[Tim Donohoe]

John Smith ® wrote:
"Tim Donohoe" wrote in message
...

SapperPest19 wrote:


On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 11:11:40 -0500, JMiller
wrote:



If so, why isn't XM's total net sub counts beating Sirius
again? XM packed it in because Sirius had Stern and there was no way
for them to win anymore.

Answer the question. If so, why isn't XM's total net sub counts
beating Sirius again?


Do you understand that XM's not having a higher net sub count has
nothing to do with stern? It has to do with churn. XM has been
outselling sirius. XM has also been losing more subs than sirius. But
one important fact is the, even with the stern effect, more new
satellite radio subscribers chose to go with the company that didn't
have stern.

It also means that people buy cars with XM in them and don't keep the
service. Losing existing customers is worse than adding fewer customers.


Which is worse, the people that don't re-up or counting cars that are just
sitting on a lot, and when sold, never activated. Not being sarcastic, just
wondering how all this fits into the stats being published.


They are never "never activated" since they have the sub pre-paid. If
the end user doesn't want sirius he will be counted in the churn.