# Coming Soon to XM Radio: More Commercials



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

_*Come May, some XM Satellite Radio listeners will hear a jarring new sound: commercials. XM will air advertisements by Clear Channel Communications, an early investor and owner of competing radio stations, on certain music channels including KISS, specializing in contemporary hits, and Nashville, a country music station.*_

For your reading enjoyment, or should I say for your listening enjoyment.

Wouldn't it be nice to have Music Choice back with NO COMMERCIALS?

*Coming Soon to XM Radio: More Commercials *

_*XM Radio*_ recently replaced its marketing slogan of _*"100% commercial-free music"*_ with _*"most commercial-free music channels."*_

Other Thread: *XM on DirecTV = bag of suck*


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

If you do more research at XM you'll find that XM is adding equivalent programming channels that will continue to be commercial free.



> Wouldn't be nice to have Music Choice and NO COMMERCIALS back?


No. This way there are even more channels and the same number of commercial free as before.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

Jon J said:


> If you do more research at XM you'll find that XM is adding equivalent programming channels that will continue to be commercial free.
> 
> No. This way there are even more channels and the same number of commercial free as before.


Other than the fact that the analysts believe that this is just the start of the slide and that all of the XM Radio music channels will soon (a couple of years at most) have commercials.

QUOTE from article:

_*"Indeed, terrestrial and satellite radio are becoming increasingly alike. And while that may come as bad news to satellite listeners, it's music to advertisers' ears."*_


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

Your dislike of XM is coloring your thinking. I believe Music Choice will add commercials before the end of 2009. Of course, I know as much about this as the "analysts" do about XM.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

Jon J said:


> Your dislike of XM is coloring your thinking. I believe Music Choice will add commercials before the end of 2009. Of course, I know as much about this as the "analysts" do about XM.


So you work for Forrester Research, Gartner Research, Stanford Financial Group, and Thomson Financial, the groups quoted in the article.

And considering the following information actually released by Sirius and XM Radio that is included in the article:

_*Sirius is considering increasing commercial time on its Howard Stern show from six to nine minutes an hour. XM, meanwhile, expects to double its ad-sales team by mid-2006, compared with mid-2005 levels. The company also will increase the number of commercial minutes on its talk channels, currently at about seven minutes an hour.*_

_I do have a bias for completely commercial free music, which now Music Choice is the ONLY CHOICE._


----------



## jrinck (Nov 24, 2004)

tbeckner said:


> Other than the fact that the analysts believe that this is just the start of the slide and that all of the XM Radio music channels will soon (a couple of years at most) have commercials.
> 
> QUOTE from article:
> 
> _*"Indeed, terrestrial and satellite radio are becoming increasingly alike. And while that may come as bad news to satellite listeners, it's music to advertisers' ears."*_


Advertisers may like it at first, but they won't be smiling when they realizing nobody is listening.

Perhaps the number one reason why satellite radio killed FM is because the music is commercial free.

No way in heck would I pay to listen to commercial laden radio.

I'll cancel my Sirius sub in a heartbeat if they started adding ads to the music stations--Howard or no Howard.

Commercial free MP3s may just be the death knell of all radio.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

tbeckner said:


> Other than the fact that the analysts believe that this is just the start of the slide and that all of the XM Radio music channels will soon (a couple of years at most) have commercials.
> 
> QUOTE from article:
> 
> _*"Indeed, terrestrial and satellite radio are becoming increasingly alike. And while that may come as bad news to satellite listeners, it's music to advertisers' ears."*_


You are stubborn and a hater.

XM was FORCED to add commercials to a few channels programmed by Clear Channel as part of their original funding a few years back. They are adding more channels to make up for them so they can remain commercial free. XM is NOT adding commercials to music.

But, of course, you will continue to hate and not believe what is being told to you except by some "analysts" who did not do their homework.

Now go spew your incorrect hatred somewhere else, okay?


----------



## dagap (Dec 5, 2003)

These companies have a real problem in that they can't make any money. And one of them (can't remember which) has satellites that are failing much faster than expected.

Both have spent 10 figures building their infrastructure and it's going to be difficult or impossible to recoup that investment without increasing their per-subscriber revenue.

So yeah, expect changes... because the companies can't make it with their current model.


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

TonyD79 said:


> XM was FORCED to add commercials to a few channels programmed by Clear Channel as part of their original funding a few years back.


