $129.00+ for an adapter to listen to the radio in you house I am sure they would have sold more. It is what stopped me from buying it.
I don't know about anything else, but the attempt to shift everything from a "purchase" to "rental" model bothers me enormously.
s is one thing. Sure, inkjet consumables are a ripoff, but at least the thing doesn't eat money when I'm not using it. But if someone tried to sell me a printer for $150, plus $20 per ink cartridge, PLUS $5.99 PER MONTH, I would behave badly.
I don't mind in the least paying $300 or $400 for a nifty gadget.
I have VERY HIGH SALES RESISTANCE to anything that carries a "monthly" fee for anything. My nifty gadgets OFTEN last for, say, 100 months (a bit over 8 years) and I am quite capable of multiplying a monthly fee by 100.
When I buy a $20,000 car, I'm quite agreeable to considering a $300 or $500 add-on.
But a MONTHLY fee? Forget about it.
Give-away-the-razor-and-make-money-on-the-blade
Perhaps I'm not the only consumer who can multiply by 100 in my head.
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
I'm not suprised. I tried it for a little while, and it was the WORSE.
I suppose I could be missremembering, but don't these services share the same spectrum as WIFI? I seem to recall some talk a few months back that WIFI would have to go to make room for Satelitte Radio. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but if that's the case, I hope they all die fast. P2P wireless internet is a much higher social priority in my book.
ok, so XM is expensive, that's true. And all things being equal, it's very tough to make it up on volume when you're loosing money on each transaction. I currently have XM, and to be honest, I don't know if I'd buy it again, but I do love having it
That being said, here are three reasons to get it:
So, reasons not to get it?
If you blog it...
According to the recent New Yorker article on Willie Nelson, he loves satellite radio which lets him listen to a few of his musical inspirations (in cluding Frank Sinatra). But how many of us really are on long drives in tour buses with drivers?
I'd like to see them offer programming from other countries. Give me a feed from the Australian Broadcast Company, or the BBC, even plug in the Voice of America stations (if they allow that now) to hear what we're telling other nations about ourselves. Let Grandma listen to radio from the 'old country'. I love listening to radio stations on the net now and I think to have *that* in your car to listen to would be more a great selling point.
I mean really, did anybody here expect pay radio to be the next big thing? Most people live in places that have acceptable radio coverage. The thing was a joke from the start.
People who think they know everything really piss off those of us that actually do.
There is, IMHO, no chance for Sirius & XM to survive as presently organized. XM needs over one million subscribers to break even - they have 200,000. Sirius has similar needs, but not nearly as many subscribers. Does this mean that things are hopeless ? No. Their orbital assets are real, and have real value. Just like in the case of Iridium, the initial investors will take a bath (those that didn't cash out) and the reborn companies will be able to make a profit.
Remember, in the Satellite world, bankruptcy can be part of the business model!
1. The quality sucks (96kbps... yummy)
2. You're still limited to the formats of your local stations, which means limited choice and lots of commercials.
The only thing they've added is shitty digital sound... how exactly is that going to kill satellite radio?
"And like that
I bought an XM radio kit with some of my signing bonus last year. Since I was going to commute one hour each way down the interstate, I justified the cost to myself as a nice way to have better programming for my commute. The station guide seemed interesting enough...I could get BBC radio, CNN, CNet, a channel of standup comedy, selections of music that interest me, and so on. The $10 each month seemed very reasonable for commercial-free options that I'd enjoy.
So, I bought the kit and I installed everything as per the manual. I activated my account. I got everything in order. I started listening that night. It was really cool to be able to get a continuous mix of house techno and, with the spin of the dial, CNet news. I loved that, if I wanted a laugh in the morning, I could listen to comedians with talent instead of shock-jocks with carnival barker voices. Everything was all well and good...
And then two weeks went by, and I still couldn't keep a signal over my commute. I also started noting that I couldn't keep a signal in-town all that well. I also made a couple drives through the major metro areas of central Florida and could not keep a signal. This started becoming frustrating. It was about this time, though, that I noticed the programming wasn't all that good. The comedy channels just played the same handful of routines by trite comedians over and over again. The 80's station wasn't really covering what I wanted to hear, either. Slowly, the stations I was enjoying just became boring.
After letting XM take two weeks to try and resolve their issues, I called again, only to be told by the support rep that there were not any such problems and that everything was my fault. I explained my configuration to her and she agreed I hadn't done anything wrong. I told her that XM had been given a month of opportunity to communicate with me and hadn't done so, and so I needed to cancel my account. She then asked me to hold the phone for a minute. When she came back, she reported that there was indeed a problem in my area and, if I could just sit tight a little bit longer, it'd be fixed.
By this point, I'd given XM a month, and I needed to return the radio soon or I wouldn't be able to get a refund from Best Buy. I cancelled my account and took the radio out of my car. I was a little disappointed that I lost my alternative to crappy commercial radio, filled with advertisements, music I hated, shock DJs, and insipid conservative commentary on the news stations. Then I discovered I really rather enjoyed the one alternative I had left- NPR. I started listening to Morning Edition and All Things Considered over my commute, both of which are pleasant and informative shows, and both of which are provided commercial-free.
So, I save my $10 every month and, every third month or so, I use the money to treat myself to a new audiobook or a couple of CDs when I want an alternative to NPR. I really have to say, if you're going to get XM just to have an alternative to standard radio, see if there aren't some local or public stations you like first. Here in Tampa, we have something like two NPR stations and a local, commercial-free station that runs some excellent world news, commentary, and music you'd never find even on XM.
I don't know about anything else, but the attempt to shift everything from a "purchase" to "rental" model bothers me enormously.
That's great and all, but this argument does not apply to satellite radio. You are not renting anything. You are paying for a SERVICE.
I pay a guy $20 a month to mow my lawn. I could do it myself for free, but I like the service.
"And like that
I see this as the major fault of the DR plan. Why would I pay for a service that uses advertisements to suppliment income? By the way, I don't use cable for the same reason. I believe if you pay for a service, you should exclusively get what you pay for and no extra baggage. If the service has ads, then the service should be free or public. I think a better plan for DR would be to incorporate multimedia broadcasting. You know, like what 224.0.0.0 nets were reserved for (but not used anymore). I think it'd be great to have an on board computer that gets continuous weather updates and news reports (like what I have on my pager, but more detail). So you could get updated weather maps and news with some live video. Yes, maybe not today, but the service definitely has promise. Just drop all that ad crap. I won't pay for ads!
Maybe it's time for satellite radio to adopt the Spring and Fall Fund Drives that plague avid listeners of public radio.
I blinked. When was the beginning? Hasn't satellite radio been bigger in Europe? It's been only one or two months now that I have been hearing ads for satellite (on AM/FM) in the US.
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
I forecasted this was going to happen about a year ago here on Slashdot. It was so clear then to me.
Simple economics. They need 400k subscribers on day 1. They need millions of subscribers within a year. They're off by an order of magnitude.
I have first hand knowlege and experience of how these things get off the ground in the first place.
Basically, the marketing is done too much by engineers and scientists.
I contributed to this by co-developing a very sophisticated software application that analysed terrain data from US Geological survey. The results showed that there was a huge potential target market.
You've got scientists on the one end wanting desperately to build a new bird that does what no other bird does. What they have no clue about is how the consumer couldn't give a damn that incredible technology was involved and hundreds of millions spent to bring some sweet sweet sounds to their automobiles.
XM is far simpler than some of the other 2 way projects like Satellite telephones (American Mobile Satellite, dba Motient).
