tonyho7476

QUOTE(greg775 @ Jul 11, 2006 -> 11:01 PM) Fair point, but it's usually all about the benjamins. In fact it's almost always about the benjamins, though Paulie did give up an extra million to stay in Chicago. Its all about the benjamins alright...but...they also want to play for a winner....so maybe a first hand glimpse of Ozzie in action, will allow some players to give the Sox more of a shot at signing them...plus he guided us to a WS Championship.

I'm not interested in getting Rowand back...if anything, I'm looking to upgrade the pitching staff.

QUOTE(POPPY_HIDALGO @ Jul 12, 2006 -> 09:22 AM) 57-31 in the 1st half. Pretty damn good. This has been a great year if Sox baseball and the memories keep adding up as the day's go by. That win over the Red Sox was a marathon of the lord looking down upon his favorite team giving them a wink and lifting them up above their competitors yet again. Simply beautiful to watch. I smell a trade, probably the Sox sending Vazquez to someplace. I don't know. I don't think they need help anywhere, but Kenny might just have a blockbuster in mind that will make everyone happy. 15 starts for each starter left. Here are my predictions for their records. Buehrle 12-1 Contrerras 10-0 Garcia 6-4 Garland 9-1 McCarthy 5-2 Look for a huge second half where the sox completely step everything up even more and make the Tigers a distant memory. I predict a second half run of 62-12. Then a roll through in the playoffs culminating in the White Sox winning the world championship for the second straight year. Anyway you look at it this year adds up to a world series title. There is not a team out there who can beat the Sox in a full series. You might be crazy, but I like it. I'm rooting hard for your scenario. And I think Vazquez...HE GONE!

That Madonna video brought back nasty thoughts from my childhood.

QUOTE(RibbieRubarb @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 03:27 PM) I want to make sure I got this right... Our leadoff man is bad. Our starting pitching is bad. Our SS is bad. Our CF is bad. Did I miss anything? We're in second place, which is not 1st.

QUOTE(Kalapse @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 02:38 PM) Ugh, that's just horrid. Chris Young, Orlando Hernandez, Luis Vizcaino, Josh Fields and Lance Broadway for a 33 year old Jason Schmidt. That's 3 top prospects, an excellent bullpen arm and a #5 starter for a guy who is no where near a gaurantee to succeed this year. Yeah, that is vomit-ous.

this guy is exactly what is wrong with our legal system...and America in general. Everyone wants handouts. and he looks nothing like Jordan. Stupid. And maybe he should use that to get laid!

QUOTE(RockRaines @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 10:58 AM) I wouldnt go that far. The 35 thousand white sox fans drowned them out with ease. I would say around 6-7 thousand red sox fans maximum. They were loud, but only seemed extremely loud because we didnt have that much to cheer for most days. yes, that was the problem...not having reason to cheer.

QUOTE(SoxFan76 @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 09:19 AM) I wasn't directly referring to your post, it was more of a general statement. If there were more Red Sox fans than White Sox fans, then the Red Sox have the quietest fans in baseball. 3-5 thousand sounds more realistic. Somebody will have to check my numbers here, but I BELIEVE 28,000 tickets are sold for every game through season tickets alone. So the amount of visiting fans for any team cannot be that high. Unfortunately, there were a lot of Red Sox fans in season ticket holder seats.

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 09:02 AM) It seemed a little far fetched to me, but if you listened to the pregame show yesterday as I did on my way to the park, it was a topic of discussion. There were plenty...but not more than a few thousand...which is a few thousand too many.

QUOTE(Spiff @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 08:48 AM) I hope you realize how dumb this sounds. i don't

QUOTE(redandwhite @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 08:45 AM) You also have to realize that there were more Red Sox fans than White Sox fans on both friday and saturday, which I expected, according to Farmer and Singleton. Not sure what you are saying. There were not more Boston morons at any of the games. And if there were, how did this follow my post?