Make a deal with the devil, you'll never quite get out from under the pitchfork.


----------



## morgantown (Mar 29, 2005)

Someone "killed FM radio?" What was it like 20 years ago that MTV was supposed to kill...


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

dagap said:


> These companies have a real problem in that they can't make any money. And one of them (can't remember which) has satellites that are failing much faster than expected.
> 
> Both have spent 10 figures building their infrastructure and it's going to be difficult or impossible to recoup that investment without increasing their per-subscriber revenue.
> 
> So yeah, expect changes... because the companies can't make it with their current model.


XM is the one with the premature satellite failure.

Both companies are nearing the subscriber levels where they'll be profitable. It took many years for DirecTV and Dish Network to report any quarterly profits. Let's give XM and Sirius more than a couple years before judging that aspect.


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

dswallow said:


> XM is the one with the premature satellite failure.


It could be both XM and Sirius, Doug. In Sirus's case, they are saying they don't believe there is a change in the useful life, but...

Sirius has been making the following statement in their 10Q Filings:
The expected useful lives of our in-orbit satellites are 15 years from the date they were placed into orbit. We are depreciating our three in-orbit satellites over their respective remaining useful lives beginning February 14, 2002 or, in the case of our spare satellite, from the date it was delivered to ground storage in April 2002. Our spare satellite is expected to operate effectively for 15 years from the date of launch. Space Systems/Loral, the manufacturer of our satellites, has identified circuit failures in solar arrays on satellites since 1997, including our satellites. We continue to monitor these failures, which we believe have not affected the expected useful lives of our satellites. If events or circumstances indicate that the useful lives of our satellites have changed, we will modify the depreciable life accordingly."


----------



## dswallow (Dec 3, 2000)

HomieG said:


> It could be both XM and Sirius, Doug. In Sirus's case, they are saying they don't believe there is a change in the useful life, but...
> 
> Sirius has been making the following statement in their 10Q Filings:
> The expected useful lives of our in-orbit satellites are 15 years from the date they were placed into orbit. We are depreciating our three in-orbit satellites over their respective remaining useful lives beginning February 14, 2002 or, in the case of our spare satellite, from the date it was delivered to ground storage in April 2002. Our spare satellite is expected to operate effectively for 15 years from the date of launch. Space Systems/Loral, the manufacturer of our satellites, has identified circuit failures in solar arrays on satellites since 1997, including our satellites. We continue to monitor these failures, which we believe have not affected the expected useful lives of our satellites. If events or circumstances indicate that the useful lives of our satellites have changed, we will modify the depreciable life accordingly."


I sort of just dismiss such things in 10Q's for the overall negative outlook 10Q's generally have about everything; they read like legal disclaimers on lawyers emails.


----------



## HomieG (Feb 17, 2003)

dswallow said:


> I sort of just dismiss such things in 10Q's for the overall negative outlook 10Q's generally have about everything; they read like legal disclaimers on lawyers emails.


I agree, but that statement about solar panel (uninsured) failure is interesting...


----------



## TivoGeezer (Dec 3, 2003)

jrinck said:


> No way in heck would I pay to listen to commercial laden radio.


Ditto that. I will go back to OTA radio.


----------



## minorthr (Nov 24, 2001)

As other said this is being forced on XM by an arbitrator. its 4 channels which xm is launching 4 of there own that offer the same programming without commercials. 

As far as sats go XM does have one that's life expectancy is not what it should have been. Their insurance company is paying or paid to have it replaced.

It should be noted that Sirius self insures their sats. Which to me sounds like they have no insurance on them but I have no idea.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

TonyD79 said:


> You are stubborn and a hater.
> 
> XM was FORCED to add commercials to a few channels programmed by Clear Channel as part of their original funding a few years back. They are adding more channels to make up for them so they can remain commercial free. XM is NOT adding commercials to music.
> 
> ...


If XM Radio is adding channels to remain commercial free as you described, then why did XM Radio recently replaced its marketing slogan of "100% commercial-free music" with "most commercial-free music channels."

And If I read your post correctly, are you saying that you know more about the subject than the writer of the article and Forrester Research, Gartner Research, Stanford Financial Group, and Thomson Financial?

You might want to get some perspective on the situation; I didnt write the article and I am not paid for my opinion like the research groups quoted in the article, I was just the messenger.