They need to find a way to put a bird up there that not only provides a nice product, it's got to provide a revenue stream in the order of billions.
400,000 subs is only going to get you about $100M per year. You need to start out getting about $1B per year.
I say, follow the successful business model of the Internet. What put Internet commerce on the map? Porn. For some reason, porn enthusiats are very willing paying customers.
But how do you find out about new music? I like my music collection, but I don't fool mysef into thinking that I've already discovered everything that's good. To everyone who's saying local digital broadcasts will take this market - Clear Channel already owns all the radio towers in my area. I don't think digital clarity will make their content sound any more original.
Having said that, I'm holding off on sat radio until the receivers aren't proprietary.
Since Clear Channel owns a majority of the stations in my area I'm limited to what they decide to play if I listem to FM. I mean how many times can you here the same 100 or songs over and over ? And unless you are a pirate your MP3 collection will get as expensive or even more so than XM's subscription fee. Anyways I'm a real minority in liking Bluegrass so I signed up right away . There's enough of us across the USA to support a channel devoted to singin through yer nose ;)
I really hope XM is able to survive. It has a chance if it stays up long enough. I personally know 3 other people who have XM with me and none of us can ever think about going back to the commerical laden top 40 stations trying to pass themselves off as "alternative progressive rock". The problem isn't subscriber retainership, its attracting new subscribers. I think there business model should have been structured around giving away free hardware (or atleast a reduced price much like gaming consoles) and making up for the loss in a slightly higher monthly subscription fee. After 2 years or so the hardware is yours, if you cancel the service before 2 years, you must return the hardware.
Has anyone noticed that General Motors is selling cars equipped with XM Radio. This will hide the initial cost well, since no one thinks about that when its included. They will also be a lot more likely to continue paying for the service. If a lot of people buy these cars, this may give XM a chance.
The FCC adopted the wrong model for satellite radio. The pigopolists pretty much got what they wanted, and are suffering for it.
For technical reasons, there are only two satellite radio networks, Sirius and XM. Both have capacity for a lot of channels. The FCC decided to use a "market" approach and allow each company to choose details of its own technology, so their radios are incompatible. Imagine how well TV or FM radio might have done if different stations required different receivers! Consumers are locked in. Sure, it's nice work if you can get it, but consumers aren't quite as dumb as the companies wanted them to be.
Even worse, the duopolists were not charged as common carriers, but as programmers. So XM and Sirius determine what they will carry, and if they don't want something run, it won't run. Sure, they've figured out that they have to offer some kind of musical variety, so they have country & western streams, '70s rock streams, '80s rock streams, sports streams, etc. But the plain fact remains that they control the horizontal, they control the vertical, and a Sirius or XM subscriber won't be exposed to anything that the suits at Sirius or XM don't want them to hear. I guess to them, a stream playing Wilco and an NPR stream are radical enough.
So if this turkey fails, maybe somebody else will try again. If an operator were less greedy, and leased enough channels to independent programmers, then a workable business might be found.
No really, check it out. Always a good business model to try to tap into the insatiable desire for more pornography, but I can't imagine why its not working!
Satellite radio's problem is the cost of the receiver. Getting people to pay for another piece of equipment is the issue. I think they'd have more success "renting" the equipment as part of the monthly fee.
--*Rob
Although XM Radio already does have a AAA station (Adult Album Alternative), I doubt it is as good as Radio Paradise.
:-(
Paradise is similar in some respects to a radio station we had in southern California, KSCA 101.9 FM (LA's Finest Rock!), which was for a time the only place where you could listen to good new music. It was bought and replaced with a Spanish station. Another AAA station came out of the ashes, but it too was bought and converted to Spanish-language format. Now, the southern California radio market is a vast musical wasteland, with the exception of KMZT 105.1 classical, and the KPRW 89.9 public radio station (which is good but very eclectic).
Which all goes to show why I would be willing to fork over $10/month if I could get Paradise in my car. One would think the recording industry would have a clue. I haven't bought a single CD since the last AAA station went off the air in southern California, years ago. After listening to Radio Paradise for a few weeks, I've already targeted 5 CDs which I'll be buying shortly.
Incidentally, my list is:
Aimee Mann - Bachelor #2
Pat Metheny - Works
Coldplay - Parachutes
Cowboy Junkies - The Trinity Session
Stevie Ray Vaughn and Double Trouble - The Real Deal: Greatest Hits 2
Radio Paradise is struggling to pay the new webcaster royalties, which are completely stupid. The recording industry won't be happy until they've squashed every outlet for new and interesting music, and they wonder why CD sales are down!!
- BBC World Service
- Fox News
- CNN Headline News
- ABC News and Talk
- The Weather Channel
- CNBC
- CNNfn
- Bloomberg News
- CNET Radio
- C-SPAN Radio
These are services that you can't get on the radio in 99 percent of the country, unless you use satellite radio. How many people will pay for this? Not many, but, this is probably another vertical market similar to over-the-road truckers.I haven't bought an XM receiver because I don't think the service will survive in its present form, and I don't have the disposable income that I had prior to the recession.
I haven't seen this posted elsewhere in this discussion, but an AM radio station in NYC has already brought HD-Radio on-line. This is interesting because I don't know of any receiver I can buy the handles this service at the moment. If HD-Radio doesn't add to the programming options we receive, however, no consumer will care about it. Then, IMHO, all it will be is a long-term way for the broadcasters to reduce transmission costs.
-- Dave Aiello
as someone who both has XM radio and is an installer in the mobile electronics industry, I'd have to say that XM is going to be around for a while, but Sirius may simply be a transient company.
The real question here seems to be "what is its attraction?" To answer that I'd have to say that most of the hype is more or less true. To compare choice in music between your local FM station and a satellite station, ask yourself what you hear most on your local FM station.
I'll use rock stations as a case study. More than likely there'll be one or two rock stations in your area if you live in a major market. I know in philadelphia the only way I can tell the difference between the two rock stations is by the talk shows that they air. Both stations pretty much play the same set of alternative, a little bit of guns and roses, and then a touch of heavy metal thrown in for good measure.
XM radio has the advantage over this setup simply because one company controls 10 rock stations, so they can coordinate music coverage between the stations and they can specialize in genres of rock. For instance there is one station that only plays alternative, another that plays folk rock, one devoted to heavy metal, and another just for hard rock. There is a channel devoted only to unsigned bands, then another that adopts the format of a university radio station; playing only the newest music and underground rap.
Local radio stations have to compete with each other and they are only given one channel with which to work. Therefore, they will have a tendency to stay in the middle of the road and go with what the focus groups tell them. That's why your local rock station predominantly plays what most people will like. That's why they sound the same.
Thinking about satellite radio in terms of local stations is why many people draw such damning conclusions. Its much more like a webcast: stations thrive on specialization and expert knowledge of a genre.
And as for commercials, you get on average about 1 commercial every 20 minutes. Compare that to 5 in a row every 20 minutes on local radio.
Until the industry come out of the innovation rut it's been stuck in, I won't be purchasing anything new.
You sound like an old man whose had the same haircut and worn the same style of clothes for 50 years: "It ain't gotten better goddamnit, so I'm stickin' with the best!".
I'd pay twice as much for the service just to keep it alive.
Don't worry about satellite radio as the providers have some large pockets to draw upon - the auto makers. Next year, GM will offer the service as standard equipment on some of the vehicles - with a free year of service. If only a small percentage renew, then the satellite providers will be listening to satellite disco. If a significant percentage renew, then you are looking at a threat to FM.
