Ducati Monster Forum

Kitchen Sink => No Moto Content => Topic started by: tonyj311 on January 30, 2009, 07:50:36 AM

Title: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: tonyj311 on January 30, 2009, 07:50:36 AM
My free 3 month trial is up next week. I lived without until I got this new car, does anyone think its worth the money that is paying for it? I would get the lower tier without Howard Stern and NFL games.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: the_Journeyman on January 30, 2009, 07:56:19 AM
My fiancée loves, it, so does my sister and Dad.  None of the three complain about it not being with the money.  My fiancée spends more time in the car than I do.  I'd rather pop in my favorite CD (tape in my Taurus [laugh]) or whatever.  I also commute on the bike a lot so a subscription would be wasted for me.

JM
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: Popeye the Sailor on January 30, 2009, 08:04:57 AM
You should totally get it.





<--builds the satellites for them.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: Rev. Millertime on January 30, 2009, 08:52:26 AM
I've had Sirius for a little over a year...

Now my cds are collecting dust in the trunk of my car.

Of course I live in the middle of nowhere, my terrestrial radio choices are very limited.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: mitt on January 30, 2009, 08:57:44 AM
Quote from: Rev. Millertime on January 30, 2009, 08:52:26 AM
I've had Sirius for a little over a year...

Now my cds are collecting dust in the trunk of my car.

Of course I live in the middle of nowhere, my terrestrial radio choices are very limited.


+2 - both my wife and I have sirius going on 3 years.  It is a lot of money, but we don't buy CD's, and we don't update mp3 libraries very consistently.

mitt
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: OverCaffeinated on January 30, 2009, 09:10:36 AM
I've had XM for about 7 years or so, before Sirrus was even out there. I tell people it's like having cable, you don't really notice how great it is until you get into someone else's car that doesn't have it. As for price, it started out at 9.99/month, then 12.99/month. But I just heard there are packages now, like satellite tv, you can choose a basic package for 9 bucks a month.


In short get it.*



*unless you have an iPhone with pandora radio.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: ducpenguin on January 30, 2009, 09:16:51 AM
Quote from: OverCaffeinated on January 30, 2009, 09:10:36 AM
*unless you have an iPhone with pandora radio.
+12 on the Pandora radio...It is awesome!
I also agree that you will miss it when it is gone...my free year ended last month and I am going to subscribe...I hate the commercials on regular radio!
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: toaster on January 30, 2009, 09:27:40 AM
i hate to say it, but you would be better off getting an ipod. after the initial purchase and the cost of the stuff to make it play through your radio, you would come out ahead after as little as one year if you get one of the cheaper ones.

the nano that will do 2000 songs* is 149, and the one that holds 4000 songs* is only 199. and if you get the nano, they have a armband so you could, in theory, put it around your arm outside the jacket with the cord running up your sleeve and pick your tunes while you ride.

this is just what im planning on doing.  i do not currently own an ipod, but it is one of the things i plan on purchasing in the near future.  my buddy has his setup to do the radio in his car and its great.  but then again i have a buddy with xm and its also great (90s on 9 for the win).

*according to the apple website.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: JEFF_H on January 30, 2009, 09:29:09 AM
have it and love it.
we listen to it live at home.
recorded in the car,working in the yard, snowboarding, etc (pioneer inno and samsung nexus)
and streaming on the laptop at work.
[thumbsup]

the sirius merger also gave it some extra channel choices.
(still no SKA channel  :()

our ipods are gathering dust
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: NAKID on January 30, 2009, 09:32:23 AM
I've had Sirius since 2006. We like it, Have it in the car and the truck...
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: OverCaffeinated on January 30, 2009, 09:35:19 AM
Quote from: JEFF_H on January 30, 2009, 09:29:09 AM

our ipods are gathering dust

same here. ipods are great, but even if you have 5000 songs you will get bored of them. With xm or pandora radio you get to hear new stuff. I'm listening to pandora right now and you hear stuff you normally wouldn't search for but will like when you hear it.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: CowboyBeebop on January 30, 2009, 11:02:07 AM
Depends on what you want it for.  If its music you like, there are much better (and free) options.  Post merger, the XMSiri stations are little more than terrestrial radio without commercials - repetitive playlists with little variety in either artist or song choice.  Pandora, Slacker, and Last FM beat it hands down, and are free. 