I do agree that I have a bias towards uninterrupted music, but I don't care if DirecTV keeps or drops XM Radio. I have Music Choice now and have had Music Choice since early February when I added digital cable, after I realized that I missed Soundscapes and the Windham Hill music that played on it and realized that XM Radio was not offering the same mix on the Audio Visions channel.

And I agree that I supported the people who voiced their opinions in the other thread on the chatter and self-promotions that XM Radio ran on their music channels, but I found that I could tolerate that level of chatter on the three channels I listened to 856, 864, and 866.

If you disagree with the article then you might point out the problems with the content in the article and maybe in the future you should not shot the messenger and make assumptions that are unfounded.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

Jon J said:


> Your dislike of XM is coloring your thinking. I believe Music Choice will add commercials before the end of 2009. Of course, I know as much about this as the "analysts" do about XM.
> 
> __________________
> That's my opinion. It ought to be yours. - Makk Trukk


Like TonyD79 who posted below, if I read your post correctly, are you saying that you know more about the subject than the writer of the article and Forrester Research, Gartner Research, Stanford Financial Group, and Thomson Financial?

If you have a problem with the article and the research, then point out the problems in the article and maybe you should attempt to not shot the messenger.

I agree that I like uninterrupted music, but I DO NOT hate XM Radio, in fact I listen to channels 864 and 866 almost everyday.

Before adding digital cable in early February to get back access to Soundscapes on Music Choice (for the Windham Hill music), I only listened to 856, 864, and 866 on XM Radio which match up to the Soundscapes, Classical Masterpieces, and Light Classical channels on Music Choice.

Anyway, we should all hope that this does not become a trend and that XM Radio and Sirius become profitable without adding commercials to their music channels as suggested in the article. And if by chance XM Radio does add commercials to more of their music channels, then I pray they add them to the channels I dont listen to. And if they add them to the channels you listen to then you will have to make the choice to drop the service if you subscribe or voice your opinion to DirecTV which appears to be like talking into a Gale force wind.


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

tbeckner said:


> If XM Radio is adding channels to remain commercial free as you described, then why did XM Radio recently replaced its marketing slogan of "100% commercial-free music" with "most commercial-free music channels."


First, I can't believe I'm replying to this, but...

Because they were FORCED by arbitration to allow Clear Channel to place ads on the channels that they (CC) program and deliver to XM. Since those channels have both music and ads, it wouldn't be factual to say "100% commercial free music". But they've added exactly the same number of new, commerical-free music channels to make up for these CC music-with-commericals channels. So they still have 69 commerical-free channels, just like they did before. And now they just happen to have 4 other, music-with-commericals channels.



> And If I read your post correctly, are you saying that you know more about the subject than the writer of the article and Forrester Research, Gartner Research, Stanford Financial Group, and Thomson Financial?


Well, perhaps, but that's besides the point. If you're going to claim to be "a messenger", then you should have mentioned the quote in the article from the ONE person most qualified to comment on the issue of commericals coming to other XM channels. From the article:

_
An XM spokesman insists advertising won't spread to other music channels. "We are committed to maintaining commerical-free all music channels we program," he says.
_​
And from my own experience, I was at XM's press event when they announced they were going commerical free on the music channels. I talked to them about the loss of ad revenue, and it comes down to customer's desires - they all want commerical-free music. The growth in subscribers more than made up for the loss of ad revenue on the music channels. And as the article points out, there will be ads on the talk channels (and I'd expect more on the regional news and the traffic channels).

And as for the accuracy of Gartner or any other analyst or firm predicting something that could happen "in five to ten years", I say - Y2K and flying cars... 

Jeff


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

jautor said:


> First, I can't believe I'm replying to this, but...
> 
> Because they were FORCED by arbitration to allow Clear Channel to place ads on the channels that they (CC) program and deliver to XM. Since those channels have both music and ads, it wouldn't be factual to say "100% commercial free music". But they've added exactly the same number of new, commercial-free music channels to make up for these CC music-with-commercials channels. So they still have 69 commercial-free channels, just like they did before. And now they just happen to have 4 other, music-with-commercials channels.