QUOTE(SoxFan76 @ Jul 10, 2006 -> 08:39 AM) So I don't think it's fair to criticize New England Red Sox fans. PS, Everyone says they dislike the Yankees, well I can't agree. You can only use the payroll argument for so long. But those teams of the late 90's were damn good teams that weren't just stacked with All-Stars from the year before. If they don't win the World Series the season is a failure! If the Red Sox don't win the WS, it's because of Babe Ruth's ghost. Hey, whatever. I didn't poll the crowd to see where they were from. I just know they were cheering too much and I didn't like it. Here, New England, f*** 'em all. And I'm sick of Big Sloppy and Big Sloppy T-Shirts.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jul 7, 2006 -> 10:24 PM) I've found the quality on Sirius' music stations to be subpar in comparison with XM. XM on many of their channels does at least have some on-air personalities rather than the radio jukebox that most of Sirius channels have been - at least as far as my limited radio experience has been. If what I listened to radio for was just music - I'd probably go satellite - but I'm one of those dorks who listens for a total package. It's not enough to have music, I need a personality to bring it all together. When I find it, I listen to it all the time. When I don't, well I use my CD player more and more. If you read XM fan sites...you'll hear a lot of...I don't need DJs like at Sirius. So I got the impression that Sirius had more DJs than XM. When I listen to the Big 80s channel...I like that Sirius has the original MTV V-JAYs. Not sure why...its just cool to me.

I didn't read this whole thread...nor do I want to. I was at Friday's game...and I must say...I was so annoyed by all the Red Sox fans. The main reason being, we were losing, and they were cheering loudly. I had a group of 6 a few rows behind me, and I wanted to punch them all. So, to the Red Sox, and their fans, I say f*** YOU!

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 7, 2006 -> 02:42 PM) I know some people who would want you hanged for calling a system with bazooka tubes "audiophile" They might even want to Bazooka him! Hey OH!

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 7, 2006 -> 02:15 PM) Definitely, but my mom didn't win a free iPod to give me! I didn't even have the antenna hooked up in my car for 3 years. I just hooked it back up this spring so I could listen to Sox games. Well, then this whole mess is your mom's fault!

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 7, 2006 -> 02:09 PM) Well, to be honest, the sports, news, and talk don't interest me too much so I don't really miss them. I wonder why they don't broadcast them online? Its a question of bandwidth... And it sounds like you'd be more of an IPod kind of person.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 7, 2006 -> 01:56 PM) What is there available on one of the radio units that isn't available online? More channels? No commericials is great. Its the best thing about it. Like other have said about the Score, I tried listening for a while one day. When they came back from commericial to tell me they were going to another commercial, I switched it off. I'll never listen to it again aside from game broadcasts. I guess I was just sort of let down. I hadn't listen to FM radio in years because it was so crappy. The same stations playing the same crap songs over and over again. Sirius is indeed better than that, but I guess I was hoping for even greater variety. I do enjoy listening, but I just can't see spending $120/year on it. Well, you are getting none of the sports...the comedy (which is great)...the news...the talk... Listen to Deep Tracks a little...its not up my alley, but you might like it...or Super Shuffle can be interesting...but that is Top Hits...new/old, from different generations of music and different genres. If you like the Dead and that style...check out Jam On... And have you tried Little Steven's channel....Underground Garage? I know that is pretty popular. HEre is a link to the Rock channels....Sirius Rock

