|
|
Post by poseidon on Mar 30, 2006 13:42:06 GMT -5
Ah well...my guess is he deleted himself from posting on this forum (we do have that capability) as I did the same to myself once several months back.
Bi Jac...
|
|
|
|
Post by poseidon on May 18, 2006 10:13:24 GMT -5
Hi Jac. Glad yer back. Is Melon far behind?
|
|
|
|
Post by luke on Aug 24, 2006 20:00:51 GMT -5
Dude, I meant to post this awhile back:
On the drive up to Colorado we had Sirius. It fucking SUCKS. I've heard they've almost bought out XM, God I hope this doesn't happen. Completely shallow playlists. Awful. I don't think I heard a song on the indie station that I didn't already have on my computer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 24, 2006 22:22:06 GMT -5
My brother said he's switching to Sirius either at the end of this year or afterwards, due to some of his favorite sports channels/shows moving to this provider. I think I'll hold on to the XM account. Hee hee, what a dumbass.
|
|
|
|
Post by luke on Aug 24, 2006 22:48:30 GMT -5
Yeah, Sirius is smoking XM right now due to sports.
It's sad that "the last hope for radio" will probably end up getting smothered out by a half-ass imitator that wins out in fucking sports.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 24, 2006 22:58:06 GMT -5
He's an auto-racing fanatic and apparently XM's NASCAR package is moving to Sirius at the end of the year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 24, 2006 22:59:24 GMT -5
That's probably not the only reason but its a biggie.
|
|
|
|
Post by luke on Aug 24, 2006 23:12:10 GMT -5
Well, most people- especially people buying luxury vehicles, SUVs, and full sized trucks equiped with satellite radio- really don't give a shit about music past your basic classic rock/country radio stuff, but fuck if they don't love sports. And Sirius completely owns XM when it comes to sports.
XM is going to get buried, and Sirius is going to keep on giving us a handful of half-assed stations that don't play anything more obscure than what the DJs read about on Stylus and Pitchfork. And I don't just mean indie rock- across the board, Sirius is all about weaker playlists that rotate songs much more frequently. It's really a fucking shame.
Maybe I'm just being too defeatist, but goddamnit I love XM and I hate the way their battle with Sirius is going.
|
|
|
|
Post by Adam on Aug 24, 2006 23:27:26 GMT -5
I'll hold on to XM as long as possible. For me, its all about channels 40-50, 65 and the decade channels.
|
|
|
|
Post by luke on Aug 24, 2006 23:48:50 GMT -5
Yeah I'm not giving up XM. It's my ticket to new music and really just blows up new genres in my face. Can't imagine that I'd ever listen to bluegrass on such a regular basis, for instance.
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Aug 25, 2006 19:22:57 GMT -5
I just got my XM hooked up this past Sunday. I expected to listen to the talk stations non-stop (primarily the news talk and Opie and Anthony). I've surpirsed myself by how much I'm listening to the music channels - especially the decades. Even though it's not my most favorite music, I end up on the 70s channel more often than not. I just keep on discovering songs I'd toally forgotten about. I have a feeling that it won't last for long -- in time I'll disocver it's the same songs repeatedly, and the newness will wear of. But it's fun for now.
I have a friend who works for one of the rock terrestrial stations here. We were talking about how they've had to adjust to the growth (?) of satellite radio. I think it's still too early to tell, but it COULD be a good thing for radio down the road. Think about it - when cable TV first came along, it was supposed to be the end of broadcast stations ... yet broadcast audiences still VASTLY outnumber cable audiences. Terrestrial radio is learning that they have to give listeners somethig more. They can't just be a jukebox anymore. As a result, they're starting to put more focus into entertaining listeners in a way they can't get it anywhere else - investing in personalities and what not. They're even hoping to make dayparts "appointment listening" and programming more like TV. It'll be interesting to see if they really stick to it or not.
