this is factual information I have known micheal for a very long time. hes not that large of a shareholder..
If sirius and xmsr wanted they could have easily resolved this issue by saying no devices exist or are interoperable currently....Which really does beg the question of why have they avoided comment on this issue
its also all publicly available information http://stumbler.proboards41.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1194674248 I hope this does not require a edit by the board managers.
Im glad to see people with backbone, stand up for the truth!..Just like the StopIboc cause, which i also support in the am band. Its serves my sole well when people fight for the correct reasons..based on fact!
MICHAEL HARTLEIB
P.O. Box xxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
November 4, 2007
Honorable Richard B. Lowe III
Supreme Court of the State of New York
60 Centre Street
New York, N.Y
Re: Greg Brockwell et al v Sirius Satellite Radio, Inc. et al
Index# 07600819
Dear Honorable Judge Lowe:
It is with great respect that I seek your consideration and assistance in
regard to the foregoing case.
As a shareholder of Sirius Satellite Radio I am compelled to protect my
interest to the fullest extent possible. For approximately two years, I
have sought answers to questions from Sirius and XM executives as well as
the FCC involving the FCC Interoperability Mandate and licensing
requirements for both satellite licensees. I have also pursued details
contained in a settlement stipulation (Sirius v XM) where the two companies
agreed to develop and deploy a unified standard for satellite radio; thereby
giving consumers access to a ubiquitous receiver capable of receiving
services from either satellite radio company. This issue is at the heart
of the FCC Licensee Transfer Request and pending merger in the form of a
Petition for Declaratory Ruling which I filed (copy attached).
After hundreds of hours of research, it is my opinion that the two companies
have been less than forthright with consumers and their shareholders and
have done their best to confuse the issues with qualifying and misleading
statements. I have confirmed information that leads me to believe many of
the satellite radios in the marketplace today are indeed capable of allowing
the end user to access services from either company; if the companies were
to enable the interoperability function of these receivers. Therefore, it
could be possible for millions of satellite radio subscribers to switch
services from one company to the other, thereby having tremendous impact on
current valuations and share price. It has been my intent to disseminate
this information prior to the shareholder vote. I had hoped that the
aforementioned case would be the avenue that would lead to full disclosure
but in speaking with counsel from both parties, there appears to be a
resolution to this case without benefit to its class members and without the
disclosure this suit requested. Even more troubling is the Motion to have
the records sealed. As I am sure your Honor can understand, sealing the
record on a case to provide full and complete disclosure leaves one to
wonder what this case was all about.
I have been an outspoken advocate for and consumer of Sirius Satellite
Radio and their services. It pains me to consider taking legal action
against the company and its management. They have a fiduciary responsibility
to disclose all relevant and material facts to their shareholders. My
concerns are that if they continue with the shareholder vote without
complete transparency and disclosing all material facts, they will expose
their shareholders (ie: "the class") to lengthy and costly litigation
thereby damaging the class even further. One could argue that soliciting a
shareholder vote prior to knowing the Regulators' restrictions and
conditions on said merger is irresponsible and could lead to many
shareholders wishing they could change their vote and feeling
disenfranchised; such was the case in the recent AT&T Bellsouth Merger
where AT&T was forced into agreeing to many new conditions and concessions
in the eleventh hour in order to consummate the deal. I believe if the
Company continues with the shareholder vote without full disclosure, they
will be doing so with malice per the information I have provided them over
the past 18 months, as well as this suit, suggests.
I am filing the attached Order To Show Cause in an attempt to intervene as
time is of the essence: shareholder vote scheduled for November 13, 2007.
Sincerely,
Michael Hartleib
If sirius and xmsr wanted they could have easily resolved this issue by saying no devices exist or are interoperable currently....Which really does beg the question of why have they avoided comment on this issue
its also all publicly available information http://stumbler.proboards41.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=1194674248 I hope this does not require a edit by the board managers.
Im glad to see people with backbone, stand up for the truth!..Just like the StopIboc cause, which i also support in the am band. Its serves my sole well when people fight for the correct reasons..based on fact!
MICHAEL HARTLEIB
P.O. Box xxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
November 4, 2007
Honorable Richard B. Lowe III
Supreme Court of the State of New York
60 Centre Street
New York, N.Y
Re: Greg Brockwell et al v Sirius Satellite Radio, Inc. et al
Index# 07600819
Dear Honorable Judge Lowe:
It is with great respect that I seek your consideration and assistance in
regard to the foregoing case.
As a shareholder of Sirius Satellite Radio I am compelled to protect my
interest to the fullest extent possible. For approximately two years, I
have sought answers to questions from Sirius and XM executives as well as
the FCC involving the FCC Interoperability Mandate and licensing
requirements for both satellite licensees. I have also pursued details
contained in a settlement stipulation (Sirius v XM) where the two companies
agreed to develop and deploy a unified standard for satellite radio; thereby
giving consumers access to a ubiquitous receiver capable of receiving
services from either satellite radio company. This issue is at the heart
of the FCC Licensee Transfer Request and pending merger in the form of a
Petition for Declaratory Ruling which I filed (copy attached).
After hundreds of hours of research, it is my opinion that the two companies
have been less than forthright with consumers and their shareholders and
have done their best to confuse the issues with qualifying and misleading
statements. I have confirmed information that leads me to believe many of
the satellite radios in the marketplace today are indeed capable of allowing
the end user to access services from either company; if the companies were
to enable the interoperability function of these receivers. Therefore, it
could be possible for millions of satellite radio subscribers to switch
services from one company to the other, thereby having tremendous impact on
current valuations and share price. It has been my intent to disseminate
this information prior to the shareholder vote. I had hoped that the
aforementioned case would be the avenue that would lead to full disclosure
but in speaking with counsel from both parties, there appears to be a
resolution to this case without benefit to its class members and without the
disclosure this suit requested. Even more troubling is the Motion to have
the records sealed. As I am sure your Honor can understand, sealing the
record on a case to provide full and complete disclosure leaves one to
wonder what this case was all about.
I have been an outspoken advocate for and consumer of Sirius Satellite
Radio and their services. It pains me to consider taking legal action
against the company and its management. They have a fiduciary responsibility
to disclose all relevant and material facts to their shareholders. My
concerns are that if they continue with the shareholder vote without
complete transparency and disclosing all material facts, they will expose
their shareholders (ie: "the class") to lengthy and costly litigation
thereby damaging the class even further. One could argue that soliciting a
shareholder vote prior to knowing the Regulators' restrictions and
conditions on said merger is irresponsible and could lead to many
shareholders wishing they could change their vote and feeling
disenfranchised; such was the case in the recent AT&T Bellsouth Merger
where AT&T was forced into agreeing to many new conditions and concessions
in the eleventh hour in order to consummate the deal. I believe if the
Company continues with the shareholder vote without full disclosure, they
will be doing so with malice per the information I have provided them over
the past 18 months, as well as this suit, suggests.
I am filing the attached Order To Show Cause in an attempt to intervene as
time is of the essence: shareholder vote scheduled for November 13, 2007.
Sincerely,
Michael Hartleib