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 7, 2006 -> 01:39 PM) Yes, I exaggerated a little, but I do hear it about every other day. I mainly listen to buzzsaw or classic vinyl from 8am until 430pm. There's just so much music that they could be playing. Just like regular radio, they'll get into cycles where they'll play the same couple of songs by an artist and slowly phase over to a new set. In those rock channels, a lot of music fits into several groups, especially a song like that. And the satellite appeal is more than just the music. Now, online, you are limited to music, so...I could see how you aren't getting the full effect. Another thing to note...no commercials, means more music, which means more likely a repeat will be heard.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Jul 7, 2006 -> 01:27 PM) My mom won a"tailgate" prize package from Icehouse that included a Sirius radio and a free 1-year subscription. I've been listening to it online at work this summer. After listening to it, I'm not interested in paying $10 a month. Yes, regular radio blows ass, and this is a lot better, but its still so god damned repetitive. I listen to "classic vinyl 14" a lot. They play music from about a 20 year period, yet I'll hear the same songs by the same artists every day. Yeah, I like the Beatles--play more than 5 songs by them. I was hoping it would be better than that. With the HUGE selection of music from that era, there's no reason to hear the same song twice in a MONTH if they really want to mix up the variety. Instead, I've just heard "Smoke on the Water" for about the 20th work day in a row. Lame. I can't say I've had that experience, but I mix up my music a lot. I have a friend here at work who loves Indy/College music, and he did a lot of checking on repeating of music, and he was pretty happy with their selection and repeat-ability. And I did a song search for 'Smoke on the Water'...and you exaggerated a little...remember, this channel is classic vinyl...they do also have a deep cuts channel...this plays more of the classic hits. "Smoke On The Water" by Deep Purple played on... Channel # Channel name Date Time 14 Classic Vinyl July 7, 2006 01:19 PM 19 BuzzSaw July 7, 2006 09:59 AM 19 BuzzSaw July 6, 2006 04:30 AM 12 Super Shuffle June 30, 2006 01:13 PM 19 BuzzSaw June 30, 2006 12:04 PM 14 Classic Vinyl June 30, 2006 01:02 AM 147 Road Dog Trucking June 29, 2006 02:44 PM 19 BuzzSaw June 29, 2006 06:34 AM 14 Classic Vinyl June 28, 2006 04:30 PM 19 BuzzSaw June 28, 2006 12:47 AM 14 Classic Vinyl June 27, 2006 08:42 AM 19 BuzzSaw June 26, 2006 10:01 PM 14 Classic Vinyl June 24, 2006 05:06 PM