If you get it for the sports coverage, nothing can beat it.

If you get it for Stern...don't.  His show's jumped the shark and its become painful to listen to. 

If you do decide to keep it, get a month-to-month contract.  In all likelihood, the company will go bankrupt this year. 
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: mitt on January 30, 2009, 11:27:13 AM
Quote from: OverCaffeinated on January 30, 2009, 09:10:36 AM
I've had XM for about 7 years or so, before Sirrus was even out there.

Hmmmm, from wiki:

"Sirius was officially launched on July 1, 2002"

" XM satellite service was officially launched on September 25, 2001."

The first people I knew with sat radio were Sirius owners...

mitt
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: mitt on January 30, 2009, 11:35:27 AM
Quote from: CowboyBeebop on January 30, 2009, 11:02:07 AM

If you do decide to keep it, get a month-to-month contract.  In all likelihood, the company will go bankrupt this year. 

There is a chance of this.  Neither company has ever made a profit, and they continually pay bloated salaries to stale celebrities like Stern, Steward, and Winfrey.

mitt
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: OverCaffeinated on January 30, 2009, 11:37:52 AM
Ok then I've had it for 8 years. I remember getting my car in late 2000, then soon having a stereo installed that was xm ready.


The channels that do play commercials are now playing longer commercials and several back to back. Very much like fm, I'm not happy with that. They used to be short 30sec bits that you would even notice.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: toaster on January 30, 2009, 11:38:29 AM
Quote from: JEFF_H on January 30, 2009, 09:29:09 AM

our ipods are gathering dust

Quote from: OverCaffeinated on January 30, 2009, 09:35:19 AM
same here. ipods are great, but even if you have 5000 songs you will get bored of them. With xm or pandora radio you get to hear new stuff. I'm listening to pandora right now and you hear stuff you normally wouldn't search for but will like when you hear it.

what are your prices for said ipods shipped to 75791?  i tend to have a special interest in music and have a feeling that if the radio stations cant play songs i like by request because its "too old" for the classic rock station im not gonna hear it on xm or sirius or whatever is out there.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: Triple J on January 30, 2009, 11:52:22 AM
We just let ours expire after the 3 month trial. I never really got into it because I always listen to CDs, and I tend to listen to one band/genre for a while...then switch. Consequently, I rarely like what is on the radio because it isn't what I'm into at the moment.  :-\

I DID like the traffic feature that worked with our GPS. That was somewhat useful to keep from getting stuck on I-5 in traffic. If it would have been included in the standard XM price, or if we could have only gotten that service, we would have. Unfortunately it was an extra $10/month over the regular XM fee. Not worth it IMO, as I've always done fine without it anyway.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: CowboyBeebop on January 30, 2009, 12:05:27 PM
Quote from: OverCaffeinated on January 30, 2009, 11:37:52 AM
Ok then I've had it for 8 years. I remember getting my car in late 2000, then soon having a stereo installed that was xm ready.


The channels that do play commercials are now playing longer commercials and several back to back. Very much like fm, I'm not happy with that. They used to be short 30sec bits that you would even notice.

I've noticed this, too.

There is no difference between XM and Sirius music-wise.  Post merger, they combined their channels.  XM's music choice was vastly superior to Sirius, but unfortunately, Sirius was driving the merger, and when XM was absorbed, it lost most of its channels.  The result has been a slight improvement to Sirius's music line-up, but a gross decline in the quality of XM's.

I actually have both (though I don't really pay for either); I get XM through DirecTV, and I had a Sirius sub that I canceled a year ago, but they never turned my reciever off (I here this is a common), so I still get it.  Post merger, the only things I listen to on either are Opie & Anthony and Ron & Fez, both on XM.  I use to be a die-hard Stern fan and got Sirius exclusively for him. 
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: tonyj311 on January 30, 2009, 12:44:05 PM
I've been noticing repetition for some artists, but its nice to hear some stuff I forgot about. The commercials and edited music have been getting on my nerves too.
I have an 80G ipod and the cable is always plugged in. But, I still have about 500 cd's to load on to I-Tunes, so my available selections are over played.
I always get the free downloads on I-tunes- good way to find new music. 9 times out of 10 the artists blow, but I have come across some decent ones.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: OverCaffeinated on January 30, 2009, 01:04:15 PM
one more plus to satellite radio is the uncensored songs and talk.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: CowboyBeebop on January 30, 2009, 01:49:58 PM
Quote from: OverCaffeinated on January 30, 2009, 01:04:15 PM
one more plus to satellite radio is the uncensored songs and talk.

