John Adams Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 I would add, not burning off the spill from the beginning to that list. How would you "burn off" this oil spill?
Booster4324 Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 How would you "burn off" this oil spill? It will burn when in sufficient thickness. Mind you, this could pose other hazards, but from what I have read, it seemed a possibility. Link
DC Tom Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 I would add, not burning off the spill from the beginning to that list. They tried. The sea state wouldn't allow it.
IDBillzFan Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 They tried. The sea state wouldn't allow it. The sea isn't a state, dumbass. [/conner]
....lybob Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 I'm sure if you google those two names, you'll find the video. Maher was on ABC's This Week, and was complaining that "Brazil got off oil...why couldn't America." Except Brazil isn't off oil, and Will called him on it, and what you ended up with was video of a guy who usually sounds smart when talking to a cheering audience of drones suddenly realizing he can't just make crap up when he's not surrounded by his followers. Video here at Newsbusters (about 3:30 in). At one point Maher asks for a fact check, so Politifact accomodated his request. In the grand scheme of things it doesn't mean anything, but if you've grown tired of Maher's constant yapping of ridiculous stuff to keep his ratings up, it's funny to watch Will turn him into Vinny Barbarino. For a long time many of the Brazilians have been driving cars that run on both Gas, ethanol or mixes of the two- which fuel they use depends mostly on cost- there were years when ethanol was dominate- but since Brazil found large amounts oil off-shore, gas is cheaper than ethanol- The Brazilians maintain the ethanol producers by requiring 25% ethanol blended with most gas and should the oil peter out or the price of oil sky rocket they will ramp up ethanol production again- of course they have always needed some oil for diesel and jet fuel although they are working on bio-diesel projects. so in summary has Brazil ever totally replaced oil with ethanol? NO! has ethanol ever been the dominate fuel used for private cars? Yes! did Brazil use ethanol to save the planet? NO! Did Brazil use ethanol for energy independence and economic stability Yes!, Could we get off oil? Yes!- Could we get off oil without destroying our way of life? No! at least not anytime soon.
John Adams Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 It will burn when in sufficient thickness. Mind you, this could pose other hazards, but from what I have read, it seemed a possibility. Link But isn't most of this submerged? I would guess burning wouldn't get rid of most of this.
/dev/null Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 How would you "burn off" this oil spill? Give Lindsey Lohan a glass bowl and a lighter
John Adams Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 Bill Maher = Howard Stern + agenda. Wow is that off! Howard Stern = Bill Maher + talent + success - douchiness
DrFishfinder Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 Wow is that off! Howard Stern = Bill Maher + talent + success - douchiness My point was that IMO, neither one is funny anymore, but Maher has an agenda whereas Howard has.....uh...major flatulence & sapphic fixations? (edited twice, now)
John Adams Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 My point was that IMO, neither one is funny anymore, but Maher has an agenda whereas Howard has.....uh...major flatulence & sapphic fixations? (edited twice, now) And my point was who ever heard of Bill Maher? Everyone has heard of and is still hearing of Hoawrd Stern. He's a huge media figure. Bill Maher is a "Who's that?"
DrFishfinder Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 And my point was who ever heard of Bill Maher? Everyone has heard of and is still hearing of Hoawrd Stern. He's a huge media figure. Bill Maher is a "Who's that?" Well, in fairness to Maher, he's not exactly a complete unknown in the media. To me, they're both a "Who cares?" I'll take Lewis Black over both of them, combined.
GG Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 And my point was who ever heard of Bill Maher? Everyone has heard of and is still hearing of Hoawrd Stern. He's a huge media figure. Bill Maher is a "Who's that?" I don't know about that. Stern fell off the collective media radar since the Sirius switch. To his million or so devotees, he's still relevant, to others he's a non-entity.
John Adams Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 I don't know about that. Stern fell off the collective media radar since the Sirius switch. To his million or so devotees, he's still relevant, to others he's a non-entity. He was in the mix to replace Simon Cowell on the biggest TV Show in America and probably could have had the job if he wanted it. His departure from the CBS/Viacom radio empire gutted a massive cash cow and that business unit has been in shambles since his departure. Maybe only 8-10M followed Howard to Sirius but that's a $14/mo subscriber base (for those with just 1 subscription...unlike me with 4 in my house...and I drop 2 in a heartbeat without Howard). That's 112M in cash a MONTH! That's a billion dollars plus a year. That is relevant.