On that note, with all these satellite head units running around in the new autos, it would make financial sense to provide some publically funded stations free-of-charge. That would be the largest opportunity.
$0.02
Life is the leading cause of death in America.
And has been offered since the early days of XM and Sirius both. It's the biggest reason why I will be getting XM.
As for the others, there's no market -- BBC is the gold standard in (English-language) international news media, everyone else trails behind. And VoA still is not allowed to broadcast to the U.S. -- there's a good reason for that, the government isn't allowed to (overtly) propagandize to U.S. citizens. XM runs several international music channels programmed in non-English languages; I couldn't tell you whether they also contain foreign-language news.
I've been itching to buy one of these as of late because I live in an area with poor analog radio reception. Personally, there are a couple of reasons I've been holding off buying one of these...(hope you're listening sirius/xm)
First of all, you can only get a receiver for your car! Is this really the only place they expect people to listen to the radio? Sony makes a unit for the XM systems that is car removable, but I have been told that is just the headset and the "base unit" which mounts somewhere like under a car seat is separate.
Secondly, they need to come up with something better than "just tear out your factory deck". I LIKE my factory deck, and for those who don't know this already, you get better resale on a car that has the factory deck in it. Tearing out a custom unit when it comes time to sell a car is a pain.
Third, and probably most importantly for the prudent consumer, "Will I make the right choice?" The topic of this thread alone should be enough to convince most that this isn't a device you want to run out and spend $300 on. I want a little bit of a guarantee that my nifty new receiver isn't going to become a useless box less than a year after I buy it because the network is no longer in business.
Which brings me to point four: "Why can't I have a receiver that works on both Sirius and XM?" Yes, I realize they are competing for the same market segment. I DON'T CARE. I am a consumer. I want some guarantee that if Sirius(the network I'd probably choose due to a choice of programming) ends up in bankruptcy court, I want to know I have the option of getting service with XM. These devices are just too much money to be throwing away. And I want one that works in my car as well as my home.
Sirius seems to offer a bit higher quality programming than XM. XM seems like a whole lot of the shit that is on television, only now I can listen to it. I can pretty well guarantee that most consumers who are willing to shell out $10 or more a month for this type of service, which is basically radio(something we're accustomed to getting for free), aren't going to willingly listen to a bunch of damn commercials. This is in fact the reason I would choose Sirius over XM. Because they have NPR. No commercials. I get to listen to the news in peace. Commercials are just plain annoying.
Russian Russian Russian RussianDollSig DollSig DollSig DollSig
It wouldn't surprise me if their finanical trouble started relatively small and then snowballed. My boss just had XM installed in the Company Pimp Van, but he we originally looking at Sirius. Our city was one of the initial test markets for Sirius, and the store he went into was covered in Sirius promotional propaganda. When he asked about it though, the salesmen wouln't even demo it, saying "Nah, you don't want that. They may be gone in a year - You want XM." I can't help but wonder if their sales reps aren't partially to blame for the decline.
Now maybe they can use those satellites for something useful. Let's face it, with 3G wireless why not just listen to internet radio stations? And if they don't have 3G in your area, they will and you'll need it anyway, so why waste your money on radio when you could give the RIAA some more of your hard earned $$ in the mean time. ;-)
XM Radio CEO announced when they first got started that they would need 1 million customers worldwide to break even. That's considered to be a lot of people, but then again, worldwide, it's really not. XM just needs some more time. And somehow I doubt they will have any trouble getting capitol from investors to keep them going as they continue to grow. Lets be honest, XM and Sirius are still really young when considering how long they've actually been offering a product, so it's way too early to rule them out.
Blessed be he who reads this post, Cursed be he who tells my boss.
And as for people whining about price, yes the hardware is proprietary, and yes it costs money to keep two satellites up in orbit and to run 100+ stations. Most of the stations I've listened to have been ad-free, some do have occasional adds but they certainly don't have 5-minute blocks of ads.
Sometimes I prefer the satellite radio to television, now that's worth the investment. I'd rather fry my brain on good music then crappy TV.
In fact there's an interesting point here. I originally paid $300 for my television, and are currently paying $40 for basic cable. I'm listening to the radio more these days than watching TV, so what's really a waste of money in this case?
You don't want to shell out the $300 + $10/mo, fine. I will, and I'll dump the f***in' cable. There's nothing worth watching on cable anyway, and I honestly don't have the time. It's easier to multitask with the radio on than with the TV on.
#this line toggles the rant function
RANT=0
I signed up a couple of weeks ago and have not listened to local radio since. Clear Channel (owns more that 1600 stations) has destroyed local radio by programming the same 50 songs on whatever format they own. In addition almost every station syndicates the same mindless drival morning talk shows. Sirius frees you from this which is the real reason for spending the money to get it. Hopefully more people will realize this is the true reason for getting Satellite Radio. (Sirius would seem to be better than XM)
While he's being busted for the shell game that enabled them to get so much debt, the actual debt->bankrupcy->no debt->increased profits part is completely legal (IANAL, milage may vary).
/ isptelecom/story/0,10801,75316,00.html
Check out this article: http://www.computerworld.com/managementtopics/xsp
I like lots of people. That doesn't mean I go carting them around the galaxy with me. --Dr. Who
They should take their lead from MSN Music (yeah yeah, MS is the devil). Model themselves less off conventional radio and more off the internet/mp3 phenomenom.
There are all kinds of music, several different choices for each genre, the new stuff and critic's choice stations. I thought about getting XM, but after going to their website, I was disappointed they didn't have any trip-hop/downtempo stations. Specific, yes, but I don't need some stupid DJ blabbling away, just continuous music... the name of the song would come up on the display and there would be no interruptions.
will most likely pull both companies out of the mud once they go bankrupt.
Sirius Satellite is Ford's baby & XM Satellite is General Motors baby. Both companies spent multiple years integrating the systems into half of their 2003 vehicles and all of their 2004+ vehicles.
Even if the satellite companies go bankrupt, they will be bought out and subsidized by the major manufacturers.
thrakos
Like we didn't see this coming? The market for pay radio has got to be slim. Who wants to pay a monthly fee for radio sat or no sat? This would be a great service if it weren't for one small, tiny miscalculation: THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF FREE RADIO STATIONS ALL OVER AMERICA! Hey, when interplanetary travel becomes commonplace, then this shit will be the bomb! Never underestimate a venture capitalist with more money than brains. Hey, I realize some of you subscribe and love it. That's great. Most of us just won't buy it. The upfront investment coupled with the subscription just make it impractical. >
First of all, XM is a Sony operation through-and-through. The main reason XM is doing so well is that Sony has pumped a bunch of money into it, knowing up front it'll run at a loss for a long time. On the other hand, Sirius is an independent business with all the attendant risks and concerns. Unfortunately Sony is a giant, monopolistic bastard of a company who pimps cheap junk at ridiculous prices, so you can guess which side I root for in this battle. :)
Second, there is the satellite problem. Sirius placed a small number of satellites in very high orbit. This means each satellite can cover a relatively wide portion of the Earth's surface. Also, these satellites are in a more stable orbit so they have a longer life expectancy. Launch costs were higher, however. Conversely, Sony opted for low-orbit satellites. This means the launches were cheaper, but the life expectancy is lower, and each satellite has a much smaller area of coverage, meaning Sony had to use significantly larger numbers of satellites.