Depends on the channel and the show.  Stern self-censors, Bubba the Love Sponge (sucks) rebroadcasts his terrestrial show, which is censored, and O&A are working under heavy censorship.  Some songs are censored (not intentionally, but because they play the FCC-friendly cut as provided by the music corporation).

The real advantage to satellite is its ubiquity, but if you have a wi-fi enabled or 3G smart phone, so are internet broadcasts.  Blaupunkt just released an internet radio head unit for cars. 
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: NAKID on January 30, 2009, 02:51:06 PM
The pop stations censor, the rap and alternative do not. I listen primarily to AltNation and Octane, the wife listens to Hits1 and occasionally country. Stern in the morning is still pretty decent, but he goes on vacation a lot and takes Friday's off. He broadcasts a "best of the week" show on Fridays, kinda shitty if you ask me since he gets $100M a year for 4 days of work a week...
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: ute on January 30, 2009, 03:52:15 PM
the lifetime hook up is a great deal at $500 it is transferable to your next unit

i like bouncing around boneyard to all Sinatra.......octane to smooth jazz
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: lethe on January 30, 2009, 05:02:02 PM
I'm in the car 5 hours a day so Sirius is a very good thing for me. My wife is in her car far less but listens to such a diverse range of stuff that it's worth it for her too.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: FatguyRacer on January 30, 2009, 05:50:25 PM
I've had Sirius for 3 1/2 years now. The merger leaves me with a little bit of a bad taste. They took my favorite two channels The Vault 16 and The Blues 74 and made them Deep Tracks and BB Kings Bluesville. They are both totally lame now. Deep Tracks more so than Bluesville. I can tolerate the expanded programming of Bluesville, but Deep Tracks has gone off the rails. Ok, it's more than a bad taste, im make the beast with two backsing pissed. At least they left my 3rd favorite channel be, Lithium 24.

The Coup De Gras and last make the beast with two backs job is internet radio is no longer free with a subscription after March. That was one of my favorite things about Sirius. I listen to it while i work at my computer.

make the beast with two backsers.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: NAKID on January 30, 2009, 06:04:48 PM
Quote from: FatguyRacer on January 30, 2009, 05:50:25 PM

The Coup De Gras and last make the beast with two backs job is internet radio is no longer free with a subscription after March. That was one of my favorite things about Sirius. I listen to it while i work at my computer.

make the beast with two backsers.

No way! I listened to the internet radio daily before I came to school here, now my new internet blocks internet radio...
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: FatguyRacer on January 30, 2009, 06:10:04 PM
Way dood. Log on the Sirius.com. Click Listen Online and you'll get a pop up 'splaining the new make the beast with two backs job.

I'm suck a sucker i'll end up paying the 2.99 a month. I've wasted money on worse things.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: CowboyBeebop on January 30, 2009, 10:25:24 PM
Quote from: FatguyRacer on January 30, 2009, 06:10:04 PM
Way dood. Log on the Sirius.com. Click Listen Online and you'll get a pop up 'splaining the new make the beast with two backs job.

I'm suck a sucker i'll end up paying the 2.99 a month. I've wasted money on worse things.

I can understand getting satrad if you're on the road a lot, but if you do most of your listening over the net, and most of that is spent listening to music, there's no reason to pay for it.  There are thousands of internet radio sites (last.fm and Slacker being the two biggest) that will deliver a far superior product than SiriXM's internet offering, and do it for free.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: Gimpy on January 31, 2009, 03:27:50 PM
Quote from: FatguyRacer on January 30, 2009, 06:10:04 PM
Way dood. Log on the Sirius.com. Click Listen Online and you'll get a pop up 'splaining the new make the beast with two backs job.

I'm suck a sucker i'll end up paying the 2.99 a month. I've wasted money on worse things.

