TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| reply to ztmike
Re: um
said by ztmike  :As far as i know both companies are doing good, why would 1 die and the other not? Neither is doing well.
XM has never made a profit:
»finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=XMSR&annual
and neither has Sirius, which is losing more every year than XM:
»finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=SIRI&annual
--
Internet News
My BLOG
My Web Page
|
|
cbrigante2
Cubs 20??
Premium
join:2002-11-22
North Aurora, IL
| I'm no financial genius, but how does combining two no profit companies into one magically make them any profit? I would agree that higher prices would be coming next. |
|
Jeffrey
too dark too early
Premium
join:2002-12-24
Dix Hills,NY
clubs:
·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Vonage
·magicjack.com
1 edit | said by cbrigante2 :I'm no financial genius, but how does combining two no profit companies into one magically make them any profit? I would agree that higher prices would be coming next. For one, they wouldn't have to spend millions of advertisement dollars competing against each other. Also, the collective assets of both companies would be joined. I think those two ideas are part of the equation.
--
And so castles made of sand, slip into the sea, eventually.
I'm the Dude. So that's what you call me. You know, that or, uh, His Dudeness, or uh, Duder, or El Duderino if you're not into the whole brevity thing. |
|
DotMac4
Shill H8r
Premium
join:2007-10-26
Huntington Beach, CA | reply to cbrigante2
Because you wouldn't have to have 2 of everything. You have all those customers with one of everything. |
|
shghgsdfh
@comcast.net
thumbs down from:
TKJunkMail
| reply to TKJunkMail
that info is not correct. siri is losong less money than XM. you need to know how to read financial charts such as balance sheets, income statement. XM is in serious trouble. Siri has about a - 0.44 cents per share, XM about - 1.69 cents per share. Siri but 1st quarter 2008 will have a positive quarter and actually start making money. XM has at least 1 year to go.
do me a favour and READ. |
|
tnewell
Premium
join:2001-02-12
Columbus, GA
 ·AT&T Southeast
| Maybe someone else needs to learn to read income statements and financial information. In real dollars Sirius lost $1,104,867,000 for the period ending 12/31/06. In real dollars XM lost $715,782,000 for the same period according to the reference. Earnings per share do not dilute real dollars and in anybody's book a lost of over 1 billion is more than a loss of 3/4 of a billion. Oh and BTW XM Stock was trading at $15.60 per share and Sirius was at $3.83 per share.
Do everyone a favor and take some accounting courses. |
|
SterlingJ85
Obama 2008
join:2000-11-19
Millville, NJ
·PHONE POWER
4 edits | Yes, but you need to understand what market cap. is.
Take the price per share and add the number of outstanding shares for each company. You'll see the market cap. (public worth) of the company.
SIRI - $5.63 Billion
XMSR - $4.90 Billion
Share prices don't indicate everything! In fact, they do not indicate much at all unless your about to be delisted! lol
Sirius and XM aren't going anywhere operating independently, they are adding capital costs because at the rate of subscriber growth they know they will still become profitable eventually. Look a few years back before Stern was signed and brought on.. Sirius was about to hit cash flow positive within the next two quarters but spent $500 million on Stern because they knew it would ramp up sub growth. The same mentality was applied to all forms of programming to ramp sub growth, including advertising dollars. If they needed to, they could cut capital expenditures and be profitable very quickly. |
|
xrobertcmx
Premium
join:2001-06-18
Sterling, VA
clubs:
·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
| reply to cbrigante2
Strictly speaking it would allow them to only pay license fees once for content, but serve the combined user base. That makes sense.
From what I've been hearing every time the contracts come up the recording industry slams them, and then, and I'm not sure why, but they can't sell advertising for anything worth buying.
Bad business model, but good idea.
--
Retaking our country one election at a time. |
|
nightstar75
@salvagedirect.com
| reply to cbrigante2
You asked why would joining 2 non profitable compnaies be benificial?
Savings come from:
- As stated by one person, advertisement money to compete against the other.
- Research fees to design new equipment would be combined to one company and could be cut by 25%.
- # of employees will be cut down, especially the big wigs which will walk away with a pretty profit from the increase of the stock price.
- Again, stock price will increase allowing invetors to control only one company instead of two.
- Better quality of radio by combining the best planners the two companies have thus more customers and the possibility of an a-la-crate package (you pick what you want and want only and pay so many cents/dollars per channel per month). This will also give XM/Siris a better understanding of what people want, thus get rid of channels that 75% of the listeners will not listen to. |
|
imanogre
join:2005-11-29
Mcdonough, GA
| reply to cbrigante2
Higher prices wouldn't necessarily be coming next. A couple of years ago ValuJet and AirTran combined. Both were suffering greatly. ValuJet had just had the large crash in the Everglades and the subsequent shutdown for 6 months and AirTran had never made a profit. By combining these 2 companies, they were able to combine their synergies (buzz word) and become a very profitable company. Every company has cost that are associated with just running a business. Now these companies can share that cost burden.
HR, IT, Legal, consumer relations, marketing; All these cost can be combined to save the larger company money. There will probably be layoffs though, and that's the unfortunate byproduct of most mergers. |
|
tnewell
Premium
join:2001-02-12
Columbus, GA
·AT&T Southeast
| reply to SterlingJ85
Market cap is current market value of the entities stock price for its issued and outstanding shares. That is the money that stockholders are paying for the stock ownership. It does not fund deficit spending by the entity. The money spent for a share of stock does not go to the issuer on the secondary market. They only get money on initial offering and that is another story all together becasue the company does not get all of the money on an IPO. A Loss is still a Loss no mater how you sugar coat it, a company that continually racks up lossess will not survive no matter its market cap. |
|