Worse yet, the XM satellites are unexpectedly having problems holding their orbit, so they're using fuel at roughly 3X the expected rate. This is one of XM's largest problems. Sony faces having to replace the satellites YEARS earlier than expected. I don't remember the exact figures to replace the satellites, but the price tag was vast -- like $700M or $1B or something equally insane.
Third, there is the ground station plan. Both systems use a network of repeater stations. These (combined with receiver onboard buffering) ensure you have a steady signal when you drive through an underpass, for example. Amazingly, Sony only has 75 repeater stations in the US, all near major cities. The Sirius plan calls for 2,500 repeaters spread somewhat evenly throughout the country. I don't recall how many Sirius currently has, but it's already much more than XM.
Fourth, of course, is the question of content. Sirius costs a bit more than XM, but it's also largely commercial-free. Sony charges you a not insigificant amount for XM, and then they sell advertising on almost all their stations anyway.
Fifth is the availability issue. Since XM is a Sony-funded effort, it was available everywhere almost from Day One. However, Sirius has a ramp-up plan which targets major cities first, then rolls out to everyone else over a 12-18 month period. This may be important to frequent travelers.
Sixth and finally, speaking of frequent travelers, another post pointed out that people like truckers are a prime target market for satellite radio. Interestingly, there is another important target market mentioned in the articles, but overlooked here so far (I think) -- ships. Merchant ships and cruise ships are potentially a HUGE market for satellite radio. It turns out that XM was very heavily focused on land-based use, and their offshore coverage is largely accidental. Because of this (and XM's use of low-orbit small-footprint satellites) XM coverage doesn't extend very far into the ocean. However, Sirius took that market into consideration when they planned their service, and their coverage extends quite far out to sea. Again, unfortunately, I forget the exact numbers, but the difference was serious, like 20 miles compared to 400 miles.
It's my opinion that Sirius is the better technology for these reasons and others (even ignoring my intense dislike for Sony), but we all know how often Joe Sixpack pays attention to little details like that.
Again, that was all from memory based on information I read almost a year ago, so please don't beat me up if I got any of it completely wrong (and please correct me). Hope you found it interesting.
Slashdot quality declines as the number of hot grits posts decreases. - Provolt's Law, Apr-09-2005
I recently purchased a car stereo, and noticed that most of the $300+ (USD) head units that handle satellite also play MP3. Satellite radio requires $10/mo service fee, and the purchase of a $150+ reciever.
Given the choise of spending at least $160 for satellite radio, or to just dump a few hundred tracks onto a couple of CD-Rs, I think I know which option most people will go with
I refuse to put that ugly shark fin on my new sports car! Too bad they could not figure out a way to just replace/reuse/recycle the old antenna. Since the shark fin has to be at the highest point of a car, where would you mount such a thing on a Jeep Wrangler or VW Cabriolet anyway?
Holy s-, it's Jesus!
I seriously considered one of these systems. Here are some of the reasons I didn't buy one.
Conflicting Standards - It is the norm in the electronics industry to come out with multiple formats in the hope of locking the users into your service. This is true of the Satelite radio services. So, once I buy a radio I am stuck with either the service I originally chose, or a large $500 hockey puck.
Can't Try-Before-Buy - I can't try before I buy, instead I have to shell out 300-500 buck-a-ronis and then pay a monthly fee - all to find out if it is worth having.
Fear of Bankruptcy - Even if I love my new stations, if my particular service goes belly up, my pre-paid time is lost, my radio turns into the hockey puck, and I am out of luck. In this business climate, it is a very real consideration to me.
Fear of Declining service - once they have you, they have you. If they need to actually make money, or failing that, loose less, the first thing to go will be the DJ's. And then all you will hear is the same songs over and over, programmed by Mort (you know, the guy who was once an assistant to the Manager for one of those 80's bands that you kinda recognize their song when it comes on the radio, but never really remember their name.)
No one will pay per-month charges for things they already get free over the air. That's why cable and satellite TV are destined to fail.
Best Slashdot Co
And what about cable? If I'm out of town for 3 weeks out of the month, I still have to pay full price, even if nobody was watching the TV! It's a rip-off, I tell you!
How do these work in heavy rain? My satellite tv quits completely.
Indecision is the key to flexibility.
Satellite radio is doomed - it *will* fail - for the very reason you stated - availability of the music on cd. The reason cable and satellite tv does so well is because there isn't an alternative - i.e. the shows aren't available elsewhere until well after they come on the tv. The music on satellite radio is *already* available on cd, tape, vinyl, or the internet. Contributing to this is the fact that most people don't spend a large portion of their day relaxing in their cars - they relax in their homes, which provides a better soundstage than a car.
These sattelite radio companies are dead meat. They don't even have competition from digital radio yet and they are struggling.
Current radio operators will soon roll out digital signals alongside their analog counterparts. This will allow people to upgrade slowly to digital recievers without missing any programming.
Sirius and XM will be gone in two years.
-ted
I came close to getting SR but when I called I asked a simple question:
"What guarantee do you have in writing that, while the stations are currently commercial free, ensures that the stations STAY commercial free?"
This is the response
"We cannot guarantee at this time that we will remain commercial free."
After having a lawyer friend make some calls this was the response
"The commercial free aspect of our service is an introductory program only. We are currently pricing out commercial time and negotiating with prospective sponsors. We do not have any fixed implementation time yet."
Man, what ever happened to false advertising? Serves these shady bastards right for trying to fleece their customers. I feel really bad for all those who did subscribe.
In fact answer me this: Why, if I pay for cable TV, are their commercials? I remember early on that cable was virtually commercial free. I also clearly remember when Showtime, Cinemax, and the Movie Channel had zero commercials (HBO didn't have their own station yet. They were more of a production studio. I remember getting HBO's station when it came out, begging my Mom to get it, for one thing... Fraggle Rock, mmm Doozer sticks.... Ahhh...)
It's kind of like public education, when is enough money enough? Studios keep telling me that it costs too much to make a film. Well first lower salaries... oh wait that solves the problem.
The problem is that the contemporary marketing methods have no concrete, economic validity anymore. They have brushed aside capitalism in exchange for poorly disguised Socialism and we are paying the price. Capitalism is the idea the in economic terms it is survival of the fittest. True Monopolies, Government bailouts, restrictive cost of entry, and plain criminal racketeering have crippled Capitalism and forced people to embrace Socialism thinking it will solve the problem. This is the same mentality the satellite radio producers were thinking.
-=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
I work in IT at a Fortune 5 company (woohoo). The coffee cabana's here have been littered with guerilla marketing by people paid to seed interest in this technology for several months now. The spam they leave lying around trying to make it look like people are reading about it on their breaks are almost laughable. It is like those people who are paid to hang out in bars with a new mobile phone or wear designer clothes to "advertise" in stealth mode. The ads for XM are misleading and the local interest is fake. BTW, I don't care how they try to skirt around it: the service is NOT commercial free.
standard optionXM and the like have been heavy to push factory installs of these units in demographically selected automobile models. There are groups at the Big Three automakers that are designing marketing plans around these technologies. I imagine it will be along the lines of "first 6 months free!" then you get $10/month'ed to death like every other subscription service that you don't need. The lazy will keep paying it and think they're getting value.
transmission controlI think it is interesting how it is billed as satellite radio when in fact the majority of subscribers will be receiving signal not from the satellites but from the repeater towers they had to erect in the major cities to deal with the signal loss caused by tall buildings. San Francisco, Los Angles, New York, Boston, Chicago... they and more only run on the repeaters. Subscribers of satellite TV can tell you what happens to the signal on a stormy day or even a cloudy day. Ask this to your satellite radio provider: does it come with local channels?
epilogueI've discussed this technology with my family and friends and advised them to avoid it like the plague. I did the same thing when those DivX players came out. It is bad news people. Stay away. Stay far away. Invest your money in public radio.