FYI. I got an email from Sirius stating that if I bought one of the longer term packages the internet listening would remain free and I could lock in my lower rate.  Haven't read through all the fine print yet.  but here is the link:  www.sirus.com/lockin (http://www.sirus.com/lockin)
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: FatguyRacer on January 31, 2009, 05:57:56 PM
I got that E-mail this morning too. I'll read it later.
Title: Re: To XM or not to XM? That is the question.
Post by: Popeye the Sailor on February 11, 2009, 12:37:36 PM
They're all going out of business, fyi.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/11/technology/companies/11radio.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/11/technology/companies/11radio.html)

Sirius XM Prepares for Possible Bankruptcy

Published: February 10, 2009
Last summer, Mel Karmazin was rattling off his trademark one-liners to talk up the future of Sirius XM Radio, the combined company he ran that had just been blessed by regulators.

He was planning to cut costs and expand a business that was already a fixture in the lives of millions of Americans. “Forty-three cents a day â€" it's not even vending machine coffee,” he said at the time, parrying a question about whether the softening economy might hurt subscriptions.

But now Sirius XM, the satellite radio company, has problems with much bigger price tags. It has hired advisers to prepare for a possible bankruptcy filing, people involved in the process said.

That would, of course, be a grim turn of events for the normally upbeat Mr. Karmazin, Sirius XM's chief executive, who had hoped to create a mobile entertainment juggernaut with stars like Howard Stern.

It is unclear how a bankruptcy would affect customers. Service is unlikely to be interrupted, but the company might have to terminate contracts with high-priced talent like Mr. Stern or Martha Stewart.

A bankruptcy would make Sirius XM one of the largest casualties of the credit squeeze. With over $5 billion in assets, it would be the second-largest Chapter 11 filing so far this year, according to Capital IQ. The filing by Smurfit-Stone, with assets of $7 billion, has been the year's biggest to date.

Sirius XM, which never turned a profit when both companies were independent, is laden with $3.25 billion in debt. Its business model has been dependent, in part, on the ability to roll over its enormous debts â€" used to finance sending satellites into space and attract talent like Mr. Stern (who was paid $100 million a year) â€" at low rates for the foreseeable future until it could turn a profit.

The company's success and failure are also tied to the faltering fortunes of the automobile industry, which sells vehicles with its radio technology installed and represented the largest customer base among Sirius XM's 20 million subscribers.

Sirius XM owes about $175 million in debt payments at the end of February that it is unlikely to be able to pay.

Sirius XM's problems could pave the way for a takeover by EchoStar, the TV satellite company, which has bought up Sirius XM's debt.

Mr. Karmazin has been locked in talks with EchoStar's chief executive, Charles W. Ergen, over Sirius XM's options, people involved in the talks said. The men are said not to get along, these people said, and Mr. Karmazin had rebuffed Mr. Ergen's takeover advances before.

Sirius XM hired Joseph A. Bondi of Alvarez & Marsal and Mark J. Thompson, a bankruptcy lawyer with Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett, to help prepare a Chapter 11 filing, these people said.

Documents and analysis are close to completion and a filing could come in days, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The threat of bankruptcy could also be part of a negotiating dance with Mr. Ergen, who could decide to convert his debt into equity instead of demanding payment.

In addition to the $175 million due in February, EchoStar also owns $400 million of Sirius XM's debt due in December. If Sirius XM files for bankruptcy, EchoStar could seek in court to take over the company. Mr. Ergen, however, may be able to negotiate to convert his shares before bankruptcy at an attractive rate and gain control of the company, these people said.

For Mr. Karmazin, the sale or bankruptcy of Sirius XM would be one of his first failures. He founded Infinity Broadcasting, sold it to CBS and later merged the combined companies into Viacom, where he had a notoriously difficult relationship with Sumner M. Redstone, the chairman, before being ousted.

Mr. Karmazin bought two million shares of Sirius XM at $1.37 a share in August. Before that, he had bought 20 million shares at an average price of $5 each. On Tuesday, Sirius closed at 11.4 cents a share.

Since the summer, the company's prospects have dimmed.

“I'm not trying to paint the rosy picture, because we have challenges connected to our liquidity and certainly our stock price is dreadful,” Mr. Karmazin said in December. “But, you know, our revenues are growing double digits. We're growing subscribers. We're not losing subscribers.”

A spokeswoman for Mr. Karmazin declined to comment. A spokesman for EchoStar could not be reached.

Mr. Karmazin staked the success of the merger on nearly $400 million in annual cost savings and the potential to gain subscribers through deals with auto companies to put satellite radios into cars.

But satellite radio failed to win over many younger listeners, and competition from other sources slowed subscriber growth.