DrFishfinder Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 He was in the mix to replace Simon Cowell on the biggest TV Show in America and probably could have had the job if he wanted it. His departure from the CBS/Viacom radio empire gutted a massive cash cow and that business unit has been in shambles since his departure. Maybe only 8-10M followed Howard to Sirius but that's a $14/mo subscriber base (for those with just 1 subscription...unlike me with 4 in my house...and I drop 2 in a heartbeat without Howard). That's 112M in cash a MONTH! That's a billion dollars plus a year. That is relevant. He could have had $112,000,014.00 a month if he said or did anything that was remotely relevant to me. Actually, it would have been fun to watch Howard, Ellen & Kara mix it up on Idol.
GG Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 He was in the mix to replace Simon Cowell on the biggest TV Show in America and probably could have had the job if he wanted it. His departure from the CBS/Viacom radio empire gutted a massive cash cow and that business unit has been in shambles since his departure. Maybe only 8-10M followed Howard to Sirius but that's a $14/mo subscriber base (for those with just 1 subscription...unlike me with 4 in my house...and I drop 2 in a heartbeat without Howard). That's 112M in cash a MONTH! That's a billion dollars plus a year. That is relevant. Your numbers are way off, and not surprisingly probably taken from Stern's self promotion. If those numbers were even remotely close, Karmazin wouldn't be drawing a hard line in the contract renegotiation. When you examine the historic net add numbers for Sirius (especially in relation to former XM), you will see that the rabid Stern fan base is about 1 million.
John Adams Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 Your numbers are way off, and not surprisingly probably taken from Stern's self promotion. If those numbers were even remotely close, Karmazin wouldn't be drawing a hard line in the contract renegotiation. When you examine the historic net add numbers for Sirius (especially in relation to former XM), you will see that the rabid Stern fan base is about 1 million. Even if you were right and you're not, that's over 150M/year attributable to him. Before the Stern show went to Sirius, it was a second fiddle to XM. Sirius had less than a million subscribers to XM's 4 million. I was one--for the NFL only. I barely listened to anything else on Sirius. In the space of 3 years, Sirius acquired XM and now their combined subscriber base is 20 million people. Some of that growth would have happened just because people are buying satellite compatible cars but I guarantee you that no one is buying Sirius or XM for much in the way of specific content other than the NFL (which Sirius already had in 2005), MLB (which XM had in 2005), and Howard Stern. Karmazin isn't playing hardball. He knows Howard has the company over the abyss. If he goes, Sirius--which just finally started turning a profit--will go belly-up in 2 years. Subscribers will flee if Stern leaves and it will be more than 1M people gone. It won't be the 8-10M he brought with him because some people will keep Sirius/XM because they like it but people like me will kill the extra subscriptions and others will leave because you can get the music offerings on Sirius anywhere these days. Stern's departure, should it happen, will prove one of us right. If they only lose a few hundred thousand subscribers and don't have to pay 100M/year for the stern show, the company will be just fine. If they lose more, the company will tank.
GG Posted June 4, 2010 Posted June 4, 2010 Even if you were right and you're not, that's over 150M/year attributable to him. Before the Stern show went to Sirius, it was a second fiddle to XM. Sirius had less than a million subscribers to XM's 4 million. I was one--for the NFL only. I barely listened to anything else on Sirius. In the space of 3 years, Sirius acquired XM and now their combined subscriber base is 20 million people. Some of that growth would have happened just because people are buying satellite compatible cars but I guarantee you that no one is buying Sirius or XM for much in the way of specific content other than the NFL (which Sirius already had in 2005), MLB (which XM had in 2005), and Howard Stern. Karmazin isn't playing hardball. He knows Howard has the company over the abyss. If he goes, Sirius--which just finally started turning a profit--will go belly-up in 2 years. Subscribers will flee if Stern leaves and it will be more than 1M people gone. It won't be the 8-10M he brought with him because some people will keep Sirius/XM because they like it but people like me will kill the extra subscriptions and others will leave because you can get the music offerings on Sirius anywhere these days. Stern's departure, should it happen, will prove one of us right. If they only lose a few hundred thousand subscribers and don't have to pay 100M/year for the stern show, the company will be just fine. If they lose more, the company will tank. Other than by taking Stern's words at face value, you reached your conclusion by comparing the subscriber add trends before & after Stern, OEM vs retail, XM vs Sirius and still came up with Stern accounting for 50% of the total DRS audience. M'kay.
Recommended Posts