Speak truth to power.
Um....well, the auto makers may have big pockets, but they have a deal to put receivers in their cars, one assumes they got the year's programming for free, and the receivers at a cheaper rate...not a deal to give XM and all money.
Yes, but there is no money in the short term, or even the medium term. Let's see, starting sometime next year XM gives free service so lots of people with new GM cars. That doesn't cost XM very much money (they might have product support costs, but they should be low, right?). For a year after that they have no extra money from those people. Then, after over a year they can start getting an idea about how many people keep the subscription.
Think about that.
We are still over a year from them getting money from the GM deal, and more importantly over a year from finding out how much money they will get from the GM deal. Do they have money to make it that long without going into bankruptcy?
How does that makes sense (to XM, not the listening public!)? It wouldn't make money for XM, and it would make the XM subscription slightly less valuable in as much as people that like the publicly funded stations would then have something they could listen to "whenever" without paying XM for anything!
And then there's the issue of paying $10 a month (after shelling out $300 for a SM receiver) and you still have commercials on some of the stations. Like I'm going to pay $10 a month for music that has commercials. I don't think so! I can buy a CD a month for that price.
Then there's this thing about not being a teenager with my first car. I try not to spend my entire day in my car, thank you very much. Their model is problematic for the majority of people and they probably don't even realize it.
-- Knuckle Blood : Official Lube of Team Rusty Nuts.
AOL (and here is some text to get through the filters)
-- dieman - Scott Dier
Then I discovered I really rather enjoyed the one alternative I had left- NPR.
If you're looking for informative news and interesting programming - tune in to your local NPR station. During my 30 minute commute to and from work, I alternate between my cd changer and NPR. There's always something interesting on there. Also, don't forget to send your local NPR station a pledge if you enjoy the programming!
Have you ever seen satellite antennae? At least it isn't a dish. Antennas need to be "tuned" for the frequency range they are intended to pick up, so factory antennas are designed to pick up FM (AM will pretty much come in on anything, so they don't need to do much for it). There is really no reliable technical way to use the factory antenna to recieve satellite radio. The only problem with convertables is if they have hard tops. The satellite signal travels right through soft-tops, so the antenna can be mounted on the trunk lid or rear deck.
I can see where the black satellite antenna (which I think looks more like a computer mouse than a shark fin) might stand out on a yellow sports car, for example. It is barely noticeable on my black Golf. I'm more concerned about my own entertainment and driving experience while I am in my car than what other people think of the way my car looks.
The only real concern I have about the antenna is it very obviously announces to the world that you have a fairly expensive satellite radio system installed in your car. A good security system is a must in a lot of areas, even though the system would be completly useless to any moron that steals it or buys it stolen.
Since I got XM I've been intorduced to a vast verity of music and artists that I simply wouldn't know about had they not been on XM. While my cd changer in my car still gets a good amount of use, the two simply aren't the same thing in my opinion. I also think you'd be suprised at the number of people such as myself that spend a good amount of time in their car every day. I might be seeing things in rose colored glasses because I use the service, but I consider XM to be just as important as my Tivo, and that's saying a lot.
Keep Austin Weird!
--cyberfriend of mine told me she and her husband were so impressed with satellite radio when they got it for themselves that they installed it for their drivers on all the trucks in their small trucking company. She said-and I agree- keeping employees happy just makes more sense when it's a minimal cost like this. Long haul truckers cover a lot of turf and regular broadcast stations reception can change wildly sometimes depending on where you are driving, whereas the sat radios work most anywhere's and are very good quality audio. --nice to know there's decent bosses left.
I want my flying car, and I won't purchase another car unless it flies!
This was my main worry when I was looking into getting the service, but I've now had the service with two different setups in two different cars, and the ONLY time I've had the service cut out was in a parking garage. It's almost scary how stong their signal must be to have been recieved in some of the monsoons I've been in.
Keep Austin Weird!
A lot of you are missing the point! There have been too many posts here about the virtues of "digital radio" and how it is going to kill satellite radio.
Satellite radio is appealing to people who live in cities with crappy local radio, or none at all.
It is VERY appealing to people in Clear Channel controlled cities that are sick of listening to the same crappy music over and over again with stupid syndicated drive-time radio shows. It is also appealing to people who are sick of hearing 10-minute blocks of commercials on local radio stations.
It is also VERY appealing to people who live in areas of the country where there is limited or no decent radio service. It is also very appealing to cross-country truck drivers, people with long commutes in areas with bad radio reception, and for recreational use in areas with bad or no radio reception.
All "digital radio" does is allow you to get the same shitty programming in areas that already have decent radio reception, but with much better quality. In other words- digital radio does almost nothing to compete with satellite radio.
All digital radio really does is allow the company that is licensing the technology to make a butt-load of money, while it allows the FCC to drool over the possibility that it can eventually get back radio bandwidth by forcing people to go "digital" in 5-10 years (just like they are trying to do with TV now).
I think in the long run that anything digital is a good idea, and I like the idea of digital radio in the future (although I don't particularly like the current plan for it).
I don't believe that hailing digital radio as a satellite radio killer in the next couple of years and extolling its virtues as a "free" service is valid. One of the biggest advantages to digital service is it can be much more easily controlled by the source than an analog signal. Sure- it's free now because there is no way to control who listens to it. What happens when all radio is digital? Do you honestly think it will be free then? In the mean-time- how do you think all these "free" radio stations are going to pay to upgrade all their equipement for digital service? Yep- more commercials. A lot of people complain that there are more commercials on TV now than ever before- ever wonder why? Sure, we can chalk a lot of it up to greed, but we also have to look at all these TV stations that are now being forced by the FCC to upgrade all their equipement to digital/HDTV.
What are they charging? Over $10USD/month. Ha! The service may, and only may be worth $2USD/month to me. ... The reason I didn't subscribe, even though I live in an area where the AM band has nothing but Rush Limbaugh, Paul Harvey and spanish language pop music, where the FM band has only 4 signals that go full quieting (with an outdoor antenna, at that), these are: Zit rock, RAP, evevator music and christian rock.
... Thank god for MP3s. ... No, I don't buy CDs; at $4USD each, I would, and do at a remainder store in the city. Yup, a long drive about 2x/year.
You'd think those choices would be enough to make me subscribe.
I Know I may be thought of as a TROLL but, really. People are not going to pay extra for a radio, then pay a subscription to listen to the radio. People will point out that Cable tv is the same basic model. I disagree. I watch TV when I am home. I listen to the radio in may car. I am not in my car enough to PAY for the programming, yes I know I pay in different ways. But you see my point. Who are you customers. Just a little rant.
This is the way the world ends, not with a bang , but a wimper
Friends and music reviews.
I have XM and it is great, I recommend it every chance I get. Maybe I am not in the norm but local radio stations suck , unless I am in the mood to hear the same crap over and over and over. MP3s are a substitute but less convenient.
The fact that XM has then number of subscribers that it has and the start up cost for the service is around $450 is impressive. I assume somewhere in the game plan, the logic of renting out the receiver so people without the initial funds will subscribe exists at XM. All my friends like the service though they haven't purchased it because of the initial startup costs. The music selection is great the technology is impressive, now it is up to sales and marketing at XM to make it successful.