I can't believe you replied either, because what you said is just what the article said. Although, having the same number of commercial-free channels is not exactly like having no commercials on any music channels. The article was not pointing to just this one situation, but at the possibility that based upon the large sums of money being offered to celebrities by both XM Radio and Sirius (like Howard on Sirius and others on XM Radio) to help attract subscribers and the need to become profitable at some time in the future, and with the ad time increases on the news, talk, and non-music channels there could be added pressure to add external ads to the music channels to help achieve profitability.

XM Radio never did have in the past and still does not have 69 active commercial-free music channels. The 69 commercials-free music channels you are talking about include 10 additional new channels that XM Radio announced at their March 27th press event in Washington, D. C. and some of those channels will not be active until sometime this month and next month, May.

I am not here to point out errors in your post, but if you are going to point out hard facts, you should at least research the information before you post. Agreed the Clear Channel-programmed music channels KISS, MIX, Nashville, and Sunny did change the mix somewhat, but in total XM Radio only previously had 64 commercial-free music channels before the current lineup changes.

XM Radio has added and is adding:


Big Tracks (XM Channel 49): Classic Rock from the late 70's onward 
XM Chill (XM Channel 84): Chill Music 
U.S. Country (XM Channel 17): Country Superstars of the 80s & 90s 
Flight 26 (XM Channel 26): Modern Hits of the 90's & Now 
XM Hitlist (XM Channel 30): Today's Hit Music 
enLighten (XM Channel 34): Southern Gospel 
XM Liquid Metal (XM Channel 42): Heavy Metal 
The Heat (XM Channel 68): Rhythmic Top 40 
Escape (XM Channel 78): Easy Listening 
Viva (XM Channel 91): Latin Pop Hits



jautor said:


> Well, perhaps, but that's beside the point. If you're going to claim to be "a messenger", then you should have mentioned the quote in the article from the ONE person most qualified to comment on the issue of commercials coming to other XM channels. From the article:
> 
> _
> An XM spokesman insists advertising won't spread to other music channels. "We are committed to maintaining commercial-free all music channels we program," he says.
> _​


So, you are saying that you would rather believe a company spokesperson who is paid to "PUT ON THE SPIN" for Public Relations, than an independent article, now that really is believable.

And I am only the messenger; I didnt write the article or create the headline. I didnt do the research and I am not in the satellite radio industry, I do not have ties to anyone in the industry, and I do not have insider information. But I do hope that the pressure being applied to XM Radio to become profitable and to spend large sums of money on celebrities to help attract subscribers does not force XM Radio and Sirius to place external ads on the music channels, and if they do, I hope they start on the music channels that the younger listeners listen to.



jautor said:


> And from my own experience, I was at XM's press event when they announced they were going commercial free on the music channels. I talked to them about the loss of ad revenue, and it comes down to customer's desires - they all want commercial-free music. The growth in subscribers more than made up for the loss of ad revenue on the music channels. And as the article points out, there will be ads on the talk channels (and I'd expect more on the regional news and the traffic channels).


What does physically being at an XM Radio press event have to do with getting an honest answer about the future direction of a company that is losing money and has to put a positive spin on its information to help keep its investors.

Not that it matters, because being physically at a press event really doesnt matter and not that I am questioning your honesty, but when and where was that press event (they are headquartered in Washington, D. C. and you are located in Huston, Texas, as per your profile) and what would a Computer Engineer (as per your profile) be doing at a recent XM Radio press event?


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

tbeckner said:


> Not that it matters, because being physically at a press event really doesnt matter and not that I am questioning your honesty, but when and where was that press event (they are headquartered in Washington, D. C. and you are located in Huston, Texas, as per your profile) and what would a Computer Engineer (as per your profile) be doing at a recent XM Radio press event?


Hmmm... Not questioning my honesty, then immediately questioning it...

But since you asked - they announced the move to commerical-free music at CES 2004 in Las Vegas. And believe it or not, there's this thing called an "airplane", which can move people from one city to another at very high speeds.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

jautor said:


> Hmmm... Not questioning my honesty, then immediately questioning it...
> 
> But since you asked - they announced the move to commerical-free music at CES 2004 in Las Vegas. And believe it or not, there's this thing called an "airplane", which can move people from one city to another at very high speeds.


So, are you saying that they didn't have commercial-free music before CES 2004?

And why would you believe that something they put the SPIN ON in 2004, over two years ago would hold true in 2006 or later?

Do you always believe the SPIN DOCTORS?