Of course, if satellite in general keeps on going in the diretion that it is these days, then the terrestrial stations may just get to sit back and say "whoo, dodged that bullet!" and we'll be back where we started.
|
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on Aug 27, 2006 16:10:44 GMT -5
It would be nice if satellite were an agent to spur growth and quality in terrestrial radio...they'd better get movin', though, cuz as it stands Satellite is "where it's at" now.
I like the 70's channel for the same reason you do...this is the music that was on the radio in my formative early years (8-18), and I do think it's cool to hear something I'd totally forgotten about. It happens a LOT. As for repetition there...it's really not that much of a problem...unless you just listen to a channel ALL THE TIME for days on end yuou don't really run into much repetition...
That said, there are channels where repetition is a necessity. The Top 20 on 20 channel will naturally play the Top 20 in rotation. I've heard that the country channel Highway 16 is fairly repetitous, but that's not one I listen to (I MUCH prefer XM10 America and the newly re-christiened XM13 Willie's Place...I'll spare you all my rant about the name change from Hank's to Willie's...).
I never listen to those fools Opie and Anthony. They are scholars in the school that thinks obscenity is humorous every time it's used...they (O&A) simply aren't funny, to my sensibilities at least.
There are a lot of news talk channels (hope you weren't under the impression that these particular channels were "commercial free"), and though Sirius has a lock on Stern, XM has exclucive Fox News content AS WELL AS an "all-Oprah" channel premiering next month, so here's hoping that will pick up some of the slack in the ratings and stock war between the two providers. I would HATE to see Sirius take a big lead just because they've got certain sports that XM doesn't. Sports is a television affair. Radio is for music, IMHO.
At any rate, welcome to the XM Nation, Chrisfan. If you have any questions, feel free to ask and most of all ENJOY!
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Aug 27, 2006 20:12:48 GMT -5
I'm not sure that I agree with you that satellite is "where it's at" Jac. There is a lot to the sub counts on satellite that terrestrial stations and shareholders are starting to take notice of ... primarily the subscription drop off rates. There are so many deals being offered right now where you get a year's subscription for free - when you buy a car with it installed, etc. There are many people buying a car for OTHER features who are ending up with satellite as a bonus - not something they sought out. They're taking the free year, and then deciding it's not worth paying for after that. In addition, the sub counts are elevated in ways they shouldn't be able to get away with -- Sirrius as an example counts as subscribers every unsold car on lots which has it installed. i'm not sure how XM counts Air Tran as a subscriber, but if they count it as anything more than one, it's misleading.
In all honesty, right now, I don't see myself subscribing past the year I have it for free. (my parents already had it -- it makes sense for them, they're in a smaller radio market and have trouble at times with reception -- my dad bought a car that came with it installed and a free year, so he gave me his old receiver and a free year). It's something I'd pay 4 or 5 bucks a month for. But the things I'm listening to right now don't merit paying what they're charging.
|
|
JACkory
Struggling Artist
Posts: 167
|
Post by JACkory on Aug 28, 2006 11:05:44 GMT -5
Oh...
I guess I'm the kind of XM listener who gets more excited about Satellite's content than with "sub counts" and Satrad stock shares.
It's not even worth debating whether or not Satellite kick's terrestrial radio's ass content wise. That's what I mean when I say XM is "where it's at".
|
|
|
|
Post by chrisfan on Aug 28, 2006 11:17:50 GMT -5
I mentioned sub counts because when you're looking at where satellite will be 5 years from now, it's critical. For satellite to survive, they're going to have to do two things: get more aggressive about selling advertising, and get more aggressive about booking talent and shows that you can't get anywhere but satellite and HAVE to have. (things like Oprah and O&A won't really work since you can get both of them elsewhere ... while Stern's performance is to be noticed, it can't be seen as a saving grace either considering the number of people who did not make the jump with him).
I really and truly think that down the road, the winner here is going to be terrestrial radio. I think they're going to change and evolve in their programming to get back an audience that for too long they took for granted as captive. But I think that the iPod is going to be credited more for spurring change than satellite radio.
|
|