I purchased XM radio and was up and running on the first day of nationwide rollout. Since then I have used it constantly and rarely tune back into local FM stations. Once you begin using it and see the HUGE difference in quality regular FM becomes unbearable. Yes some of the stations do have commercials, but personally listning to 15-30 seconds of commercials is better than listning to 3-5 minutes of commercials then another 2-3 minutes of the DJ talking before we finally get to a song, and also note only SOME of the stations have commercials. In fact the majority of the stations that I listen to don't have commercials, such as 90's, ethel, etc. Personally the investment was worth it for the equipment, and the mere 30 dollars every 3 month, coming from a poor college student. Just my 2 cents -- Chris
XM will benefit from a sort of compulsory adoption by way of GM installing XM radios in upwards of 20 models of it's vehicles The important quote here...
Leading manufacturers such as Sony, Alpine and Pioneer will offer a broad array of XM radios including models that will easily enable any existing car stereo system to receive XM service (the Pioneer Universal Receiver and the Sony Plug-and-Play) and over 20 models of new AM/FM/XM systems offering many other great features. General Motors this month rolled out factory-installed Delphi-Delco XM radios in Cadillac DeVille and Seville models, and will expand to more than 20 GM models next year.
Oh, and satan^H^H^H^H^H ClearChannel is an investor in XM. Seriously, read the previous link. The article neglected to disclose when ClearChannel and Microsoft were to merge into MegaCorp, Inc. and implant the chips in our brains, but I'll let you know if I find out a date.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Driving from Saskatoon to Calgary or Edmonton is an 8 hour drive (if you take it fast). You'll spend about 8 of those hours outside of any radio coverage.
XM is a panacea to people who drive between cities in Canada even a few times a year, because it makes it so much more bearable. Plus, the local radio stations have all consolidated under something called Rawlco radio (which puts out tho same bland shit as ever).
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Every city has:
The Edge.
The Eagle.
K-Hits. (pop crap)
I live in Dallas where The Edge *used* to be very cool. Until about 2-3 years ago, its all I listened. Nowadays, its just like the edge in every other city I've been to.
I never liked the idea of satellite radio from the start? Before you start sniffing for troll aroma, let me say I already HAVE a form of Satellite radio - DirecTV. Since I mainly listen to pop/rap/top-40 stuff, DirectTV's digital audio-only stations play the same songs I listen to on FM, but guess what - I only listened to them maybe once or twice as a novelty.
Yea, commercial-free radio is neat... But some commercials are actually entertaining, Bennigans for example comes to mind. Yesterday, I heard a commercial for Time Warner Roadrunner service and the spokesperson was mouthing modem tones ("I no longer have to hear those bleeep beep blah pbpbpbpbpbpb dialup sounds") - it was hilarious. Do I like all commercials? No, certainly not - but missing the good ones would really suck.
I don't know about XM or Sirus, but the local stations all have DJs that put people from the area on the air to give shout outs, talk about things happening in the area and take requests. I don't care if the actual station is run out of a closet in Bumfsck, Alaska, as long as they're still Central Florida-centric, it seems more "personalized". Stations seem to realize that part of getting people to listen is listener participation. Hell, I've even called in a few times to vote for songs and make requests.
The other major problem with satellite radio is you can only listen to it where the equipment is. Yesterday, I was working on my moped (yes, I have a car too, the moped is NOT the reason for not liking satellite radio) in the garage - there's a boombox in the garage with a FM tuner, a tape player (what the hell are those things again?) and a CD player. I wanted to listen to music and didn't feel like getting up every 74 minutes or so to change CDs - so I put on the radio. If I had a satellite radio service in my car, I'd feel like I'm wasting my money since the majority of the time I listen to music (while working in the garage, mowing the lawn or in front of the computer) I wouldn't be able to use it. If I want to hear high quality commercial free music with just the songs I want - well, I can just bring my hard drive based MP3 player with me...
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
Yes that ClearChannel.
http://archive.salon.com/ent/feature/2002/03/27/be ltway/index.html
Sony may have a stake. But ClearChannel, Directv and some others have the largest share I believe.
That is exactly why I think people who love radio should stay away from XM and use Sirius. Don't help ClearChannel extend their reach into satellite radio.
It's already showing. XM has under 5mins of commercials, but still they do have commercials. Sirius doesn't have commercials on their music channels.
Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
Currently XM and Sirius are almost exclusively available as high-end aftermarket add-ons. Obviously this isn't conducive to helping the satellite radio companies reach their break-even points (if memory serves me correctly from other articles I've read, the break even point is either 500,000 or 1,000,000 customers).
Sirius is partnered with Ford (Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Land Rover, Jaguar, Aston Martin, Mazda, Volvo), Audi, BMW, DaimlerChrylser (Mercedes, Chrysler, Dodge, Plymouth, Jeep), and Nissan (Infiniti and Nissan). XM also has an impressive partnership list, including GM and more.
Once these OEMs start selling cars with satellite equipped radios from the showroom, sales are going to skyrocket.
"Another thing, most people listen to the radio for local weather and traffic conditions. Satellite radio doesn't supple[sic] that need."
to
"Another thing, most people watch TV for local weather and traffic conditions. Cable television doesn't supply that need."
Yet I find the weather channel easily on cable. I can also find breaking headlines easily as well. Besides, XM does not preclude flipping to FM for a local informational station.
I don't think the negatives you point out are enough to weaken the positives in most people's eyes.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
That's the problem with libertarians, they're always advocating that everyone else pays huge amounts of money to private corporations, they're never willing to put the money up themselves. Compare this to liberals, who quite happily pay extra contributions on top of what they already pay in taxes for public services like NPR and PBS voluntarily.
Satellite radio will have subscribership problems until most of the car manufacturers start providing it as an option in some or all of their model lineup. Some manufacturers are, so there's some hope. See Honda
I know that the concept is a success, based on the fact that there are several hundred thousand subscribers, but until the system is as ubiquitous as FM or AM, we're going to continue to here these 'Satellite radio struggling' stories.
Personally, I hope the satellite radio thing catches on. I do enough automobile traveling that not searching for stations is a great thing. And CSPAN Radio nationwide is just what a grizzled old Washingtonian needs.
Is if they started broadcasting Opie & Anthony. They provided compelling programming.
My afternoon commute has been a lot less entertaining since they got kicked off the air.
-nd
Particularly with the discontinuation of shortwave BBC World Service to North America (not that shortwave is common at all in one's car over here), the only way to get BBC News (except for the 20 mins a day we get in on local NPR at 3am) is over satellite radio. This is why I was thinking about it.
Madness takes its toll. Exact change please.
"It is the norm in the electronics industry to come out with multiple formats in the hope of locking the users into your service. This is true of the Satelite radio services. So, once I buy a radio I am stuck with either the service I originally chose, or a large $500 hockey puck."
It's about a $200 hockey puck right now, and a lot of people went through the same thing with VHS/Beta and DSS. Any new technology is a risk- both to the companies promoting them and to the consumers. In a way- this is less of a risk becuase chances are good if one of these companies goes out of business- the other will buy it to get their assets (including customers) dirt-cheap. If they both go under- either another company will take over or we will all lose and have to continue to listen to the garbage that Clear Channel is giving most of us.
"Can't Try-Before-Buy - I can't try before I buy, instead I have to shell out 300-500 buck-a-ronis and then pay a monthly fee - all to find out if it is worth having."