Additional Thoughts:

You are no doubt a reasonable person, and since you have described me as an XM Radio hater, which of course is not true, and you are at least a previous XM Radio subscriber. You should understand that I am not attempting to spread hate and discontent about XM Radio, but just posted the link to the article and quoted the first paragraph in the first post. I listen to the XM Radio channels 864 and 866 almost everyday.

You should understand that I am hoping the XM Radio does not add anymore chatter to their stations/channels and the post of this article was just meant to be a wake up call to XM Radio listeners/DirecTV customers, that there was a possibility that XM Radio and Sirius could end up being pressured into adding ads to their music channels in the future.


----------



## hoopsrgreat (Jan 2, 2005)

I rarely listen to XM in my house as I prefer to plug my Ipod into my receiver and listen to my own music, but we do have XM in the car. I love xm and you really get used to song after song with no commercials. If they started having ads play I would quickly cancel our subscription. If they arent commercial free, how are they different from FM... although the comedy channels are pretty damn funny.



LOve XM as it is.... dont screw up a good thing.


----------



## Jon J (Aug 23, 2000)

Flailing a deceased equine is always fun, no?

It becomes clear your problem is NOT with XM but rather DirecTV for replacing Music Choice with XM.


tbeckner said:


> I agree that I like uninterrupted music, but I DO NOT hate XM Radio, in fact I listen to channels 864 and 866 almost everyday.


You don't pay XM like many of us, your music service is simply another service of DirecTV. You have your beloved Music Choice now, so I'm interested in why the channel switches and concurrent additions on XM bothers you.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

Jon J said:


> Flailing a deceased equine is always fun, no?
> 
> It becomes clear your problem is NOT with XM but rather DirecTV for replacing Music Choice with XM.
> 
> You don't pay XM like many of us, your music service is simply another service of DirecTV. You have your beloved Music Choice now, so I'm interested in why the channel switches and concurrent additions on XM bothers you.


And no, flailing a deceased equine (flogging a dead horse) is never fun and that was not the intent of the thread and the original post and the link to the original article.

My only hope is that XM Radio doesn't get pressured into adding commercials to their music channels to become profitable for their investors and end up screwing up the remaining channels that I do listen to, like 864 and 866.

I would prefer not having to subscribe to digital cable to gain access to Soundscapes from Music Choice, but that was not the intent of pointing out a possible future problem with the satellite radio war and the need to become profitable.

It already appears that both services are adding commercial minutes to their non-music channels to pay for this feature war and after they have saturated their non-music channels with far too many minutes of commercials, will they add commercials to their music channels so they can continue to add celebrities in their quest to add more subscribers to become profitable for their investors? Ultimately what the article was about, was about asking the question Have they already started down that slippery slope?.

Only time will tell and I know I dont have a crystal ball.


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

tbeckner said:


> So, are you saying that they didn't have commercial-free music before CES 2004?
> 
> And why would you believe that something they put the SPIN ON in 2004, over two years ago would hold true in 2006 or later?
> 
> Do you always believe the SPIN DOCTORS?


You're believing a speculation made by analysts, who are out to sell their research - it's paid spin. The company has said, very clearly, that they don't intend to put ads on the music channels under their control. I don't call that spin, sorry...

You keep using the word "spin" as if anything a company says about its products or services must be a lie - which is why, IMO, you come off sounding very, very biased.

And yes, before CES 2004 there were commericals on the music channels on XM. And I mean "real commericals", not the promo/dj talk/identifiers that some people are characterizing as commericals. The switch to commericial-free happened in Feb '04, but was announced at CES.

And being a harmless engineer at those annoucements allows one to talk more freely with the personnel, as they're not "in press / analyst mode" (must... not... say... anything... that will... be... printed...  ).

At that time, Sirius was commerical-free, and XM had ads. So there was certainly some competitive pressure (in those days, not very much pressure), but the rationale for the switch was based on customer research. People had difficulty with paying a monthly fee and having ads. HBO was mentioned very often as a comparison - you pay for premium content with no ads. What they found was that people were much more likely to subscribe if the music channels went commerical-free. And that the uptick in subscribers would more than offset the (very small at that time) ad revenue they were getting.

At the same time, they announced the traffic/weather channels, which would carry more regional advertising, which is apparently easier to sell in radio land... The commercials on the music channels were generally cheezy infomercial-grade stuff - XM didn't have the listener base to attract any 'good' ad campaigns.

