Firing DJs Will Eventually Doom SiriusXM

Getting rid of DJs, whether it's to save money or to focus on music, will ultimately bring about the downfall of SiriusXM.

Feb 10, 2014 at 2:28PM

SiriusXM (NASDAQ:SIRI), which has been steadily shedding DJs in favor of music-only channels since the two satellite radio companies merged, has dropped personalities on its '50s and '90s channels. The moves might make economic sense and they might even be what some listeners want, but ultimately, offering personality-free radio may doom the company's long-term prospects.

New York Daily News Columnist David Hinckley, who covers the radio and satellite radio business, wrote about the moves in his column Feb. 5, explaining that the service was becoming "music intensive -- a trend that has permeated all of music radio over the last 10 years."

The loss of DJs, however, makes the SirisuXM stations less distinctive and removes a differentiating factor between satellite radio and music services like Pandora (NYSE:P), Apple's (NASDAQ:AAPL) iTunes Radio, and Spotify.

End of the arms war

When Sirius and XM were competitors, the two companies spent tens of millions of dollars locking up personalities and brand-name content in an attempt to lure customers. With the companies no longer competing, SiriusXM has retained a few signature personalities (Howard Stern, Opie and Anthony, and Christopher "Mad Dog" Russo, to name a few), but with no direct satellite competitor, the company has let deals with Martha Stewart and Cosmopolitan magazine expire while also letting the other well-know personalities on Stern's channels -- Bubba the Love Sponge and Scott Ferrall -- leave.

Will people leave?

Despite the loss of hosts, Hinckley said in an email interview with the Fool that he does not believe subscribers will leave the service in any significant numbers.

"It's a nuisance to drop a subscription. You have to call and go through the whole ordeal of getting to a live person," he said. "More significantly, my guess is that relatively few people buy a SiriusXM subscription for just one channel, with the possible exception of some Howard Stern fans."

Hinckley explained that most people were buying because they like the package -- perhaps the sports channels, the news channels, or something else combined with the music offering. "Even if it's your favorite channel, my guess is that most people feel disappointed, but decide they'll give what's left a shot," he said. "This is a conditioned response, too, from 'regular' radio, whose MO has always been change -- change in hosts, change in playlist, change in formats. Radio listeners, on some conscious or subconscious level, are used to it."

Is it worth it financially?

Though some of the major deals like Martha Stewart's bring a considerable cost saving to SiriusXM, getting rid of individual DJs does not. According to Hinckley, most hosts are voicetracked and do a whole shift, or a whole week, in one session, for which they get paid scale.

"Back before the merger, when Sirius signed that first big contract with Stern, it cut a whole flotilla of its DJs loose. That, obviously, was a way of making up some of the cost of Stern's deal," he said. "Then more DJs were eliminated in the merger.  So most of the DJs on channels where jocks were considered superfluous or marginal had already been taken off. What Sirius XM is doing now, even with the occasional live jock like Norm N. Nite, feels more for strategic than financial purposes.

Can a competitor swoop in?

If eliminating DJs is not for financial reasons, you can assume the company is doing it because it believes people want only music on its music channels. That might be true. But with it becoming easier for people to stream Internet music services in their cars, not having DJs makes SiriusXM -- as a music service -- a less-effective version of Pandora. SiriusXM offers a lot of music for a radio station, but it does not take your input and let you customize the way Pandora does. It also does not let you simply pick what you want to hear the way Spotify and other streaming services do.

"I think it does become easier for a Pandora or streaming music services to poach consumers if SiriusXM doesn't offer something different. But I suspect SiriusXM looks at it from the other perspective -- that it also becomes possible for satellite to poach music service customers," Hinckley said. "I've heard satellite radio in a number of supermarkets, which clearly prefer an all-music feed to something with DJs."

SiriusXM, as a package, does still have differentiators in its news, sports, and talk programming. But as its music offering fades to generic, the company is dropping something that made it special -- something that made it radio, not just music.

And while SiriusXM offers a lot of value for the price, the company, if it stops being special, faces the same vulnerability the cable business does. At some tipping point, SiriusXM customers will realize they can bundle most of what they get out of SiriusXM for free or less money with not much more hassle.

The next step for you

Want to figure out how to profit on business analysis like this? The key is to learn how to turn business insights into portfolio gold by taking your first steps as an investor. Those who wait on the sidelines are missing out on huge gains and putting their financial futures in jeopardy. In our brand-new special report, "Your Essential Guide to Start Investing Today," The Motley Fool's personal finance experts show you what you need to get started, and even give you access to some stocks to buy first. Click here to get your copy today -- it's absolutely free.

Daniel Kline has no position in any stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool recommends Apple and Pandora Media. The Motley Fool owns shares of Apple and Sirius XM Radio. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

4 in 5 Americans Are Ignoring Buffett's Warning

Don't be one of them.

Jun 12, 2015 at 5:01PM

Admitting fear is difficult.

So you can imagine how shocked I was to find out Warren Buffett recently told a select number of investors about the cutting-edge technology that's keeping him awake at night.

This past May, The Motley Fool sent 8 of its best stock analysts to Omaha, Nebraska to attend the Berkshire Hathaway annual shareholder meeting. CEO Warren Buffett and Vice Chairman Charlie Munger fielded questions for nearly 6 hours.
The catch was: Attendees weren't allowed to record any of it. No audio. No video. 

Our team of analysts wrote down every single word Buffett and Munger uttered. Over 16,000 words. But only two words stood out to me as I read the detailed transcript of the event: "Real threat."

That's how Buffett responded when asked about this emerging market that is already expected to be worth more than $2 trillion in the U.S. alone. Google has already put some of its best engineers behind the technology powering this trend. 

The amazing thing is, while Buffett may be nervous, the rest of us can invest in this new industry BEFORE the old money realizes what hit them.

KPMG advises we're "on the cusp of revolutionary change" coming much "sooner than you think."

Even one legendary MIT professor had to recant his position that the technology was "beyond the capability of computer science." (He recently confessed to The Wall Street Journal that he's now a believer and amazed "how quickly this technology caught on.")

Yet according to one J.D. Power and Associates survey, only 1 in 5 Americans are even interested in this technology, much less ready to invest in it. Needless to say, you haven't missed your window of opportunity. 

Think about how many amazing technologies you've watched soar to new heights while you kick yourself thinking, "I knew about that technology before everyone was talking about it, but I just sat on my hands." 

Don't let that happen again. This time, it should be your family telling you, "I can't believe you knew about and invested in that technology so early on."

That's why I hope you take just a few minutes to access the exclusive research our team of analysts has put together on this industry and the one stock positioned to capitalize on this major shift.

Click here to learn about this incredible technology before Buffett stops being scared and starts buying!

David Hanson owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway and American Express. The Motley Fool recommends and owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway, Google, and Coca-Cola.We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

©1995-2014 The Motley Fool. All rights reserved. | Privacy/Legal Information

Compare Brokers