Why not? Best Buy lets you try anything (except computers) for 30-days. Most other large electronics retailers do the same. Best Buy only charged me for materials to install my unit, and told me they would uninstall it for free if I wanted to return it within the 30-days. Buy it and try it- if you don't like it- return it. You may be out a bit of money for installation if you didn't do it yourself, and one month's service fee. There isn't a contract to sign with either Sirius or XM (that I am aware of), so you can cancel at any time.
"Fear of Bankruptcy - Even if I love my new stations, if my particular service goes belly up, my pre-paid time is lost, my radio turns into the hockey puck, and I am out of luck. In this business climate, it is a very real consideration to me."
This is a legitimate fear that I already addressed. I'm confident that no matter what happens- I will still be able to get satellite radio service in one form or another. Even the anjoyment I have gotten from it in the last month or so has been enough to justify what I have paid for it. It was certainly cheaper than the last time I upgraded my computer, and hasn't given me as many headaches.
"Fear of Declining service - once they have you, they have you. If they need to actually make money, or failing that, loose less, the first thing to go will be the DJ's."
Not likely if enough people use the service. They have fairly fixed expenses and have already invested the major capital they need for the next couple of years. They will get enough money from subscribers and in the case of XM and some of the talk stations on Sirius- from the little advertising revenue they get. The music stations don't NEED DJs, although it is nice to have them for a bit of personality. One of the things I like about Sirius is the lack of DJs. I don't need some shmuck to tell me the name and artist of a song when it is displayed on my receiver. And, as far as lame programming and repetition- we have enough of that with regular radio stations now. Sirius (and I'm assuming XM) has extensive libraries for each of their "stations", and seems to do a really good job of mixing things up. I can drive home from work here in Denver and hear the same songs on my way home that I heard on my way into work on local radio. That hasn't happened yet on Sirius. I also don't have to listen to crappy drive-time shows with lame jokes and stunts.
I agree with you. I thought about getting satellite radio; I almost did, but haven't. Here's some of the problems as I see it:
(1) How often do people replace the radios in their cars? Not very often, I presume.
(2) As you pointed out, how much time do they spend in their cars?
The real problem, as I see it, is that most people don't spend enough time in their automobiles to make upgrading their car audio to satellite radio worth it. Add the fact that you have proprietary systems for each service (XM versus Sirius), and this becomes more problematic: what do you do if you later decide to switch services? Get a new car radio? Whatever.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding how that thing works, but I doubt it.
If things weren't proprietary, I might seriously consider getting a reciever for my home. I do spend enough time there that I might enjoy sophisticated audio service.
But neither satellite radio service is targeting home use! Sure, they have receivers you can put in your home, but they're add-ons that go from car to home. I have yet to see an integrated AM-FM-Sat receiver of home audio quality being offered.
If they did, and I got the impression they were more serious about things, I might take it more seriously. But as it is, the impression they're giving is not of "satellite radio as sophisticated audio commodity", but "individual proprietary services for your car." Very different things.
All Digital radio does is give you a higher fidelity version of the same analog crap most of us are getting now from local radio stations. It does nothing to extend the range or programming quality of the station.
Frankly, if it wasn't for the fact that the FCC is going to shove it down everyone's throats like they are starting to do with digital/HD TV so they can eventually recover RF bandwidth- digital radio would have much less of a chance of success than satellite radio does.
Most people interested in satellite radio are either fed-up with local radio programming or are in areas where normal radio reception sucks. These two things won't be helped at all by digital radio, but can be helped a great deal by switching to satellite radio.
Satellite radio also provides continuous entertainment coast-to-cost for truck drivers and long-distance commuters, and can be used in airplanes and on ships. I get 100 channels of Sirius loud and clear up in the mountains of Colorado or driving in the middle of Kansas. Once again- digital radio can't offer this level of service.
If you live in an area with one or more radio stations you like and only commute a few miles to work each day- you probably would have no need for satellite radio. If you live in an area with good TV stations that can be picked up cleary by antenna- you probably don't need cable or DSS either. Some people are happy with modem connections to the Internet and no cell phone too. Chances are in these cases- you aren't going to shell out the money for digital radio either. It may not have a monthly fee (at least not until it is in widespread use and the FCC starts mandating the phase-out of analog radio), but you will still need to shell out $150-300 more for either a digital-ready receiver or an add-on tuner.
Satellite radio offers an excellent alternative to "normal" radio, and is available NOW.
I used to think this way about inkjets too (they don't eat money when I'm not using it), but then I discovered that if I leave an inkjet unused for too long, the ink nozzles gum up, rendering the ink cartridge and all its overpriced ink completely useless. So the cost is more like $150 for the printer, then $20 per month because the cartridge has to be replaced every time it gums up. I've since sworn never to buy another inkjet. Laser toner doesn't do this.
I bought an indash MP3 player (Pioneer) with XM, so I got both at the same time. I find that I listen to XM every day and very rarely bother to burn MP3 CD's. I've got hundreds of gigs of MP3's to choose from, but I can just fire up XM and get news, comedy, music, whatever. To me, XM is easily worth $10 a month.
The only reason I listen to traditional broadcast radio is Howard Stern. Come to think of it, if XM or Sirius wanted to guarantee their future existence, they should look into getting Stern's show. Regardless of your opinion of Stern and his show, he brings listeners (and viewers, he carries E!). Of course Infinity would never let that happen because it would ding their own stations that currently carry Stern.
I thought sirius only got fully rolled out less than a year ago.
-
Hey guys.
I was kinda wondering if XM Radio is available
in a portable form these days.
Just put the antenna on your head and there you go.
--- Eat my sig.
I've also heard that XM and Sirius make you agree to obnoxious EULA-like conditions in order to subscribe. Apparently you're not allowed to tape broadcasts, you're not allowed to take the radio apart, you can't let someone else use the receiver on your subscription (except maybe in your car), etc. I don't know the specifics of this because I haven't tried to subscribe (and won't), but someone was ranting at me about it a couple months ago.
Anyway, if these services go down the tubes I'll say good riddance. I don't have anything against paid cable TV since at least in principle, the broadcasters are providing the medium. Electromagnetic spectrum, though, is a public natural resource and should not be turned over to private interests without a clear public benefit. (Cellular phones and traditional radio/TV broadcasting are also spectrum handouts, but satellite broadcasting seems even harder to justify. You don't get person-to-person communication and you don't get free, anonymous access to the broadcasts).
Can they track my location with one of these radios, as can be done with cell phones and GPS? If anyone knows...
I did some work for Siruis Satellite Radio a few years back, and I can tell you that I knew as soon as I stepped in their corporate Midtown New York office, with Herman-Miller chairs and glass-and-metal desks, that they were the pentultimate dot.com company just ripe to go bust. I mean, they went a few steps further than making a wesbite and selling stuff on it -- they sent satellites into orbit and built a control-station on the first floor of their offices! The article points out that terrestrial stations will be broadcasting digital signals, but even without this satellite-killer, I often wondered who exactly would pay $10/mo to listen to radio in their cars? They can already do that for free.
I tried posting a similar (and better story, not just a stock report) a while back and Slashdot passed. This article has more detail on why Sirius is doing so bad.
GetTheJob.com : Nothing but Real Jobs.
The purpose of my post wasn't to debate the benefits of Satellite radio, or the limitations of digital ground-based radio. You are correct: satellite radio is a (technically) better alternative to standard analog ground based radio.
My point is that the business model is doomed. The buying public knows it, and so does Wall Street (as reflected in the stock prices). The public has decided, despite the technological benefits, that a single receiver subscription for $10.00/mo. is not worth it. Each receiver has a monthly cost....that just doesn't fly. Maybe 5 receivers per account would be a better model...who knows?