Jeff


----------



## jautor (Jul 1, 2001)

tbeckner said:


> My only hope is that XM Radio doesn't get pressured into adding commercials to their music channels to become profitable for their investors and end up screwing up the remaining channels that I do listen to, like 864 and 866.


Well, we can certainly agree on that!

And since XM changed from commericals-on-music to commerical-free as a way to *increase* subscriber growth - which it did - I don't think we have anything to worry about. Especially with the addition of the DirecTV deal. Certainly, DirecTV would drop XM if they went (back) to having commericals on the music channels.

I don't remember Soundscapes, but is that something that XM Chill will cover for you? XM Chill is excellent, and hopefully it gets turned on DirecTV next week...

Jeff


----------



## dagap (Dec 5, 2003)

dswallow said:


> Both companies are nearing the subscriber levels where they'll be profitable.


Hardly. They're each losing over $100M per quarter.

Doubling their current subscribers wouldn't move them into the black.


----------



## face (Feb 9, 2005)

Hey, somebody, what sub is this?

Oh Yeah, DirecTIVO!

Almost forgot!


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

dagap said:


> Hardly. They're each losing over $100M per quarter.
> 
> Doubling their current subscribers wouldn't move them into the black.


Good, I hope XM burns to the ground.

Maybe then we can finally get some uninterrupted music back on DTV. You know, the kind where they play one song after another without some blathering DJ or freaking promotions for other XM channels or stupid retro-commercials that sucked in the 60's and still suck today.


----------



## tbeckner (Oct 26, 2001)

jautor said:


> You're believing a speculation made by analysts, who are out to sell their research - it's paid spin. The company has said, very clearly, that they don't intend to put ads on the music channels under their control. I don't call that spin, sorry...


Currently I do not believe that XM Radio and Sirius will be pressured into adding commercials to their music channels, but I am afraid that after they saturate their non-music channels (they are adding more commercials minutes to their non-music channels, which has been announced by both companies) with commercials in their quest to both expand their subscriber base to pay for their 'celebrity war chest' and also to become profitable for their investors.

You do the math, do you have crystal ball? I know I dont have a crystal ball.

And no matter how you might explain it, every DirecTV subscriber is paying for the XM Radio channels indirectly.


----------



## jrinck (Nov 24, 2004)

Net result:

XM can no longer boast that they have 100% commercial free music channels.

Sirius CAN, and no doubt will tout this competitive advantage to the fullest.


----------



## RS4 (Sep 2, 2001)

I certainly don't hate XM, but I hated Direct for getting it and not keeping the other music channels that did not have the awful interruptions that XM has.

I read above that at least one of the stations Direct broadcasts will now have commercials (Sunny). I wonder if Direct will replace it? It will be interesting to see if they try to get some of that commercial income or replace the channel.

I tried finding the Music Choice channels from my basic Comcast service, but I can't find them. I actually hooked up the cable to the vcr receiver just to find the Music Choice. I hate the interruptions.

It's one thing if you purchase a service and know they'll be there. But after listening to MC for all of the years it's been on Direct, it's a big shock to hear something else.


----------



## TonyD79 (Jan 4, 2002)

tbeckner is just being a pain in the posterior.

Yes, I think I do know more about the situation than the self-proclaimed analyst since he missed the boat on WHY the commercials are there. XM wants fewer commercials, not more since they do now have a slogan disadvantage to Sirius because they cannot claim totally commercial free music.

Everything they have done, except when FORCED to, has to been to maximize the number of commercial free music channels and minimize the commericials themselves.

As for a "paid analyst" have you ever listened to sports talk or read bad analysis on stocks, policitics, sports or even the weather? I can find you "industry experts" in any industry that will contradict each other, so what is the value of their expertise? So don't bash me based on that I am actually following the ACTIONS not just reading an article by someone I have no idea about and forming an opinion then running here to bash XM as you did.

You have your Music Choice. You made your choice.

I will be waiting for you to tell me that I know less than some "industry expert" for the tenth time. You will still be wrong.


----------



## EricG (Jan 31, 2002)

jrinck said:


> No way in heck would I pay to listen to commercial laden radio.


That's what we're doing with "Cable" TV Stations!


----------



## heySkippy (Jul 2, 2001)

EricG said:


> That's what we're doing with "Cable" TV Stations!


And then we pay TiVo to help us skip the commercials!


----------