All Hail King Stern By Rick Aristotle Munarriz (TMFBreakerRick) July 7, 2006 Is the self-appointed "King of All Media" also the king of all markets? Terrestrial-radio deserter and wickedly popular morning-show radio host Howard Stern helped Sirius (Nasdaq: SIRI) close the subscriber gap with market-leader XM (Nasdaq: XMSR) for the third quarter in a row. In the second quarter, which ended last week, Sirius claims that it landed 600,460 new subscribers, while XM generated just 398,000 net additions. XM can't sugarcoat the disparity. It's true that XM still commands the larger audience. The company closed out the quarter with 6.9 million subscribers, while Sirius totalled 4.7 million. Even if XM's subscriber count remains stagnant over the next few periods -- highly unlikely, of course -- Sirius wouldn't catch up until the first half of 2007. The problem is that this is a momentum game, and at the moment, Sirius is the one behind the wheel. It was able to land 64% more net new subscribers during the period than it did a year earlier. Over at XM, the company suffered a 38% slide in net new additions, after claiming 640,000 new sets of ears in the June quarter of 2005. XM is still growing -- reporting net new additions, not subtractions. That doesn't take away from the one thing that's now becoming painfully -- or gloriously -- obvious: Howard Stern is bigger than even he thinks he is. Hugh blew it When Sirius agreed to a five-year deal with Stern, a stock-and-cash pact valued at $500 million at the time, XM CEO Hugh Panero was critical of the amounts being bandied about for the sometimes-controversial host. David Gardner interviewed Panero last year, and this is what he had to say: I don't know if it is a good move for Sirius. It is clearly a very good move for Howard Stern. He is a smart guy, and he has obviously done a deal that is very good for him. I think that there will be a number of his hardcore fans who will subscribe to listen to him in that environment. Whether it is a good business deal, I think time is going to tell. It is a lot, a lot of money. I had also spoken to Howard and some of his people, and there was some interest in us doing some sort of a deal with him, but I never, ever contemplated a deal of that magnitude. That is more money than people like Oprah Winfrey make. That is more money than some of the biggest stars that exist. It is quite a gamble, but it was clearly a very good business deal for Howard Stern. In retrospect, Panero was wrong. Since the day the deal was announced, shares of Sirius are only trading marginally higher; that still tops XM, which has seen its shares nearly halved in the same period. It's interesting to note how Panero singled out Oprah, a broadcasting celebrity with whom XM eventually teamed up to create a new XM channel debuting this fall. Along the way, we've had downward subscriber revisions, troublesome product rollouts, and a defecting Chicken Little board member. Investors keep waiting for the other shoe to drop at XM, only to realize that XM is really Imelda Marcos in disguise. Boy, Stern would have been really convenient about now. Would we even still be in a duopoly if Sirius had let Stern slip through its fingers and into XM's hands? We can argue about Stern's merits until we're blue in the face -- and I don't mean the FCC's definition of "blue" here. Whether you think he's brilliant or a potty-mouth, the numbers don't lie. Consumers have been choosing Sirius over XM since Stern made his media blitz over the 2005 holiday season. Stern is the not-so-secret ingredient behind Sirius' killer recipe. I subscribe to both XM and Sirius. I love both. XM has more channels, with a lot of content overlap. You'll get a wide range of opinion on who has the best music channels, but both services are excellent substitutes to old-school radio. One can argue that XM's deal with Major League Baseball and Sirius' pact with the National Football League make each offering distinctive, but that's also what makes Sirius clobbering XM here so Stern-driven. We're waist-deep into the baseball season and a couple of months away from the start of the NFL games. All things being equal, XM should have smoked Sirius this quarter. Eighteen months ago, I made a pretty ridiculous prediction. XM was trouncing Sirius, yet I proclaimed that Sirius would land more net new subscribers by the fourth quarter of 2005. It seemed outlandish at the time, but I was spot-on accurate. I'm off to hock my crystal ball, though. A year later, I predicted that XM would regain the new-listener lead in the second and third quarters. Not even close. Another shoe tumbles This doesn't end here, of course. Anyone with a calculator and a penchant for train wrecks can see that XM may let us down one more time. Back in May, XM announced that it intended to close out the year with 8.5 million subscribers. It had originally planned to end 2006 by lapping the nine-million mark. On the other hand, Sirius expects to wrap up the year with 6.2 million subs. In other words, over the next six months, XM expects to land 1.6 million more net new users, with Sirius projecting just 1.5 million net new subscribers. How? If the baseball-charged second quarter didn't do it, how will XM outmuscle Sirius when the playing fields of choice go from diamonds to gridirons? XM will have "its Oprah moment" in a few months, but that's a wildcard, since Oprah's emphasis will remain with her syndicated television show. What would it take for XM to avoid another heartbreak? Will next month's earnings report bring that 8.5 million year-end target to a round 8 million, or will announcement come in early October instead? Things don't have to be that bleak. As logic goes, the more time that Stern spends entrenched in satellite radio and away from the mainstream spotlight, the less of a factor he becomes in moving new receivers. True Stern fans would have made the migration already. But the strong second quarter, months after Stern's first show for Sirius, throws that theory into the wood-chipper. Maybe the thinking is that XM stars Opie & Anthony, pioneers in taking their controversial morning show to satellite radio, will be successful ambassadors. XM began syndicating part of the show to Stern's former haunt at CBS (NYSE: CBS). If lightning can be caught in a bottled-up radio show twice, XM may be on to something. But the early XM migration numbers don't seem to have panned out that way. I still believe in XM. I even recommended the stock to Rule Breakers subscribers last year. I'm realistic, though. A year ago, I was wondering why XM had a lower market cap than Sirius. Now I understand. Still, XM's attractive valuation, and the upside potential of the niche, keep me glued to the possibilities. Stop dropping shoes, XM. And if you've got platform shoes in there, try them on. We can all use the lift. Rick recommended XM to Rule Breakers subscribers last year. The stock is currently in the red, though the average newsletter service pick is currently beating the market. See David Gardner's full list of growth-focused picks with a free 30-day guest pass. Longtime Fool contributor Rick Munarriz is a Sirius and XM subscriber, but he does not own shares in any of the companies mentioned in this story. The Fool has a disclosure policy. He is also part of the Rule Breakers newsletter research team, seeking out tomorrow's ultimate growth stocks a day early.

Don't we all know that it takes Cooper half a season to fix these underachievers? He'll be lights out for the 2nd half. Book it.

QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Jul 7, 2006 -> 08:38 AM) Would someone like to buy one of those for me? I don't wear watches but I think I'd make an exception. So you walk around late all day?

Ouch! Those teams are f***ED! Get 'er done!