Digital radio does give existing radio users an upgrade path, at their convenience, with no additional recurring charge. That's the model joe-sixpack is comfortable with, and that's the model that will succeed.
-ted
Probably going out of business for the cost of all the pianos, other insturments, sports equipment and other things that they dropped from cranes in their commercials.
Slap yourself for me.
"You can't put that range of music in a single station..."
That's why satellite radio offers a hundred different stations to suit every flavor you crave and many you don't. Or did you forget that it has more than one channel?
As for the hills and tunnels... you can't get XM in Switzerland (with its 45 mile tunnels), so don't worry. I live in the Rockies and rare are the times when a slope or even a tunnel causes me to lose reception.
After much thinking and weighing the benefits, I decided I was better off spending ten dollars a month supporting my local public radio station, WNYC. My music needs are minimal, I get the BBC and Radio France International off the Internet as well as from local radio (WNYC broadcasts the BBC during early morning hours, and a station owned by the board of education broadcasts RFI), and so there's just not much room in my life for subscription-based digital radio.
Wordnik, a dictionary project which aims to collect
When the FCC first auctioned off the satellite radio spectrum over a decade ago it seemed like a good idea, but a lot has changed since then.
Even though it sounded like a good idea a decade ago it wasn't. Here's why:
If you look at the demographic trends of radio listening (especially music), per capita, the peak happened sometime between 1938 and 1948. In 1948 when Kay Kyser left the air, it signified the end of the radio age.
Satellite radio is, for all intents and purposes, Radio Frequency delivered pre-programmed music. It's nothing new. It's an old horse gussied up to look pretty. XM satellite channels are not advertising free, in fact 70% of XM content will be interrupted by regular ads. Sirius has less advertising, but it still has it.
Someone mentioned that XM needs 1 million subscribers to break even -- sorry that's wrong. To service XM radio's debt load and cover day-to-day operating expenses they need FOUR MILLION paying subscribers. And not this does not cover upgrades and unforseen costs - it merely keeps them afloat. Remember XM and Sirius have hemmorhaged over 6 billion dollars of investor's money already...
XM also made the mistake of putting their engineering HQ in Washington, D.C. which probably raises their cost of doing business by at least 30% over locating the site in a place like Denver, Kansas City, or Phoenix.
I see know way of XM or Sirius being able to hold a subcscriber base of several million people. It doesn't seem like there are enough target consumers (people who drive cars more than and hour a day) to keep either operation afloat.
I'm in an area where the oldies station has been changed to NASCAR racing and Rick and Bubba, where the talk radio station is often off the air or otherwise screwed up, and where the alt rock station plays 30 minutes of commercials and 3 minutes of music. I'd purchase an MP3 player for my car, but oh wait - even though I'd have any song at the touch of my fingertips, I'd be inclined to play the same crap over and over again as I do at home, which would get kind of boring. I travel often commute on I-10, quite possibly one of the worst damn roads in the U.S. I don't want to be messing with my iPod while I'm on the Atchafayala Basin Bridge, so I bought an XM Satellite Radio, and quite frankly I love it. They even have an INDIE STATION for crying out loud!
Go ahead and flame me, but that's my opinion and I'm sticking to it
I heard from a fairly reputable source that There was a new technology being released where radio would be turned digital... (best example: old cell phones vs. new cell phones) anybody hear about this? I'd think this would be a hit. Then again, everybody would have to replace their fm recievers to pick it up.
This useless space for sale, inquire at front desk.
If they want to know my music preferences I don't mind filling in an anonymous questionnaire. I don't want to give them my name and address, which have nothing to do with my music preferences. I get enough spam already by email. I don't want it by snail mail too.
Upon further examination, the article made a lot more sense.
In order for something to come to an end, it needs to START first.
[insert witty comment here]
I have had XM Radio for about 5 months now, and I can tell you it's the best thing i've ever invested in.
Don't buy the reciever/head/antenna from Best Buy / Circuit City. Save money and buy it online. I got my Reciever/Antenna from http://www.bsless.com.
Having 100 channels rocks. You don't listen to them all, true, but the thought of having them there if you need them, for, say, a friend who likes Country, you can tune to the 4 country channels and find something they like.
The comedy channel (150) is a RIOT. non-stop standup comedy from Jackie the Jokeman, Lewis Black, Robin Williams, *EVERYONE*! And they don't linger on one person a lot, either. They jump comedians about every minute. "Ethel", (40) their "Hits from the 90's" station plays everything from Nirvana to Collective Soul to Dave Matthews Band. They play all of the top hits from the late 90s, and some current hits too. Plus all the news channels kicks ass too.
Don't forget it's digital too. XM's quality blows WAY past FM or AM. Now, I got an XM head unit. I'm not using an FM Modulator, I have the digital signal pumped straight to my head unit, and it sounds *fabulous*.
I, too, would pay twice as much for XM. It is an excellent service that I would hate to lose.
surviving till the cost of the hardware is to a point where. Joe Cosumer will buy the equipment to get hooked up. $300 for equipment is a little pricey for something you have to pay a monthly fee on. I know thats one of the reasons I haven't gotten it yet, once it gets down to the sub $100 range I'll be seriously looking to get one. Directv and E* aka Satellite TV didn't really take off till the cost of the equipment got to a point to where Joe Consumer would buy it. Heck they give the receivers away free nowadays with a service commitment of a year. Sattelite Radio will be a niche type market item till the cost of equipment comes down in price.
Not that dreaded word used by RIAA! I'm talking about the digitalized version of shortwave radio, which transforms its quality to near-FM!
Check it out: Digital Radio Mondiale
Hello!? Every other country on Earth is standardizing on DAB [worlddab.org], and Americans a futzing about with XM, Sirius and (please let it die) IBOC...
and the article from the ex-Qualcomm guy has it wrong... The US will not deploy quicker because the futzed with other techs'. They might deploy quicker because the tech they have (ie. not GSM) sucks, so the market for the next-gen gear will be bigger.
Hypothesis: disparaging US incites replies.
Hasn't anyone considered that in addition to the EZ-Pass or similar toll token devices, this is yet another method of vehicle tracking and thus easily adapted for automating speeding tickets?
If you want privacy now and you have a new generation cellphone you already have to power it down completely or you will be tracked via GPS. EZ-Pass was already tested for its ability to trigger automatic speed/radar devices. Now this.
I wish more people would boycott these devices...it won't be long until we all regret them.
But why can't I get a stand alone unit? What about people who don't own/like/use cars?
ashaver at pdx dot edu if you know how to get one
Both me and my girlfriend got Sirius for our cars. We both got the Serius systems when we bought our vehicles because the offer was good. Hers was 2 years + hardware + installation for $260. Mine wasn't as good, but still decent for $260: 1 year + hardware + installation. Considering how much the hardware & installation would normally cost, I thought it was a pretty good deal.
We both are extremely happy with the Sirius system and content. I hope Sirius survives!!
Evolution is as much a fact as the earth turning on its axis and going around
the sun. At one time this was called the Copernican theory; but, when
evidence for a theory becomes so overwhelming that no informed person can
doubt it, it is customary for scientists to call it a fact. That all present
life descended from earlier forms, over vast stretches of geologic time, is
as firmly established as Copernican cosmology. Biologists differ only with
respect to theories about how the process operates.
-- Martin Gardner, "Irving Kristol and the Facts of Life".
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...